Loving Home For Party-Mix Toy Poodle
John Munro
Does anyone have information concerning reputable breeders of
party-mix toy poodles in the Austin (central Texas) or San Antonio or
Houston or Waco or Dallas areas of Texas?
Cris Waller
jlm...@texas.net (John Munro) wrote:
What exactly do you mean by a "party-mix" toy poodle?
If you mean a particolor Poodle (one that is two different colors,
like black and white)-this coloration is not allowed under the AKC
standard, so reputable breeders do not breed them.
If you mean a mix of some other kind of dog and a Poodle, again,
reputable people do not breed them. Your best bet would be to try a
small breed rescue.
I am glad to see that you are looking for a reputable breeder. Please
let us know what exactly you are looking for so that we can help you
out.
Cris Waller
Cr...@ix.netcom.com
E-mail may be posted as I see fit!
Cris Waller
This is the reply I got to my last post. I am posting it here in case
others are also wondering exactly what this person is looking for.
>Dear Chris,
>I am not an AKC member, and I am ignorant of what the AKC considers
>correct for breeders and breeds.
Don't worry-individuals cannot become members of the AKC. Only dog
clubs can.
>Also, I do not understand why I should
>consider AKC standards as having validity for what makes a "reputable"
>breeder and a "correct" breed - please educate me.
In my post, I mentioned that particolor poodles were not correct
according to the AKC standard, and thus responsible breeders do not
breed them.
Responsible breeders have as their goal the production of better
specimens of their breed-hopefully not just better in looks, but in
health. temperment, and working ability as well. In order to do that,
responsible breeders must have *some* standard to follow. For some
breeds, that means the AKC standard for conformation. These standards
are set not by the AKC, but by the parent club for the breed, made up
of people who are very knowledgeable about that breed. Different other
breeds may have different registries, like the Field Dog Stud Book for
pointers and setters, or the FCI for many rare breeds.
Breed standards are what keeps Poodles looking like Poodles and not
Bichon Frises or Irish Water Spaniels. Thus, as just one part of their
breeding program, responsible breeders breed only dogs that meet the
breed standard. in these standards, Some things are listed as being
absolutely not correct for the breed. For example, Golden Retrievers
cannot have large patches of black in their coats, Dobermans cannot be
white-and poodles cannot be particolor. If breed standards are not
followed, and people just breed any old dog to any other dohg, then
the unique qualities that make a breed special are soon lost.
Responsible breeders also have some objective method of ensuring that
their dog meets the standard-for most breeds, this will mean
competition in conformation shows, whether by the AKC or some other
organization. They will also most likely judge the performance of
their dogs-especially working, sporting, or herding breeds-in some
other areas as well, such as obedience, agility, tracking, or
breed-specific tests like herding or field work.
People who do not show their dogs in any type of competition are
generally not reputable breeders. They may offer many excuses, but I
would not patronize such a breeder. if they are not breeding to make
better specimens of the breed (and if they aren't competing with their
dog, they have no objective way of evaluating their dogs) then they
are probably breeding for money, and that's not reputable.
Responsible breeders also care about the health of the dogs that they
produce. They will not breed dogs that have genetic disorders, and
they will test all breeding stock to make sure it is free of such
disorders. For poodles, at the very least this means that the parents
are certified by the Canine Eye Registry Foundation (CERF) to be free
of eye disease. I also imagine that it's a good idea for toy poodles
to be certified free of hip dysplasia, a crippling disorder, by the
Orthopedic Foundation for Animals (OFA). I am sure that there are
other specific tests that poodles should have, which someone
knowledgeable about the breed can fill you in on.
Reputable breeders may be breeding for show dogs, but not every dog
oin a litter will be show-quality. Thus, you can get a lovely pet from
a show breeder-one that will be healthy, well-socialized, and
good-looking.
>My contact with AKC members at dog shows has shown me that the AKC
>members I talked with are persons who exhibit an intolerant dislike
>towards those who do not want what their organization considers as the
>very best AKC show dog for their pet. I hope my limited experience is
>not indicative of AKC members in general.
Remember-private individuals are not AKC members.
Most dog people don't want a show dog for everyone. However, most
*are* introlerant-and rightly so-of the backyard breeders and puppy
mills who breed substandard, unhealthy dogs that suffer and die by the
thousands.
