# Please help what breed?



## jonnyjonnyuk (Sep 14, 2014)

Hi all, new to the forum and would like help in knowing what breed my cat is that arrived yesterday if anybody knows I would be so grateful.

I will put some photos now but be ready for a shock as his hair was so matted from the previous owners so he had to have a lion cut but I will put some before and after photos to hopefully help a bit more. Thanks in advance and he's around 3 years old.


----------



## jonnyjonnyuk (Sep 14, 2014)

And with the lion cut....Sorry I couldn't see how to upload more than one photo


----------



## moggie14 (Sep 11, 2013)

Hi and welcome 
He looks like he might be a Persian cross or similar. Handsome young man!
What is his name?


----------



## moggie14 (Sep 11, 2013)

Just seen your post in the introductions forum. Is Nani a Russian name?


----------



## jonnyjonnyuk (Sep 14, 2014)

Hi Moggie Persian cross is interesting, some people have said British longhair but it's not easy to tell for sure.

Nani is actually a Georgian name which was formerly part of the USSR but the name came from just a few personal things to me more than anything

Thanks for your responses

John.


----------



## carly87 (Feb 11, 2011)

He is a moggy.


----------



## moggie14 (Sep 11, 2013)

He looks quite similar to this Persian:
http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb...sian-cat-1-.jpg/640px-Blue-persian-cat-1-.jpg

But as Carly rightly says with no pedigree papers he is a beautiful moggie 
I bet he feels better after the haircut


----------



## jonnyjonnyuk (Sep 14, 2014)

Wow he does look very similar to the Blue Persian!) I'm not worried about if he's a pedigree or anything special in terms of breed but it's just interesting to know so I could read up about him with regards to temperament and character etc so as I know what to expect and what to do and not to do if you know what I mean.

A Moggy? I understand this is a general term for a cat but is this bad?))

He does seem a lot happier yes but still a bit nervous after the experience. To think he had his first day in a new place with a new person and then endured that experience which he really didn't like it is a pity but better for him now. I had just managed to get him to join me on the sofa at the end of his first day but now he will only be in the same room but not too close or he hisses I guess it will just take time for him to see how much I care and love him

John.


----------



## Polski (Mar 16, 2014)

Nowt wrong with a moggy. Pedigrees are potential moggies. If a pedigree gets out, is unchipped and is found 100 miles away by someone...they found a moggy because without the papers thats all they all are. 

But its useful to know what lineage is in cats as certain breeds (regardless of papers) are more prone to certain diseases and disorders.


----------



## Cookieandme (Dec 29, 2011)

jonnyjonnyuk said:


> A Moggy? I understand this is a general term for a cat but is this bad?))
> 
> John.


Not at all . Moggy is just a term for no known parentage . Or even cross bred but not recognised as a breed which can be registered.

I have a BSH they are supposed to be a laid back breed - she is anything but. So reading up on a breed specific temperament probably won't help. The longer he is with you the better you will get to know him


----------



## jonnyjonnyuk (Sep 14, 2014)

Polski said:


> Nowt wrong with a moggy. Pedigrees are potential moggies. If a pedigree gets out, is unchipped and is found 100 miles away by someone...they found a moggy because without the papers thats all they all are.
> 
> But its useful to know what lineage is in cats as certain breeds (regardless of papers) are more prone to certain diseases and disorders.


You explained it well thanks very much and now it's clear  Yes as you say I would like to know for such things as potential health issues to or what to look out for. I'm starting to feel better about having a beautiful Moggy))


----------



## jonnyjonnyuk (Sep 14, 2014)

Cookieandme said:


> Not at all . Moggy is just a term for no known parentage . Or even cross bred but not recognised as a breed which can be registered.
> 
> I have a BSH they are supposed to be a laid back breed - she is anything but. So reading up on a breed specific temperament probably won't help. The longer he is with you the better you will get to know him


Thanks very much for carefully explaining to me Here in Russia they could of told me anything about his parentage and it might not of been true without papers)) That's interesting what you say about your BSH because I also had only heard about them being so chilled and friendly, that just goes to show!

