Healthy debate about breeding designer dogs.

[MylesyPug]

A few years ago a neighbour bought a "Pugalier" (Pug/Cavalier King Charles Spaniel) from a backyard breeder. At the time I thought she'd done the wrong thing buying into the whole designer dog thing, but I didn't say anything. She told me she'd always loved Pugs but had been sold on "the fact" that crossing with another breed would mean her little guy wouldn't have the Pug problems and this was a "nice" lady breeding her pets in her home. During this sweet little dog's life it has had surgery for elongated soft palate and stenotic nares (Pug problems but can also be found in Cavs); surgery for a luxating patella (genetic in both breeds) and was found to have mitral valve disease (a killer found in 50% of Cavaliers) and died today at age 4. She is devastated and heartbroken (of course).

I am beyond angry on her behalf at the people who would tell her this outcross would be healthier. This poor little dog inherited the WORST faults of BOTH breeds. There is little she can do and no real remedies from trying to sue the breeder, who continues to breed, apparently. Ethical breeders breeding to improve their particular breed will genetically test their dams and sires for all these problems. It is of no concern (obviously) to someone trying to cash in on this whole ridiculous concept of coming up with these "cutsie" names for mutts. Our shelters are full of discarded designer dogs and still they are being churned out.

I am sorry about this rant but I just had to get this off my chest with people that understand (I hope). I am so angry and so upset for my neighbour.

What do you, as a community, feel about people churning out "designer dogs" in their backyards (as opposed to puppy mills about which noone has anything positive to say), without genetic testing or any consideration to improving the breed or adding to the over-population of dogs, as a whole?

I hope this debate doesn't start anything negative, but I think it is important.

[Wally 'n' Leto]

There are 2 issues in your post -- mixed breeds and genetics. Mixes have been discussed in other posts, I'm not touching that with a 10 foot pole. There are lots of BYB of purebreds, too, and the finger should not be pointed just at the mixed breeds. However... I do think that anyone who breeds anything should have an understanding of genetics.

If you breed an animal with a high risk of a certain anomaly with another animal with at high risk of the same anomaly, the offspring will be at high risk of the anomaly, no matter whether the parents are the same or different breeds. The exact odds of the offspring having the problem depend on the mechanism of heredity (eg recessive or dominant or multifactorial). You can reduce (or increase) the odds of offspring carrying certain traits by careful selection of matings, but in the end it all comes down to a roll of the dice.

Hybrid vigour only applies to an animal with a risk of an anomaly being bred to an animal without the risk of the anomaly. Like a dog with stenotic nares being bred to a dog who does not carry that trait - then you REDUCE but not eliminate the risk of the offspring having the trait. You can still get unlucky and have the offspring carry the undesired trait. Breeding a pug to a cavalier and expecting to lower the risk of bulging eyes, stenotic nares, long palate, bad kneecaps does NOT MAKE SENSE. If pugs don't carry the gene for mitral valve problems (I don't know), then this little 'Pugalier' just got unlucky, getting the bad gene from the cavy parent.

Line breeding and inbreeding within a breed not only increase the odds of offspring carrying desirable traits (which is why it is done), it also increases the odds of undesirable traits that are carried in a family line. Mating 2 unrelated animals of the same breed with an undesirable trait (say 2 pugs with stenotic nares) will more likely give you a pup with stenotic nares than if you bred one with open and one with stenotic nares.

I don't see this as a crossbreeding question at all, but a basic animal husbandry one. ANY breeding animal, of any species and any breed, should be shown to be free of heritable faults whether it's through genetic testing or physical exam. And an animal should only be bred to another animal that reduces the chance of having these undesirable traits, whether the mating be within breed or across breeds. People who do not wish to breed mixes OR purebreds following these basic biological concepts should not be breeding, period.

The saying in the horse racing world is "Breed the best to the best, and hope for the best." Really, all animals (you can include people in there if you want) should be bred to the same philosophical standard.

[MylesyPug]

Thank you for your well thought out and knowledgeable reply.

Yes, I guess there are two parts to my query and I agree, it shouldn't just be directed at people breeding "designer" dogs but include people breeding pure-breds with no thought as to what they are doing. Genetics are a lottery and anyone making claims that breeding two breeds together will give a guarantee on hybrid vigor....

I see there have been many views of this topic and only one response. I am not quite sure what to make of that - have I touched on a prickly subject? Are there people on the forum that are offended as I am coming out against a practice in which they are participating or support?

I guess I'll leave it at that!

[puglover22]

I am not offended by your post, I'm offended by ignorant people....for example last week I was out with Louie and a lady asked me...."what kind of dog is that?" I said "he's a pug"...and then she went on to tell me (with great pride) "I have a puggle" (like that would impress me??)
I think I just said "oh", not wanting to go there.....then she felt the need to add "they're really great dogs" (referring to the puggle). I couldn't respond, I think I just said "hmmm", but what I really wanted to say was...."I hope you didn't PAY for it.....
and if she had any brains at all and she had a puggle, wouldn't she know a pug when she see's one?
I agree with you 100%, and also with Heather....breed the best to the best, and that should apply to humans also, unfortunately the world has a bunch of idiots reproducing......

[Cheryl7777]

As a person who bought a full blooded Pug from a back yard breeder, I can tell you I learned a horrible lesson. I will never buy another puppy from anyone who is just breeding dogs for profit. I don't care if they are breeding dogs of the same breed or crossing them with something else. I stupidly added to this idiots profits by purchasing my Gus and Abby. I did it unknowingly, but I sure got an education about back yard breeders and unresponsable pet owners. I think everyone should quit breeding dogs, or cats for that matter, until all the homeless pets in shelters and on the streets have warm safe homes with people who love them and are taking good care of them. I know that's never going to happen, but that's what I think.

[Snifter]

I object to the "designer dog" craze because it seems to me it is purely done to make a fast buck.

If I saw a person breeding something with well thought out reasoning as to why they may be giving the offspring a better chance of health or temperament then I might be swayed. Or if there is a necessary characteristic missing from one that ought to be added. But even things like labradoodles which were apparently started so allergic people could have non-shedding dogs would not fall into that category. If an allergic person wants a non-shedding dog what on earth is wrong with a poodle?

I think in most breeds it is possible to breed for healthy characteristics without going outside the breed.

I realise there is a market for cute dogs but if you are selling mongrels, they are just that. Mongrels. Giving them fancy names like pugalier or pucker or jug or whatever just tries to sugar coat it, seems to me, and fuels the craze for ever more weird crosses. I saw an advert for a Border Terrier x Mastiff the other day, with some fancy name that I have cast from my mind.

[BeachyKeen]

Thank you for your well thought out and knowledgeable reply.

Yes, I guess there are two parts to my query and I agree, it shouldn't just be directed at people breeding "designer" dogs but include people breeding pure-breds with no thought as to what they are doing. Genetics are a lottery and anyone making claims that breeding two breeds together will give a guarantee on hybrid vigor....

I see there have been many views of this topic and only one response. I am not quite sure what to make of that - have I touched on a prickly subject? Are there people on the forum that are offended as I am coming out against a practice in which they are participating or support?

I guess I'll leave it at that!

I don't think that no response means no opinion; I haven't commented because it can turn touchy in a heartbeat and I have seen it happen. Plus, you're preaching to the choir here!

I appreciate any opportunity for civilized discourse and am glad that you got considerate, well-thought-out answers.

[Pugpillow]

Bottom line for me is whether the breeder is breeding for the benefit of humans or for the benefit of the dogs. Any breeder who breeds without doing due diligence with respect to health and temperament is either uninformed or doesn't care about the animals, or both. Those who know better and don't do better - i.e. don't care - are the lowest of the low in my book because they are opportunists prostituting their animals whose interests they are entrusted with. And there are some of those who portray themselves as responsible breeders .... they disgust me.

[MylesyPug]

Snifter, I haven't heard of "Puckers" what abomination of a combination are they? I must go and google....

[BeachyKeen]

Snifter, I haven't heard of "Puckers" what abomination of a combination are they? I must go and google....

Pug/cocker?