What’s your designer dog from hell? Here’s mine…
By Christie Keith
June 20, 2009
I was poking around the Interwebz recently looking for some information on Beagle health, and I came across a Beagle fancier’s rant about something called a “Puggle,” which is apparently a Beagle/Pug cross. I tried to find it again to link to it here, but like so many things including my car keys and the handset to my cordless phone, damned if I know where it got to.
But the gist was this: If you want a Beagle, get a Beagle. If you want a Pug, get a Pug. But these dogs have virtually nothing in common besides short coats and popularity, so crossing them makes no sense.
Well, I thought, playing devil’s advocate for a moment, yes, but… the problem with the Beagle — or wait. Not the problem with the Beagle himself, who is, after all, exactly the dog he “should” be, but the problem most people looking for a dog as lap-happy and biddable as the Beagle appears to be, with his cute little droopy ears and his compact size, is that he’s extremely independent. And stubborn. And his hearing isn’t so good, if the number of people yelling after the tiny white tip of his tail as he sniffs his way at top speed on the trail of a squirrel in the park is any indication.
Maybe adding in some Pug to that would actually result in a dog more to people’s liking. And certainly adding in some Beagle to the Pug will solve his biggest problem, too: The endless list of health problems related to his flat face. From spinal deformities to respiratory problems to dental disease to eye injuries, that cute little pug nose is not doing the Pug himself any favors.
No, I thought, what would really be wrong would be to take a dog breed that’s as stubborn and “hard of hearing” as the Beagle and mix those two breeds. And then I thought… a Jack Russell Terrier. That would have to be the ultimate Designer Dog from Hell, I thought. Small, yes. Cute, yes. Popular, yes. Iconic, yes.
And destructive, bull-headed, hard to train, virtually no recall when off-leash, high prey drive, lots of wanderlust, completely destructive when bored. Can you imagine any worse combination than that, for a companion dog? Especially a small one intended to be a lap dog?
Apparently some folks don’t see it that way, because a quick Google check on “Jack Russell Terrier Beagle cross” gives me something called a Jack-a-bea, which I’d never heard of. Perhaps that’s because others thought it the crossbreed from hell, too; it doesn’t look like this designer dog caught on.
So, tell me, oh Pet Connection readers: What would be worse than crossing those two breeds? What’s your Designer Dog from Hell?
Well, Shar-pei with anything would be the worst cross I can think of. Of particular awfullness - Shar-pei/Bulldog cross - yep, that’s the worst idea of all.
Comment by KateH — June 20, 2009 @ 4:53 pm
The shep-a-doodle.
Yeah, we thought it up one night while entertaining this exact question. I believe the act of googling it made it come into being, for there it was.
Ferexample: http://shannons-shamrock-kenne.....oodle.html
The permanency of coat that has dubbed my favorite breed the German shedder, combined with the continuous curly growth of the poodle. Recipe for a rank, stinking brillo pad overlaid on some dog meat.
The fantastic health that one finds in indifferently-bred poodles and indifferently-bred GSDS.
Temperament? Who knows?
Intelligent? Probably. Probably smarter than an owner who pays $1200 for a shaggy mongrel. That’s not a formula for success in ownership.
And, sorry, personal opinion here — that is one hell of an ugly dog.
I find both GSDs and poodles beautiful. But this is two great tastes that go awful together.
Comment by H. Houlahan — June 20, 2009 @ 4:54 pm
Oh for Pete’s sake, I forgot about these:
http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/shockerd.htm
As you can imagine, the English shepherd community was THRILLED when a couple of puppymills in S. Dakota started making these.
The reaction time, speed, and agility of an English shepherd, combined with the … ahem … stellar bite inhibition and mental stability of a puppymill American cocker, all packed into an ubercute fluffy puppy package.
This will keep the facial surgeons in business for years …
Comment by H. Houlahan — June 20, 2009 @ 5:02 pm
Whimper… and what would you CALL a Sharp-pei Bulldog cross? I mean, other than a genetic disaster zone?
Comment by Christie Keith — June 20, 2009 @ 5:02 pm
One of those shepadoodles looks like a DEERHOUND!
Comment by Christie Keith — June 20, 2009 @ 5:03 pm
The weirdest dog I ever saw was an Airedale/GSD cross - looked like a crocodile on stilts, hyper, high prey drive, and dumb as a bag of rocks!
Comment by Maria Shanley — June 20, 2009 @ 5:03 pm
Oh! I’d forgotten that we have a purposely chosen shep-adoodle that came in a few months ago. It was so ugly (and even worse behaved than a Ladradoodle, which is saying something!), I must have buried it - and you just brought it back. (Runs screaming.)
Comment by KateH — June 20, 2009 @ 5:03 pm
Chiweinies. Bad attitudes, bark-bark-barkers and back problems.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 20, 2009 @ 5:06 pm
Baskadors. Basset/Lab crosses. Everyone of them is a pig headed, hyper, scent hound with ADD, joint accident waiting to happen. They also do NOT look right. Basically every single one I have seen is a midget black lab with a basset head.
Comment by Cindy — June 20, 2009 @ 5:10 pm
poorly bred giant molassar breed x puppymill yorkie. Very fierce.
(No, it doesn’t exist. But it would give me nightmares if it did. I’m picturing a 200 pound neurotic evil yorkie.)
Can I chime in here with my favorite crossbred, though? I *adore* the farmcollie crosses (collie x ES, BC, Aussie)- I’ve met a lot of the purposebred ones and they’ve all been uniformly wonderful dogs. :P
Comment by Cait — June 20, 2009 @ 5:16 pm
Hey, I’ve got a chiweenie, and he’s a gentle, loving little dog, good with other animals, reasonably obedient, doesn’t bark too much and … well, no back trouble, but he’s got ‘loose’ knees, another problem I gather comes from the dachshund side.
I would never have specifically sought out a chiweenie, but I feel lucky to have found Bertie Woofster.
I don’t know enough about dog breeds to play at that, but my nightmare cat cross just from a genetic standpoint is Devon Rex/Munchkin.
Comment by Eucritta — June 20, 2009 @ 5:19 pm
Some dogs, like some people, turn out just great no matter what. But both the Chi and the Dach are a lot of dog, and the doubling up on that … ohhhh, you got lucky with Bertie! (Really cute name, by the way. Do you have a Jeeves, too?)
On the flip side, when I was doing Sheltie rescue, we got a dog in who HAD to be a corgi-Sheltie mix. What a cool dog he was. I was so tempted to keep him for myself.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 20, 2009 @ 5:23 pm
Pit bull/border collie. Apparently some of the ranchers around here are crossing them to increase the border collie’s herding drive and livestock “gameness”. We get them into the shelter fairly regularly.
Physically an odd mix, which I don’t find attractive for the most part. The border collie head ends up with a coarseness that just looks weird.
Temperments seem ok, though. Maybe a wee bit calmer than a lot of the BCs we get.
Comment by Susan Fox — June 20, 2009 @ 5:23 pm
Answer to Designer Dog from Hell question? All of them, because the focus is on ‘cuteness’ and what will sell to the clueless consumer. I can tolerate “legitimately” bred labradoodles for therapy/seeing eye work, lurchers for live game hunting, border jacks for small AG dogs better than I can tolerate random crossing of two breeds without any forethought, planning or genetic health testing just to make $$$ in the accessory department.
Sigh, Designer Dogs brings out my “effete intellectual snobbery” and makes me think that dogs should be owned only by people who have pasted my personal intelligence test! lol. It’s similar to my personal intelligence test for prospective parents and requires common sense, something this society of ours is lacking. Met a woman today with 2 poorly groomed and trained “Bittyshitz” ( Bichon X Shih-tzu Xs) and had to bite my tongue when she said they were “purebred”.
Comment by Anne T — June 20, 2009 @ 5:44 pm
Honestly, I hate the labradoodles the most, but that’s mostly because my undocked standard poodle is CONSTANTLY confused for one.
But for ‘wow, this is a breed most people need’, I’m going with the doodleman pinscher.
http://www.aspencypress.com/page5/
Ugly, hairy, terrible temperaments possible in poorly bred specimens of both breeds, lots of health issues, and will be way way way way way too smart for most people to deal with.
I love how they say on that web page that a doodleman pinscher will alert you to everything. That’s a polite way of saying ‘let’s take the sheer overwhelming noise of a poodle and add to it the alertness of a doberman and see if you can create a dog that NEVER EVER SHUTS UP EVER. YAY!’
Comment by Stephanie — June 20, 2009 @ 5:46 pm
Labradoodles are very much the “it” dog in the upscale nabe where I love to have coffee and meet up with friends. And I have met some that were just wonderful, although it’s just too much curly coat for me. (Not to mention, I don’t like beards on dogs … too drippy!)
Of course, the problem is when you have bad genetics on both sides. One of the Labradoodles I’ve met is already (owner informed me) destined for double hip replacement surgery. He wasn’t much more than a year old. I asked her what the puppy-seller had to say, and she said, basically, they were told they were on their own. Although when they pushed, they WERE offered another puppy. Because, well FOUR hip replacements are twice the fun of two, huh?
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 20, 2009 @ 5:53 pm
Crestiepoo. Chinese Crested and poodle. Standard poodle., not mini or toy. The 65-pound spoo is the dad; mom is a 9-pound hairless Chinese Crested.
I am not making this up. However, in fairness I should mention that it appears to have been a clueless accident, not intent. Dad has bee neutered, and mom is scheduled to be spayed after the three pups are all placed. (Two hairless, one powderpuff.) Which I suppose disqualifies this from the “designer dog” category. But it’s a disturbing mix.
Comment by Lis — June 20, 2009 @ 5:56 pm
Bo-jack. A cross popular with flyball and agility types, a cross between a border collie and a Parson (Jack) Russell terrier.
Let’s take a high drive herding dog and cross it with a high drive terrier - and then let’s sell it to people who don’t do flyball, agility, or anything with their dogs, and wonder why the dog is as neurotic as hell. Poorly bred, under-exercised, and bored, bored, bored.
An acquaintance recently got one - bought (at 6 weeks old) because it was cute (“it was the face that sold me”) off of a Craig’s List-type web site. I told her to let me know before she drops it off at the pound in a few months, and I’ll try to find a proper home for it.
Oh, and it’s her first dog and she works 8+ hours a day…
Comment by K. B. — June 20, 2009 @ 6:02 pm
Any cross that is made without thinking about the possible health and temperment issues that could possibly result from that cross is nightmarish and irresponsible. Crosses should be made just as purebred crosses — examine the health and temperment of the parents and their breeds so that the resulting puppies have a high genetic chance of being happy, healthy, well tempered dogs.
You touched on a very good point — “Maybe adding in some Pug to that would actually result in a dog more to people’s liking” — this is very true. Our purebred dogs were once the ‘designer’ dogs — somebody many years ago began crossing different breeds to create their ideal dog and now that breed is standard. But standard breeds don’t necessarily fit with what modern city dwellers want in a dog. How many Shepherds do you know that actually have a pasture full of sheep? How many terriers hunt? Today’s crosses might some day be standard breeds, and I’m hoping that anybody who breeds these crosses takes that to heart and tries to avoid the health problems that are currently in many of our standards. Again, crossing any dog without taking the health and temperment of the parents into account is just horrible.
Comment by Shauna — June 20, 2009 @ 6:05 pm
“Today’s crosses might some day be standard breeds”
Comment by Shauna — June 20, 2009 @ 6:05 pm
It’s already happening.
The Cesky terrier is in the FSS of the AKC, and is recognized by the CKC (Canadian, not Con KC). It was a “breed” developed in the 40s and 50s by crossing a Sealyham terrier and Scottish terrier (and lets not even go into the fact that those two breeds are really, really, really similar to begin with, so why cross them…).
The Lucas terrier is recognized by the UKC. It was developed by crossing Norfolks with Sealyhams after World War I.
So yes, there is recent precedent for accepting mixes into kennel clubs, as long as they breed true, have a written standard, and an active breed club.
And I’m sure there are more examples!
Comment by K. B. — June 20, 2009 @ 6:17 pm
bulldog/sharpei crosses are called bull-peis and regretfully do exist.
I have seen a bulldog/crested cross, and yep, hairless.
