[nq:2]From the FCI standard [link], [nq:1]Good, bad or something else, [nq:1]Apparently it

1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 » 38

Sandy in OK:

[nq:1]Good, bad or something else - she is breeding miniature schnauzers out of the breed standard. Although I personally don't ... even enter the ring.) Then she misrepresents the prices charged by show breeders to make her own prices seem reasonable.[/nq]Apparently it is not to the American standard but is allowed in Europe. I'm assuming (don't know enough about them to know for sure) that it's a fully pigmented dog with a white coat - so no health problems assoicated with it. (unlike white Boxers or "white" Dobermans.) Some breeders do specialize in certain colors. Some breed to preserve characteristics which aren't rewarded in the show ring (you'll see very few working line Aussies in a conformation ring.

They meet the standard but actually meet the "moderate" part of the standard a lot better than big boned, heavy-coated dogs who tend to be the show winners.) Breeding dogs which meet the European standard isn't unheard of. It would be like accusing someone who bred French Brittanies of being disreputable because their black dogs can't be shown in the US. Its not really unusual for a good breeder to breed for goals other than BIS. Can't say that is true in this case.

But I do know that the whole "only dogs who are bred to win dogshows should be bred" is one of those easier-to-swallow Animal Rights pills. BroomSandy

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

Judy:

[nq:1]Apparently it is not to the American standard but is allowed in Europe.[/nq]
The American standard is based on the original European standard - which recognized only three colors. Salt and pepper, black and silver, and black. That there are now some European breeders and some American breeders who are now breeding whites does not change the standard or what it was and is based on.
As I stated in my original explanation, the miniature was to be a smaller replica of the standard schnauzer. There were never any white standard schnauzers. So therefore they were not included in the European standard used when the breed was created and therefore was not in the American standard that was based on it.
[nq:1]Its not really unusual for a good breeder to breed for goals other than BIS.[/nq]
Perhaps not for some breeds but it would be very unusual for respomsible breeders of miniature schnauzers. For example, there are retrievers bred for field work that would never win BIS. From what I know of these breeds, the field dog may actually more closely fit the breed standard than does the show winner. A BIS miniature schnauzer will have been bred to the breed standard. Which IS what responsible breeders do. The idea is to protect and preserve the breed as it is intended to be. If you love miniature schnauzers, why would you want to change what is basic about the breed?

Should I consider someone a good breeder of miniature schnauzers if they decide that the beard, eyebrows, leg furnishings and wiry coat are just too difficult for most people to deal with grooming so I'm going to try to breed them out? It's not that a miniature schnauzer without those things wouldn't win BIS. It's that it wouldn't be a miniature schnauzer.
[nq:1]But I do know that the whole "only dogs who are bred to win dogshows should be bred" is one of those easier-to-swallow Animal Rights pills.[/nq]
The dogs should be proven as breed-worthy. There should be a reason for doing the breeding other than creating income for the breeder. There is no reason to breed white schnauzers except as a marketing tool.

Since miniature schnauzers were created as farm dogs who could come into the family home, ideally one consideration to determine breed-worthiness would be a performance title in Earthdog. The breed standard includes as much of that "attitude" as can be determined in a show ring. I know of judges who will intentionally put two terriers in close proximity to see their reactions.. And most responsible breeders would agree that a BIS miniature schnauzer who had no interest or ability in vermin would not be breedworthy.

I'm just enough of a breed purist to believe that responsible breeders should breed to the breed standard. If you want a white terrier, there are other ways of getting one. If you want a miniature schnauzer, they should not be white.
Judy

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

Sandy in OK:

[nq:2]Apparently it is not to the American standard but is allowed in Europe.[/nq]
[nq:1]The American standard is based on the original European standard - which recognized only three colors. Salt and pepper, black ... and therefore was not in the American standard that was based on it. From the FCI standard http://www.schnauzerclub.com/zsstanduk.html(translated from German):[/nq]
COLOUR
Pure black with black undercoat.
Pepper and Salt.
Black/Silver.
**Pure white with white undercoat*
[nq:1]I'm just enough of a breed purist to believe that responsible breeders should breed to the breed standard. If you want a white terrier, there are other ways of getting one. If you want a miniature schnauzer, they should not be white.[/nq]
So, if someone breeds to the FCI standard they are not responsible?

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

shelly:

[nq:2]As I stated in my original explanation, the miniature was ... not in the American standard that was based on it.[/nq]
[nq:1]From the FCI standard http://www.schnauzerclub.com/zsstanduk.html (translated from German):[/nq]
Judy was referencing the historic reason why white was not included in the US standard that white was not accepted by FCI for Standard Schnauzers. Citing a new, revised FCI standard for Miniature Schnauzers is really unpointful. (Reading is fundamental!)
[nq:1]So, if someone breeds to the FCI standard they are not responsible?[/nq]
Location is everything.
The point of responsible breeding is to improve the breed. Breeding specifically for one physical trait like a particular color without regard for conformation, health testing, or temperament, is not at all responsible. Doing the bare minimum health testing that is recommended by the parent club is not exactly something to brag about. Doing the above for a color that is not even allowed in your country's breed standard? Not responsible!

Tell me, how do you feel about "mini" Aussies?