I agree completely that it's just going to take time and each day will be a new experience I'm sure and hopefully all good

John.


----------



## carly87 (Feb 11, 2011)

Reading up about a breed that your cat could *possibly* be descended from is not really going to help you predict his temperament, nor what health conditions he might have. I' think you're just adding unnecessary worry here.


----------



## Howl (Apr 10, 2012)

Funny how cats differ with how people see them. I might be wrong but if someone bought a cocker spaniel with no KC papers in dog chat and asked what it was most people would just say it was a cocker spaniel, not a mongrel or a pooch. Without paperwork it would be a given that they couldn't show but why is it different when it comes to identification? Not starting a bunfight BTW just curious.


----------



## jonnyjonnyuk (Sep 14, 2014)

carly87 said:


> Reading up about a breed that your cat could *possibly* be descended from is not really going to help you predict his temperament, nor what health conditions he might have. I' think you're just adding unnecessary worry here.


Your right Carly and I'm just worrying unnecessarily as this is my first cat and living in a foreign country and thinking too deep.

John.


----------



## Polski (Mar 16, 2014)

Howl said:


> Funny how cats differ with how people see them. I might be wrong but if someone bought a cocker spaniel with no KC papers in dog chat and asked what it was most people would just say it was a cocker spaniel, not a mongrel or a pooch. Without paperwork it would be a given that they couldn't show but why is it different when it comes to identification? Not starting a bunfight BTW just curious.


lol...yeah. Daft isnt it.

Personally I would be quite happy saying that that cat is a persian but I think i'm fairly alone in that thought. For insurance purposes it is a moggy, for show purposes it could only be entered as a moggy but vets would often list an animal on what they thought the parentage was.

Meh...it doesn't matter. Its a cat at the end of the day, a cat thats fallen on its feet and been rescued so above all else its a rescue and thats the best breed in the whole wide world!


----------



## buffie (May 31, 2010)

Howl said:


> Funny how cats differ with how people see them. I might be wrong but if someone bought a cocker spaniel with no KC papers in dog chat and asked what it was most people would just say it was a cocker spaniel, not a mongrel or a pooch. Without paperwork it would be a given that they couldn't show but why is it different when it comes to identification? Not starting a bunfight BTW just curious.


I question that myself.
The definition of a pedigree cat/dog is one which has documented proof of the parentage etc,A pure bred cat/dog is one whose parents are of the same breed and not crossed.
A moggy/crossbreed/ or what ever is one where the parents are either different breeds or a mix there off.
I cannot see how a piece of paper changes this.


----------



## carly87 (Feb 11, 2011)

The piece of paper is the documented proof of the parentage. You can't say that a cat is a certain breed without that proof, IMO.

Actually, it's more than that for me, and I've explained this on other threads. It's the fact that people are desperate to know what breed their cat is, and aren't happy until a breed has been identified. If you want a purebred, then go buy one. If you find or acquire a cat with no paperwork, no known parentage and no very distinctive looks, then why is it so important to know the breed? In most cases, and I accept that isn't the case here, it's almost wanted for bragging rights (Oh my cat is half Persian/Siamese/Maine Coon) or whatever. Breed shouldn't matter once you have and own the cat.

So, allow me to turn the question on its head. Why is it so important to such a large section of pet owners to have their cat be placed in a certain breed? Pure curiosity doesn't really cut it on its own. you don't see lots of people come on here with a first question of "Why does my cat chatter at the windows?" or, to take an example from current Cat Chat "Why does my cat drown his toys?" Whereas the question of "What breed is my cat?" comes up so commonly it's unreal.

So, examine motivations and tell me what the driving factor is BESIDES curiosity, because there is one I'm sure.

John, if you really want to know which breed your cat is genetically closest to, there's actually a genetic test that you can have done to determine this.

