On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 23:04:02 -0700, Matthew Montchalin
wrote:

On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, BarB wrote:

Actually Ru wrote:

|But are there enough usenet readers? That's all that really
|matters. Why aren't the current r.p.cats.* groups satisfying
|breeders as forums for their discussions? What are the problems
|with those forums, and how will the proposed group help? What
|kinds of problems might the proposed group create and how will
|they be mitigated?

BarB wrote:
|
|Some users believe all breeding of animals is immoral, not just
|the back-yard breeder cranking out litter after litter for a quick
|profit, but also the breeder working to improve the breed.

How on earth is it possible to improve a breed without hybridizing?

A breeder can improve the line by breeding to higher quality animals in
the same breed or by testing and eliminating genetic defects in the
line. Incidentally they can also ruin a line by trying for the more
extreme features that have won shows. The flat face of a Persian is one
example of over breeding that can cause respiratory and eye problems
(blockage in the tear ducts). So is the narrow head on a Collie.

New breeds are constantly being developed by cat and dog breeders to
develop a certain look. Some are deliberate crosses and some are
mutations. Eventually with work and luck some of these breeds will
proceed to be registered purebreds with the cat organizations. The
Himalayan is one such cross, with the points of a Siamese and the
Persian face and coat.

Is the breeder going to induce mutations instead?

Usually these occur by accident and someone saves the line...the
curly-coated Devon Rex, La Perm, Selkirk Rex, American Keuda to name a
few.

This is more than a rhetorical question, it's a quandary, because
it requires someone, somewhere, to decide which set of cat genes,
properly concentrated, constitute an approved 'breed.'

See http://www.messybeast.com/workbreed.htm

BarB