>What I want is a breeder who does not mistreat their dogs with poor
>health and breeding standards and who will represent their dogs
>honestly: knows their dog's health, pedigree, and behavior and will
>reasonably warrant their dogs. This dealer will also provide customer
>references
These are excellent things to look for in a breeder. But you must also
be an educated consumer and be aware of what exactly you *should* be
getting. You might want to check out the FAQ on "Getting a Dog" in
rec.petsdogs.info.
> and possibly BBB references - essentially saying this is a
>person the community holds in esteem for what they are and do.
If any breeder I was dealing with had Better Business Bureau
certification, I'm afraid I'd run away from them screaming!
Reputable breeders do *not* breed to make money, and thus would never
be selling enough dogs to warrant BBB scrutiny. If they were breeding
that many dogs,I don't care if the BBB had good things to say about
them, they would not be a reputable breeder to me.
>Those are
>qualities of being a reputable breeder, to me. I think I can understand
>what the AKC thinks is reputable in breeders, but I am not sure I can
>agree with that, and I think it impugns and slanders the integrity of
>what I think are honest, ethical breeders.
Why? What qualities do you see in breeders that do not follow AKC
standards that you consider honest and ethical that you do not think
you see in breeders breeding to AKC standards?
>From what you have told me, I desire a dog that to an AKC member
>resembles a toy poodle that has two colors (such as black and white).
OK, so you are looking for a particolor Poodle. As I mentioned, you
will probably *not* find reputable breeders of this type of dog,
because it is a disqualification under the breed standard. Therefore,
anyone purposely breeding particolors is unlikely to be doing so for
the good of the breed, but instead is probably doing it for money.
They probably will not do things like the genetic testing that is so
important.
Why is the color of the dog so important to you? To be frank, health
and temperment should be far more important to you than color. If you
like the personality of the Poodle, you will have a much easier time
finding one from a reputable breeder if you stick with a recognized
color. If you really, really want a small black and white dog, then
you are better off doing some research on the breeds for which this is
an acceptable color, like Boston Terriers, Shih Tzus, and Papillons,
to see if one of these would be a good fit for your family.
>If I posted this request to the wrong newsgroup, I apologize. Please
>guide me to the correct newsgroup for my posting.
You are in the right place. I hope that this information is helpful.
Diane Blackman
John Munro wrote:
: Does anyone have information concerning reputable breeders of
: party-mix toy poodles in the Austin (central Texas) or San Antonio or
: Houston or Waco or Dallas areas of Texas?
It might be more difficult to find a responsible breeder of a
parti-colored poodle. That is because two-colored (parti-colored)
is not a color allowed to compete in AKC. However, what you are
looking for is a breeder that knows the common genetic diseases
for the breed and has information on at least the parents and grandparents
of the puppies as to whether the dogs were tested for and cleared of
those genetic diseases, ideally this information would also be
available for the siblings, and great grand parents etc.
Also the responsible breeder should consider the puppies part of
an extended family.
There are lots of poodles in rescue that come
from breedings where the breeder knew nothing about testing for
genetic disease, or selecting for temperament. Some of those
breeders are well meaning, but lacking in knowledge, some are just
greedy, most create sadness and heartache. In order to avoid a dog
ending up in rescue or a shelter the responsible breeder will take
back the dog at any time in its life. That way the dogs produced
will never be homeless, and never be a burden on society.
So there it is, if you want the best possible chance for a healthy,
dog with a sound temperament you will be looking for a breeder who
cares very deeply about where the dogs go, and what happens to them
after they leave. Ideally the parent dogs would be tested for fitness
someway by, for example, competing in obedience, agility, or the
show ring. Its very difficult to be objective about a dog you
love. This helps make sure the breeder isn't overlooking some
serious health or temperament problems (didn't someone say "love
is blind").
A solid color puppy is not necessarily "better" than a parti-color
just because the solid color meets AKC standards. Still it will
be easier to find a breeder who cares about all the things that
go into making a responsible breeder when that breeder also
tries to get dogs that meet breed standard. If you decide that
parti-color is very important you will need to work extra hard
to make sure that the puppy you get is of sound temperament,
and as likely to be free of genetic disease as one can tell
by testing and record keeping of the family tree.
I care because I have read the heart wrenching posts from
people who have watched their little friend
--
Diane Blackman
di...@dog-play.com http://www.dog-play.com
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
You must speak to be heard. Silence assumes assent.
Maytree
On Mon, 09 Dec 1996 07:05:26 GMT, thus spake Cr...@ix.netcom.com (Cris
Waller):
>> and possibly BBB references - essentially saying this is a
>>person the community holds in esteem for what they are and do.
