# Serious Sport vs. Fun Sport



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

I was getting into a designer dog breed debate over on another more pet oriented forum a while back. I said that for 95% of dog owners who just want a nice pet, they should be able to get a nice dog from either a shelter or from a responsible breeder, not from some yahoo making a buck off the designer breed of the month. There is no point in this wild crossing of all the toy and small terrier breeds because they are companion dogs and frankly, most of them look pretty similar to me anyways. I said that the only intentional cross breeding I would support is for crosses like Alaskan huskies in sledding and Dutchie/Mal/etc crosses where they are for an actual working purpose. Then someone countered my argument by saying that not that many people use Alaskan huskies for more than recreational or competition racing, so it's not "real" work. So if all you do is ring sport or Schutzhund with your Dutch/Mal cross, I guess they wouldn't consider than "real" work. Then they asked about intentional crosses in serious agility and flyball like the border collie/Jack Russell mixes for height dogs. 

So my question that I pondered is this: at what point (if any) and for what purpose should intentional cross breeding be considered legit? Does a sport have to have a certain amount of "seriousness" or "realism" for it to be considered okay? i.e.-protection sports and dog sledding are because of x reason, but flyball and agility aren't because of y reason.


----------



## Patrick Murray (Mar 27, 2006)

I guess if there was a "legitimate" need and breeds of dogs could be combined to come up with one ideal breed best suited to address the need then I guess it could be justified.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

That was kind of my thought. Just what is a legitimate purpose? Can I rightly condemn someone who wants a poo mix while not minding a Mal/Dutch shepherd cross as long as it serves some sort of purpose, even if it is just to have fun getting titles?


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Some yrs back Dalmation breeders (with AKC approval) bred English Pointers into theirdog to help eliminate serious genetic liver problems. All it dod, from what I recall, was to create other problems they didn't cinsider. Same with the Basenji. Crosses with half wild, African village dogs to widen the gene pool had the same results. Health problems they didn't forsee. The Basenji did get a nice brindle color added to their standards. :roll:


----------



## Woody Taylor (Mar 28, 2006)

Maren Bell Jones said:


> That was kind of my thought. Just what is a legitimate purpose? Can I rightly condemn someone who wants a poo mix while not minding a Mal/Dutch shepherd cross as long as it serves some sort of purpose, even if it is just to have fun getting titles?


Well, it's a free country, people are free to do what they want.

Having said that, xbreeding within the context of *service sport* ( I don't like saying "protection" anymore as it's not inclusive enough or specific enough), is a different ball game...in an ideal world.

Ideally, service sport should feed legitimate service application. Meaning, the goal of national sport governance should be directed towards developing out skills that are then translated to actual work for humans. Sledding, biting, tracking, obedience, etc. It would be a great day when there was some kind of metric (tied to service application of the titled stock) that various sports used to guage the effectiveness of their overall program, something that would allow for club-level newbs and hobbyists but distinguish professional application. Those metrics should also drive breeding guidelines, etc. and might highlight the need for xbreeding...e.g., Ring Mals are getting too small, we need bigger Mals...or Shepherds are getting to big/weak, we need...and so on.

So anyways, KNPV is a good example of "ethical" xbreeding because the goal is to develop a gene pool of dogs that eventually translate to service work.

I realize what I'm describing above would take intelligence, creativity, honesty, and progress on the part of national sport leadership as well as involve interest and "pull" from law enforcement leadership, so I'm not holding my breath. 

Flyball terriers--breeding 14.5" at the shoulder JRTs down to 12.5" so the overall jump height is lowered for the team, or whatever nonsense they do, I forget--is worlds away from what I'm describing here. And a few degrees of "goodness," as xbreeding in that situation is done for dogs that are ultimately _entertaining_ humans rather than _working_ for them. The same logic would apply to other types of breeding...breeding for conformation, for debilitation (bulldogs, pugs), for whatever, all that lame crap that basically boils down to somebody just wanting a material object to impress the Joneses down the street.


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

"Well, it's a free country, people are free to do what they want."

That pretty much said it all. Besides, it was the only part I understood unlees I wanted to keep ciphering a frew more times. There is a need,or an expectation, that everyone follow suit to our way of thinking because we are always right. We think!


----------



## Woody Taylor (Mar 28, 2006)

Don Turnipseed said:


> Besides, it was the only part I understood unlees I wanted to keep ciphering a frew more times.


I didn't really understand it either!

I will point out that the world would be a lot more efficient if everyone thought like me, though. I'm just sayin'.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Woody Taylor said:


> ... I will point out that the world would be a lot more efficient if everyone thought like me, though. I'm just sayin'.


Oh, we all say that all the time....... PMs, letters to the editor....... It's always "Why doesn't everyone just think like Woody?!"


