Great...

[courtnek]

I'm not arguing with your thinking...if making the dog better is the purpose, I have no issues with it. HOWEVER...many of these "breeders" are not interested in "making the dog better", or making a dog that will have less illness or personality trait issues. Thats why I advocate licensing. Yes, sometimes you can make a better dog by mixing traits and bloodlines. The problem is the BYB's who seem to think that breeding any dog to any dog will make good puppies....that';s what pisses everyone off here...because we see the "throw-aways" from such breeding...

and the dogs do NOT deserve to suffer because of idiot owners, and breeders. And they DO suffer, when they end up in shelters, and on the euthanaisa block..

[Guest Anonymous]

I agree with all of you that some of these back yard breeders may only be in it for the money. But don't you think that if money was the only thing they cared about, they would buy two purebred dogs of the same breed and sell their puppies? That would be guaranteed money because it would be easy to check it out and see how much these puppies sold for. You know for a fact these puppies sell. If you're going to sell cross-bred puppies, that's definitely not guaranteed money. You're not going to have any idea how much you'd be able to get. I think most of these people probably just had two different kinds of dogs and they had puppies together, possibly accidentally, and the owners loved both their dogs so much that they were pretty sure their puppies would have to turn out to be great as well.

Another thing: I think the fact that these people are selling their puppies instead of just giving them away is probably a good thing simply because it stands to reason that someone who is going to lay down cold hard cash for a pet is going to give the whole thing a lot more thought than if they were just accepting it as a gift or picking one up out of a box that says "free puppies". So, the fact that these people are selling them may not always be such a bad thing.

[kendalyn]

[quote]it stands to reason that someone who is going to lay down cold hard cash for a pet is going to give the whole thing a lot more thought than if they were just accepting it as a gift or picking one up out of a box that says "free puppies". So, the fact that these people are selling them may not always be such a bad thing.[/quote]

This has been proven wrong time and again. If this were true there wouldn't be so many purebreds in shelters being put to sleep. It's not uncommon that once the dog is past the puppy stage and is displaying bad behavior people are way more apt to get rid of it. They're not thinking about the money they paid for the dog, they're thinking about replacing that leather couch the dog just ripped up, or the carpet they keep peeing on.

[Horsefeathers!]

[quote name='doglover'] I think that maybe all this bitching is a result of people who just don't like it because it's competition for them. They turn their noses up at it because they're worried about their bottom line, PROFIT.[/quote]

Well, that just went over me like a fart in church. Of course... the shelters and breed rescues and independent rescues (that would be me) are indeed beating each other to death to see who can acquire the most dogs. I don't understand that logic. The people bitching here the most are typically the ones most active in rescue, whether it's by fostering and adoption, or simply picking their companion from a shelter or rescue. What in the world are you talking about, "competition?" What are we competing against other than trying to lower the sheer volume of dogs killed each and every day due to nothing more than existing in a market of too much supply and not enough demand?

[quote]Another thing: I think the fact that these people are selling their puppies instead of just giving them away is probably a good thing simply because it stands to reason that someone who is going to lay down cold hard cash for a pet is going to give the whole thing a lot more thought than if they were just accepting it as a gift or picking one up out of a box that says "free puppies". So, the fact that these people are selling them may not always be such a bad thing.[/quote]
Wrong again. Almost every dog I've fostered and placed was a purebred dog purchased at a ridiculously high price from a backyard breeder or pet store. Most of them were given up within a year's time. One was only eight months old and my most recent foster just turned one year old. Just today, a friend of mine helped place a purebred Chihuahua that someone paid some outrageous amount of money for and "had" to give up (only after treating this little beast like some baby in a fur coat... the most unsocialized and scared to death thing I've seen in a while with no clue how to be a dog... more "responsibility" from someone who paid a small fortune for it). From what I see in breed specific rescues, all breed rescues and shelters, this isn't an isolated thing. It's a throwaway society. For people with no money to put down upfront, credit is usually easily obtained and it's easy enough to purchase a puppy on impulse with virtually no thought given other than it was cute at the time. There is absolutely no truth in the belief that people who spend a lot of money buying a dog are more responsible. It seems to me that the opposite is true. People willing to fork out ridiculous sums of money on impulse typically aren't responsible and are the first to dump a dog when it's past "cute."