>
>If any breeder I was dealing with had Better Business Bureau
>certification, I'm afraid I'd run away from them screaming!
>Reputable breeders do *not* breed to make money, and thus would never
>be selling enough dogs to warrant BBB scrutiny.
Um, I think this is a something of an over-reaction to the person's
question. I don't know about BBB "certification" of any sort; what I
know about the BBB is that if a consumer has a complaint about a
business, they can call the BBB and the BBB will keep a file on that
business. Whether or not the business makes money isn't relevant; the
BBB will log consumer complaints against any legitimate business.
While I understand that reputable breeders don't breed for money and
don't make any profit as a rule, don't most breeders run their
operations as actual businesses in the legal and tax sense so they can
get tax breaks? If so, even if the business doesn't make a profit,
consumers can lodge a complaint with the BBB if the business cheats
them.
Therefore, calling the BBB to see if anyone has filed any complaints
about a certain breeder isn't a bad idea. If the BBB doesn't have the
breeder in their files, then no one has filed a complaint on that
company, so that's a plus.
>>From what you have told me, I desire a dog that to an AKC member
>>resembles a toy poodle that has two colors (such as black and white).
>
>OK, so you are looking for a particolor Poodle. As I mentioned, you
>will probably *not* find reputable breeders of this type of dog,
It's true that reputable breeders won't deliberately try to breed
particolor poodles, but don't reputable breeders sometimes have
mismarked pups anyway? I know that when I bought my absolutely
wonderful little Papillon (a retired Champion that I promptly had
neutered) the breeder had a couple of mismarked female Pap pups from a
recent litter on hand. (The Pap standard is dark ears and a
particolored body, so a Pap that's all white or all dark is
mismarked.)
Are you saying that reputable breeders of solid Poodles *never* get
mismarked pups??? I'd think if this fellow was willing to do some
hunting and perhaps pay for shipping, he could find a Poodle from a
reputable breeder with otherwise excellent lineage that happened to be
born mismarked, and that the breeder would be happy to part with.
(If you say that reputable Poodle breeders never get mismarked pups in
their litters I'll believe you, but I know it's not the case for all
breeds.)
-- Jen
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jennifer Hawthorne
j...@rio.com
jennifer....@sierra.com
---------------------------------------------------------------
"I like you. You're trouble."
'Ha. Well, thank you, that's the nicest thing anybody's said about me
in days.'
- Draal and Ivanova, "Voices Of Authority"
Lisa K. Baird
Maytree (j...@rio.com) wrote:
: On Mon, 09 Dec 1996 07:05:26 GMT, thus spake Cr...@ix.netcom.com (Cris
: Waller):
: don't make any profit as a rule, don't most breeders run their
: operations as actual businesses in the legal and tax sense so they can
: get tax breaks? If so, even if the business doesn't make a profit,
Nope, anything that consistently loses money is just an expensive hobby,
to the IRS.
: It's true that reputable breeders won't deliberately try to breed
: particolor poodles, but don't reputable breeders sometimes have
: mismarked pups anyway? I know that when I bought my absolutely
To the original poster:
Yes, they do. And since it IS a breed DQ, they are automatically pet
quality, and breeders would be thrilled for a loving home. Mioght take
longer and not be as close, but they are out there. I would contact teh
Poodle clubs (national and local) to let them know what you want.
Breeders can pass your name around. They also come up with "phantoms"
from time to time. That is not a parti colr, but more of a "two tone",
like the Dobe type markings.
--
_____________________________________________________
Lisa Baird "Visit our Home Page to see the Haleakala PWD's doing
Haleakala PWD's what they do best, being cute! Also have a look at
Dublin, Oh. the Haleakala Crater!"
lba...@infinet.com http://www.infinet.com/~lbaird/
-----------------------------------------------------
Cris Waller
j...@rio.com (Maytree) wrote:
>Are you saying that reputable breeders of solid Poodles *never* get
>mismarked pups??? I'd think if this fellow was willing to do some
>hunting and perhaps pay for shipping, he could find a Poodle from a
>reputable breeder with otherwise excellent lineage that happened to be
>born mismarked, and that the breeder would be happy to part with.
You're correct-what I was trying to say is that responsible breeders
will not *deliberately* breed them. I don't know much about poodle
genetics, so I am not sure what kind of a mating could produce
particolor Poodles as a mismark, therefore I don't know how often it
happens.