Hog hunters breed beagle or walker to fox and jack russell terriers. NOT a great family pet in most cases.
Scariest thing I ever saw advertised? Chow/timber wolf.
Comment by JenniferJ — June 20, 2009 @ 6:22 pm
I agree with the two previous comments re: basset-cross-anything (the dwarfism seems to be crazy dominant in these mixes, producing HUGE dogs with itty bitty legs and long bodies). These dogs are always crossed with something high on the activity scale (I know one basset-retriever and just met a basset-border collie). Whereas the basset is generally a low enough activity level to keep it from self-inflicted injury, crossing with working breeds is BEGGING for trouble.
Also, I have to speak up for purpose-bred mixes. I’m a huge fan of some of the herding mixes out there, although one must be very careful and FULLY aware that the litter will have a wide range of temperaments. My two girls are a rott/ACD (accidental breeding, and luckily the intelligence, agility and size of the ACD with the calm, stoic nature of the rott) and a purpose-bred ACD/Aussie mix (a great herding and searching dog capable of working with easier stock than cattle, still determined and energetic, observant and focused - all in an ACD sized, short haired variety).
I’m mixed regarding Golden-doodles and Labra-doodles. On one hand, I have met some from Australian lines who have been sturdy, nonshedding, steady dogs with great temperament and good health. On the other, I have known far too many north american line doodles that have been health *disasters* and fear-aggression seems to run rampant in both breeds (I’ve taken in a handful, all with the same issues, and just turned down another one this week because we’re full). Also, they run the gamut from intelligent like a working breed mix to dense as a show-bred retriever.
Oh, and Christie - I HATE pug mixes. Sorry, Pug X owners - I’ve rescued a few and they’ve been interesting - but anyone who would mix such genetic basket cases with behaviour-challenging dogs (like every pug mix I’ve ever seen) with an obvious lack of knowledge regarding the *possible* outcomes is… well… I have no words.
Did I mention I also detest any mix that has a name, or at least any breeder/owner that uses that name as a selling point? Read: anything ending in -poo or -doodle is included. Your dog is a Yorkie/Poodle CROSS, not a yorkie-poo!
Comment by Kim — June 20, 2009 @ 6:38 pm
There’s a sharpei/pit mix at 1 of the local rescues ,also a baskador. Its a shame,both seem like good temperment,but talk about ugly !I have a neighbor who drove 4 hours & paid $600 for a beagle/bulldog cross. That worked out about exactly how you’d think ! She’s a sweetheart but chases everything,digs under the fence,is stubborn & doesn’t listen.
Comment by Leslie K — June 20, 2009 @ 6:47 pm
I’m of two minds. Most of these “designer dogs” are being bred by idiots who think that some magic will make their “hybreds” healthy and sweet natured. Their ignorance is epic.
On the other hand, I used to be totally against creating new breeds, figuring we already had all the breeds we “needed” and creating new breeds just to be companions or meet a need unrelated to work other than companionship was wrong. I’ve softened there considerably, and have considered several times getting a Silken Windhound, a newly created breed that was developed from the Borzoi being mixed with some established lines of Whippet X Sheltie (although the original crosser denied the Sheltie until DNA proved it).
I’ve also come around on purpose-bred working dogs, and no longer give a damn WHAT breeds they are. I used to, no lie. Now I have no idea what I was thinking.
And I’m even softening on crossbreeding for pets, as long as it’s done knowledgeably and the breeders are otherwise ethical and compassionate. But there really has to be a better reason than OMG let’s see what THESE puppies would look like, and the absurd and ignorant idea that I see again and again on the websites of these folks, that they can somehow just magically make the puppies have the qualities from each parent that they want.
Yo, breeding for specific traits is HARD and it takes GENERATIONS. And did I mention it’s hard?
Comment by Christie Keith — June 20, 2009 @ 6:54 pm
Oh oh(raises hand) Pick me! When Pugles first came round the mix made no sense to me and I invented a joke. Ready? What do you get when you cross a pug with a beagle? A pug that runs away. The mixes that upset me most are all the Cavaleir mixes at the pet store. Cuter pups there are not, and I know they are health nightmares in disguise.
Comment by Nancy Freedman-Smith CPDT — June 20, 2009 @ 7:17 pm
(Really cute name, by the way. Do you have a Jeeves, too?)
Not yet!
Comment by Eucritta — June 20, 2009 @ 7:48 pm
The only puggle that I’ve met is actually quite a nice dog, and if they were being bred by people who knew what they were doing and weren’t just selling F1 crosses with no goal in mind, might be the basis of a fine new companion breed.
Sadly, a lot of “working” dog people seem to think that Purpose is Companionship=Has No Real Purpose. But at least I can get my mind around where they’re coming from. What blows my mind is the people who are truly outraged by the idea of cross-breeding to produce dogs well-suited to real, working jobs that we didn’t have for dogs 150 years ago. They seem to be just completely scandalized by the mere fact of crossing breeds, and there simply is no purpose, no matter how practical or how noble, that can redeem it.
That, I truly do not understand.
Comment by Lis — June 20, 2009 @ 7:57 pm
Personally, I think a Basenji/JRT cross would be the dog from hell. Or, how about a Dalmation/Border Collie mix? But I also can’t imagine anyone doing either of these on purpose, the name combination wouldn’t be cute enough. What really gets me though, is how much money people spend to buy mutts when they purchase these dogs!
Comment by Cate — June 20, 2009 @ 8:06 pm
The latter group gets upset and won’t eat when different kinds of food touch on the plate, too.
Comment by H. Houlahan — June 20, 2009 @ 8:06 pm
Long, long ago when I brought one of my Dachshunds to a neighborhood vet clinic for a rabies booster, one of the techs mentioned that they were caring for a lost dog that someone had found wandering that morning - told me it was a “German Shepherd/Dachshund cross.”
Contemplating the sheer unlikelihood that such a breeding could be accomplished, I asked if I could see the dog. Sure enough - Cardigan Welsh Corgi. I knew all three of the CWC breeders in a 300 mile radius, and contacted them to ask if they’d heard from any buyers that were missing a dog. One had, and Cardi and family were happily reunited.
There’s a “however” to this story, though - a year or two later I was boarding a friend’s Doberman bitch for several weeks. Jessie came in season, and since the only male in my house was a Dachshund, I was sure there was nothing more to worry about than the boy-dog needing to be reminded of his house manners. Until around Day 12, when Jessie found Ignatz lounging on the sofa, and conveniently backed up to him, twitching her you-know…
Mercifully, I was in the room at the time and averted the potential litter of Dober-hunds.
Comment by elaine — June 20, 2009 @ 8:33 pm
Years ago, I had a neighbor who had what she said was a 6-week-old Shar-Pei/Pit Bull cross. It was a sweet, adorable puppy and I have often wondered what it grew up to be like. Around the same time, I was turning down ads in Dog Fancy for “Ori-peis,” which were Pug/Shar-Pei crosses (stood for Oriental Shar-pei). There was a “Beagalier” in Harper’s puppy class. Sigh.
Comment by Kim Thornton — June 20, 2009 @ 8:55 pm
Anything mixed with a shiba inu is going to be a real problem child.
Some “breeders”, or rather businesses, have “created” Minshi - a min pin/shiba cross who has to be the most manic-depressant dog on the planet.
I’ve seen Peke-Shis which just blew away my decree that no dog can be ugly. Yes, yes they can.
Shockers, shiba/cocker crosses that have enough ball and feistiness to actually be human aggressive.
Shibamos - Shiba Inu/’Eskimo’ crosses - really, whats the point?
The list undoubtedly goes on and on and I just can’t understand any of it! You’re already a glutton for punishment by choosing the Shiba Inu breed as it is, why in the hell add to them? They are perfection to me as is.
Comment by Jen — June 20, 2009 @ 11:06 pm
Hybrid “Designer Dog” sales are now outstripping those of purebreds. I think that a lot of this has to do with the fact that all the scientific research shows mutts live longer and are healthier.
Most people just want a happy, healthy family pet. But say “Boxer” and vets think heart disease; say “Bernese Mountain Dog” and they think cancer. The incidence and severity of inherited diseases in purebred dogs increases every year, and yet traditional breeders continue with outdated practices (like inbreeding and line breeding) that continuously limit genetic diversity. The BBC program “Pedigree Dogs Exposed” that screened last year brought many of the health problems associated with purebred dogs to the attention of the general public (see http://vids.myspace.com/index......=44215931)
In addition, changing fashions and fads in the show ring have caused some purebred breeders to exaggerate physical characteristics that make dogs more susceptible to health problems problems (bulging eyes in Pekingese, elongated backs in Dachshunds etc). Recently the RSPCA in the UK cut it’s ties with the Kennel Club dog shows for “encouraging the breeding of deformed and disabled dogs” (see http://uk.reuters.com/article/.....020080916).
However, it is possible for hybrid “Designer Dogs” to provie the best of both worlds, purebreds and mutts: the ability to carefully select the parent dogs for health and temperament, and test for inherited diseases (like purebreds); and the increased health and longevity provided by genetic diversity (like mutts).
Certainly you need to be careful. There are puppy mills and pet stores that have jumped on to the “Designer Dog” band wagon purely to make a profit.
However, there are also many dedicated hybrid breeders whose main aim is to produce healthy dogs, without the genetic problems that plague many purebreds. They carefully select the breeds they use, and test the parent dogs for any possible inherited problems. They aren’t trying to produce a particular “look”, or compete with purebreds - these breeders simply want to provide healthy, happy family pets.
Comment by Gem — June 21, 2009 @ 12:48 am
“Hybrid “Designer Dog” sales are now outstripping those of purebreds. I think that a lot of this has to do with the fact that all the scientific research shows mutts live longer and are healthier.”
Can you please cite some of the actual peer-reviewed, published studies here?
Comment by Katie Bruesewitz — June 21, 2009 @ 5:35 am
However, there are also many dedicated hybrid breeders whose main aim is to produce healthy dogs, without the genetic problems that plague many purebreds.
Comment by Gem — June 21, 2009
This is also true of reputable, ethical breeders of purebreds.
And for me, that’s the point: Puppy-milling scum and careless, clueless hump-and-dump backyard breeders exist in both purebreds and trendy mixes.
In both cases, choosing the right breeder is the most important part of the equation if you’re going to be buying a puppy.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 21, 2009 @ 5:35 am
Comment by Gem — June 21, 2009 @ 12:48 am
Hybrid “Designer Dog” sales are now outstripping those of purebreds.
Considering the fact that AKC stopped publishing actual registration numbers a few years ago, one has to wonder where the source of this little tidbit of information comes from.
Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 21, 2009 @ 5:45 am
Not to mention “all the scientific research shows mutts live longer and are healthier” is patently untrue. There are too many variables to make any “scientific” claim in this regard.
The best we have is anecdotal evidence and an “impression” that mixed-breeds live longer and are healthier. And in fact, there are quite a few breeds that can rival any dog in the health and longevity area.
Pets aren’t appliances with brand names and warranties. They’re family. And like all family, health and temperament is a highly individual thing, even with the best “breeding” and intentions.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 21, 2009 @ 5:56 am
“I think that a lot of this has to do with the fact that all the scientific research shows mutts live longer and are healthier.”
I’ve always been skeptical of this claim. The science of breeding seems to support that carefully bred hybrids (as farmers do with livestock) have fewer diseases.
But 2 randomly bred mutts.. say a boxer x Berner? You could as well end up with a dog with heart disease AND cancer.
Comment by EmilyS — June 21, 2009 @ 7:33 am
Here’s a lovely example of a ‘healthy’ designer cross — Wiggles, the Sharpei/French Bulldog cross, as seen on “Dogtown”.
Wiggles on YouTube
Leaving aside the part where Dogtown’s idiot vet in residence says that Wiggles health issues are a result of ‘inbreeding’ (because nothing says inbred like a Chow/Frenchie cross), there are a myriad of health issues going on with this dog.
As someone (Gina?) said above, you get all of the health problems from BOTH component breeds, all in one dog. So much for hybrid vigor.
Comment by FrogDogz — June 21, 2009 @ 9:11 am
BTW, here’s a link to my personal rant about this episode:
http://bullmarketfrogs.com/blog/?p=1045
And to Dogtown’s own page on Wiggles:
Wiggles
Comment by FrogDogz — June 21, 2009 @ 9:15 am
Jen said “Anything mixed with a shiba inu is going to be a real problem child.”
