i think because the majority breeding crosses doesnt do it responsible and with the right aims... there is a tiny tiny minority which does it the right way but they sink down under all the other ones...

i could point u to loads of websites with health tested pure breds... how many websites of health tested cross breeds could u or someone else come up with ? ( if u know what i mean)

There are an awful lot of bad cross breeders out there, i dont think anyone is denying that.

There is a huge amount of ignorance when it comes to breeding. This applies to cross and pure. There are a HUGE amount of people that are unaware of health testing.
There are also those that truly believe that cross breeding is healthier and requires no testing.

Not sure about the website thingy. Cant say ive ever googled. Im not sure if responsible cross breeders would breed on a level where they require a website. I do know they are few and far between, and if the trend continues, i hope the number increases.

This doesnt mean they shouldnt be able to breed though, as long as they take the necessary measures.

__________________

Knacker Lacquer - Adds Luster To Your Cluster

From my experience

Its around a 99/1 split of bad vs good breeders of mongrels

and a 70/30 split of bad vs good breeders of pedigrees

There is still thousands of badly bred pedigrees out there, some registered with the kc (because some members of the public think registration = health), some just raised en masse in puppy farms.

What i never wanted to see was mongrels being produced en masse in puppy farms because they are currently a fashionable hot comoddity. Noone who cares deeply about their dogs would want to see one who has come from a PF.


Unfortunatly with the bad (and sometimes deserved) press that the registered pedigree world has recieved, and the misinformed attitudes of unresponsible mongrel breeders, then the mongrels have grown in popularity. Demand outstrips supply for cute little mongrel pups. Therefore the demand is now being supplied by irresponsible breeders and puppy farmers. NOONE here surely wants that?

Any dog bought from a rescue centre is unfortunatly often considered inferior to a dog bought from a breeder. Buying a dog from a breeder intimates purposeful healthy breeding, well raised stock of good temperaments. Unfortunatly this is too often not the case. There is no difference in homing a mongrel puppy from a rescue centre as buying one from an unresponsible breeder. But the general public dont see that.

I know a couple of breeders of more uncommon breeds. They actually breath a sigh of relief that their dogs are not the most popular of breeds, and therefore have much less chance of ending up on the list of a puppyfarmer!

Surely we can all agree that this is whats happened? The bad press pedigrees have had, combined with the misinformed mongrel breeders giving out false information, has led to a HUGE rise in demand for these mixes. These dogs are now amongst the most popular to be produced en mass by irresponsible breeders and puppy farmers, to line their pockets!

__________________
PETFORUMS CHRISTMAS FUNDRAISER: http://www.charitygiving.co.uk/petforums

please donate if you can!

There have been numerous studies that show that the health of cross-breeds is on average better than that of pedigrees.

'Several studies have shown that mixed-breed dogs have a health advantage. A German study finds that "Mongrels require less veterinary treatment".[4] Studies in Sweden have found that "Mongrel dogs are less prone to many diseases than the average purebred dog"[5] and, referring to death rates, “Mongrels were consistently in the low risk category”.[6] Another study reports that “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”,[7] and a study in Denmark finds that "Higher average longevity of mixed-breed dogs (grouped together).[8]

I cannot believe how aggressive some people are in attacking those who want to buy cross breeds? It seems ridiculous to me. And many arguments seem to suggest that those who deliberately cross breed are after money - a bit of a strange argument really considering that pedigree dogs are also sold for money..

There also seems to be belief that buying from a 'reputable breeder' ensures there will be little risk of ill health - not so. I just read a really sad story in Dogs Today magazine, about a woman whose Pug (brought from a reputable breeder and thoroughly checked) was plagued with ill health and had to have numerous operations on various breed-specific conditions.

I'm not here to criticize pedigree dogs or breeders - I just really am shocked at how annoyed some people get with those who are interested in or own cross breeds.. I really can't understand it.

So on the basis of the above your saying we should cross as many dogs as we can, thereby having no distict breeds ?

I think that dogs are pretty 'distinct' as individuals anyway, to be perfectly honest.

I don't have anything against pedigree dogs- I just could not understand the hostility that any mention of cross-breeds seemed to evoke.. It's as if anyone interested in a mixed breed dog was an idiot who had no concerns for animal welfare (I've seen numerous condescending and aggressive comments on this and other forums, regarding this issue) and it did puzzle me.

However, I've actually just this second finished watching the Pedigree Dogs Exposed documentary on Youtube - and I have to say I think I now understand the politics of this situation a little better.

Fantastic post...especially the part in red!!!

I couldn't agree more! Do you think they will listen......????? Doubt it....its all me me me me me in this world....

It seems there is no greater scheme of things, which is sad!!! It SHOULD be about the animals, not the humans need....

An interesting point...

I am firmly of the belief that a puppy from a RESPONSIBLE breeder will NOT add to the rescue crisis, regardless of breed or type.

However Fashion dictates trends in dogs. Staffy types are highly fashionable at the moment however due to their "fashionable" status, thousands have been bred badlywith mainly money as a motivation. Rescue centres are OVERFLOWING with staffy type dogs, so your argument doesnt hold up!

Not many years ago due to film and advertising Weimeranas became fashionable, as did dalmatians, puppy farmed puppy populations of these breeds exploded, and so rescues became full.

Current trends seems to point to toy breeds or toy sized mongrels, anything mixed with poodles/bichon (mixed with more common curly coated or non shedding breeds), staffys, and some of the husky/akita/malamute breeds and mixes. Unfortunatly these are readily available now in rescue centres. As soon as someone realises that there is a "market" for selling these pups in large quantities then the puppy farmers step in and begin to produce these dogs in huge numbers .

Sadly they are bought often by people who havent put the time, reasearch or effort into looking for their pup, they dont realise just what they are buying. So when the fad has finished, these dogs are disgarded like last years christmas toys. Still more then do not undertake proper training, and so this is another reason why "teenage" dogs so often end up in rescue.

__________________
PETFORUMS CHRISTMAS FUNDRAISER: http://www.charitygiving.co.uk/petforums

please donate if you can!

I would imagine most of the statistics are taken from pet insurance companies regarding pedigree verses mongrels/cross breeds, but I feel (and I dont want this taking the wrong way), ususally when a pedigree is bought the owners are given some form of puppy insurance, which in many cases is continued by the owners because they paid £..... for the pup, mongrels etc unless from a rescue dont usually come with insurance as pups, and in many cases unless something crops up the owners dont think of getting insurance. so to me the information given by the insurance companies may not be comprhehensive, and because many pedigrees have insurance the owners are more likely to take the dog to the vets and possibly claim over what may be considered minor things, where as someone that does not have insurance may take the attitude of lets wait and see and those health problems are obviously not recorded because the dog has not attended a vets or made a claim on the insurance?

Mo