It might be possible to find one, but as I said,I think color should
not be at the top of the list in decision -making.. What is more
important is that the pup is healthy and has the right kind of
personality for the family.
Maytree
On 9 Dec 1996 13:27:55 GMT, thus spake lba...@infinet.com (Lisa K.
Baird):
>Maytree (j...@rio.com) wrote:
>: On Mon, 09 Dec 1996 07:05:26 GMT, thus spake Cr...@ix.netcom.com (Cris
>: Waller):
>
>: don't make any profit as a rule, don't most breeders run their
>: operations as actual businesses in the legal and tax sense so they can
>: get tax breaks? If so, even if the business doesn't make a profit,
>
>Nope, anything that consistently loses money is just an expensive hobby,
>to the IRS.
Hmm...according to the research I did when considering doing some
freelance writing, it's only a "hobby" if you can't prove you were
honestly *trying* to make money. In other words, if you write a stack
of fantasy stories for your own pleasure or for your friends to read
and never submit them for publishing, don't try to claim any expenses
related to writing them as business expenses; the IRS won't bite.
However, if you regularly submit stories and make a serious effort to
get published, and can prove you've done so (pile your rejection slips
in front of the auditor) you can deduct the costs as business expenses
even if you didn't make a dime for your efforts.
Of course, the IRS being the IRS, they may regard a good breeder's
refusal to follow puppy-mill practices as evidence that the breeder is
not, in fact, actually trying to make a profit with her dogs, and that
therefore it is a hobby. And since a good breeder honestly *isn't*
trying to make a profit, I suppose that legally a reputable breeder
isn't running a business in the true sense of the word. Is this the
way it works for breeders?
-- Jen
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jennifer Hawthorne
j...@rio.com
jennifer....@sierra.com
---------------------------------------------------------------
Q: What's the difference between a French Horn and a Scud Missile?
A: Well, not much, but the Scud Missile is a little bit more accurate.
Twzl & Sligo, Happy Together
>and never submit them for publishing, don't try to claim any expenses
>related to writing them as business expenses; the IRS won't bite.
>However, if you regularly submit stories and make a serious effort to
>get published, and can prove you've done so (pile your rejection slips
>in front of the auditor) you can deduct the costs as business expenses
>even if you didn't make a dime for your efforts.
You're leaving out that you must make a profit in one year out of (I
think) five. Otherwise it is just an expensive hobby and you can not
deduct anything, no matter how seriously you may take it.
Ann, Twzl & Sligo
--
********************************************
Anyone who is such a scaredy cccatt that they MAIl their flames to me
rather than posting them, will see them posted as a followup to the thread.
j...@rio.com
In article <58ha1d$8...@sjx-ixn4.ix.netcom.com>,
Cr...@ix.netcom.com (Cris Waller) wrote:
>
> It might be possible to find one, but as I said,I think color should
> not be at the top of the list in decision -making.. What is more
> important is that the pup is healthy and has the right kind of
> personality for the family.
I agree with you completely (although I'm even more extreme -- I think
specifying certain colors as off-limits for certain breeds is silly and only
important traits like health, temperament, intelligence, suitability of the dog
for its intended purpose, and similar qualities should matter.) However,
I'm sure we both know that most people have preferences for dogs of
certain colors. If the original "Parti-colored poodle" poster can find an
otherwise fine poodle from a reputable breeder that also happens to be
"mismarked" in a pattern he finds attractive, he'll be happier and he'll have
made the breeder happy by giving a good home to a dog that otherwise has limited
prospects (from the breeder's point of view, anyway.)
Y'know, I just can't help but think of a "Parti-colored poodle" as a
"Parti-pooper"...(Sorry!)
A related question that I hope will be answered seriously, without gratuitous
insults and nastiness: Why precisely do fanciers of a particular breed make such
a big deal over a dog's appearance? If a conformation fault is actually harmful
to the dog (legs that give a sighthound a clumsy motion instead of a smooth one,
for example, or a shoulder conformation that hinders the jumping ability of a
field dog), definitely get rid of it, but what if it's something like a
particular ear shape or coat color? I understand the argument of "Hey, we gotta
have *some* standards to judge our dogs against!" but why are so many of the
aspects of the standards so darn superficial? A lot of the worst genetic
excesses among breeders seem to come about when they try to breed for looks over
everything else.
