I don't like ad's like this

[Mendel's Balls]

Mixing a borneo and a ball is mixing species. Mixing a pug and a poodle is mixing "morphs" of one species(the dog).
There's no real difference genetically in making a "puggle" than making a "bumblebee", since both mix seperate distinctly bred lines.
The REAL LIFE difference is in breeding dogs when many dogs are being put to sleep in shelters. But then you get.. why breed ANY dogs? It's a large can o worms to breed any dog.. whether purebred or not. Why not restrict breeding to only the very prime healthiest stock of purebred AKC breeds? Well.. because not all breeds are recognized by AKC. Some people prefer non-purebreds thinking purebreds are all inbred. Some like this.. some like that.
If someone breeds a litter of pups, correctly cares for parents and pups, and sells them into a good home, then I see no moral difference to that, than in a purebred breeder doing the same. There are many purebreds in shelters too!
That said, the ad is "clearly to me" for a mill type organization, since a family should not need that many dogs that they are advertising for, nor that many different breeds.
Why not charge big bucks for "mutts"? If someone will pay it, then charge it. Maybe that mutt will have more value in their eyes if they pay a big price. The issue is normally that people then try to breed THEIR dogs.. thinking they will make big money.. then they skimp on the care of the animals.. or skimp on the checking out the buyers...
Well.. another long ramble.
The big difference to me is that snakes are solitary by nature, and prefer to not have contact and socialization for the most part. Dogs are more needy, needing care and exercise and attention and affection and training. Can you keep 50 dogs for breeding and give ALL of them that? Now.. can you keep 50 snakes and give them what they need? Probaly so.
Unless you walk your snakes with that ultra cool snake walker of course...

Breeding 2 different kinds of dogs is not like breeding 2 different kinds of ball pythons. With 2 diff morphs of ball pythons, you have to remember that the only main differences are the colors and pattern of the snake. There arent any physical differences like size and shape of the animal. With dogs, they are all different sizes and shapes. In some cases it isnt even safe to breed 2 dogs together, or even physically possible (imagine a male great dane and a female chuhuahua for example) Even though some consider all dogs the same species, they have evolved to so many different breeds that it doesnt make sense to say a dog is a dog and all can/should be mixed. Would you say the same about snakes? Is a snake a snake? Going even more specific, is a python a python? Of course you can get diff kinds of pythons to breed just like you can get different kinds of dogs to breed but why would you want to mix them together when it is recognized by most serious breeders/owners as a mutt?

Wolfly-hound and corrupter both make good points. One of the reasons I think there is a lot of confusion in this thread is that there really is a lot of ambiguity surrounding the term "species". You see professional biologists have a lot of difficultly right now defining exactly what a species. Often biologists define two different organisms as a separate species more on their exact field of work rather than easy to follow set of hard and fast rules. In biology, there are many different concepts of a species.


Two very similar looking snake species may actually have more in common genetically than two different breeds of dogs. Furthermore, say intelligent life evolves long after the human species disappears from this planet or an extraterrestrial intelligence visits this planet long after we are gone. Their paleontologists may very well classify a great dane and a pug as different species based on the morphological species concept.

Depending on what type of species concept you use you can classify two different organisms as the same species or different species. I do not think whether or not two organisms are classified as the same species has anything to do with whether or not you "should" breed the two organisms together in society.
In other words, I dont think you can use the fact that two different organisms are of a separate species as a hard and fast rule in breeding ethics. Because there is no one hard and fast concept of species!

For example, for argument’s sake in captivity I think you (could) make a better case that it is more ethical to breed a ball and an Angolan python together than say a two a male great dane and a female poodle. The female will need to have a c-section in order to deliver the pups. The c-section may need to be done earlier and many of the pups will likely be too premature to survive. This would not be the case for the hybrid offspring of the snakes.

That being said I don’t have anything per se against designer dogs or mutts. Some mutts are healthier than certain pure breed dogs. Some pure breed dogs, like pugs, can often only deliver by c-section. Some pure-breeds have tons of health problems that mutts don’t. Some pure-breeds are prone to seizures, hip dysplasia, breathing problems, etc. There are advantages of having a pure-breed-you are more likely to know what health problems to look out for and you have an idea of its temperament and final size. However, as wolfy pointed out there are now healthy lines of “designer dog breeds” such as labradoodles that are propagated by breeders that are not in it just for the money and are in it for the “betterment” of the breed and care of the dogs.

That being said I think the ad is a little iffy in that it seems they just want to buy all those different dogs outright without any respect to each of the dogs own particular characteristics. But I don’t think that is necessarily related to the designer dogs that would be created with that group. If I saw an ad that said “wanted 10 Italian greyhounds asap with breeding rights ”, then I would raise an eyebrow or two and be a little suspicious.

However, it hard to judge too much on a single ad, it has more to do with how the dogs are raised and treated. And some people just like too pass judgment too much in my opinion.

Some people judge me because I bought my Italian greyhound (iggy) from a breeder rather than adopt an iggy or just adopt any dog. “There are so many dogs that need good homes that need rescued, etc.” They say it as though I am contributing to the problem of dogs being in shelters.

However, some dogs up for adoption have developed bad habits and mean temperaments. Furthermore, my dog was born and it needed a good home eventually or it might have ended up in rescue. Also whose saying I would be able to put up with all of that and I may have just given the dog back to the shelter. Other people because of the time they have or their lifestyle may be able to put up and deal with retraining and that’s awesome. But that doesn’t mean that you should only get a dog from a shelter.

I went to the breeder’s home twice before buying it and saw the conditions my dog was born into and got references. It was a very family friendly home in which the puppies were brought into. We often get comments on how friendly and non-jittery our dog is compared to other Italian greyhounds.

I’m not even sure the breeders that we bought our iggy off of were totally in it for the “betterment” of the breed-to create show quality dogs etc. This couple had raised Italian greyhounds as pet for many years and had two small children---I think they were mostly breeding to make a few extra bucks for their kids college funds. But they had experience with the breed, animal care ethics, and they weren’t being greedy and just selling the puppies off asap. They were in it for the long haul for very good financial reasons. However, I know some people who would quickly dismiss them as "backyard breeders" because they dont do too much rescue or have a professional looking website, etc But I am pleased with the companion we obtained from them.