About the mixing of breeds... if someone is legitimately working toward a higher goal other than profit, I'm all for it, generally speaking. However, most of these designer breeds are nothing high priced icons of some people's ignorance. I find VERY few valid excuses for the mixing of these breeds.

[Guest Anonymous]

[quote]This has been proven wrong time and again. If this were true there wouldn't be so many purebreds in shelters being put to sleep. It's not uncommon that once the dog is past the puppy stage and is displaying bad behavior people are way more apt to get rid of it. They're not thinking about the money they paid for the dog, they're thinking about replacing that leather couch the dog just ripped up, or the carpet they keep peeing on[/quote]

I never said that there was any kind of guarantee. Obviously all kinds of dogs from all kinds of backgrounds end up being abandoned. It's just a matter of odds. A purchased puppy has a better chance of finding willing and able owners. Lack of knowledge is the number one cause for abandoned pets. This happens often when you pick up a puppy at a shelter without knowing anything about what you might be getting. It also frequently occurs when breeders only emphasize the positive traits of their breeds and keep silent regarding the less than desirable traits. Keeping all this in mind, most people do at least trouble themselves to find out all they can about a breed before spending money. Therefore, being armed with that knowledge, they are more likely to make a good decision and end up with a dog that will be compatible with their living environment. It doesn't always work out that way, but I think it works out more often than it does for dogs that are given away.

[Guest Anonymous]

Obviously, when I was talking about profit competition, I was referring to other breeders, NOT pet rescue. If you happen to be both, then kudos to you. As far as mixing dogs together, I see no problem with it as long as the puppies are making good pets for people. I think that this probably works out JUST as often with mixes as it does with purebreds.

We will just have to disagree on whether a financial investment helps to ensure a better home for a puppy. For every example you can give me of a purchased dog being abandoned, I can give you two or three examples of freebie. The reasons these "freebies" don't end up in rescue is because they aren't even given that consideration. They usually become roadkill, or are set out somewhere by their owners.

[Horsefeathers!]

[quote name='doglover']Obviously, when I was talking about profit competition, I was referring to other breeders, NOT pet rescue.[/quote]
No, not so obviously when you're referring to the bitching on this board, especially considering that most on this board do not breed.

[quote] If you happen to be both, then kudos to you. As far as mixing dogs together, I see no problem with it as long as the puppies are making good pets for people. [/quote]
I have a huge problem with it when already existing dogs, purebred or mixed, are destroyed daily. There is absolutely no reason to be breeding "just pets" when there are already more in existence than available homes. The absolute ONLY reason to do this is profit motivated, regardless of how people choose to validate it.

[quote]We will just have to disagree on whether a financial investment helps to ensure a better home for a puppy. For every example you can give me of a purchased dog being abandoned, I can give you two or three examples of freebie. The reasons these "freebies" don't end up in rescue is because they aren't even given that consideration. They usually become roadkill, or are set out somewhere by their owners.[/quote]
No, I'm not comparing statistics on freebies vs. purebreds. My sole argument is that plunking down obscene amounts of money for a puppy in no way assures that a person has researched that breed, or has given it any thought at all. Plenty of people have more money than they have sense. I'm not simply offering an opinion. It's a stone cold fact. People can spin it any way they want to make it conform to their ethics, but the fact remains that "financial investment" in a dog has no bearing on whether someone is responsible. Heck, just read the stories in the news about animal abuse... Cocker Spaniel Drowned By Weights, Husky Shot Repeatedly By Bow & Arrow, Boston Terrier Sexually Abused, and the list goes on. The one thing many of them have in common is they are purebreds. Again, I'm not offering statistics on purebreds vs. mixed in regard to abuse and neglect, but I think far too many people have this warped view that purebreds are typically more valued (not meaning monetarily) and therefore better cared for, living in the lap of luxury. People use that to validate breeding more of them since they think that people who pay obscene amounts of money for them will naturally take better care of them. It's just not so. Disagree all you want.

Still, even giving the benefit of the doubt, I live in a really rural area where "free to good home" dogs abound and I work inside a vet clinic. Most of the surrenders and abandoned dogs we see ARE the ones people spent money for and not the freebies. Maybe it's just a crazy fluke isolated to our area, but it wasn't my original point, anyway.

[bk_blue]

[quote name='doglover'] A purchased puppy has a better chance of finding willing and able owners. Lack of knowledge is the number one cause for abandoned pets. This happens often when you pick up a puppy at a shelter without knowing anything about what you might be getting. It also frequently occurs when breeders only emphasize the positive traits of their breeds and keep silent regarding the less than desirable traits. Keeping all this in mind, most people do at least trouble themselves to find out all they can about a breed before spending money.[/quote]

Shelter dogs are also "purchased" pets. I don't know of any shelter that gives dogs away. I don't know anyone who goes to shelters just to see what's going, and maybe buy a dog if they feel like it. Most people go there to purchase, would I be correct? And many "breeders" who can't sell their pups and have no contingency plan in place, dump them at the shelter.
The only reason I can think of if there wouldn't be in a given day as many purebreds at shelters as mutts is because there are numerous breed rescue programs operating- even so, they have a limit on how many they can rescue. The very fact that breed-specific rescues exist demonstrates how many purebred (or "purchased") dogs are unwanted.
I really think HF hit it on the head- the amount of cash one spends on the purchase of a pet in no way correlates with the care it receives from then on. I could get a dog for free or I could spend hundreds on one- it wouldn't change how I treated it. Dogs don't attach monetary value to themselves, but people do it all the time, not only with pets but with everything else they "own". Honestly, I think dogs are more evolved than the human race sometimes.

[Guest Anonymous]

[quote] have a huge problem with it when already existing dogs, purebred or mixed, are destroyed daily. There is absolutely no reason to be breeding "just pets" when there are already more in existence than available homes. The absolute ONLY reason to do this is profit motivated, regardless of how people choose to validate it.
[/quote]

I would agree with you if it would make a difference. There will always be people who will get their pet from a shelter or rescue, and there will always be others who would never get their pet in that way. I disagree that it can only be profit motivated, because they may be trying to come up with a better dog. You can't just lump everyone into the same category. It's unfair to do that.

[Guest Anonymous]

[quote]No, not so obviously when you're referring to the bitching on this board, especially considering that most on this board do not breed.[/quote]

This started out as an attack on crossing breeds. Many references were made to how crossbred puppies were "throwaway" dogs. Somehow less entitled to exist. Such a tone led me to believe that most of you people must be breeders to be so against crossbreeding. Now, I am beginning to see that most of you are against breeding period, unless it's done by licensed breeders.

[/quote]

[ellieangel]

[quote]Many references were made to how crossbred puppies were "throwaway" dogs. Somehow less entitled to exist. [/quote]

No-one on here would say that :evil:

[quote]Now, I am beginning to see that most of you are against breeding period, unless it's done by licensed breeders. [/quote]

WRONG again,just because a breeder is licensed doesn't mean they are good breeders,we are against ANY irresponsible breeding whatsoever.

I have owned the most beautiful crossbreed boy and at 18 months he had to be put to sleep because he couldn't cope,he had nervous aggression and "panic attacks" which made his life a misery,everyone here was touched by his story and it's stories like his which make people get so upset about issues such as this.

I have recently heard of a litter mate of his that is having the same problems :(

And guess what I also know that they are selling a new batch now :cry:

Your first post was very offensive,

[quote]you people can all just f**k off. there's nothing wrong with what these ppl did. if u have a male and female dog, u can breed them if u want to. AND put them on the internet, there's nothing wrong with it. So what if ppl are proud of their puppies? Find something else to bitch about![/quote]

I think it's you who should f*** off.....or apologise.

NOTHING WRONG WITH IT !!!!!! :evil:

Honestly you haven't got a clue have you.

This was my baby and he was a VICTIM of these kinds of people who are p***ing about with breeding ...

[img]http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0aAC1KBcgf5rVtleqMDRrA6vDxfv5FQJlEEK0ZlpgqyhQA9cHrlhNCXJplkWyfR2kiQU4ci2dXrJ9VCVI*1Qx!zLNa6EsvS9mOMbDjZ6bbNgHRxHuyeyq5fk9aPQNOrlGjo0pPhBJd4xJJmOC0kWQhhhTgTVg3LY6/Rio%20asleep%20in%20his%20bed.jpg?dc=4675454213734688405[/img]

And this is where he is now......

[url]http://groups.msn.com/Dog-O-Maniaphotohosting/ellieangelspictures.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=1075[/url]


Don't you dare tell me there's nothing wrong with it.

[Horsefeathers!]

[quote name='doglover'][quote] have a huge problem with it when already existing dogs, purebred or mixed, are destroyed daily. There is absolutely no reason to be breeding "just pets" when there are already more in existence than available homes. The absolute ONLY reason to do this is profit motivated, regardless of how people choose to validate it.
[/quote]

I would agree with you if it would make a difference. There will always be people who will get their pet from a shelter or rescue, and there will always be others who would never get their pet in that way.[/quote]
How could it NOT make a difference if people stopped buying bred to death dogs? Obviously, if people became more aware of the dogs available in breed rescues (if they MUST have a purebred, or a specific mix) and the fact that so many were available, I'd be willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that you'd see a lot more adoptions and fewer purchases from these "just pet" breeders. These sound like the very words of a "just pet" breeder trying to validate breeding "just pets." Many of my own clients in just this small part of the world had no clue that so many purebreds were thrown away. These are some of the very people like you mentioned who would have never considered adopting from a shelter or rescue because they thought it was only for problem dogs and "substandard" dogs. They figure that if a dog costs a lot of money, it's surely a "good" dog. Ignorance runs both ways... in the "pet" breeder who believes s/he is not adding to the problem of overpopulation and that people who spend a small fortune on their dogs will surely take care of them and in the pet owner who believes that spending a lot of money on a dog surely makes it a good sound dog. If both sides became more educated, it would OBVIOUSLY make a difference. Instead of figuring, hey, these people will NEVER adopt... I'll just breed for them, I instead chose to educate them. Fortunately, I have a very good track record of telling people the hard cold truth about backyard bred dogs, pet store dogs, dogs advertised in the local newspapers. I've referred many, many clients to petfinder, breed specific rescues and all breed rescues for those who insist that they MUST have a specific purebred. For what it's worth, every single one of the people I've dealt with who would originally have never considered adopting simply didn't realize that there was such a huge problem with overpopulation and they also didn't realize that dogs in shelters and rescues are no less deserving of a home than the puppies being mass produced. For clarity's sake, I have no problem with mixed breeds existing, but I'm referring solely to those people like you pointed out who would otherwise have never considered adopting a dog and, for whatever reason, feel they must have a certain breed.
[quote]I disagree that it can only be profit motivated, because they may be trying to come up with a better dog. You can't just lump everyone into the same category. It's unfair to do that.[/quote]
Again, you're dancing all the way around the issue. If you're actually paying attention, you'll see that most of us have no problem with people who are actually breeding for a valid purpose, so cut the crap about "lump everyone into the same category." I'm talking about people who are breeding the "just pets" you are so adamantly defending, not the ones with an in depth, educated breeding program. There is absolutely NO reason to intentionally bring more of ANY kind of dog into the world, purebred or mixed, except those who are truly trying to sustain/improve a breed. If I'm overlooking it, please do tell me why we need more Dobes, Pit Bulls, Poodles, Labs, whatever? These breeds are certainly in no danger of becoming extinct, any one of them are abundant in shelters and rescues across the country, so why do we need more "just pet" quality ones when so many are already available? I can think of only one reason. Ignorant and/or apathetic breeders catering to the whims of the same ignorant/apathetic consumers. If each side because more educated and actually gave a d*mn, how could it NOT make a difference? The fact that every person that has given me the time of day to listen has actually realized they don't HAVE to buy a dog from some casual breeder to have a "good" dog. Therefore, since people can be taught, it's really pointless to say that we need to breed more dogs for those who simply won't adopt.

About the licensed breeder thing... if it makes you feel better, I have no respect for licensing. In my state, anybody that plunks down the money with the department of agriculture can be a licensed breeder.

One more time, before it comes up again, I have no problem with VALID breeding programs, meaning sustaining/improving of a breed, working dogs, that sort of thing, or heck, even the creation of a new breed for a specific function other than being "just pets". My problem is with the breeding of "just pets" when soooooooooo many "just pets" are rotting away in shelters and rescues. It is just beyond me how one can't see the problem with that. It can ONLY be money motivated, or just plain ignorance.

[Guest Anonymous]

[quote]My problem is with the breeding of "just pets" when soooooooooo many "just pets" are rotting away in shelters and rescues. It is just beyond me how one can't see the problem with that. It can ONLY be money motivated, or just plain ignorance[/quote]
Again, you miss both my points. To me, as just the average Joe, "a pet" would be the primary function of any dog I owned. Therefore, the qualities of the dog as a pet would be of paramount importance to me. and I applaud anyone who may be trying to impove "pet" qualities in a dog, even if it means creating a brand new breed/mix. The other point ignored, I have already stated that what you describe would be ideal, but impossible because many people, (with well founded concerns I might add) would never under any circumstances get their pet from a shelter or rescue program. For instance, if you're dealing with a grown dog, of any breed/mix, you have to wonder what kind of impact it's previous environment might have had on it's disposition. If you're getting a mix puppy from a shelter, you've even less info to base your decision on. This is why many people would just rather not risk it. This is not something that needs defending one way or the other, it's just the way things are and will continue to be. This is the real world, sadly not utopia. Many of us pet owners take our roles very very seriously and require as much assurance as possible that we are getting a pet that will integrate well with our lifestyles. I must say I have much more concern for the people trying to be pet owners than I do for the pets themselves. People have a right to expect a pet that is in keeping with what their needs are. If they take just any dog, it is a recipe for disaster for everyone. Therefore, perhaps you should not be so quick to belittle people who both search for the very best of "pets", nor of those people trying to provide the very best of "pets". Surely an overwhelming majority of dogs are obtained strictly for "pets". If breeding was as rare as you people seem to want, prices would skyrocket to the point where potentially great dog owners would be unable to afford a dog that might actually work well for them and would be forced to take shelter/rescue dogs...that may well end up right back where they started. Then the whole cycle begins again. I am not saying that there aren't many great dogs both in rescue and shelters, just that because of people's concerned, they'd rather not go there. I do feel many of those concerns are valid, therefore breeding "pets" and buying "pets" should not be viewed from the narrow point of view that I've seen on this board.

[kendalyn]

[quote]For instance, if you're dealing with a grown dog, of any breed/mix, you have to wonder what kind of impact it's previous environment might have had on it's disposition. If you're getting a mix puppy from a shelter, you've even less info to base your decision on.[/quote]

Many rescues foster their dogs in people's private homes. Those foster people can tell you more information about the dog's disposition than you would ever be able to guess about an 8 week old puppy. They really get to know the dog and can decide what kind of home the dog needs.

With any pet there are some unknowns, but it's not accurate to say that adopting a rescue animal comes with no information at all.

[quote]If breeding was as rare as you people seem to want, prices would skyrocket to the point where potentially great dog owners would be unable to afford a dog that might actually work well for them and would be forced to take shelter/rescue dogs...that may well end up right back where they started. [/quote]

Again you're assuming a dog from a shelter/rescue wouldn't be fit for a "great dog owner". That's ridiculous.

[Horsefeathers!]

You have absolutely no clue what I'm talking about. I can't make it any simpler than I've done, but you still have no idea what I'm talking about. Your perception of my views is totally out of left field and is nothing like what I tried to say. You're rationalizing and not even reading objectively, so further "debate" is pointless. All I asked is to show me why we need more pet quality dogs bred when so many exist. You pretty much summed up your point with the statement that effectively said that you're more concerned that people get what they want when they want it than those pets whose lives are affected by people's irresponsibility. I can't even wrap my brain around that, so to continue is fruitless.

I can only surmise that you're one of "them" to defend it so fervently. I can't argue with someone's ethics when it involves money. If you're that positive of the uncertainty of adopting dogs regarding temperament and "issues" vs. dogs that were purchased as puppies, well, it only shows that you've obviously never been involved in rescue. Too bad you can't open your mind. I once took your position, so I'm well aware of "the real world." As long as there are people out there willing to exploit other people's ignorance ("they would never adopt..."), then of course, things will never change. It can only change one person at a time, but it's much easier to just throw up our hands and say, "that's just the way it is..." I'm certainly glad people like Martin Luther King Jr. didn't take that attitude. Just in my area I've made a huge impact on the "pet" industry. As a result, many people are having their pets spayed and neutered for various reasons. Some because they don't want to add to the problem, some because their puppies weren't selling. That's just from word of mouth in ONE area. People started telling other people and it has made a difference. Of course, it'll never be perfect, but I would never just shrug it off and say, "oh well, this is real life and it ain't perfect." That's kind of like burying your head in the sand.

I'm not angry. This is just very, very sad to me. I once felt as you do.

[Guest Anonymous]

[quote]Many rescues foster their dogs in people's private homes. Those foster people can tell you more information about the dog's disposition than you would ever be able to guess about an 8 week old puppy. They really get to know the dog and can decide what kind of home the dog needs.

With any pet there are some unknowns, but it's not accurate to say that adopting a rescue animal comes with no information at all.
[/quote]

I am sure they could. As I stated, I am not talking about what is, I am talking about the fears potential dog owners have. They want a fresh slate. Right or wrong, they have justifiable fears in taking over where someone else left off.

[quote]Again you're assuming a dog from a shelter/rescue wouldn't be fit for a "great dog owner". That's ridiculous.[/quote]

Absolutely not so. I said many of those dogs would make wonderful pets. I was only defending people who choose not to risk it.

[ellieangel]

It's ok if you get a puppy ??

Is it ???
Did you even read my post :evil:

[ellieangel]

[quote]Absolutely not so. I said many of those dogs would make wonderful pets. I was only defending people who choose not to risk it.[/quote]

But even buying a puppy is taking a risk.

You're just not getting it are you :roll:

[Horsefeathers!]

[quote name='doglover']If breeding was as rare as you people seem to want, prices would skyrocket to the point where potentially great dog owners would be unable to afford a dog that might actually work well for them [/quote]

This caught my eye. Even if I believed that, using your logic, wouldn't that be a GOOD thing? You are the one who believes that "financial investment" in a dog is an assurance of quality of care. Now you seem to be concerned that these dogs don't cost TOO much. That's what I meant by rationalizing. It's so easy to spin things to meet our ethics rather than look at them objectively.

? :-? ?

[Horsefeathers!]

[quote name='ellieangel']You're just not getting it are you :roll:[/quote]

That's what I believe. Many of us once felt as s/he does, but evolved our thinking, yet WE are narrow minded. :o

[Guest Anonymous]

[quote]This caught my eye. Even if I believed that, using your logic, wouldn't that be a GOOD thing? You are the one who believes that "financial investment" in a dog is an assurance of quality of care. Now you seem to be concerned that these dogs don't cost TOO much. That's what I meant by rationalizing. It's so easy to spin things to meet our ethics rather than look at them objectively.

[/quote]
First of all, I in no way said it was an assurance, just a betterment of the odds. Just because I believe that "purchasing" might be a good stumbling block for potentially bad dog owners, does not mean that it should become a roadblock for potentially good ones. It's what's called middle ground. Please do not twist my comments to reflect what you want to believe of me. In my years of dog ownership, I have adopted two dogs, and several cats. Once it worked very well, the second time was disastrous. I've had much better luck with my purchased puppies. They both lived long happy lives, were cherished members of our family, BECAUSE I knew a great deal about what I was getting and knew exactly what I wanted. Luckily for me, there were specific dog breeds/mixes that fit the bill.

[Guest Anonymous]

[quote]But even buying a puppy is taking a risk.

You're just not getting it are you [/quote]

Of course it's ALWAYS taking a risk, I've already stated that the best you can hope for is better odds. There's nothing wrong with trying to achieve the best possible situation for your family. Especially if there are children involved who could be put at risk by bad judgement/or info.