An example from horse genetics: The American Quarter Horse was developed as a
working cowhorse and was bred for the traits that made him good at that job
(stamina in short runs, great strength in the haunches to be able to stop a
charging cow, excellent responsiveness for the tight turns.) When the QH
becaame a big "show" horse, someone somewhere decided that Quarter Horses looked
better with small hooves. Never mind that these are stocky, well-boned horses
we're talking about (even if they are short); someone decided they liked small
hooves, and pretty soon a lot of people were breeding for it. Pretty soon after
that they started having to put down a significant portion of their young stock
because the horse's hooves had gotten too small to support the animal's weight,
and the horses developed serious, debilitating bone disorders because of it.
Now, breeding and testing for quick responsiveness and speed is something I can
understand -- it improves the animal's ability to do the job it was bred for.
But *small feet*?? What genius decided *that* was a good idea? And what other
geniuses went along with it??
So, the question I'm asking, out of genuine curiousity, is what's the deal with
breeding for, say, narrow heads on Irish Setters if the end result is a stupid
Irish Setter? (My dad's a big fan of Irish Setters. I think he's nuts. They're
*stupid stupid stupid.* But I believe him when he says they didn't use to be :(
(And yeah, I'm generalizing from the Reds we have to the whole breed. I'm sure
there are plenty of smart Reds out there. *We* just haven't gotten any! When I
bought myself a dog, I got a Papillion.)
Have any dog clubs ever sat down, considered making a change in the standard,
and rejected it because it would change the animal's appearance without any
benefit to the animal? I'm really curious because I have no idea how these
things are decided.
Jen
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
j...@rio.com
In article <58hfif$s...@panix.com>,
alg...@panix.com (Twzl & Sligo, Happy Together) wrote:
> You're leaving out that you must make a profit in one year out of (I
> think) five. Otherwise it is just an expensive hobby and you can not
> deduct anything, no matter how seriously you may take it.
Hmm! Do you have to make a *profit* (recoup your costs plus some) or do you just
have to have an income? Is it enough just to have sold a puppy once during those
five years, or do you have to sell enough puppies to pay for your kennel, feed,
vet services, etc?
Is it the case that most reputable breeder kennels are *not* businesses in the
legal sense of the word?
(Sorry if this is drifting slightly off-topic, but I'm really curious about how
reputable breeders operate, if only to help me separate a reputable breeder from
a puppy mill the next time I go to buy a dog.)
-- Jen
Lisa K. Baird
j...@rio.com wrote:
: In article <58hfif$s...@panix.com>,
: alg...@panix.com (Twzl & Sligo, Happy Together) wrote:
: > You're leaving out that you must make a profit in one year out of (I
: Hmm! Do you have to make a *profit* (recoup your costs plus some) or do you just
: have to have an income? Is it enough just to have sold a puppy once during those
To be considered a business, you have to show "profit", at least once in
every so many years.
Lisa K. Baird
j...@rio.com wrote:
: A related question that I hope will be answered seriously, without gratuitous
: insults and nastiness: Why precisely do fanciers of a particular breed make such
: a big deal over a dog's appearance? If a conformation fault is actually harmful
: to the dog (legs that give a sighthound a clumsy motion instead of a smooth one,
: for example, or a shoulder conformation that hinders the jumping ability of a
: field dog), definitely get rid of it, but what if it's something like a
: particular ear shape or coat color? I understand the argument of "Hey, we gotta
: have *some* standards to judge our dogs against!" but why are so many of the
Well, in *theory* the standard are written to describe the dog that will
do the job. Since color was the original subject here, in my own breed,
dogs which are predominantly white used to be culled by the fishermen.
Why? Because they would have pink skin, and would sunburn on a boat out
in the water all day. Any black or brown dog that lacked pigment would
also be discarded. The dog was not fit to do its job. Therefor, since
the fishermen surely did not keep them as "pets", anything more than 30%
white was put down at birth. This is understandable. In today's world,
these animals should be placed as pets. However, we see many parti-colors
in the rings and finishing. Why? I can't imagine! However, the public
loves them, and I am sure there are breeders purposely breeding for the
color. This subject is currently being debated on the PWD mailing list
too! <g>
The reason for parts of standards that truly *are* superficial is called
"breed type". Why is a PWD not a Poodle, or an Irish Water Spaniel? What
is it that separates and defines them? These are the more superficial
differences, that set a breed apart from others.
: aspects of the standards so darn superficial? A lot of the worst genetic
: excesses among breeders seem to come about when they try to breed for looks over
: everything else.