----------



## Tim Martens (Mar 27, 2006)

i don't see anything wrong with cross breeding for a specific purpose. if that purpose is to build the largest, fastest dog within a given class for flyball....why not? as long as others are breeding for what i want (KNPV), why not let the flyball people create a super ball breed? is the resistance to this just for the sake of maintaining individual breeds? why is that such a big deal?


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

This is how all the breeds came about to start with. Without someone being adventuresome, most of our breeds wouldn't be here. Does it hurt a an individual breed? No....there will always be enough people breeding to the standard to maintain any breed. The problem may be that the right cross bred dogs may be better than the purebred dogs and that could be a problem to a lot of people.


----------



## Tim Martens (Mar 27, 2006)

Don Turnipseed said:


> This is how all the breeds came about to start with. Without someone being adventuresome, most of our breeds wouldn't be here. Does it hurt a an individual breed? No....there will always be enough people breeding to the standard to maintain any breed. The problem may be that the right cross bred dogs may be better than the purebred dogs and that could be a problem to a lot of people.


i can see that argument. so basically it's purely politcal. "i don't want some mutt outperforming my purebred (insert breed here)". makes sense to me :roll:


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

I don't know much about breeding dogs, took me a couple of years to figure out where my kids came from. I do however, know the type of dog I want to work with. It's why I only buy 18 months and up, based on behavior specific criteria. While health is certainly a primary concern, the dogs background is useless to me. Which by the way, these dogs are getting more and more expensive. The breeds we know today, mostly came from crossing something with something.

DFrost


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

When outbreeding, normally two purebred lines are used. The potential to produce a few gangbuster dogs is enormous. The first cross pups have the potential to put either parent to shame. After that cross, they start back sliding to the norm over a period of time.


----------



## Lynn Cheffins (Jul 11, 2006)

I don't see any problem with cross-breeding to suit a specific purpose. Like others have said - that's how we got most of the "breeds" we have today. I have both purebreds(racing line siberians) and "crossbreds"(alaskan huskies). It is kind of humorous to have a six generation pedigree on dogs that look like they should be tied to an old washing machine on someone's porch(the alaskans). If people want to Xbreed a better flyball dog I say go for it as long as they are being responsible about it.

I don't know if I agree with what Woody was saying as there were too many big words......  But it sounds way too organized for my liking - and too much like what is already in place.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

I think it has to pass the "stink" test. Those who make "designer breeds" have a definite odor to those of us who know bull$hit when we smell it. That's exactly why their dogs are marketed to first time/impulse/trendy dog buyers who have not developed a keen sense of smell.


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

The problem with the designer breeds is that they aren't breeding toward any type of performance goal other than the performance of their bank account. It's not like "OK lets breed a malidoodle because I think it'll make the malinois even smarter"... because typically they are using the dumbest damn breeding stock to begin with anyway :lol: The Germans would probably send their dogs on me if I went to Germany and asked Knut Fuchs if we could start breeding Malidoodles using Klemm vom Roten Falken lines :lol:

KNPV "did it right" IMO... because even though the dogs are crosses... it's not really very random, because the lines are tracked and bred on to create a whole new set of lines. Look at Selena and Dick's dogs... they are on their, what, 6th generation in their line? If not more? And if you look at the "pedigrees" to the best crosses, you will usually find certain names cropping up more than others. I don't know much about the Flyball community, but I can't really imagine that it's a very tightknit community where they are all trying to develop crosses using the best Flyball dogs and continuing specific lines that are all tracked and tracable to the original purebred dogs they originated from. Granted not all KNPV dogs can be tracked all the way back to their first crossing... but you generally have a pretty good idea of where the dogs have come from for the past 10 generations in the pedigrees.


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

125 years ago, dogs were expected to carry their weight. Serve a purpose. Guard flocks, hunt, protect. It didn't matter what really but there had to be some benefit to paying the upkeep on a dog. It wasn't hard to find a good working dog in those days. 

Those days are gone. The most prolific breeding programs are geared to producing "pets". That is what todays society has come to. Dogs are now, "Make me feel good" objects. Cock-a-poodles, labra-doodles or what ever. They are different. Everyone has a lab, or a golden retriever. People want(need) something to make them appear different even though society has digressed to the point of universal similarity. The day of the individual is dying, but we still have the need to "appear" different. Thus the designer dogs. Eventually, there will be no working dogs, just pets. All elevated to a god like status that deserves to have the same laws protecting them as protect our children. What do you think about that Woody? If everyone thought like me it would be a great place to live. We would all be responsible for our own actions and survival. Society didn't make me what I am....the internet did because one must conform to join in. Woody can take it from here. :lol:


----------



## Woody Taylor (Mar 28, 2006)

Not sure I understand what you meant, relative to me. My guess is your sentiments about how dogs have changed are, among other reasons, part of why Maren is asking what she's asking.


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

""Well, it's a free country, people are free to do what they want." 