Heh, heh, heh, don’t I know THAT one! However, we got Pepper through an all-breed rescue 7 years ago and while the BC was obvious, we didn’t realize the SI until later.
I just tell everyone it’s a snob/snob cross — Pepper KNOWS she’s better than any other dog (except another herding dog or SI — they are “acceptable” to interact with — others are ignored). But both she and her sister are near-hysterical about strangers (they don’t like them!), aloof with those they don’t think are important and when training, do have a strong element of “what’s in it for me?”
I seriously considered registering Pepper as an American Farm Collie, becuase she’s a great worker, but I ended up spaying her because 1) the SI tail on the BC body gets limber tail too often and 2) the reaction to strangers is just too extreme to pass on in a working dog.
I think the SI has sharpened her hunting ability — she’s a great varmit dog for an agriculture setting, so with careful breeding, I’m not sure that adding some SI couldn’t be useful to farm collies. However, my dog isn’t quite that mix and I wouldn’t encourage more like Pepper and Shyanne if someone didn’t know what they were doing.
Comment by Dorene — June 21, 2009 @ 9:52 am
Still shuddering just thinking about some of these. Here’s something to lighten the horror just a bit: Do you know why they call the Poodle the Vodka of the dog world? Because you can mix them with anything and make it more fun…. ;-) (Gotta get me one of them Newfadoodles… insert retching sounds here)
Comment by Becky — June 21, 2009 @ 11:09 am
Chiwtcharka - Chihuahua / Caucasian Owtcharka cross. Guaranteed to be a vicious killer.
As others have noted, my pet peeve is the fact that 99% of all designer mixes seem to be created only for the following reasons:
* to have a cute name
* to look cute as a puppy
* ‘cause some irresponsible dolt has intact dogs of two different breeds and wants to make a little cash on the side
The healthier, non-shedding, hypoallergenic, smarter, longer-lived stuff is pure crap. When you breed crappy specimens of any two breeds together, you’re just going to get a slightly different flavor of crap out of the mix.
Comment by Janeen — June 21, 2009 @ 11:39 am
I’m not sure what cross he is, but a man down the street from myself has the ugliest, nastiest dog I have ever met.
His dog is hairless, except a few strands here and there, with enormous bat ears, a brachycephalic muzzle, a kink tail, barky, and with snappy attitude.
He looks like a little grey, wrinkly dinosaur.
Comment by Canis — June 21, 2009 @ 12:19 pm
In defense of Silken Windhounds, it looks like they’ve basically done everything right in terms of creating a legitimate club and solid breed type. FOlks who loved Borzois but couldn’t handle the size anymore and who discovered there were no coated small sighthounds did what was logical to them and filled that ‘gap’. If you go to the official breed club site and read the breed timeline and look at the various health and genetic projects they are doing for their breed, you’ll see their ethics are right up there with some of the best oldtimer breed clubs out there.
Just because a breed is newer than 100 years old doesn’t make it a ‘mix’ anymore than the first ‘purebreds’ were. All dogs were ‘mixes’ at the start, no breed sprang from the ground ‘pure’. But it takes a LOT more effort, planning, and teamwork to create a viable new breed than 90% of the BYB ‘hybrid’ breeders would ever stomach.
Comment by Pai — June 21, 2009 @ 12:48 pm
Canis, the hairless gene from Xoloitzcuintli and Cresteds is a lethal dominant gene. It means that all hairless dogs of these breeds carry one dominant gene which inhibits normal follicular hair development and one normal gene (double dominant embryos fail and are reabsorbed)
So breed a xolo, hairless crested or peruvian inca to ANYTHING and statistically 50% of the offspring are hairless with anything from a sparse dusting of hair to a mane and furnishings.
So cross one with a bulldog, pug, neo, corso, shar-pei shi-tzu or random breed or mix large or small and just stand back….
Comment by JenniferJ — June 21, 2009 @ 1:08 pm
Okay - so who knows the scoop on Silken Windhounds v.s. “Longhaired Whippets”?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longhaired_Whippet
Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 21, 2009 @ 1:13 pm
In general, I love any and all dogs, purebred or mutt (and hybrids are indeed mutts, albeit with fancy names/price tags). One of the ugliest I’ve seen is my neighbor’s Rott/Bull Terrier mix. Not a designer dog, just a shelter rescue, but picture the bullet head and bow legs on a rott’s body, and a sort of tri-coloration. Nice dog, but man is she stubborn, not to mention strong as an ox.
Comment by Shellie — June 21, 2009 @ 1:14 pm
I know which breeds posses hairless genes, thanks. I understand genetics and breed type and, frankly, am a bit insulted by your condescending tone.
I do not know what mix my neighbor’s dog is, and neither does he.
Comment by Canis — June 21, 2009 @ 1:26 pm
So nice to see you’re the only person on the Internet reading (and potentially educated by) JenniferJ’s nice comment . . . . . . .
Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 21, 2009 @ 1:37 pm
Wow maybe on some level doggie types can speculate about which humans breed with another human - and the resulting bizarro results - guess I could give examples but talk about not being PC - guess I’m missing somethin’ here…..
Comment by francis — June 21, 2009 @ 1:39 pm
all this breed talk seems reminiscent of plantation owners comparing their stock and God knows that was offensive y’all.
Comment by francis — June 21, 2009 @ 1:50 pm
francis, think about it this way: Breeds were developed through “selective breeding” - named such because (theoretically, anyway) the comminity of breeders within a breed were selectively breeding dogs towards specific desirable traits that would - taken collectively - define the breed. This is why you see such a wide variation in physical types between breeds - the desirable traits in a dog meant to run down an antelope on an open plain (a sighthound - tall, long, lean and lanky) will not be the same desirable traits in a dog meant to chase vermin down their holes (think terriers and daschhunds). Some of this goes back to the “purpose bred” v.s. “companion bred” discussions as well, but for now, just focus on the physical characteristics that result when you breed a dog to “do a job” and how much they can differ.
So now if you have someone step into this and take these different - sometimes WILDLY different - physical types that dogs can come in and combine them for apparently no other reason than THAT THEY CAN - you’re just not always going to see the best interests of the dog being served. Because - physically - sometimes you’re going to end up with simply odd-looking. And sometimes your’e going to end up with something structurally unsound.
And MENTALLY, you stand a good chance of ending up with something that is more than the average dog owner is capable of dealing with. And where do you suppose THAT dog is going to end up?
So the discussion of unwise breed crosses touches on a lot more than just being PC or not.
Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 21, 2009 @ 1:57 pm
Woof! Honest to goodness I have reread the comments here and am not seeing condescending or “racist plantation owner” anywhere.
I sure as heck was not talking down to anyone. Many people who skim through here don’t make a habit of studying the difference between lethal dominant hairless traits and recessive hairlessness and so I apologize for trying to inform some of the more casual readers about how easy it is to introduce hairless to the mix.
I addressed my comments to Canis so that a casual reader or anyone who does not research esoteric canine genetics would get a quick overview of the whys and wherefores and know what comment sparked mine.
Francis, heavens, domestic animals are bred for advantageous traits. When I look at a pet dog, I want it to be healthy and mentally solid. That benefits everyone including and especially the dog. Careful selective breeding when considering any purposefully bred litter or puppy or adult dog helps assure this. People select particular breeds or crosses to fit needs and lifestyles, size, coat, activity levels, drive etc… Getting a good fit is a big part of keeping pets in homes. Mix breeds benefit from careful breeding of the parents, grandparents and so forth and all round mutts the same even if it’s a few generations back.
How is a frank discussion of the best and worst of what cross breeding animals with long established genetic traits, behaviors and abilities is possibly going to produce unsavory? I love mixed breed and mutt dogs. But they are not all perfect nor is the idea of breeding with an eye towards good genetics, no matter what breed, type, cross a bad thing.
Comment by JenniferJ — June 21, 2009 @ 2:24 pm
I’m guessing that ‘francis’ has bought into PETA’s ‘AKC= KKK’ kool-aid. =P
@theOTHERPat: Silkens are descended from stock from the ‘original longhair whippet breeder’ kennel (Windsprite). However, because that breeder claims that his longhair whippets are ‘pure’ whippets and the Silken folks went with outcrosses to refine the type into a more ‘borzoi-ish’ look, there was a split between the two factions. That’s why the Silken breedname was changed from ‘Silken Windsprite’ to ‘Silken Windhound’.
Comment by Pai — June 21, 2009 @ 3:39 pm
“Francis” believes that goggies should marry for love — after being surgically sterilized at four months of age, of course.
“Canis” believes that herm’s chosen screen name obviously announces to all that here is a cynological authority before whom we must all bow down.
And “Gem” figgers she can sell some pug-a-doodles to the readers here.
Comment by H. Houlahan — June 21, 2009 @ 3:40 pm
Oh, and JenniferJ, thanks for the overview of the hairless gene. I did not know that.
No idea when or how this knowledge will be useful, but then, that’s the thing about knowledge, isn’t it?
It strikes me that someone could put a little hairless stud onto, say, an AKC collie or a Samoyed, and create some real horrors.
The dentition problems — are those linked to the hairless gene, or a separate issue?
Comment by H. Houlahan — June 21, 2009 @ 3:50 pm
My own website is all about Cresteds, I go into the gene issue in depth there. It’s linked from my name here. =)
And yes, dentition is linked to hair growth. Premolars are always absent in a dog with the Crested/Xolo hairless gene.
Comment by Pai — June 21, 2009 @ 3:54 pm
btw, I’ve seen a GSD+Crested mix before. A perfectly formed, nekkid GSD with a long white tail plume, socks, and a short cap of head fuzz. Weirdest thing I’ve ever seen. o_O
Comment by Pai — June 21, 2009 @ 3:59 pm
Considering the fact that AKC stopped publishing actual registration numbers a few years ago, one has to wonder where the source of this little tidbit of information comes from.
Comment by The OTHER Pat
***********
Well, yes, but …
The fact that AKC is attempting to hide their fast and ignominious slide in registration numbers is not exactly evidence of the continued popularity of purebred dogs.
And many breeds that AKC claims as their own are being registered elsewhere — in greatest numbers by the puppymill registries.
And there are those of us who steward breeds and have declined the “honor” of ACK “recognition.” Many of our breeds are not exactly “rare” compared to the bottom quartile of AKC-registered breeds.
So AKC registration figures are not really the benchmark to use.
I’ve no idea how one tracks the sales of intentional mutts.
But I share your skepticism that INTENTIONALLY-BRED mutts are outstripping INTENTIONALLY-BRED purebreds, as a group.
Now, pet store sales of intentional mutts — I can easily believe that they are higher than those of puppymill purebreds sold through the same retail outlets.
Not exactly a figure I would be advertising if I was really an advocate of thoughtful and responsible cross-breeding for pets.
Comment by H. Houlahan — June 21, 2009 @ 3:59 pm
I got to spend some time with some american hairless terriers recently.
They are a recessive hairless with normal dentition. My understanding is that they have peach fuzz at birth but then shed it.
I think, but don’t know, if that’s the same sort of situation for sphinx cats.
Pai, that’s a lovely, concise overview on your site. It reminds me I need to work on mine!
Comment by JenniferJ — June 21, 2009 @ 4:13 pm
Also, the breeder of “Longhaired Whippets” claimed they were a naturally occurring Whippet with long hair, but DNA has since shown what everyone “knew” all along — that coat came from the Sheltie.
Today’s Silken Windhound was developed from those dogs and Borzois, and the little dogs are really very nice, sighthound-y, dog-friendly small pretty little things. And they run! Some of them bark a lot, yet more evidence of their Sheltie heritage and ultimately the reason I decided against them for myself.
The Silken Windhound people fully acknowledge their dogs have Sheltie behind them — they’d be idiots not to, given that they’re the ONLY sighthound breed with Multiple Drug Sensitivity. They certainly couldn’t have gotten it from a Whippet or Borzoi ancestor!
They also have a really terrific club with a very progressive attitude towards health research and testing. ALL registered Silkens have to deposit a DNA sample at a gene bank at UC Davis. For a small group with a newish, non-AKC breed, they’re very cohesive, proactive, and dedicated. They impress the hell out of me.
