I could be way off base here but I vaguely remember hearing that "Jessica Simpson" (? - ditzie entertainer, actress, singer?), had a Daisy Dog that appeared in lots of photo ops with her & she played "Daisy Duke" in the Dukes of Hazzard movie a few years ago. Sad day for dogs everywhere when they're bred to meet the "exacting" health & temperament standards of someone like her & her admirers. Sigh.......
If I'm not mistaken, this is the same person who was on here last week promoting her breeder repeatedly?
Personally, I think the Daisy dogs are cute, but they are simply a mixed breed. Rather than purchase a purposely mixed pup for about 1,000.00, I'd much rather go to the shelter and adopt one for about 1/ the price.
"Don't accept your dog's admiration as conclusive evidence that you are wonderful".
arent so called daisy dogs 3 breeds mixed together?? this is what i always thought? ( the person breeding them takes a mixed breed dog already and then mixes it with a pure bred so its like has 3 differnt breeds ? I dont remember the mixed dogs and such and probably if i clikced on the link it would tell me..lol Isnt this the dog that some one has a patent on??
Yes, a mixed dog, but didn't all the breeds get started by becoming mixed with another. There were only 14 (15?) names on that ancient breeds list. All the rest got their start somewhere. Just because you don't agree is no reason to get snippy about it.
Technically, my dogs are 'mutts' too, but the difference in them and the so called 'designer' dogs these days is that some knowledgeable people with a brain in their heads did their homework, and genetic testing on the combination that became the breed it is now, and they still have problems. I take offense at the term 'mutt' because I call all my dogs little mutts. It's the people who are breeding them to make a quick buck who should have the derogatory nickname attached to them, not the dogs.
***Edited By: Pen2 on 7/26/2007 5:25:57 PM*** Reason: spelling
Who said that mutt was a derogatory term? There are seven of us living in this house and only one could possibly be a "non-mutt" and he doesn't have papers. I don't have papers, so that makes me a mutt--so what?
I love the term mutt. I call Ripley my Rott/Lab mix a mutt and Spencer my English Setter a mutt. It's called a term of endearment. The difference between hundreds of years ago and today is that dogs back then were mostly seen as having a purpose. They were bred to assist man in one task or another. It may be to kill rodents, help man hunt, help man herd animals or to guard the herds from preditors. Some where breed so the rich could have companions. They had a purpose.
A daisey dog is not a breed. It never will be a breed. Just like the puggle, maltipoo ect. People who are in it for the money aren't going to take the time and patience necessary for developing a breed of dog.
If you have done research enough to say that all breeds started out as mixes, than one would assume that you either stopped researching there without looking into how much effort and time (decades) has gone into developing all of today's purebreeds - or didn't you care enough to continue the research!?!??!
In this case I'm just going to assume that that's what you heard "somewhere" from "people" and are quick to regurgitate as fact and final.
wrong again luv my puggle. I have actually posted here in this forum what it takes for the AKC to accept a new breed. So maybe it is you with assumptions. Do you know the answer to the question you posed to me? Or is it that you hoped I didn't?