This may have been what sent me off in my anti social tyrade Woody. Yes, there was a day that statement held some truth. Today, it is just a feel good phrase that makes people feel incharge of their lives. What is the purpose of having an in depth discussion on whether it is right or wrong to cross a lab and a poodle? Is it unethical? If so, according to whose ethics? Is it against the law? No it isn't. Is it wrong for anyone to cross breed for designer dogs if there is a market? Not really. But, here we are discussing the wrongs and right because some don't beleive they should be doing it. I watch legislators attempting to pass legislation regarding breeding and how it should be done on a daily basis. Long Beach passed an ordinace that you couldn't breed a dog in the city limits because someone didn't like it. Do we really want to be any more governed by peoples whims and individual codes of ethics any more than we already are? Do we all have to think alike to avoid being chastised by others. Who cares if someone breeds labradoodles and someone else pays big bucks for them. If you don't like it, don't do it. If your comment was true

"Well, it's a free country, people are free to do what they want." 

They wouldn't. The comment no longer has any meaning. Everyone is expected to be like everyone else.


----------



## Woody Taylor (Mar 28, 2006)

Tax season brings out the conservatives in all of us.


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

I don't understand that either??? :lol: :lol: :lol: Whoa, I feel better now!


----------



## Woody Taylor (Mar 28, 2006)

`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Woody Taylor said:


> `Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
> Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
> All mimsy were the borogoves,
> And the mome raths outgrabe.


Beware the Jabberwock, my son;
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch;
Beware the Jubjub Bird and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch."


----------



## Woody Taylor (Mar 28, 2006)

portmanteaux in thread about crossbreeding=irony


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Thanks Woody, speaking of taxes...Don, the reason I can't say "well, I'm not involved in it, so who cares what the designer dog breeders are doing?" is because they (as well as any other backyard breeders) put a financial strain on the animal control and shelter system in this country which in turn comes out of the pockets of the tax payers. People buy a $2000 mutt from a pet store and have no qualms about dropping it off at the pound in a few months because of all sorts of absolutely ridiculous reasons (the dog isn't instantly house trained, it barks, it doesn't match the furniture, etc). The very small minority of responsible breeders are not really the ones indirectly or directly putting millions of animals to sleep. People want a living stuffed animal nowadays, not a dog. You can't pass legislation to make people care about their pets (especially as what is on the books is usually hard enough to enforce) as you say, which I agree 100%. But that doesn't stop me from getting highly aggravated with people's "it's a free country, I can have whatever dog I wish!" (which I've heard on some of the pet forums in defending their wretched little fur balls) because it's not a free country vis a vis taxes, and I'm paying out of my pocket to catch, take in, house, and euthanize unwanted animals that were intentionally created just for their looks but who now "just didn't work out." It cost the local shelter $200+ average for each and every dog animals' food, vet care, overhead of running the building, etc. That comes out of somewhere besides just donations if it is a public shelter.

Back to the original topic, so Labrador/poodle mixes (I refuse to call them doodle whatevers...like nails on a chalkboard) created just for "something different" or low/no shed (haha, yeah right) is pure narcissism except the original purpose of low allergen guide dogs. Though I would wonder why you couldn't use purebred standard poodles as they are generally intelligent dogs. *shrug*


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

Maren, I am on a committee here in this county to discuss the pet overpopulation problem. Most of it has to do with the people running the animal control. They are the most inept bunch of people I have ever seen....but they are animal lovers. I am on this committee because they decided I was going to pay them $100 per unneutered or unspayed dog to help defray the cost to the county. I asked if they had plans to equally raise the fees for the neutered and spayed animals. the answer was no. They would remain at $8.00. I already pay twice as much for the privilege of mine not being fixed. I pointed out to them that they have never had one of my dogs in their facility. I was told it didn't matter, someone had to help cover the costs. It turns out that there are 1800 licensed dogs in this county out of an estimated 30,000, cats do not require licensing. I asked why they didn't work on getting the other 28,200 dogs licensed. They said they didn't know who they belonged to. I suggested they hire high school kids to knock on doors as it is pretty much a given most dogs will bark when you ring the doorbell. They said they couldn't afford it. Can You believe that!!! They can't even figure that 1/2 of the houses on every block are going to have a dog that needs licensing and they can't afford some minimum wage kids to canvass.

Since the American way is to take in cultures from all over the world and respect those cultures, I suggest they look to the number of cattle, chickens, turkeys, sheep, goats, and pond raised fish that are slaughtered every day for human consumption. (I am sure it doesn't cost them any $200 a head either Maren). A good ethical question may be why so many dogs and cats are uselessly gassed and incinerated daily across this country when there is a viable market for the ones that are not wanted. Ethically it seems like a gross waste of goods that could finance many county animal control facilities. We raise every other kind of animal for consumption. Why? There is your ethical question! 