Unfortunately, since the conformation ring is the primary "proving"
ground for breeding stock for SO many breeders, and in that setting,
outward appearance is all that can be judged, this has (sadly, IMHO)
become the case. I am proud to say that a great number of Portuguese
Water Dog champions have at least 1 performance title in addition to
conformation. A few years ago our Best in Specialty Show winner (over 300
breed entries) was also the High in Trial (Obedience) at the show. This
year the High in Trial was a young bitch who made the final cut in the
breed ring. As we are one of the more recent AKC breeds, maybe its
because for several years (in Misc.) we could not do conformation for
points, but only get obedience titles, I don't know. But it is a joy to
us that specialties are quite hectic as we try to accomodate dogs who are
entered in breed AND agility, or obedience, or tracking, etc. And you see
a great gathering of "show dogs" at the water site every year! Many of
the dogs that have performance titles and DON'T do conformation are
certainly "good enough" to be breed dogs, their owners just choose not
too. I know we are NOT the only breed out there that stresses working
ability, although yes, I wish there were more.
(BTW, anyone who visits my Home Page will see a picture of my Ch, CD, OA,
AD and her daughter, who is just beginning agility competition)
Twzl & Sligo, Happy Together
In <8501828...@dejanews.com> j...@rio.com writes:
>Hmm! Do you have to make a *profit* (recoup your costs plus some) or do you just
>have to have an income? Is it enough just to have sold a puppy once during those
It has to be a profit. So, if you breed two litters within the time span
being measured (which I think is five but may be three years), and you
also attend many shows, buy an RV, pay for a handler etc etc, you can NOT
declare all of this a business based on the sale of those puppies, unless
you made so much off of them you actually made a profit. Not very likely!
So now you made some money (income) from the puppies, and can't
legitimately deduct say your new $50,000 RV against them. I think that
it's more likely that somone making a living in the dog business also does
grooming, boarding, handling and/or training, and that the puppy sales
are just part of the overall picture. That's pretty common. And in that
case deducting that RV is probably legit.
>Is it the case that most reputable breeder kennels are *not* businesses in the
>legal sense of the word?
Well, I'm sure there are some breeders out there who breed lots of litters
each year and do make a profit even with all those show expenses thrown
in. But the only one I can think of off hand in my breed is NOT someone I
would ever buy a puppy from. FWIW. If someone is ONLY breeding and not
doing anything else in dogs, and making enough off of the puppies to not
do anything BUT breed dogs I'd be wondering about them.
Twzl & Sligo, Happy Together
>points, but only get obedience titles, I don't know. But it is a joy to
>us that specialties are quite hectic as we try to accomodate dogs who are
>entered in breed AND agility, or obedience, or tracking, etc. And you see
I just filled out my GRCA survey form in which they are trying to decide
what to leave in or take out at the National. We have puppy and vet
sweeps, every non-regular obedience class (brace, team, vet Novice, Open,
Utility, versitility), tracking, agility, field trials, hunting
tests,working certificate tests, regular obedience and regular breed. With
the advent of agility and the VST I guess the National is finally too huge
for some clubs to run in a reasonable time period!!
Robin Nuttall
j...@rio.com wrote:
>
> I agree with you completely (although I'm even more extreme -- I think
> specifying certain colors as off-limits for certain breeds is silly and only
> important traits like health, temperament, intelligence, suitability of the dog
> for its intended purpose, and similar qualities should matter.)
Ah, but in the case of my breed, the doberman, the two are related. The
dobermans was bred to be a guard/watch dog. The originator of the breed
bred for a black/rust dog. Later red/rust was also seen and valued. And
because they are a naturally occurring coat color, the Blues and Fawns
are also accepted in the US, but not in Germany where the breed
originated.
Then, several years ago, an albino doberman was born, and incorrectly
registered by the AKC as "White." This one dog was bred extensively to
her littermates, and those puppies similarly bred, to fix the albino
"masking" gene. These poorly bred dogs are photophobic (strong sunlight
hurts them), often have very poor temperaments, bad conformation,
missing teeth, etc. They were immediately disqualified by the DPCA from
showing, and the DPCA has fought, unsuccessfully, to have them
non-registerable as well.
Unfortunately a group of people has seen that they can profit from the
"rare" color, and the albino dobermans have increased dramatically in
numbers. But their presence is the antithesis of what Louis Dobermann
wanted, and they are not well bred, so they will never be allowed in AKC
or UDC competitions.
