No---I am saying what I wrote---the difference between us is that I simply want a healthy dog. I am not worried about pedigrees. I then pointed out that I'd done OK with that so far. Why is that 'one-upmanship'?

I think that a dog living to 19 is probably an indication of reasonable health---what 'good breeding' is I have no idea?

Do you mean 'good breeding' as in the royal family and blood lines being kept pure---or do you mean pups well cared for? We can disregard health in this aspect of the discussion as a 19 year old dog was almost definitely OK at age 15 which for most breeds is more than their life expectancy.

What do you consider a decent age?

rune

I don't (I never said I did), but you don't have any to support the opposite either so it's a moot point. This blog does not count as evidence, it's just someone's opinion - that's the point I'm making.

"The most authoritative study of canine lifespans in the UK was published in 1999 by the Veterinary Record, the magazine of the British Veterinary Association. [2] The study revealed some surprising facts. For instance, mongrels tend to live longer than most pedigree dogs, only 8 per cent of dogs live beyond the age of 15 and 64 per cent die or are put to sleep because of illness. Cancer is responsible for 16 per cent of deaths, twice as much as heart disease. While some terrier breeds can live for an average of 13 or 14 years, breeds like the Irish wolfhound can live for less than half this time, often as little as six years. The study also compiled a list of the average lifespan of the most popular breeds: "

rune

I didn't say it was one-upmanship, I asked if that was the case. I found your point a bit irrelevant really, you prefer crossbreeds, I prefer pedigrees. And???

To me irrelevant points are usually an indicator that someone has run out of relevant points to make and so tries to deflect this by trying to be clever, IYSWIM.

That's wonderful, but it means diddly sqaut without some evidence to back it up.

Almost definitely? Come on - get real! You didn't know this dog personally so you have no idea how healthy it was. Talk about trying to wangle your way round something!

Good breeding = a dog that is bred with good health, temperament and type fore most in mind.

I would consider a decent age to be 10 - 15 years of age dependant on the breed/size of the dog given that small breeds often naturally out live large breeds.

That's lovely. Your point?

Why is it cheeper to insure a crossbreed or mutt than it is to insure a pedigree?

Obviously because as the study found out they are now often healthier. Shouldn't be the case but is.

I suppose as you get the mix added to beyond the first cross you dilute the chances of some comditions even more.

rune

I nthink 10 ought to be young in all breds.

The average is brought down by bloat in some cases, cancer and bad arthritis in others and general joint problems because the dogs are too big.

Thats wrong as well.

rune

My Boxer I lost in 2010 was old & I mean old at 9 yrs. we lost her in June 2010 not long after her 10th B/D.

Hmmm, I thought we were talking about your claim that BYB dogs are healthier than "expert" breeders dogs?

It's impossible to tell whether cross breeds are healthier than pedigrees as there is no registry for cross breeds, but like I said we're not talking about cross breeds are we?

This thread isn't about cross breeds, please read previous posts. Many thanks.

That's lovely, but the correct age at which a dog should die is just opinion based, the same as the blog posted as evidence for BYB dogs being healthier then "expert" breeder dogs. I think 10-15 years is a good average given the massive size difference within the species as a whole, you don't. Good for you.