Comment by Christie Keith — June 21, 2009 @ 4:14 pm
Naw Pai - I’m no fan of PETA can’t stand what they’ve become - and Houlahan you crack me up but goggie’s are capable of love - I’m just trying to learn stuff about how breeder’s do what they do - no disrespect intended to caring breeders but I think a living dog whatever its background deserves some respect too - I did find some of the comments condescending and admittedly I stick up for the underdog - always have…..
Comment by francis — June 21, 2009 @ 4:18 pm
They also have a really terrific club with a very progressive attitude towards health research and testing. ALL registered Silkens have to deposit a DNA sample at a gene bank at UC Davis. For a small group with a newish, non-AKC breed, they’re very cohesive, proactive, and dedicated. They impress the hell out of me.
Comment by Christie Keith — June 21, 2009
Drew wants to know why you keep bringing that Sheltie thing up like it’s a Bad Thing. :)
I gotta say, since you started researching the Silkens I’ve seen enough to be pretty impressed with their club. Plus, the dogs are really, really adorable. (Again, Drew says that’s the Sheltie influence.)
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 21, 2009 @ 4:20 pm
I went and watched the silkens the day before Del Valle last year, very nice little dogs. I was also really impressed at the care going into their development.
Comment by JenniferJ — June 21, 2009 @ 4:27 pm
LOL… no disrespect meant to Drew or the other Shetland Sheepdogs!
Comment by Christie Keith — June 21, 2009 @ 4:28 pm
Jennifer… I was the ring steward that day!
Comment by Christie Keith — June 21, 2009 @ 4:29 pm
francis … you are aware that you OWN your pets, right?
And I don’t think anyone here would say that dogs don’t “love” in their own doggie way, but if you’ve ever managed a bitch in heat and intact males, you’d know that love has nothing to do with how puppies are made.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 21, 2009 @ 4:35 pm
Rosie, coming in season, eyeing her (long-ago neutered) brother — and I swear I am hearing a driving beat and Tina Turner …
What’s love got to do, got to do with it …
Comment by H. Houlahan — June 21, 2009 @ 4:40 pm
The other pat wrote:
<>>>
On the Wiki page they state that the long haired gene is naturally found in the breed and, at least to me, imply strongly that it didn’t come from a sheltie. Well also at the bottom it says the MDR1 gene is found in long haired whippets.
Hmmm . . . The MDR1 gene is widespread in collies (75% of the breed carry the gene). It’s a mutation that affects how certain drugs (ivermectin & imodium are two of them) are transported across the brain/blood barrier. The MDR1 gene is also found in lesser percentages in related herding breeds: BC, Aussie, Shelties, etc and oddly enough in only two sighthound breeds: the Longhaired whippet & the Silken Windhound. The MDR1 gene is not found in regular shorthaired whippets, nor greyhounds, nor Borzois, etc.
So one of the early Longhaired Whippets could have spontaneously developed the MDR1 gene mutation . . . or, more likely, they have some Sheltie in the woodpile.
It’s not that I care either way but I find it funny how hard some Longhaired whippet fanciers argue that their dogs are pure whippet, dammit, with no Sheltie.
Comment by chris — June 21, 2009 @ 4:42 pm
Whenever Silken people talk about Longhaired Whippets they make air quotes around it. Very amusing.
Comment by Christie Keith — June 21, 2009 @ 4:45 pm
Any condensation about designer breeds here is likely to be directed at the breeders, not the dogs. And only because the majority of the designer producers are hump-and-dump style who do no testing or screening and are not honest with themselves or the buying public about the possible downsides. Feeding on a misconception that you can avoid all the puppymill health and temperament issues because of the “mix” factor may be good business, but it’s poor ethics.
Sticking up for the underdog in my book means standing up to any indiscriminate breeding, purebred, designer or purpose bred.
I was at an agility and fly ball meet in Oregon and a woman was proudly showing me her BC, kelpie, catahoula cross. She said it had taken years to get the combination just right and that there had been 11 in the litter and this was the best. As I watched the dog literally bouncing off the walls in a frenzy to get out to go run his relay, I asked how the heck you find homes for the other ten. She told me they all went to good pet homes except for the two others competing. But further questioning revealed she had done no follow up. No spay neuter agreements or contracts either, why would she? They were so healthy.
I can assure you these dogs were likely way too much dog for most average pet owners. They were purpose bred, but not in a responsible way. I know that many of the breeders breeding for these performance sports are very good responsible folks, but not all.
At the end of the day, breeders have a reponsibility to produce dogs that will be able to fit in with and survive domestic life, and do what is needed to find appropriate homes as companions or working partners and that requires transparency and honesty about the dogs pros and cons.
Being honest that breeding a high prey drive, low compliance, high energy terrier to a high energy, vocal scent hound with a low level of desire to please may not create a dog that is easy to live is responsible. Hunters utilizing dogs such as this for, say, pig hunting is one thing. Joe’s interweb puppy factory selling them as the “perfect” companion is a whole other.
Comment by JenniferJ — June 21, 2009 @ 4:50 pm
“Jennifer… I was the ring steward that day!”
Small world, please let me know next show you’ll be at, I’d love to come say hi! :)
Comment by JenniferJ — June 21, 2009 @ 4:54 pm
One of the funniest crosses I’ve seen was a Cardigan Corgi x tri Smooth Collie - he had typical collie tri markings, a fairly collie-ish head with a shallow stop, slightly round eyes, big honking Cardi ears and short Corgi legs. He looked like a low-rider Smoothie.
The prettiest cross I’ve ever seen was a Ibizan Hound x Smooth Collie. It was a sable with dark pigmentation and looked like a very racy, aerodynamic smooth collie. I think it worked as a cross as the two breeds are alike in general build & style.
Note, neither of these two crosses were on-purpose, they were both from oops litters.
One thing I’ve noticed about Shar-pei crosses is that the small stiff ears and the fat lips/meaty muzzle are often inherited whole. I’ve seen a Shar-pei x Golden, a Shar-pei x Chow and a Shar-pei x Dalmation and they all had the big fat muzzles/lips and little tightly folded stiff ears. I hope to goD, no one ever crosses a Shar-pei with a collie.
Comment by chris — June 21, 2009 @ 5:01 pm
It’s arguable - who owns who but I know legally I’m the owner - also my only recollection of dogs in heat comes from childhood - it was in the country when dogs would “lock up” and the children (me) would run around asking what’s that doggie doing to that other doggie…..and a grown-up would get a pail of water or a hose and drench the hapless pair…..really that’s about all I know and that I’ve spay/nuetered my dogs and cats as an adult - this is all from the dinosaur era way before Tina Turner changed the landscape of love.
Comment by francis — June 21, 2009 @ 5:06 pm
Wow maybe on some level doggie types can speculate about which humans breed with another human - and the resulting bizarro results - guess I could give examples but talk about not being PC - guess I’m missing somethin’ here…..
Comment by francis — June 21, 2009 @ 1:39 pm
Um, I doubt it. Compared to dogs, humans have no genetic diversity. Trivial differences in hair texture or hair and skin color, trivial differences in head and facial structure, only four blood types; even comparing the Watusi/Tootsie people to the Pygmies doesn’t get you anywhere near the divergence between chihuahuas and Irish Wolfhounds.
Speculate about the weird ways we dress, sure. But the most genetically diverse domestic species wasting time speculating about the “bizarro” breeding possibilities in one of the least diverse domestic species? I kinda doubt it. :)
More seriously, humans have been selectively breeding dogs for thousands of years, and it’s impossible to do that responsibly or to any real purpose, without discussing the possible results of various combinations.
Comment by Lis — June 21, 2009 @ 5:24 pm
Lis - I think you mean plasticity of the gene pool, not diversity.
Comment by Cait — June 21, 2009 @ 6:02 pm
That someone would deliberately breed a Pug to a nose with legs is appalling to me on oh so many levels.
I am very fond of Pugs. They are charming and fun-loving dogs who are bright and capable of much more than folks give them credit for. I have one here for training and he is a brilliant little dog.
I own one currently “on loan” to a trainer friend of mine who wanted a low maintenance companion with no issues for her other dog. He has no breathing issues, is healthy and possesses remarkable stamina. I hooked him out of a shelter half dead from pneumonia at the age of three months.
I also have worked with many ‘puggles’ in the last few years I wouldn’t feed let alone buy. I have one here right now for training that is one of the nastiest little buggers I have met in a long time. Each owner has personally told me that if they had it to do over again, they would certainly choose more wisely. Two of the last four were bred at the same “kennel” and both suffer from the same skin issues, temperament problems and nasty biter dispositions.
Doodles in this part of the country are a mish mash of somebody’s dog bred to somebody’s else’s dog for a quick buck. Temperaments range from bad to horrible. I think I have seen one with a decent temperament as a pet since they became popular.
I had a gal in a group class about a decade ago who spent over 2 grand on one of the Australian crosses and it was a disaster.
The worst deliberate combo I have seen (and I have seen a lot of them) is a yorkie bred to a mini dachshund of the long coat variety. I have yet to see one with a decent temperament and they are ugly.
I have no problem with purposefully breeding breed A to breed B if there is something of value to either conserve or create from the cross. I am adamantly opposed to the arbitrary cross of those dogs for any other reason.
There was an individual locally deliberately breeding Labs to Goldens as service dogs and had such a high incidence of HD that all of the dogs were washing out of training for health issues at incredibly young ages.
CCI was doing it too, I can only hope that they used a higher selection criterion for their breeding stock.
Worse yet is the habit of shelters creating fanciful breed names for their shelter dogs in the hopes of making them more adoptable.
Comment by Linda Kaim — June 21, 2009 @ 6:33 pm
There was an individual locally deliberately breeding Labs to Goldens as service dogs and had such a high incidence of HD that all of the dogs were washing out of training for health issues at incredibly young ages.
CCI was doing it too, I can only hope that they used a higher selection criterion for their breeding stock.
Worse yet is the habit of shelters creating fanciful breed names for their shelter dogs in the hopes of making them more adoptable.
Really? Shelters creating cute names for the mixes they have to help the puppies catch the eyes of potential adopters is worse that creating a deliberate mix that has such a high rate of hip displasia that the washout rate from their intended purpose is close to 100%? Truly? You’re serious?
Comment by Lis — June 21, 2009 @ 6:57 pm
… situation for sphinx cats.
Well, I’m not an expert — it’s just something I’ve read about a bit because I’ve got a Sphynx — but since no-one else has chimed in … the Sphynx gene is autosomal recessive, and produces a cat with a reduced rather than absent coat — typically, a very short, fine fuzz, palpable but mostly not visible save at the snoot and ears, with very short crinkly whiskers. There are three other genes which produce something closer to hairlessness in cats, two of which are recessive and one dominant, that being the Hp gene of the Russian Donskoy hairless.
Comment by Eucritta — June 21, 2009 @ 7:38 pm
Right now I’m wishing I had a hairless cat, I tell you.
Ilario got out and came back with hundreds — and no, I’m not exaggerating — of tiny round burrs in his coat. He is not in a good mood about it, either, and it will take me days to get him cleaned up. He is not exactly being cooperative.
Honestly, I am consider shaving him, except that the burrs slide out easily with a Furminator. Except that there are, you know, hundreds of them. On one cat. He is so furious with me after just a few minutes of gently working with him that he is hiding in the garage, glaring at me from a rafter.
Damn.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 21, 2009 @ 7:48 pm
Cats. Gotta love ‘em.
Comment by Susan Fox — June 21, 2009 @ 8:07 pm
Love how they figure things out. My current elder statesman, “T” knows whenever any form of grooming is on the way. He once loved it, now would prefer not to be bothered, especially for ear care.
Rule one is to get the dog door blocked as he goes from 3-toed sloth to formula one within a nano-second of seeing a grinder or bottle of ear cleaner.
And will stand right on one side or the other of the flap and hop back and forth through to avoid capture!
Comment by JenniferJ — June 21, 2009 @ 8:12 pm
Poodle crosses. I have a lovely Standard as a service dog in training and people keep asking me to bred him with their dogs. Absolutely not. I’m not actually that big of a lab fan, so I can’t see why you’d want to dilute the poodle greatness.