Your reasoning doesn't wash here Maren. Everyone blames everyone else for the problems in over pet population. Here's one that few people ever think about. While the counties run amok trying to levy higher fee's only on the legal people that do have their animals licensed, they continue to be the biggest peddlers of worthless dogs in every county, in every state, in this country. They peddle about 1000 animals yearly in this county alone.


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

Maybe I should also add that, more than likely because of our great power of reason and ability to rationalize , no one has mentioned the fact that, while cross breeding is presently on the whipping post, cross bred dogs are much healthier than pedigreed dogs. I would have thought, because of your studies Maren, you would be more to the side of crossbreeding than pedigrees. The stance makes no rational sense other than, there again, someone is doing something another someone doesn't want them to do. These attitudes will go full circle some day and no one will be able to do anything. When my rights are infringed on, I will certainly spend the rest of my days making sure I infringe on every elses rights......if for no other reason because I can. It is my right and duty.


----------



## Kristen Cabe (Mar 27, 2006)

Here's what I believe. I'm going to say it and then I'm not going to post any more to this thread.

I believe people need to stop breeding pets. Period. There are ALWAYS going to be pet quality puppies produced, even out of two top champion dogs, as everyone on this board already knows. There're always going to be dogs in shelters. If people would stop breeding dogs for no other reason than to produce more pets (vs. breeding to produce show/working quality dogs, or better service dogs, etc.) there would be a significant impact on the pet overpopulation problem.


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

Good luck with that one Kristen. 99% of the people want a pet. Not a working dog. The working dog will much more likely be the center of a discussion like this one where the pet owners feel breeding working dogs is wrong.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Don, I think Kristen's point (though don't let me put words in her mouth) is that there are many, many very nice animals in shelters and rescues either pure or mixed bred and for the vast majority of people who just want a nice companion animal to sleep on the couch, maybe play some ball, take some walks, that should be fine. Or the pet quality pups that don't quite have it from a litter of working dogs can be spayed/neutered and sold as pets and taken out of the gene pool. Though it is getting better, there's too much of a mental block with some people that shelter dogs are somehow spoiled or tainted or something. Some of my fosters have been very difficult to work with, but about twice as many would make great pets as long as the owner gives them structure, etc, same as any other dog. 

I personally have no problem with mixed breed dogs. I own two mixed breeds for sure and probably a third, afterall. Two of them have occasional health issues and one is very, very healthy. I've always thought a really cool looking mix would be to have some smaller, more square shepherd (Malinois or Dutch shepherd) crossed with an Alaskan husky-ish type thing or a Siberian husky from racing lines. Snarky, wolfy looking all purpose dog.

You are correct. A lot of folks in the animal rescue/shelter system don't know a thing about training, behavior, etc, or sometimes about basic business practices, but they do love their animals. The $200+ cost from the salaries of the animal control officers, vets, the vet techs, and the staff, the overhead (water, electricity, maintenance, etc) running the building, gas for the vans to go and pick up strays and seized animals, the food, cages, and supplies for the animals, office supplies, the price of treating the animals for all sorts of diseases and injuries. The head vet tech at one of the rural mixed practice vets that I shadowed with this fall and winter said it cost about $140 an hour (!!) to run the clinic. And this is out in the middle of nowhere Missouri. I would assume it would be pretty similar out at the shelter. And actually, many euthanized pets are sold as food to rendering plants for pet food. Yum. Not sure if my local shelter does this, but it certainly isn't rare.


----------



## Becky Shilling (Jul 11, 2006)

Not rare AT ALL if you google the sodium pentothal levels in commercial dog foods.


----------



## Ian Forbes (Oct 13, 2006)

> Not rare AT ALL if you google the sodium pentothal levels in commercial dog foods.


Not all commercial foods, Becky.  

I think breeding for pet quality (even if most dogs are pets) is setting the bar very low. If all breeders were aiming to breed for working ability or even top conformation, there would still be a good percentage of pet quality pups.

It'll never happen, of course...


----------



## Kristen Cabe (Mar 27, 2006)

Ian, that was my point exactly.


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

I understand everyones's point. Always have. I personally think pet dogs should all be capable of something. What I am saying, have been saying, and will say, we are sitting in judgement of how we want everyone else to think and do things according to "our" views. We are in the minority and in todays society, the pet dog has replaced peoples children in importance. The pet people see no earthly reason to have a dog with the aggressions that big game dogs, or protection dogs have. They will side with the cat lovers and hunting fur is going to end soon and has in most states. We fight for it every year here. To the vast majority of people today, a passive sweet dog is a better dog. Look at the breed lists that you can no longer own and you can see the trend. Where does this kind of stuff start? From sitting around discussing how eveyone should have to do things according to how we think. Well, there are a lot more pet folks thinking than there are working folks and that is scarey.


----------