[courtnek]

[quote]I agree with all of you that some of these back yard breeders may only be in it for the money. But don't you think that if money was the only thing they cared about, they would buy two purebred dogs of the same breed and sell their puppies?[/quote]

there seems to be a new prevalance lately for "designer dogs"....sold at ridiculously high prices for what is basically a mixed breed. Now at first you said that the Maskita's breeders may have been trying to improve the breed, by giving the edgy Akita a more easy-going Mastiff like temperament. All good and well....except, as was mentioned, there are
no pictures, or mention, of selling adult Maskita's. Only the puppies. Which makes us think that there are NO adults for sale, this is a first litter. And
in no way can you promise temperament, personality and illness traits on a first litter. It makes multiple generations of the type of dog you are trying to produce, to perfect the traits you want it to have. Good breeders
know that, and expect that the a good number of litters will NOT have dogs with the traits they want. In the old days, those dogs were culled from the litters, so that they could not be bred. So perhaps just maybe, these people are trying to produce a dog with the above mentioned
characteristics...guarding capability with a gentle temperament and good with kids. I somehow doubt it. They are not trying to perfect a breed or create another, they are trying to get their piece of the designer-dog pie....

Now I personally have no issues with "creating" a new breed of dog for a specific purpose, as I mentioned, The Golden Lab. Some will disagree, I know, but we are civilized here and tend to accept each others' differences of opinion. Hower the GL is being bred by the assistance dog societies, the
Seeing Eye, the Hearing Ear, etc., specifically for use with the handicapped and people in wheelchairs. Why? Because it has the temperament of Golden Retriever, the tenacity and strength of the Lab, shed's a little less than the Golden and is easy to care for grooming and physically wise.
But dogs have been used extensively in assistance care...but the combination of the two appears to make an even better assistance dog.
and they DONT sell them at outrageous prices...Assistance dogs are given away to people who need them and cant afford them. Do you think for one minute, when they started this breeding program, that they allowed the first, or second or third or fourth litter to be guide dogs? Not on your life.
The ones that do not meet the extremely stiff standards they are looking for are found good homes to fit their personalities, the same as the guide dog has to fit the personality of the owner it is given to. These people put
a lot of work into this, and they literally get nothing for it, except the satisfaction of a job well done for thier clients and dogs.

So back to the Maskita....will it be an even tempered guarding breed dog
that loves kids? No way to tell till it hits 8 months, when the natural guarding tendency tends to come up. By then it will be sold to some family expecting this to happen. And when it doesnt? because no investigation of temperament in the adult dog has ever been tested? and it bites the kid? It will be a throw-away....And I bet the "breeder" wont return their money, either...Imagine that.

Also, on that note...If you want a guarding breed dog that is gentle tempered, and loves kids, the well-bred, well-trained, well-raised in a loving family German Shepherd will fill that niche. And has been filling it for decades.

[Lokipups]

[quote]Of course it's ALWAYS taking a risk, I've already stated that the best you can hope for is better odds. There's nothing wrong with trying to achieve the best possible situation for your family. Especially if there are children involved who could be put at risk by bad judgement/or info.[/quote]
And then what happens to that dog? A reputable breeder will not only take back the pup, but will no longer breed that line. Try and get that to happen with a BYB or (my favorite spin :roll: ) hobby breeder. A reputable breeder also makes sure the odds are the best, not a crapshoot with genetics. And a crapshoot is what it is with this craze of "designer dogs".
And Horsefeathers is dead on, financial investment means squat, the risk with a rescue dog is almost nil, they live in our homes, get the best care possible, and are usually better behaved than that adorable Cujo somebody just spent a grand on at the petstore.

[KP]

[quote name='doglover']Who's to say that combining the two breeds would not have at least a marginal chance of pulling the better traits from both parents? And if it failed, it wouldn't be any worse than [b]either[/b] parent singularly. [/quote]

**Cough cough** Don't forget if it failed and got BOTH sides [u]worst[/u] traits combined. You convieniently left that part out for some reason. I can see where that wouldn't be an important factor though, right? Seeing how thats one of the main reasons the abandonment and surrender rate is at an all time high now.