Comment by AmandaS — June 21, 2009 @ 10:17 pm
“Can you please cite some of the actual peer-reviewed, published studies here?
Comment by Katie Bruesewitz — June 21, 2009 @ 5:35 am”
Here’s just a few of the peer-reviewed studies published in scientific journals that show mutts live longer and are healthier. I’d be very interested to see any studies showing the reverse, as I’ve been unable to find a single one:
1) B.N. Bonnett, A. Egenvall, P. Olson, . Hedhammar, Mortality in Swedish dogs: rates and causes of death in various breeds, The Veterinary Record, 12/7/1997, S. 40 - 44)
“Mongrels were consistently in the low risk category” (S. 41)
2) P.D. McGreevy & W.F. Nicholas, Some Practical Solutions to Welfare Problems in Pedigree Dog Breeding, Animal Welfare, 1999, Vol 8, 329-331
“Hybrids have a far lower chance of exhibiting the disorders that are common with the parental breeds. Their genetic health will be substantially higher.” (P338)
3) A. Egenvall, B.N. Bonnett, P. Olson, . Hedhammar,Gender, age, breed and distribution of morbidity and mortality in insured dogs in Sweden during 1995 and 1996, The Veterinary Record, 29/4/2000, p. 519-57
“Mongrel dogs are less prone to many diseases then the average purebred dog.” (S. 524)
4) R. Beythien, Tierarten- und Hunderassenverteilung, Erkrankungshufigkeit und prophylaktische Manahmen bei den hufigsten Hunderassen am Beispiel einer Tierarztpraxis in Bielefeld in den Jahren 1983-1985 und 1990-1992, 1998, Diss., Tierrztl. Hochschule Hannover
Mongrels require less veterinary treatment
5) A. R. Michell, Longevity of British breeds of dog and its relationship with sex, size, cardiovascular variables and disease, Vet. Rec., 27 Nov. 1999, S. 625-629
“There was a significant correlation between body weight and longevity. Crossbreeds lived longer than average but several pure breeds lived longer than cross breeds, notably Jack Russell, miniature poodles and whippets” (S. 627 - thus only small and toy breeds, as to be expected)
6) G.J. Patronek, D.J. Walters, L.T. Glickman, Comparative Longevity of Pet Dogs and Humans: Implications for Gerontology Research, J. Geront., BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES, 1997, Vol 52A,No.3, B171-B178
“The median age at death was 8.5 years for all mixed breed dogs and 6.7 years for all pure breed dogs For each weight group, the age at death of pure breed dogs was significantly less than for mixed breed dogs.” (p. B173)
7) H.F. Proschofsky et al, Mortality of purebred and mixed breed dogs in Denmark, Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 2003, 58, 53-74
“Higher average longevity of mixed breed dogs” Age at death (grouped by size) mixed breeds 8,11,13 years, purebreds 6, 10, 12 years”.
Comment by Gem — June 22, 2009 @ 1:17 am
“Comment by Gem — June 21, 2009 @ 12:48 am
Hybrid “Designer Dog” sales are now outstripping those of purebreds.
Considering the fact that AKC stopped publishing actual registration numbers a few years ago, one has to wonder where the source of this little tidbit of information comes from.
Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 21, 2009 @ 5:45 am”
That comes from an article published here in Australia by Don Bourke last year, using figures supplied by the ANKC and local government (council registration is compulsory in Australia).
Comment by Gem — June 22, 2009 @ 1:35 am
Gem, what about well bred purebreds versus, well bred mixes? I’m guessing they’d come out about the same, no?
They’re a reason big service dog schools have breeding programs. Even the crosses are carefully bred.
Comment by AmandaS — June 22, 2009 @ 3:13 am
Lis writes:
“Really? Shelters creating cute names for the mixes they have to help the puppies catch the eyes of potential adopters is worse that creating a deliberate mix that has such a high rate of hip displasia that the washout rate from their intended purpose is close to 100%? Truly? You’re serious?”
It creates unintended consequences. Like a market niche for cutesy designer breeds otherwise known as mutts.
People think they are getting something intentionally bred, which is not an image a shelter should be projecting and they create demand that should be discouraged instead of encouraged, don’t you think?
Is this really what shelters are all about?
Having worked in the shelter environment for close to a decade now, I have seen the metamorphosis and I am not in agreement with it.
Besides, it’s not about the image of puppies here, Lis: it’s the labels they give adult dogs to make them more adoptable. Here, as anywhere else, there is absolutely no problem adopting out pups. Designer misnomer or not.
Comment by Linda Kaim — June 22, 2009 @ 4:10 am
Linda, first of all, the market niche for cutesy designer breeds was not created by shelters trying to find homes for dogs—whatever the age of the dogs.
Secondly, while adopting out puppies is not remotely a problem anywhere in the northeast, I’m in regular contact with shelter and rescue volunteers in the deep south, where, yes, in fact, puppies are routinely killed “for space” because they can’t adopt them out quickly enough. (They think Mandatory Spay/Neuter would help, or is at least worth a try. They don’t believe me when I suggest that a low-cost voluntary spay/neuter program that requires the pet owner to produce a Medicaid card or some other proof of poverty is a program crippled at birth.)
Thirdly, the very fact that adult dogs are harder to adopt out is more reason for shelters to put more effort into making them as adoptable as possible.
Fourthly, my experience, which is admittedly not a scientifically valid study of the practices of North American shelters, is that most of them, once they have an interested potential adopter, do share what limited information they have and what the breed/breed mix identification is based on. (“The surrendering owner told us.” “This dog came in as a stray; this is our best guess.” Etc.)
Fifthly, while there are things shelters could do to make more of a difference than they currently do, such as far too many of them need much better adoption programs than they currently have, and leadership of the shelter industry needs to get with the comprehensive No Kill program, the shelter workers and volunteers on the front lines have the primary responsibility of getting the dogs adopted, not making a tiny and entirely theoretical contribution to reducing the popularity of “designer breeds.”
Sixthly, I’ve found that one of the most effective arguments in discouraging someone from buying a designer mutt from a pet store or directly from a mill is to show them the number of those fancy mixes on Petfinder. So, no, I don’t even buy your theory that slapping the fancy monikers on the mixed breeds they have is aiding the cause of the irresponsible breeders.
Comment by Lis — June 22, 2009 @ 5:28 am
all this breed talk seems reminiscent of plantation owners comparing their stock and God knows that was offensive y’all.
Comment by francis — June 21, 2009 @ 1:50 pm
Repeat after me: Dogs are NOT human. Dogs are NOT human. Dogs are NOT human.
And to equate dog breeding (or any selective breeding for that matter, from Airedale terriers to Merino sheep to zucchinis)to slave owners, Hitler, and the like, is to lessen the suffering of those individuals that had to suffer through slavery and genocide - and I most definitely want to remind you that no matter how terrible your life is, the fact that you can come on this blog (implying a basic level of literacy, computer access and an internet connection) and make a comment like that (implying you have been given certain basic freedoms, like freedom of expression) shows that you in NO way can even start to understand the issues involved in this discussion.
If you want to stay around, and discuss this in an adult manner, you are welcome. If you want to stay around, and add something to the discussion, even if I don’t agree with you, you are welcome. Hell, I’m not even asking you to have an open mind.
But DO NOT EVER imply that ANY animal has ever suffered in the same way that slaves did. It is not germane, and it lessens the impact of any relevant opinion you might actually have.
You should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself.
Comment by K. B. — June 22, 2009 @ 5:45 am
Comment by Lis — June 22, 2009 @ 5:28 am
while adopting out puppies is not remotely a problem anywhere in the northeast, I’m in regular contact with shelter and rescue volunteers in the deep south, where, yes, in fact, puppies are routinely killed “for space” because they can’t adopt them out quickly enough.
How much effort are they putting into getting those puppies transferred to northeast shelters where their chances at adoption are so much better?
http://www.adoptarescuepet.org/transport.htm
Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 22, 2009 @ 5:50 am
Lis writes:
“Linda, first of all, the market niche for cutesy designer breeds was not created by shelters trying to find homes for dogs—whatever the age of the dogs.”
Don’t recall suggesting that they did create it, but this certainly perpetuates it.
The OTHER Pat handled the rest quite nicely. I work with four transports that routinely take dogs out of the high kill shelters in the south and there seems to be no problem with recieving dogs from as far away as OVERSEAS to place in high adoption shelters across the North east, the Mid Atlantic and in states on the west coast.
Another issue I have issues with. If there is such a high population rate in this country and all, but I digress.
My question is why has it become such a crime to say “This dog is a GSD mix, or a Shih-Tzu mix as opposed to the glorious and most often erroneous identifiers. The dog is just as cute/funny/sweet/in need as the peekachu or cavachon they are advertising.
Comment by Linda Kaim — June 22, 2009 @ 6:01 am
How much effort are they putting into getting those puppies transferred to northeast shelters where their chances at adoption are so much better?
In general? Not nearly enough. In particular? Two of the people I’m in contact with have started a rescue org to do exactly that for the puppies and also the adults that would have a better chance of adoption in the northeast.
Comment by Lis — June 22, 2009 @ 6:04 am
Comment by Lis — June 22, 2009 @ 6:04 am
Two of the people I’m in contact with have started a rescue org to do exactly that for the puppies and also the adults that would have a better chance of adoption in the northeast.
Excellent! One step closer to a “No Kill Nation”!
Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 22, 2009 @ 6:10 am
Linda, no, sorry, the shelter workers who are actually trying to get dogs adopted rather than just killing them “for apace” because their shelters don’t have the programs and policies in place that they should, are not responsible for creating the “designer dog” niche and are not appreciable contributors to perpetuating it. People with a profit motive, and silly fashionistas who don’t know any better, are doing that just fine by themselves.
“…if there is such a high population rate in this country…” but you know that the problem is not really the pet birth rate nationwide, and if you pull dogs from high kill southern shelters, you know that not all of them are eager to send the dogs out of area, even if it’s the difference between life and death.
And the high adoption shelters in the northeast, don’t have the resources themselves to go down and take the dogs, so they take homeless dogs that will be highly adoptable from the organizations that are willing and able to bring them. They’re not taking foreign dogs in preference to American dogs, choosing to let the southern dogs die.
BTW, I have no idea whether you personally are guilty of this, but we’re sort of on the subject so I’ll mention it: Dogs from Puerto Rico are not “foreign” dogs; they are American dogs. Puerto Rico is part of the US, and Puerto Ricans are American citizens.
I wish I had a nickel for every time someone ranting about the supposed hypocrisy of high adoption shelters “importing” “foreign” dogs from Puerto Rico. And citing this as proof that there aren’t really all that many homeless American dogs, and the shelters should be closed…
Comment by Lis — June 22, 2009 @ 6:43 am
if you’ve ever managed a bitch in heat and intact males, you’d know that love has nothing to do with how puppies are made.
Isn’t that the truth, especially 24 hours after she comes out of heat, and tries to tear her former boyfriend’s head off. It’s one of the things that makes me laugh when groups like Best Friends ramble on about poor goggies that were “bred against their will”.
There’s no sluttier creature on the planet than a bitch in heat, and no point whatsoever in even bothering to attempt to breed a bitch who isn’t, so what’s the point of claims about dogs being bred ‘against their will’?
I hate that sort of ridiculous pandering. It completely dilutes the point they really should be making, which is one about responsible vs irresponsible breeding, and good animal husbandry versus bad.
Comment by FrogDogz — June 22, 2009 @ 7:18 am
I’d like to see shelter “marketing” for adoption be about the DOG, not some adowable fake label invented for the dog.
Back in the day, it was just the invention of the “pound boxer” and “terrier mix” for any pit bull/bully mix that the shelter staff thought was too nice to kill. That’s hard to fault, until the unsuspecting adopters’ landlord pitches a hissy on seeing the dog, or the ACO in a town with BSL comes knocking.
(A close friend had this exact thing happen. When they brought their new “terrier-lab mix” to see us, three days after adopting him, I had to deliver the truth. It did not matter for Mike and his wife, insofar as they already loved Rocco, and OMG, what a great dog. It did matter when training and managing him, as, among other things, Rocco could and would take down and keep down any dog that acted like a pratt towards him or his beloved lady, our Mel — never injured another dog, but it was classic pit bull technique. It did matter A LOT when they moved from NYC to Florida, and were limited in the towns where they could safely live or even drive through.)
