Genettas, new breed?

That's just wrong. Even Munchkins are too much for me so I don't like the fact that they are ruining other breeds with mixing them.

I'm "forced" to breed under TICA because other associations in Finland (FifÃ[emoji]169[/emoji] & CFA) don't recognize my breeds (Scottish Fold, British Longhair) or colors (like colorpoints, lilacs etc.).
I usually joke around that you can breed cow and chiken together and TICA would accept the result as a new cat breed..Too bad that it seems to be almost true..

CFA recognizes the Scottish Folds but not the LH Brits....yet. I wish they would accept the Brits in colorpoint and chocolate/lilac too. Have seen some Points in NZ and Australia breeders.

Originally Posted by GoldenKitty45

CFA recognizes the Scottish Folds but not the LH Brits....yet.

I wish they would accept the Brits in colorpoint and chocolate/lilac too. Have seen some Points in NZ and Australia breeders.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't understand why they don't accept these colors. I have a lilac point BSH (he is registered in FifÃ[emoji]169[/emoji]) who is going to be used in breeding Foldies, FifÃ[emoji]169[/emoji] does accept those colors (outcluding silver points) but not breeds, so only TICA was left..
And what is wrong with British Longhairs?! I adore them!! I hope CFA and FifÃ[emoji]169[/emoji] will recognize them some day. They don't have health issues or anything 'unethical' about them so why not recognize them?

Getting a new breed/color/hair length accepted into CFA takes a lot of time and work. More than anything, there must be documented evidence that there are breeders who are currently working with the new trait/breed and those cats must be shown. This process does not happen overnight, and takes considerable time, effort, and dedication.

New colors/traits also need to gain the approval of the breed councils, so unless the current Brit breeders in CFA are willing to allow the longhair/pointed/chocolate/lilac Brits, we're not going to see them as British Shorthairs. They could possibly come in as a seperate breed, as long as there are sufficient breeders willing to breed and show their cats.

If a new breed is similar to an existing breed, the breed councils of the existing breeds will be consulted. So the American Bobtail and Japanese Bobtail breeders are going to have a say about any new breed with a bob-tail. Scottish Fold breeders will have a say about any new breed with folded ears. Each breed needs to remain "unique" and copycat breeds are discouraged.

Shame that CFA doesn't accept the Snowshoe cats. ACFA does and I've seen them in person (there is not a lot of breeders - probably biggest problem). They are totally different then any existing breed in CFA.

Ok, I had it wrong. It was TICA not CFA. It took awhile to find the reference because I just read two and a half lines on a webpage and kept racking my brains trying to remember where.

On The Messybeast Cat Resouce Archive's page on short-legged cats it says that in 2006 the TICA Genetics Committee reported:

'The Committee proposes that TICA does not accept any proposed breeds for Registration Only status that do not exhibit novel mutations. The current mutations would be reserved for currently recognised breeds exclusively. This would end the seemingly endless application for 'munchkinized' new breeds and then deter the inevitable introduction of 'rexed', 'bob-tailed' amd 'poly-ed' everything else.'

However, she doesn't say whether this proposal was accepted. Do any of our members that show and register under TICA know it this was accepted?

Keep in mind, the ultimate goal of in the case of the Gennetta is a domestic cat that looks like an African Gennet. If they succeed, it would be something totally different.

I oppose to the Munchkin so I'm not fond of this either.

Originally Posted by KittiesHasMe

'The Committee proposes that TICA does not accept any proposed breeds for Registration Only status that do not exhibit novel mutations. The current mutations would be reserved for currently recognised breeds exclusively. This would end the seemingly endless application for 'munchkinized' new breeds and then deter the inevitable introduction of 'rexed', 'bob-tailed' amd 'poly-ed' everything else.'

Click to expand...

IF this proposal was approved, then is TICA going against their own registration policies by accepting the Genetta?

I don't know if this goes against the proposal. The idea behind the Gennetta is to produce a cat that looks like a African Gennett and not a munkinized bengal. The Munchkin to Bengal cross is step towards that goal, not the final stated goal. The breeder even states on their website that cats looking like munchkin bengals will be petted out and only cats with features taking them closer to the final goal will be kept for breeding. If they can maintain this ideal who knows where they will be in thirty years. They've only been working on this since 2006. They have a long way to go.

But it's not a novel mutation!

Originally Posted by FerrisCat

But it's not a novel mutation!

Click to expand...

That's true. So either TICA did not approve the proposal or they consider the final goal different enough to justify approving the Gennetta for experimental status. Also, just because it's approved at that level doesn't mean that it will ever be approved for championship status. The whole project may fall apart, who knows.

I just read TICA's registration rules and there is no mention of Genettas anywhere. It's updated in 2008 and here are the 'experimental' breeds:

American Ringtail
Asian Group
Asian LH (Tiffanie)
Asian Shorthair
Burmilla LH
Burmilla SH
Australian Mist
Bristol
California Spangled
Ceylon
Chantilly
Chinese Harlequin
Copper
European Shorthair
European Burmese
German Rex
Mandalay
Ragamuffin
Ruffle
Safari
Tiffany
Vienna Woods
York Chocolate

Interesting list. I'm gonna look up some of the "breeds". One thing - the York Chcolate was in the list of experimental/pending breeds with ACFA about 10 yrs ago. But due to lack of interest in persuing the breed, it may have died out. I can't even find breeders for the York, so interesting that TICA has it in the list.

Some of the breeds from that list are familiar to me because they are already recognized in FifÃ[emoji]169[/emoji], like European Shorthair, Burmilla (SH), German Rex and European Burmese (which is the only Burmese I've ever seen, we don't have the American ones here).

One of my cat's breeders breeds European Shorthairs, it's a similar breed to American Shorthair. You can get your domestic sh registered as European if it fits the standard and is ' good enough'. Very natural breed which doesn't allow any outcrosses or cats that look like mixed breed. And Burmillas are very pretty.

Not to be nitpicking, but the animal attempting to be emulated is called a "Genet".
It isn't even a cat. It's in the Viverridae family of which Civets are also part of. They are closely related to the mongoose.

Why is someone attempting to create a breed of cat using a model that isn't even in the feline family?

Sorry, I got stuck spelling genet wrong and stayed with it.

And it's true it's not a feline. But the breeder thinks this is a worthwhile goal. If they can't get enough other breeders to work with them then it becomes a moot point. If the ocicat and the oriental shorthair breeders could block them from getting breeding stock that would make their task more difficult. They will also need kitten buyers that want a cat that looks like a genet. If no one wants a psuedo-genet then the breed will never happen.

I would be more concerned if the goal was to produce munchkinized bengals. That would be a BYB looking to profit on the popularity of munchkins and bengals. I would hate to see that, I like bengals the way they are.

The main cat registries set the guidelines for new breeds and they are the ones to draw the line on the development of new breeds. CFA has become more conservative over the years. TICA still pushes the envelope. Of course, there is no way to stop someone from selling a new 'breed' that doesn't care about official recognition.

Hi,

regardless what the goal is- at the moment they ARE producing munchkinized bengals ..

In my opinion a cat is near to perfection and gifted with a wonderful body and...well- cat like grace (with some exceptions )

I also think that any cat that was bred has the right to be born without any deformities or disadvantages- and this includes: with normal length legs, a tail, a fur coat, whiskers, a normal nose and functional tear channels, with full hearing, normal ears and number of toes.

Don't get me wrong here- a cat born with any of these defects/ deformities will have just as lovable character as any other cat , I just don't think its fair to breed such animals on purpose.

Breeding is in my books OK if the cats are brought up with care and love and the breeder knows his genetics and takes care when planning a litter.

Changing the hair length, coat colour (blue, cinnamon, ticking) and slight changes of the body shape are also fine with me. Breeding cats that are slightly smaller or larger, slimmer or more compact is also fine with me.

...but anything that takes things to extremes will most probably be to the disadvantage of the cats.


Christine

Christine, by your criteria there would no Persians, no Exotics or Himalayans, no Sphynx, no Rexes, no Manx or any bob-tailed breeds. You could add Scottish Folds to this since breeders cannot breed two SF's with folded ears together as the desired phenotype is connected to a crippling genetic problem (osteochondrodysplasia).

Members on this forum with these breeds are going to be more than willing to defend their breed and explain why the world needs Persians, Sphynx, or Manx, etc. inspite of the 'problems'.

What to one person is a travesty and a horrible disfiguration is endearing and cute to someone else. This is why I find it hard to get worked up over Munchkins. There are numerous accepted breeds with genetic problems linked to the desired phenotype and people overlook these everyday. Domestic animals do not have to survive in the wild. They have humans to take care of them. (I know, I know, not everyone is a good pet owner.)

I do object to people breeding crippled cats like the 'Twisty Cat' that cannot have any kind of normal life. Personally, I think that 'breeder' needs to be thrown in jail for animal cruelty.

Good points Kitties. However, except for the Munchkins, all cats are very capable of running, jumping, leaping and acting like cats should. Even the Persians can do jumping in the air without problems if they choose to do so.

That's my objections to breeding the Munchkins. And it seems that you see a lot of Munchkins being bred to other breeds to creat long, short, curly hair, curly ears, etc....so something is wrong.

Originally Posted by KittiesHasMe

Christine, by your criteria there would no Persians, no Exotics or Himalayans, no Sphynx, no Rexes, no Manx or any bob-tailed breeds. You could add Scottish Folds to this since breeders cannot breed two SF's with folded ears together as the desired phenotype is connected to a crippling genetic problem (osteochondrodysplasia).

Click to expand...

Why wouldn't Rexes (Rexes actuarally include many breeds so it's a bit unfair to merge them into one group) meet the criterias?

My Devon Rexes have normal legs, normal tails, they have whiskers, full coats (they do very well outdoors), normal noses, normal ears, full hearing and normal number of toes.

I actuarally agree with Christine.