> I'm sure we both know that most people have preferences for dogs of
> certain colors. If the original "Parti-colored poodle" poster can find an
> otherwise fine poodle from a reputable breeder that also happens to be
> "mismarked" in a pattern he finds attractive, he'll be happier and he'll have
> made the breeder happy by giving a good home to a dog that otherwise has limited
> prospects (from the breeder's point of view, anyway.)
Yes. But in my breed ethical breeders do not breed albino animals, so
that arguement is moot.
> A related question that I hope will be answered seriously, without gratuitous
> insults and nastiness: Why precisely do fanciers of a particular breed make such
> a big deal over a dog's appearance? If a conformation fault is actually harmful
> to the dog (legs that give a sighthound a clumsy motion instead of a smooth one,
> for example, or a shoulder conformation that hinders the jumping ability of a
> field dog), definitely get rid of it, but what if it's something like a
> particular ear shape or coat color? I understand the argument of "Hey, we gotta
> have *some* standards to judge our dogs against!" but why are so many of the
> aspects of the standards so darn superficial? A lot of the worst genetic
> excesses among breeders seem to come about when they try to breed for looks over
> everything else.
See above. And though some conformation may seem "superficial," it is,
indeed, what sets a poodle apart from a doberman apart from a Golden. If
we paid no attention to any of those "superficial" things, the breeds
would cease to be identifyable as breeds.
--
Robin, Jasper and Dreamer
robin_...@muccmail.missouri.edu
(my opinions are strictly my own!)
Doberman page:
http://www.hsc.missouri.edu/people/robin/
Charlene Vickers
In article <8501816...@dejanews.com>, j...@rio.com wrote:
>In article <58ha1d$8...@sjx-ixn4.ix.netcom.com>,
> Cr...@ix.netcom.com (Cris Waller) wrote:
>
>>
>> It might be possible to find one, but as I said,I think color should
>> not be at the top of the list in decision -making.. What is more
>> important is that the pup is healthy and has the right kind of
>> personality for the family.
>
>
>specifying certain colors as off-limits for certain breeds is silly and only
>important traits like health, temperament, intelligence, suitability of the dog
>
Isn't it true that some colours are linked to genetic defects, though? Isn't
merle linked to some defects? And white in some breeds?
Shouldn't breeders try to stop dogs with these colours from being conceived if
the colours are linked to defects?
Just wondering....
Charlene Vickers cvic...@internorth.com
Yellowknife, NWT, Canada
and Watson the typing dog (wer;l h24q)
It is no wonder misery surrounds us; count the cheapskates.
Cindy Tittle Moore
j...@rio.com (Maytree) writes:
>Hmm...according to the research I did when considering doing some
>freelance writing, it's only a "hobby" if you can't prove you were
>honestly *trying* to make money. In other words, if you write a stack
>of fantasy stories for your own pleasure or for your friends to read
>and never submit them for publishing, don't try to claim any expenses
>related to writing them as business expenses; the IRS won't bite.
>However, if you regularly submit stories and make a serious effort to
>get published, and can prove you've done so (pile your rejection slips
>in front of the auditor) you can deduct the costs as business expenses
>even if you didn't make a dime for your efforts.
You can only do this for soemthing like three years and show no profit.
IT's not a good thing to do, according to CPA's that breeder freinds of
mine have consulted. It can nail your insurance too -- that puppy buyer
who comes over and trips on your carpet and sues you is not covered
under your homeowner insurance since you were engaged in a business
venture (proven by your tax returns), blah blah blah.
Not a lawyer or an insurance agent OR a CPA, take it for what it's
worth.
--Cindy
--
*** tit...@io.com *** http://www.zmall.com/pet_talk ***
WAGGERY U-CD Terrell's Chocolate Deduction CGC CDX--Hershe LABRADORS
------- Delby's Wood Nymph at Waggery WC CGC--Angel ---------
Elizabeth B. Naime
In article <32ad3010....@news.rio.com>, j...@rio.com (Maytree) writes:
> On 9 Dec 1996 13:27:55 GMT, thus spake lba...@infinet.com (Lisa K.
> Baird):
>>Maytree (j...@rio.com) wrote:
>>: On Mon, 09 Dec 1996 07:05:26 GMT, thus spake Cr...@ix.netcom.com (Cris
>>: Waller):
>>: don't make any profit as a rule, don't most breeders run their
>>: operations as actual businesses in the legal and tax sense so they can
>>: get tax breaks? If so, even if the business doesn't make a profit,
>>
>>Nope, anything that consistently loses money is just an expensive hobby,
>>to the IRS.
