Quote Originally Posted by borzoimom
There is a ton of information so to speak on how " he" views this.. But my thoughts over and over with each paragraph was total disgust..
Mixing the breeds is one thing- 400 dogs- is another thing- but the over riding concern here - is there no attempting to clear breeding stock. This makes it NO different than any puppy mill anywhere.
It also appalls me- the NY Times would give this much space to this outrageious practice...
I tend to agree, he is spouting as if he is maintaining a laboratory, when in fact he just got priceless ad space for a puppymill.

I am apalled, and truthfully very dissapointed in the Times.

I do agree with the parallel they drew, that most of our "known and recognized" (quotes are mine) breeds were also crossbred, however it is wise to temper that with the information that they were done so for the majority of honing their abilities to work. No I am not discounting the toys here, several were actuall bred for no other function than lap warmers, and in the case of the Poi (now extinct) food.

I do believe though that more care and more record keeping went into creating the breeds we know today. As for designer dogs? Go to a shelter, I am fairly certain that all of them can be found there, without purposeful breeding on our part.

Just my thoughts.

Kym