Alternative: Pre-adoption education about the joys and responsibilities and frank handicaps of adopting a bully-type dog. Harder than coy mislabeling.
But I digress. Instead of declaring the frank mutt via best guess — He’s fifty-four pounds, has a short double coat, and might have some shepherd in him — and then adding value with, say, training provided by a volunteer, or even just a decent description of the dog’s actual temperament and strong points, the value is added with fanciful and misleading labeling: This here is a rare Mississippi spitz-a-doodle.
“Dog people” tend to treat such labels as ironic. It’s fun to joke about our beloved mutts’ putative heritages, especially when one can provide a send-up of the BS “breed histories” so beloved of the fancy clubs by embellishing one’s creative narratives.
Ordinary adopters accept the shelter workers as cynological experts (rarely true) and regard the marketing whimsy as important information. They are misled, and are driven to believe all sorts of nonsense about their own dogs. Nonsense gets in the way of understanding the dog and meeting his genuine needs. Nonsense in place of information can cause someone to adopt a totally unsuitable (for them) dog, and to have totally unsuitable expectations. And it makes the poor owner seem a fool.
Comment by H. Houlahan — June 22, 2009 @ 7:48 am
Comment by Lis — June 22, 2009 @ 6:43 am
and if you pull dogs from high kill southern shelters, you know that not all of them are eager to send the dogs out of area, even if it’s the difference between life and death
And this is another piece of the problem that needs to be addressed and solved. More attitudes that need to change.
Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 22, 2009 @ 8:07 am
Christie, you just did this because Gina was creepin’ up on your stats, didn’t you . . . . .
Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 22, 2009 @ 8:08 am
Don’t you worry: I’ll get even by assigning her more WORK. I AM her editor, you know. :)
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 22, 2009 @ 8:26 am
I”m No. 100. Again. How did that happen?
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 22, 2009 @ 8:27 am
Lis again:
“Linda, no, sorry, the shelter workers who are actually trying to get dogs adopted rather than just killing them “for space” because their shelters don’t have the programs and policies in place that they should, are not responsible for creating the “designer dog” niche and are not appreciable contributors to perpetuating it. People with a profit motive, and silly fashionistas who don’t know any better, are doing that just fine by themselves.
Your last statement says it all. They are just as culpable in more ways than you are willing to attribute. The shelter environments in this area MD< DC< DE< Metro PA are getting storefronts AS SHELTERS to dispense with their designer puppies as designer breeds. There was one in Abington MD until just a few short months ago. If they are not “People with a profit motive, and silly fashionistas who don’t know any better” I don’t know what else would qualify.
What shelter is not profit oriented? They have to pay the bills somehow. I just have a problem with misrepresenting a dog just because it fills the ‘gotta have it now, and oh, gee, it’s a rescue dog too” factor. AS Heather pointed out, what ever happened to representing the dog in the cage as what it is and capitalize on the efforts of the shelter to rehab it for a suitable home with training/socialization/grooming and just great care?
As for Puerto Rico, where in either of my posts did I mention there?
As far as I knew, neither Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Mexico or parts south of Mexico are members of the US of A but we are sure seeing a lot of pups and half grown dogs from these areas in considerable numbers. If they are in fact *NOT* from these areas, the public is buying it anyway, it’s the new thing, to have saved a dog from some faraway third world land.
I will allow you to do your own Google search for the material.
Comment by Linda Kaim — June 22, 2009 @ 11:41 am
For me it would be a cross between a dachshund and a miniature pinscher - in other words, a wiener pinscher ;)
Comment by Don Davidson — June 22, 2009 @ 12:01 pm
I forgot to mention Taiwan
Comment by Linda Kaim — June 22, 2009 @ 12:37 pm
just one last comment from me - regarding comparing human/animal suffering - read if interested one of the most memorable essays i ever read - Alice Walker’s short essay “Am I Blue?” (1986) I think - Blue is a horse and with Alice Walker he communicates basic ideas like the fact he loves to eat apples as well as complex emotions and a complex personality - Blue feels loneliness, boredom, independence, and more, very touching - (its a powerful story that will leave an impression) plus its true - teachers and students have used this story to aid discussions in ways animals communicate with each other and with humans - also didn’t mean to get your hackles up kb - if you don’t like what i write you can always avert your friggin’ eyes….
Comment by francis — June 22, 2009 @ 1:03 pm
What shelter is not profit oriented? They have to pay the bills somehow.
Ah, another person who doesn’t know what the difference between a for-profit and a not-for-profit organization is.
Yes, the not-for-profit has to pay its bills. Many, not all, but most that the average person is likely to interact with, have to pay salaries to some of there staff. If they are both well-run and somewhat fortunate, they may even generate a surplus that can either be reinvested to improve or expand services and operations, or it can be banked for a rainy day.
What non-profit/not-for-profit organizations don’t do, is take any of that surplus and redistribute to the personal benefit of private individuals, including the board members of the non-profit.
Whereas, taking some of that surplus and distributing it for the private benefits of the shareholders is the whole point of for-profit organizations.
This is not a small difference; I’ve been an active part of both kinds of organizations, and that difference in what the intended purpose is has a huge impact on how people approach certain kinds of decisions.
I’m not aware of any shelters that are for-profit corporations. Perhaps you are.
As for the foreign dogs and Puerto Rico, no, you did not mention Puerto Rico, and I referred specifically to the fact that you had not. However, your reference to foreign dogs had a familiar sound to it, and I thought it might be helpful to remind people again on that point.
With your new comment, your arguments are sounding even more familiar—shelters are “for profit” because they need to cover their costs, and there’s something self-evidently wrong about rehoming foreign homeless dogs to willing adopters in the US.
Sorry, but I don’t buy it. High-adoption shelters are not turning down American dogs in favor of death row dogs in the US; they take the adoptable dogs scheduled for death in southern shelters when they can get them. And they take the adoptable foreign dogs when that’s what’s available to offer to their willing adopters.
They’re all homeless dogs. I’m all for taking care of the homeless American dogs first, but the homeless foreign dogs are still homeless dogs, and still deserving of homes. Get more of the southern shelters to agree to ship the adoptable dogs in excess of what they can expect to rehome themselves to the shelters that are waiting for them, and fewer high-adoption shelters will be saying yes to adoptable foreign dogs. Then perhaps you can be less annoyed.
Comment by Lis — June 22, 2009 @ 1:43 pm
Francis - you equated animal breeding with some of the worst human suffering this world has known. It’s not simply a matter of “averting” my eyes”.
I will not be complicit with that sort of egregious snark though silence.
And you do know the difference between fiction and reality, right?
Comment by K. B. — June 22, 2009 @ 1:43 pm
Francis, I’ve read that story. It brought tears to my eyes. It was very touching. It may make some people look at horses and other animals with new eyes.
However, it does not qualify Alice Walker as knowledgeable or an expert on horses. She is projecting motive and reasons onto a horse to make a point about our fellow sentient beings.
Whether or not she literally believes that what she wrote about that horse is true, you sure as heck don’t know, unless you’ve spoken with her personally. It’s true in the sense that all great writing is true, as an expression of the writer.
Just because a teacher uses something like it as an example for students is also irrelevant as to whether or not something is “true”.
I just checked my copy of the book that “Blue” appears in. Although it is written in the first person, there is nothing in the book’s introductory material to suggest that it or any of the other content are “essays” or non-fiction, for that matter. The fact that you may have assumed that…..
Comment by Susan Fox — June 22, 2009 @ 2:02 pm
I could only read the first part of the essay on an Amazon “search inside,” as I don’t have the anthology.
And I wonder why black folks didn’t slap Ms. Walker silly for it. Honestly. Great writer, that has not changed, but really! My great-grandparents were not bought and sold, were not ripped from their mothers’ arms or severed from their spouses, but I am offended as a member of the human race by the unabashed equivalency.
Is it unacceptable to keep a stallion isolated from other horses, unsocialized, unridden, and bored?
I would say yes.
Is it unacceptable because the stallion has a romantic attachment to a mare-wife?
Nonsense.
Pure projection, and more than that, a denial of the social animal’s actual needs — which certainly gets in the way of actually meeting those needs.
Comment by H. Houlahan — June 22, 2009 @ 2:17 pm
You know what I felt it when I read it so long ago…if you don’t feel it you don’t….I don’t think slapping Alice silly for writing it would help any either….and really discussing with some of y’all is like arguing with a drunk on a barstool…..
Comment by francis — June 22, 2009 @ 2:59 pm
Lis, there are some U.S. high adoption shelters that have been documented as turning away even local adoptable pets in favor of cherry picked imports from Mexico and other countries. People had a snit fit over it.
The organizations were private, not public, and they have a right to decide that they don’t want large brown mix breed dogs from 2 hours down the road. But some of these same organizations were concurrently pushing MSN because of overpopulation and citing the deaths at those same shelters of the same pets they had no desire to take on.
That is a problem and something that needs calling out. Same with shelters which refuse to transfer to rescues or higher adoption, lower shelter pet population areas then blame everyone else.
Comment by JenniferJ — June 22, 2009 @ 3:25 pm
“and really discussing with some of y’all is like arguing with a drunk on a barstool…..” Francis
You’re free to leave us to it at ANY time. Trust us, we won’t mind a bit.
Comment by Susan Fox — June 22, 2009 @ 3:29 pm
I have met two very nice dogs of mixes, that if said aloud, could end up on the dog-from-hell list. In fact, they are “happy accidents”. #1. The Papillon-Pembroke Welsh Corgi mix(dynamite agility dog!)#2. The Australian Cattle Dog-Parson Russell Terrier cross (a Cattle Russler)also great at agility. Who knew?
Comment by Martha Mullis — June 22, 2009 @ 4:29 pm
Don’t know which shelters you’re referring to, Jennifer, but it’s quite possible that large brown mixed breed dogs weren’t what they were experiencing high adoption rates for. The key does have to be moving the dogs to where they are adoptable.
But if they were also pushing MSN, then it’s clear they’re organizations I don’t see eye to eye with anyway, and there’s a limit to how far I’ll go in expending energy defending them in the abstract.
OTOH, a few months ago, a shelter in Maine was leaping for joy at getting an entire, large, litter of coonhound mix pups, and their mom. They adopted out all fourteen of the dogs within a couple of weeks of the pups being weaned. And they regularly take medium to larger southern dogs of various ages, and adopt them out successfully. It’s all in knowing what will be considered an “adoptable” dog in your area, and being able and willing to move the dogs to where they’ll be “adoptable.”
(And having good adoption programs and accessible hours, and speutering shelter animals before they go out the door, and good outreach to bring in adopters and donations, and good low-cost spay/neuter programs including the means to bring the services to where the people who need them can access them, and a whole lot of other stuff. But being able to get the dogs to where they have a fair chance of being wanted is a biggie. A high-drive cattle dog won’t look adoptable to someone who lives in an apartment, works all day, and has no desire to do the amount of exercise that dog will require. And a sweet, affectionate Chinese Crested or Maltese will not look adoptable to someone who actually NEEDS a cattle dog, or a retriever, or whatever.)
Comment by Lis — June 22, 2009 @ 4:43 pm
… a denial of the social animal’s actual needs ….
YES. This is what malign sentimentalization does: it denies the real animals, abridges and bowdlerizes them, refuses to acknowledge or accommodate those aspects which are not congruent with our beliefs or desires, or which provoke our fears.
And animal rights proponents seem to do this every bit as much as Mrs Grundy, or, for that matter, Dolores Umbridge. Which has always been a bit of a mystery to me, since it seems to me that if you love animals, as rightists claim to do, you’d want to know more about them and be of more use to them rather than less.
Comment by Eucritta — June 22, 2009 @ 4:43 pm
Lis, a bit o’ info about ME. I have lived, breathed, sweated and bled in shelters for years. I have worked for ‘for-profit and not-for-profits, run privately and run by county shelters for aeons.
I watched or participated in the death of 143 dogs and 206 cats in a shelter in Florence South Carolina in 1982; held 143 dogs and over 200 cats in one night and SWORE that I would work to see to it that that particular little piece of history was NEVER repeated. Take a look, do the research. I am sure if you look in the right places the information would still be available.