>
> freelance writing, it's only a "hobby" if you can't prove you were
> honestly *trying* to make money. In other words, if you write a stack
I too would like to hear from breeders who have tried this. I did ask
a tax consultant but as a "gee, is this true" question -- not as a
"how should I file for this" question! Her answer was that usually
you have 5 years to show a profit, and if your total expenses still
exceed your total income on the venture, it's a hobby. Might it also
be that a writer's (deductible) expenses are less?
Elizabeth Naime <els...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>
Dana Landry Graffeo
In article <32ab71f9...@news.texas.net>, jlm...@texas.net says...
>
>Does anyone have information concerning reputable breeders of
>party-mix toy poodles in the Austin (central Texas) or San Antonio or
>Houston or Waco or Dallas areas of Texas?
You are unlikely to find a reputable breeder of parti-color toy poodles in the
U.S.A. because parti-colors are disqualified under the breed standard, however
they are recognized in France. The rare mismarks that may be produced by a
reputable breeder as a result of cross color breeding (which by the way is
done) usually consist of small areas of white on the chest or feet or what is
called Phantom coloration which is basically similar to the tan points on a
Doberman. The phantom color can be a lighter shade of the rest of the dog or
another color, and not necessarily tan. As a groomer I occasionally see a
true parti-color as in for instance black and white patches over the whole
dog. Unfortunately these are usually the result of a backyard breeder or
puppy miller who is usually concerned only with breeding the smallest dog
possible and rarely pays attention to anything else be it health, color, or
proper conformation. Finding a reputable breeder who advertises mismarked
puppies would be next to impossible and would certainly involve a long and
exhaustive seach. You may wish to contact Poodle rescue organizations and let
them know that you are interested in parti or mismarked toys. They could
possibly keep your name on their list for the next one that comes up. I don't
have the number for the national breed club's rescue person but if you
subscribe to the Poodle email list you could ask someone there. To subscribe
send email to list...@mail.eworld.com subject line blank and the body of the
message should read: subscribe POODLE-L <yournamehere>
Good luck and be very carefull in checking out any breeder you might find who
does have parti-colors.
--
Dana Landry Graffeo and the Rihannsu Poodles
Raven (nine going on two)
Corey (Why won't the moon fall?)
Desi (Huh, what?), Styx (Anorexic)
Ginny (What do you mean I'm a dog?)
Tassie (Tasmanian Devil)
Glory (Lump)
Galaxy (Looking for a home)
Lady (Border Collie couch potato)
John Munro
On Mon, 09 Dec 1996 02:07:09 GMT, jlm...@texas.net (John Munro)
wrote:
>Does anyone have information concerning reputable breeders of
>party-mix toy poodles in the Austin (central Texas) or San Antonio or
>Houston or Waco or Dallas areas of Texas?
MUCHO THANKS to all who gave me referrals - I am now confident I will
find a party-mix poodle!!!
Cris Waller
jlm...@texas.net (John Munro) wrote:
>MUCHO THANKS to all who gave me referrals - I am now confident I will
>find a party-mix poodle!!!
Just curious-after all the posts that described what you were looking
for as a "particolor Poodle", why do you still refer to them as
"party-mix poodles"? I am curious because I do not think that if you
call them this that people will know what you are talking about. They
will probably think you are looking for some kind of mixed breed,
(which does not seem to be your intent), because you use the word
"mix".
John Munro
On Thu, 12 Dec 1996 08:07:41 GMT, Cr...@ix.netcom.com (Cris Waller)
wrote:
What you say makes a lot of sense except I am trying to talk to people
who say "party-mix"; therefore, I call them party-mix because they are
the group I want to communicate with.
Charlene Vickers
>>
>>Just curious-after all the posts that described what you were looking
>>for as a "particolor Poodle", why do you still refer to them as
>>"party-mix poodles"?
>>
>What you say makes a lot of sense except I am trying to talk to people
>who say "party-mix"; therefore, I call them party-mix because they are
>the group I want to communicate with.
Isn't party-mix something you buy at the 7-Eleven to mix with hard liquor?
:*>
Charlene Vickers cvic...@internorth.com
Yellowknife, NWT, Canada
Web page at http://users.internorth.com/~cvickers/mainpage.htm