|
Location: U K
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 5,588
|
|
[QUOTE=Jackbox;1924323
Sorry but you are wrong, two pedigrees of the same breed produce a pedigree, two pedigrees of different breeds produce a cross breed, anything else is a mongrel.
Theres no breed snobbery in that , just facts.
First crosses or F1`s, are dogs that are used in a breeding programme to produce a new breed, but they will then go on to be bred back to those f1`s, creating F2`s/F3`s... they will eventually after many generations become a breed, (if bred to type and consistency) look at the RBT fro instance a very good breeding programme in creating a new breed over a short period of time.
The poos and doodles of the world don't fall into that category..because must have had no thought to future breeding programme's, and never get past the first cross.
Thats not breed snobbery , please find me a post where anyone has actually shown snobbery towards a dog, the snobbery (as some have called it) is concern for the dogs and they callousness of the breeders who give no thought to producing thousands of unhealthy tests crossbreeds, fooling people into thinking they are the new breed, and giving false information on non shedding a d temperament.
If I fall intot he catagory of breed snobbery , for being aware of that, so be it.
[/QUOTE]
Im afraid I dont agree with you Jackie. I never said that two first crosses were a pedigree, I agreed with the poster who said that they were a "first cross" and unless things have dramatically changed since I was showing dogs I would still go along with that statement.
I have no objection to people buying a crossbred puppy. If that is what they want and are prepared to spend their money on, so be it.
However I do object to people advertising pedigree puppies, people paying huge monies for it and then some months down the line finding out they have been sold a crossbred - it happened to a neighbour of my parents, he bought a Boxer puppy and by the time it was 12 months old it resembled a Labrador more than a Boxer with the light yellow coat and texture. He had papers for his "Boxer" puppy. Then there was the case of the lady who went to buy a Pug and spent a lot of money as Pugs dont come cheap. Again she got papers for her Pug pup - she thought the fluffy coat was just a "puppy" coat. Except the fluffy coat got fluffier and longer. These unscrupulous breeders are true villans!
There are those who say that the "true" designer dog is the mongrel - you dont often get two identical even in litters or if they do look alike as pups by the time they are adults they wont. As no one is sure what parentage the parents where, they cant re-create the mating and have pups/dogs the same. There is a certain logic in that.
After all Jackie it isnt so long ago that someone in our own breed decided to cross a Corgi with a Boxer to create a natural tailess Boxer. Now I personally would not knowingly go out to buy a pup of this parentage/background but there are numerous who do and actively seek out pups that carry this gene and the pups cost a lot of money. However its "each to their own"
Changing the subject slightly
there is still snobbery and discrimination attached to the White Boxer. I have heard people through rescue saying they dont want or wouldnt consider a White Boxer as they "aren't a true Boxer".
I have also come across people who have a pedigree dog yet have no papers for the dog, does that make their dog any less a pedigree because it does not come with papers....
A thread like this can open up a whole lot of possibilities