We loaded their bodies in a dumpster like garbage so they could be hauled off by the county like trash. I was 22 years old. I will never forget it.
Dr Louis Beckham presided as we systematically euthanized almost 400 animals in ONE NIGHT.
It was as close to an apocalypse as I hope to ever be a part of.
I am not the enemy here. I just an so tired of hearing about the plight of animals in this country to see reported in more than my own community that dogs are being imported enmasse to the USA from South of the Border and from overseas for placement here. Several people have been treated for rabies from Satos brought over from PR so as far as I’m concerned, they are not exempt.
It means competition for dogs domestically. As in here. Your back yard and mine.
No matter how you look at it, the little black pit mix will die because the cutesy little poo mix is marketed as being more desirable. THAT IS STILL THE SHELTER’S FAULT. No matter whose rose colored glasses you are looking through. Right here, on this very blog was a story a few months ago about the two ‘stores’ being run BY SHELTERS marketing the poor little puppy mill doodles and poos as a MARKETING TACTIC for more affluent communities like Orange County and Beverly Hills.
Do not presume to think that they are not in some way a part of the problem, they are certainly not a part of the solution with tactics like that.
I am not opposed to the placement of homeless animals, never said I was, no way, no how. I am however opposed to the misleading balderdash that passes as facts to procure homes for what naive people are expecting are exotics when in fact they are not. It is a disservice to dogs. It is also a tad more than just deceptive.
So you are essentially saying that it’s ok for shelters to lie to the public?
Comment by Linda Kaim — June 22, 2009 @ 6:58 pm
Lis, thats why I said that as a private organization, they have the right to bring in for adoption whatever they think they can most effectively move.
No argument there.
But then pointing to the numbers dogs killed in those same open admittance shelters to promote blanket anti-breeding and MSN is not going to fly with me.
Opening a dialog about which segments of the pet population in a given area would benefit from targeted low cost programs, using data collected from local shelters regarding exactly which dogs are over-represented, that I can get behind.
Comment by JenniferJ — June 22, 2009 @ 7:02 pm
So, I don’t think Gem is coming back to answer me. A pity.
Comment by AmandaS — June 22, 2009 @ 7:29 pm
Linda,
That is a horrific story, the 400+ in one night. It’s a wonder that you were able to ever return to a shelter.
Comment by Mary Mary — June 22, 2009 @ 7:59 pm
What’s sickening is that it happened at all. There was a really virulent form of dog distemper going around and parvo was still virtually “new”.
Dogs and cats came in and within days they were dying.
Cats were rampant with FIPV, leukemia and a bunch of stuff I had never heard of nor seen since. I tested positive for toxo when I was pregnant with my son. Talk about your scary moments.
It was a county run shelter and the Board decided to burn it to the ground and start again. Unfortunately, the grounds were so disease infested, there was no funding to build another shelter, let alone treat, prevent or segregate sick from well populations. It was a constant source of embarrassment to the county, it was plagued with scandals involving money, selling animals to research facilities, all sorts of things.
The people were all so dismissive of the animals. The director at the time was such a bitch. Her only comment outside of “it had to be done” was “well, there’s no shortage of animals around here (Florence SC) I’m sure we’ll be stacking them like cordwood in another year.”
I wanted to kill her.
I left instead. After I lifted the last body into the dumpster.
There was a little girl named Tammy that worked at the shelter at the same time. I never remembered her last name. We stayed in touch for a few years afterward, she went to grooming school in Philly and committed suicide a few years later. I always wonder if that night had something to do with it.
Enough depressing stuff for now. This is east coast time and well past my bedtime.
For some odd reason, I can’t seem to get to sleep.
Comment by Linda Kaim — June 22, 2009 @ 9:57 pm
when we first moved to the area, our local shelter was a roach motel.
I picked up, from the middle of a busy intersection, a little brindle lurcher pup.
Two kinds of mites, fleas, ringworm assorted intestinal parasites and 4 days after bringing him home, corona, whee!
I called the shelter to let hem know in case (snort ) someone was looking for him.
Long story short, I was told I had no business trying to keep him and I HAD to, by law, bring him in. I knew it was BS and was then told I had to keep him for two months as a civillian, also BS. Ms Personality di not like my comment that as they could and would kill him within days I was gonna choose life for him.
Three days later every dog in the shelter was killed when one tested positive for parvo. Norton survived corona, worming and lyme dips, ended up 31 inches tall and found a nice home with a family from Jenner on the coast.
The shelter is a very different place now. Regime change! New facility, quarantine and TLC. A Pit Ed program and a full time adoption coordinator. But in the Bad Old Days, less than a decade ago killing every un-owned dog and cat because craptastic or absent hygiene standards led to disease was pretty damn standard.
I can only imagine the damage dealing with “scorched earth” type shelter clearings/killings on a regular basis would do to anyone with an ounce of empathy.
Comment by JenniferJ — June 22, 2009 @ 10:49 pm
“Gem, what about well bred purebreds versus, well bred mixes? I’m guessing they’d come out about the same, no?
They’re a reason big service dog schools have breeding programs. Even the crosses are carefully bred.
Comment by AmandaS — June 22, 2009 @ 3:13 am”
No. Very few of the studies included “well bred” mixes, as in truth their are very few of them to be found. The vast majority of the mixes in the studies were likely to have originated from backyarders and/or puppy mills.
If you increased the ratio of “well bred” mixes (ie parents chosen for compatibility and health, and tested for inheritable problems) in the studies, it would be expected that the longevity of the mutts in the study would be even further enhanced.
Comment by Gem — June 23, 2009 @ 1:15 am
Gem, Amanda did not suggest that the dogs in the study were “well bred” mixes. She’s after, I think, a different point, which perhaps I can clarify:
Where did the dogs in the study come from?
Did the “purebreds” come only from the kind of careful, responsible breeders who health screen, temperament screen, don’t breed dogs with health problems, don’t breed more than a few litters a year and don’t ordinarily breed the same bitch more than two or three times in her lifetime? Who give excellent care and nutrition to the bitch and her puppies, so that they get a great start on a healthy life? Or were they a random selection of “purebred” dogs whose owners had enough care to take them to the vets’ regularly and become part of the study? Dogs most of whom will have been from careless, indifferent, ignorant, or coldly mercenary backyard breeders or puppy millers, who don’t screen, don’t care what’s wrong with the dog (even obvious genetic health problems) as long as they can still produce puppies, breed every heat for the productive life of the bitch?
And where did the mutts come from? Were they selected only from those dogs whose whole history was definitely known, got their start in someone’s kitchen or bedroom, where despite the carelessness that led to their conception, every puppy got the best chance possible? Or were they a random selection of dogs whose owners cared enough to bring them to the vets’, some loveed and cared for from birth, some the only survivors of their litters, some adopted from shelters where the dogs who came in with obvious and significant health problems were killed or else became permanent residents or permanent fosters with a rescue organization?
I.e., was this really a statistically and scientifically valid study, or was there selection bias, that led to the comparison of the healthiest mutts with a selection of “purebreds” that didn’t reflect what responsible breeding is and what it produces?
Comment by Lis — June 23, 2009 @ 5:17 am
Thanks, Lis, that’s exactly what I meant.
Comment by AmandaS — June 23, 2009 @ 5:29 am
Oh Yippee Skippee. Just got a call from a young guy who is recently married and figgered that he and his wife would try the kid thing by buying a “Morgie” (Maltese/Yorkie)from a “breeder” in Pennsylvania no less.
They have had the dog, an 11 week old male pup, for four days.
His words: “We are already going insane.”
Wonderful.
So I get to see this under-socialized, undernourished, maladjusted product of some nincompoop in a few days.
I can hardly wait.
Comment by Linda Kaim — June 23, 2009 @ 6:18 am
Linda,
I think there is more than one nincompoop in that story.
Comment by Mary Mary — June 23, 2009 @ 6:37 am
Yes. Yes, there is.
I had dogs for years before the boy was born. There’s NOTHING similar between the two experiences!!
Comment by Linda Kaim — June 23, 2009 @ 6:58 am
Linda, this is why, I suppose, so many new parents give up their original “baby” when the human one arrives?
I am currently fostering two medically needy rabbits, 7 or 8 years old, who were given the boot by a couple I would NEVER have guessed would do this. I placed one of the rabbits with them six years ago, feeling totally confident that it was a permanent home.
Six years later the baby comes and bye bye pets. Even pets that don’t need to be walked or let outside are suddenly too much bother.
These bunny ladies are too sick to take to the shelter — and pretty much no one would adopt them anyway at their age and trainwreck status; it’s hard enough to place the young healthy ones — so it looks like I’ve become a hospice foster, at least to one of them.
I hope their kid never inconveniences them.
I am very grumpy about this.
Comment by Mary Mary — June 23, 2009 @ 7:08 am
Mary Mary, I think the karmic come-around for procreation-facilitated pet dumping comes waaaay down the line, in the form of —
Cheapest possible nursing home
Comment by H. Houlahan — June 23, 2009 @ 7:29 am
In the brief few moments I spoke to this clown, er guy; we broached that conversation of pet as child substitute.
I pity the kid if one ever materializes.
I pity the dog either way, regardless of it’s dubious beginnings. Or ending.
Comment by Linda Kaim — June 23, 2009 @ 7:40 am
H. Houlahan,
Ironic … my elderly mom is in the hospital. These old ladies tend to have their ambulance events at the most inconvenient times. Making me drive in a panic through last week’s tornadoes and general Apocalypse.
I didn’t have pets growing up … dogs were to live outside, in pens, and dogs were to be Beagles … but mom always gave us the ends of the bread loaves to tear up and throw out for the birds. I would not do this to the birds now, but it’s a gentle memory. Sitting on the porch, watching the sparrows and robins etc. fussing over the crumbs.
I wonder if some social scientist will ever prove the connection between animal dumpers and people dumpers.
Comment by Mary Mary — June 23, 2009 @ 7:42 am
Recently, on a pet forum I read regularly, a new member posted saying that she’s having a baby in five months, wants the baby to grow up knowing and loving dogs from the beginning, and what breed would be good with a new baby? Could be relied upon to not hurt the baby? And yes, she wanted a puppy.
So several of us proceeded to describe caring for a new baby and a new puppy at the same time. We described how much either we ourselves, or our mothers, had been with a new baby and a new puppy to care for at the same time—even with an older child who was actually willing and eager to do all of the puppy care they were able to do. And shelter and rescue people talked about the puppies and yound dogs surrendered to them because families just couldn’t cope with both a new baby and a new puppy at the same time.
And, thankfully, the new member got the point, admitted she had not thought through how hard it would be to work with both of them at the same time, and decided that she would wait on the dog until the baby is five or six years old.
I think a lot of the problem is that too many places (pet stores, internet puppy mills) don’t have any motive to explain to people what they’re getting into if they bring a puppy and a baby into the family at the same time. Shelters that are killing puppies on a routine basis also may not have much motive to do so (after all, there’s a chance it will work out, and it may be more chance than the puppy has in the shelter.)
And the shelters that have fewer puppies and more time to find homes for them, as well as good, responsible breeders, may not have the people skills to explain it in a way that won’t leave the family offended and annoyed rather than enlightened. So then off to the puppy store, the internet, or the byb, and the puppy of their dreams that may turn into a living nightmare for them.
Comment by Lis — June 23, 2009 @ 7:44 am
Five months seems like plenty of time to get a nice dog adapted to your life before the new baby comes, especially if you set up the routine with the new baby’s arrival in mind from the get go. It’s not like she was two weeks from her due date!
I agree, a puppy would be too much, but a nice mannered medium sized young adult dog? I think this could potentially have been a great home. Her motive was fantastic and IMO accurate. I think kids should grow up with pets. I did.
I think we dump on people way too much when they transgress against our standards of
perfectionresponsible pet ownership. And that’s not an editorial “we.” I include myself in that, definitely. But it is a habit I’m trying to break.Comment by Christie Keith — June 23, 2009 @ 7:49 am
It all harkens back to the sense of responsibility people either have in abundance or lack entirely when it comes to these things. I just thank the stars that the woman is not yet preggers.
When people put more thought into the car they buy, the fridge in their kitchens and not enough on the pet that will potentially share their home for the next 10 plus years it makes my head reel and my hands shake.
Is common sense being bred out of the human race?
Comment by Linda Kaim — June 23, 2009 @ 7:54 am
Christie,
Do you think that a first-time dog owner (I am assuming that is the case with this pregnant woman) should take on that challenge during the final four months of her first pregnancy?
Some of the people I’ve know who dump their dogs when the baby comes do it because of the “dirt” factor. They are so paranoid about santizing everything for their baby that suddenly the dog hair and dirt tracked and (and maybe fecal microbes!) become a major threat.
I think if she’d lived with dogs for a long time — or if this weren’t her first baby — she might be more desensitized to the germ factor.
I don’t think it’s dumping on someone to caution them using facts.
Comment by Mary Mary — June 23, 2009 @ 7:58 am
Christie, she wanted a puppy. It was important to her to have a puppy. And my own suggestion was that she wait until she was adjusted to the baby and its demands on her, and get a slightly older puppy when the baby is 8-10 months old.
And she was really planning on bringing them into the house at close to the same time, not five months apart. So that they could “grow up together.” Which is great, except that by the time the kid is old enough to take the dog and do stuff independently with him, the dog is getting old and maybe feeling the effects of age.
Getting a dog at ten, well, honestly I think I would have been fine getting a dog at five, who would then have been a mature but not elderly adult when my sister was born when I was ten:), but at ten, I was able to almost immediately start doing things with my dog.
It was rough for my mother, though, with a five-month-old baby and a ten-week-old puppy. I was able to do a lot for the puppy, but it was my mother who had to take responsibility for seeing that it all got done, and done appropriately.
A slightly older dog, one that’s already housetrained, might be a different, easier situation.
Comment by Lis — June 23, 2009 @ 8:09 am
It’s not a question of THIS particular woman. We can sit here all night long and come up with a thousand things that are specific *to her* and her situation.
It’s the overall point that we have become so tsk tsk and “are you sure you’ve considered this and that and the other thing” and “are you really ready” and “have you put enough thought into this” that it’s become our kneejerk response to every innocent expression of interest in owning a pet.
It’s our default.
That’s not helpful. Of COURSE making practical suggestions is helpful. What I’m saying is a kneejerk response is NEVER helpful. We should really listen to people and try to understand what it is they really want and are saying.
Again, this woman? No clue. I don’t know her or anything more than what I read here. But it’s like the “impulse adoption is bad.” Because people have GOOD impulses, too. Impulses to donate to charity or volunteer at a soup kitchen or adopt a homeless pet. And yet we act like “impulses” are some horrible thing that must be squelched at all costs, and that getting a dog or cat is as difficult as planning a year in the Himalayas.
Of course there are idiots out there. Always have been, always will be. But most people can figure out a way to integrate pets into their lives, if they want to, without quite as much effort, preparation, and obsessiveness as we all bring to it. Sometimes it’s we who are lacking in common sense, not the people we’re trying to educate.
Comment by Christie Keith — June 23, 2009 @ 8:53 am
The Wall Street Journal had a page 1 piece a few years back on the “trend” of people euthanizing older pets early because the kids wanted fun young pets. The old pets were the pre-child “test run” for the parents.
But when the kids were 8-10, the dogs and cats were 10-12, and just “not much fun anymore.” So … time for the needle and on to a new puppy/kitten to keep the children entertained.
I. Kid. You. Not.
And, like Linda, I wonder what those kids are going to think about caring for their parents when the parents are old, infirm and “not much fun anymore.”
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 23, 2009 @ 9:21 am
Boy Gina, that turns my stomach. But I’d bet some animal lovers would argue that there is NOTHING wrong with “retiring” a pet who has clearly completed his/her job.
There is that word, “wrong.” Is it unethical, short-sighted parenting, lazy, fill-in-the-blank to euthanize your pet when he/she is no longer wanted?
Oh that word is so wiggly.
Comment by Mary Mary — June 23, 2009 @ 9:39 am
His words: “We are already going insane.”
Good. Maybe they will decide not to reproduce themselves. Score one for our species. And maybe you can get them to re-home the poor pup.
Comment by Susan Fox — June 23, 2009 @ 10:31 am
Susan,
I get to see first-hand on Wednesday. I suspect that the husband is already there; the wife, I’ll see for myself.
Bad thing is, they “waited months” for this puppy (total BS considering the source) and paid a pretty penny.
I suspect that the pup was a no sale from a litter of thrivers who showed well and placed early or he was a forced return where the first home knew there was something wrong and took the dog back to the reluctant “breeder”. He was 11 weeks old when they picked him up from the airport a few days ago.
Gina:
I have seen that too. When I worked in a shelter two counties over, we went through a spate of owner surrenders for euthanasia of elderly, but perfectly healthy pets. The owners would openly admit that the pet had outlived it’s usefulness and the kids wanted something “a little more fun”.
AAAAAAAKKKKKKKKKKKKKK!
We were actually able to convert most of the requests to surrender for re-adoption, but there were a few selfish clueless ones that ‘insisted’ on euthanasia.
Man oh man. I hope I do a better job of raising my kid than THAT.
Comment by Linda Kaim — June 23, 2009 @ 11:50 am
A few times a year, I’ll take someone back to see the dogs and they’ll say they want an older dog and it’s everything I can do not to hug them.
I try to discourage the “test drive before kids” adopters, especially if they’ve never had a dog before. I know no one’s perfect, but I’m playin’ the odds here.
We always seem to have 1-3 8+ year olds. I have a shtick that I do if people notice them about how after a lifetime of love and loyalty they should be in a home being comfortable and coddled, instead of in a shelter confused and sad and sleeping on a concrete floor (albeit with blankets and radiant heat). I’m shameless.
Even is what they want is a hiking or running buddy, at least I’ve planted, I hope, a seed of sympathy for the oldsters.
I love it, though, when families come in and the kids are down on the floor with five or six puppies and that magical connection happens when the kid and the puppy say “You’re mine.”
On the other hand, the one that took the cake was the older, kind of slow-moving couple who came in. They asked if we had any puppies. I gently suggested the possibility of considering an older adult dog for all the usual reasons of calmer, known temperment and size, etc. and the woman smiled sweetly at me and said that no, they wanted a puppy so it would outlive them. *sound of jaw mentally hitting floor* Fortunately we had no puppies and they never came back that I know of. But really, is that selfish or what?
Comment by Susan Fox — June 23, 2009 @ 2:09 pm
I have a rescued beagle/JRT cross who is PERFECT, and her little brother, a rescued purebred JRT became a very good little boy with a bit of patience, exercise and training. The dogs aren’t the problem, the idiots who buy designer (or any) dogs and don’t know what to do with them are. Adopt don’t shop!
Comment by Amanda — June 23, 2009 @ 2:31 pm
Don’t tell me where to get my pets.
Comment by Susan Fox — June 23, 2009 @ 3:05 pm
Thanks, Amanda, but I’m quite happy to have helped support a great breeder.
Comment by AmandaS — June 23, 2009 @ 4:32 pm
Amanda sounds like you have two sweet little boys - I’ve always adopted and heartily recommend it - I remember a few years back the well-known country/western singer Randy Travis suggested in a PSA there be a voluntary moratorium on breeding until homes could be found for those already here……..but adoption is a crucial step in the efforts toward a NO KILL NATION.
Comment by francis — June 23, 2009 @ 4:36 pm
A great step towards a No-kill Nation would be for people to stop believing that the fact dogs are born is why there are dogs in shelters. There have been plenty of research into the reasons and demographics of pet surrenders, and aside from ‘oops litters’ (unintended pregnancies) which come dead last, every other reason for relinquishment is either behavioral or economic.
http://www.petpopulation.org/
Comment by Pai — June 23, 2009 @ 4:50 pm
remember a few years back the well-known country/western singer Randy Travis suggested in a PSA there be a voluntary moratorium on breeding until homes could be found for those already here……..but adoption is a crucial step in the efforts toward a NO KILL NATION.
Comment by francis — June 23, 2009
In the meantime, francis, generations of work to preserve heritage breeds of dogs, including many that still do important work for us all, would be utterly and irretrievably lost.
Ethical, reputable breeders did not put pets in those shelters, and they are not displacing homes for shelter pets.
What Pai says is true: This isn’t solved by forcing purpose-bred dogs and cats into extinction.
Unless, of course, you’re like PETA and an end to the existence of ALL domesticated animals truly IS the solution you’re working towards.
I absolutely adore Randy Travis, but I don’t consider him to be any sort of expert or reputable source on how to reduce killing for population control. I’m sorry, Nor would I take his advice on many, many other issues that he doesn’t know a darn thing about.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 23, 2009 @ 4:59 pm
I have a rescued beagle/JRT cross who is PERFECT, and her little brother, a rescued purebred JRT became a very good little boy with a bit of patience, exercise and training. The dogs aren’t the problem, the idiots who buy designer (or any) dogs and don’t know what to do with them are. Adopt don’t shop!
I have wonderful little girl, too, a sweet three-year-old Powderpuff Chinese Crested. She came from an excellent breeder—but not as a puppy, not to me. She didn’t work out in her first home, because no screening process is perfect and produces zero errors, and was returned to her breeder, who went looking for a new home for her, and found me. She was a year old, at the height of her adolescent rambunctiousness, and because she apparently wasn’t exposed to other dogs by her original buyer, she was afraid of them. She was stressed, unhappy, scared of other dogs, scared of people—not anything like the breeder’s own dogs. An overstressed southern shelter (her temporary residence was in the south) would have quickly identified her as unadoptable, and she’d have been killed.
But she never wound up burdening the shelter system, because she had a responsible breeder, and a contract that required her to be returned to the breeder, instead of being dumped in the nearest shelter.
Responsible breeders are not the reason dogs are in shelters.
And by the way, my scared little girl is now a Canine Good Citizen and beginning her career as a therapy dog.
Comment by Lis — June 23, 2009 @ 5:38 pm
Amanda and Francis need to start their own blog.
They are not interested in honest inquiry, much less learning anything new. How they type with their fingers in their ears, singing “la la la la….” is beyond me.
And now, once again…Churchill’s definition of a fanatic: Someone who won’t change their mind and can’t change the subject.
Comment by Susan Fox — June 23, 2009 @ 5:45 pm
I didn’t believe the PSA either those years ago - I have been involved with various rescue groups and with some seemingly intelligent and influential people that have trashed breeders relentlessly (never bothering to distinguish between puppy mills, backyard breeders vs. responsible breeders) - I didn’t believe them either - what I do believe is this country needs animal control reform - and I think most people who make comments here agree with that - I read the Pet Connection to learn and I will continue to read and hopefully learn.
Comment by francis — June 23, 2009 @ 7:03 pm
Wow, what a bunch of selfish bitches. Peace out.
Comment by Amanda — June 24, 2009 @ 7:45 am
Of all the adjectives you could have thrown out, I think you probably picked the least appropriate. Not even going to address the noun.
Comment by Original Lori — June 24, 2009 @ 7:49 am
Aww, nice sexism Amanda. I’m ashamed to share a name with you.
Comment by AmandaS — June 24, 2009 @ 6:20 pm
I used to visit dogpark near my mom’s place in NJ. I would go offhours and let my dogs run around in the small dog area if no one else was there, and leave if anyone came. In the adjacent large dog area, a guy would bring his wolf dog. I watched this dog mature over about a year’s time from very submissive dog-like to dominant posturing (leg over back of other dog etc). I once commented to the owner, “nice wolfdog” and he replied, “oh, it’s not a wolf dog, it’s an “american indian dog”
WTF? Talk about your designer dog nightmare from hell!
Comment by EmilyS — June 25, 2009 @ 9:06 am
Uuuhhhh I met a dalmation- stafford terrier cross once- OMG awesomest dog ever really! big black spot on his eye, walking around with some kid’s sandwich in his mouth.
Other than that though- what bugs me about crossing breeds is that some idiot goes and gets 2 “cool” dogs of various breeds, breeds them together to create a morkie or something and considers themselves a in-the-know breeder who can seriously charge $800 for a mutt. AND people pay for it! why!
Comment by joa82 — September 8, 2009 @ 2:22 pm