Shelly (Warning: see label for details)
http://www.cat-sidh.net (the Mother Ship)
http://esther.cat-sidh.net (Letters to Esther)

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

Judy:

[nq:2]From the FCI standard http://www.schnauzerclub.com/zsstanduk.html (translated from German):[/nq]
[nq:1]Judy was referencing the historic reason why white was not included in the US standard that white was not accepted by FCI for Standard Schnauzers. Citing a new, revised FCI standard for Miniature Schnauzers is really unpointful. (Reading is fundamental!)[/nq]
Yup. What she said.
[nq:2]So, if someone breeds to the FCI standard they are not responsible?[/nq]
As I said, if they (the FCI or a group of breeders) decide that the beard, eyebrows, leg furnishings and wiry coat are no longer required, should we still consider them schnauzers? Color is originally listed on the same level as those features.
Judy

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

shelly:

[nq:1]As I said, if they (the FCI or a group of breeders) decide that the beard, eyebrows, leg furnishings and wiry coat are no longer required, should we still consider them schnauzers? Color is originally listed on the same level as those features.[/nq]
I don't think "When does it become a separate breed?" is necessarily an easy question to answer. If all of those things were lacking? I don't think it could reasonably be called a Schnauzer. Color alone? Certainly, some folks are still calling them Schnauzers.

There is also the question of temperament. There's reason to believe that temperament may have links to color. And there is certainly reason to question whether or not breeding solely for color will affect temperament (if you aren't breeding for a trait, you may well lose it).
It just seems to me that what the breeder in question is doing is A) irresponsible and B) unethical (e.g. misleading buyers by touting her dogs as "rare" in order to justify her prices). O ick.

Shelly (Warning: see label for details)
http://www.cat-sidh.net (the Mother Ship)
http://esther.cat-sidh.net (Letters to Esther)

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

Sandy in OK:

[nq:1]Judy was referencing the historic reason why white was not included in the US standard that white was not accepted by FCI for Standard Schnauzers. Citing a new, revised FCI standard for Miniature Schnauzers is really unpointful. (Reading is fundamental!)[/nq]
You are correct. Reading IS fundamental! They don't meet the American Standard. But they do meet the European standard. Is the only "appearance" reason to breed (leaving out performance qualities for the moment) to win in the AKC show ring? So, are the people who fancy French Brittanys irresponsible because they'll breed a black dog? even thought that is recognized in the country of origin. Is there any reason, in your opinion, to breed for a certain look that isn't going to win BOB in an AKC show?
[nq:1]The point of responsible breeding is to improve the breed. Breeding specifically for one physical trait like a particular color without regard ... brag about. Doing the above for a color that is not even allowed in your country's breed standard? Not responsible![/nq]The reason there are many different lines in a breed (and in some breeds many different "types" is because not everyone has the same opinion about what is improvement. Personally, when I look at GSDs who walk on their pasterns and hocks and can't move at anything BUT a flying trot, when I look at some breeds whose muzzles have been so shortened that they can't breathe or tolerate moderate heat and heads so big they can't whelp safely and naturally, and when I see numerous other "improvements" that win big but basically decrease the dog's functionality, I have to wonder about using that measurement (winning in conformation) as a true guide for breeding functional healthy dogs.

Many breeders concentrate on preferred colors. In Aussies there are a lot of show breeders who won't touch a red dog. I just did some art work for a lady who SPECIALIZES in red. Having a color preference isn't a bad thing if you are still looking at a bigger picture - and we don't know that Sylvia Hammarstrom is only breeding for color. Someone who is that successful doesn't get that way without developing an "eye" for a good dog. So you don't know that she is breeding without regard for conformation, health testing or temperament.

That's a surmise. As to a bare minimum of heatlh testing, what would you consider necessary that isn't covered in the CHIC registry? What else should she be testing for?
[nq:1]Tell me, how do you feel about "mini" Aussies?[/nq]Well, Mini people keep asking me about Alice (17.5") I don't have any problem with people branching out and developing a new breed of dogs. (for the record, I don't consider F1 mixes like Doodles, Puggles and Poos to be new breeds of dog. IF they were selectively bred for many generations to have specific breed qualities and breed true, I might) That's pretty much how we came to have dog breeds. I have no problem if the Mini fanciers want to get registered by AKC as a breed, but not a size variety of Australian Shepherd (Aussies have a variety of sizes but no size varieties.

A preferred height, but quality is not to be sacrified for size). I personally don't care for the "toy" Aussies who have buggy eyes, spindly legs, snipy muzzles and apple-heads. And frequently I find myself wondering if there is something else in there. They aren't appealing to me. Some of the larger (above 15 inch) minis look a lot like the smaller Aussies I see. And quite honestly, I tend to object less to their appearance than I do to the hound-eared, round eyed, domed skulled, dripping in coat, big boned "Aussies" I frequently see in the show ring.

As one breeder said "The look of eagles has been replaced by the look of teddy bears." BroomSandy

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

Sandy in OK:

[nq:1]Since miniature schnauzers were created as farm dogs who could come into the family home, ideally one consideration to determine ... breeders would agree that a BIS miniature schnauzer who had no interest or ability in vermin would not be breedworthy.[/nq]
So, do you think that most of the successfull winning Miniature Schnauzers do earth dog? I'm thinkin coat thing and betting that they don't. So, does that make their breeders irresponsible? I know that most of the show-bred Aussies have never seen stock (or chased three dog-broke goats arouind a round pen for a couple of minutes for a herding instinct certification.) I did see a top AmLine GSD in an AKC herding trial. She had some nice instinct, but if she needed to move faster than a flying trot, she was SOL. Her "canter" was a pitiful, slow and ungainly bunny hop. BroomSandy

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

Melinda Shore:

[nq:1]Is the only "appearance" reason to breed (leaving out performance qualities for the moment) to win in the AKC show ring?[/nq]
Belyaev.

Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - (Email Removed)

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

RE: "Don't touch my bone" page 6

Related forum topics: