So anyone that puts two different breeds together (for whatever good reason they may have) isn't making a mistake, in today's day and age?
These designer breeds will never stop.
Printable View
Um, no. That's not what I said. But if you're asserting that there is something inherently unethical about breeding a mixed breed dog, then you're full of it. It is not inherently unethical, and it is not inherently a mistake. My point was that the money-grubbing designer dog craze that followed was not Conron's fault or his intention.
The designer mutt or hyphenated breed fad that is so prevalent now makes me laugh. It seems like many people think that these cross bred mutts are actual breeds with a sound health and behavioral history. Was a time when mutts were given away or flogged for the price of first vaccinations. Now all you have to do is hyphenate the supposed two breeds and "voila" some idiot will pay a $grand for a pup. I had a buddy who was a serious Beagle guy and breeder. He always said if he couldn't unload a litter of pups at the going rate all he had to do was double the price and people would buy them thinking they were better.
No, actually, he wasn't.
Conron was not breeding designer dogs for big dollars. He worked for the Royal Guide Dog Association of Australia (a charity) and first crossed Labs and poodles to try to create a dog that would be suitable for clients with allergies. He had some success although of course not every pup had the desired characteristics. But he found that clients did not want the dogs as soon as they were told they were "mixed breeds." So he called them labradoodles.
Then people hopped on the bandwagon and people started breeding them for profit. Conron quit breeding dogs 20 years ago.
The mistake wasn't breeding the dogs. The mistake was trying to overcome the stigma attached to "mixed breeds" for guide dog work by calling them a new breed.