But sadly they are still breeding them, my point is that cross breeds in the main bring a healthy balance to the dog world, i agree designer dog breeds are not maybe the best idea but no worse than some pedigree breeders.
By the way my point was not just about the programme 'pedigree dogs exposed' but my experience over a lifetime of talking to and being around some very unscrupulous breeders.

my point is quite simply that having diversity is a good though and a good mutt will always be as good if not better than a pedigree, my insurance charges me more for my 2 pedigree dogs but less for my crossbreed when i asked why they said themselves due to the higher rate of illness in pedigrees, not really an argument as such but a lot of recognised breeds serve no real purpose at all and have been hideously bred to the freaks we see today so it would appear these breeders over the years have not had a clue how to develop a real breed.
Strange how threads develop and lose the initial thrust, for me cross breeds are as important as pedigree dogs which in reality are designer dogs.

I wonder why you have a pedigree then if they are that bad, I've only ever had 2 cross breeds all my others have been pure bred and there is no difference in health. As to insurance charging more have you ever thought that people who have cross breeds may be less likely t have insurance and therefore the overall risk is lower. Most pedigree pups when purchased come with some sort of insurance which probably puts it at the forefront of the purchasers minds.
As to pedigrees not serving any purpose, firstly many of the jobs that dogs used to do are no longer legal and secondly, why do they need a 'purpose' surely just being a fantastic companion is all that is needed for a dog these days.
I don't think any dogs are 'hideous freaks' and quite frankly I find that sort of language quite offensive and said with some venom and showing your clear hatred for pure bred dogs. I love all dogs, I don't agree with how or why some of them have been bred but it isn't the dogs fault.
Becky

Curious, what was the reason for the flattening of the muzzle in the King Charles Spaniels, by crossbreeding to shorter faced Eastern breeds, (as was done in the late 1800s)? Looks and fashion are all I can come up with.

What was the reason, besides for hobby and fashion, for the development of the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel breed (a monetary prize offered for a dog that most looked like painted images of the longer muzzled King Charles of the past)?

. . . the Pekingese, the Japanese Chin (Spaniel), the Pug, the Brussels Griffon (Griffon Bruxellois)? . . .

All of these breeds have common (shared) ancestry in the late 1800s and early 1900s due to crossbreeding. Was that crossbreeding for a working purpose then, and not about developing or changing their look?



. . . as well as sucked in and tricked by the dozens of BYB's that are churning out purebred dogs.

Where I live, where 90% are unregistered and we do not have the same purebred traditions as Europe does, it is the influx of BYBs and commercial breeders selling higher priced papered purebreds to the delight of the registries that is the bigger problem. The cast-offs from this system of breeding (ex-breeding dogs) also puts a higher strain on rescues.

Foolish dog buyers have been around forever. Unscrupulous breeders will use whatever they can, and registry papers and "purebred value" are as well a marketing ploy, especially when buyers believe they can then make money off of their new purebred's pups come a few years.

So, what to do about it? Certainly blanket assertions chastising one group as unscrupulous when unscrupulous in the other are easily found isn't going to help. People hear this and know how foolish it is. All it serves is devisiveness and nothing is accomplished.

There has to be dog buying educational topics that leave out classifying by 'what' is bred - such as about finding breeders that health screen, that back up their pups for life, that research health in their lines - that would serve better.

I saw my first English Bulldog in person just two weeks ago. I'm sure I was just as aghast as the OP was at seeing a "Cockerdor", but I would have thought it nervy of me to come on a forum and post my dismay that someone actually supported that dogs breeding. I would expect a similar reaction as this thread got if I did so.

Ruby

You refered to some dogs as hideous freaks not me, that is language full of hatred and venom. If someone called you a hideous freak I'm pretty certain you wouldn't think that they liked you!!!!
Becky

as i said i do not like dogs i consider to be hideous freaks and the sooner they have that aspect of them bred out the better and it is happening so thank God for that, where you get the term hate from i do not know, the term hate is a very strong one and almost makes it sound like i would shoot them on site, i hate the chavvy culture we live in but i am not about to go postal about it.
Some dogs to me are hideous freaks but they are here and deserve the same protection, care and love they get from their owners as dogs that i consider to be non hideous freaks, i conisider those cats that have no fur and big bulging eyes to be hideous freaks but i do not hate them or wish them any harm.
I have no idea where you stand on life and i really have no wish to find out but to infer venom and hatred to my post says more about you than it does me.
By the way to all those on here that have hideous freaks as dogs please accept my apologies, you see the beauty as i do not i am afraid but i do not hate your dog and if i see you in the street please allow me to say hello and educate me on the breed you have as i am very willing to learn.
I think i will leave this thread now as i am not too keen on personal motives and i will carry on learning about all dogs.

I don't have a problem with deliberate crossbreeds. I think as long as the dog is ethically bred (which the majority or purebreds aren't either) its fine.

On the subject of there being no need for it. Historically breeds were crossed for working purposes (colliesxspringer as all round farm dog). Nowadays most dogs are pets so have no purpose other than to give their owners pleasure. If a crossbreed does that for someone as well/better than a puebred whats the problem?

I personnaly would have a crossbreed. I think they are healthier (the health insurance premioums are lower) and if I saw a dog that was a combo of two breeds I liked I wouldn't hesitate to have one.