PS: Also not wanting to start a bun fight please.


----------



## Polski (Mar 16, 2014)

I think genuine curiosity can be a big part. I'm pretty sure Floss is part ragdoll due to her extreme floppiness so I read up about them to see if I should watch out for any medical problems _typically_ associated with ragdoll (forewarned = forearmed) but I realise that even if she IS part ragdoll it doesn't mean those illnesses will present or indeed that other illnesses won't present. Floss is Floss, shes my floppy baby girl, shes a cat that chose me. She is healthy and happy and ultimately thats all I care about.

Bragging rights would play a part with many too...and I personally see no harm. If someone wants to say "oh my cat is part Persian/Siamese/Maine Coon" what does it matter...its no different to someone saying "Oh my cat is pedigree Persian/Siamese/Maine Coon" is it?

Its a cat at the end of the day whatever parentage it has. No cat is worth more than another surely?

I do find it strange that all unpapered cats are moggies whereas unpapered dogs aren't, if you can see boxer they are boxer cross etc.


----------



## moggie14 (Sep 11, 2013)

Polski said:


> Personally I would be quite happy saying that that cat is a persian but I think i'm fairly alone in that thought.


Nope, I'm with you there. I avoided saying it is 

I believe curiosity is a perfectly good enough reason for asking though. And I also think there is nothing wrong with this being your first post when you join a forum - it's an opener, introducing the pet and asking opinions.

What annoys me is when someone joins the forum specifically to ask for advice, gets a ton of help then buggers off without a backwards glance


----------



## moggie14 (Sep 11, 2013)

Polski said:


> Bragging rights would play a part with many too...and I personally see no harm. If someone wants to say "oh my cat is part Persian/Siamese/Maine Coon" what does it matter...its no different to someone saying "Oh my cat is pedigree Persian/Siamese/Maine Coon" is it?


I guess so for some people. I don't bother telling anyone outside of this forum (aside from F&F) that my cats are Tonkinese - there is no point - Your average Joe wouldn't know what the hell that meant anyway :lol:


----------



## buffie (May 31, 2010)

carly87 said:


> The piece of paper is the documented proof of the parentage. *You can't say that a cat is a certain breed without that proof, IMO.*


This is exactly why I asked the question,I don't disagree that pedigree papers are needed to state that a cat is a "Pedigree" Cat, my question ,which has never really been answered by anyone,is why is it automatically stated that without "papers" a cat is a moggy


----------



## jonnyjonnyuk (Sep 14, 2014)

Guys I really didn't mean to come here and start a debate and my question about breed is so not connected with bragging rights and to be honest I didn't even realise identifying a cat was so difficult hence why I asked straight away after introducing myself. I really don't care about breed, pedigree or papers and if I was I would of done my research first but instead I saw a very sad cat that had clearly been neglected and I wanted to take it into my home and give it the life it deserves and in turn he will give me pleasure and that's important to me. Wanting to know what cat you have I think in my honest opinion is a very normal thing to ask even if it's just to know and nothing more.

John.


----------



## buffie (May 31, 2010)

jonnyjonnyuk said:


> Guys I really didn't mean to come here and start a debate and my question about breed is so not connected with bragging rights and to be honest I didn't even realise identifying a cat was so difficult hence why I asked straight away after introducing myself. I really don't care about breed, pedigree or papers and if I was I would of done my research first but instead I saw a very sad cat that had clearly been neglected and I wanted to take it into my home and give it the life it deserves and in turn he will give me pleasure and that's important to me. Wanting to know what cat you have I think in my honest opinion is a very normal thing to ask even if it's just to know and nothing more.
> 
> John.


Sorry John,didnt mean to hi-jack your thread,its obvious that you don't really mind what breed ,if any,your lovely cat is .
I just wondered why it is always said that a cat without "said papers" is always referred to as a moggy 

Sometimes this can happen ,threads can "wander" a bit , we are a funny bunch,hope we havnt upset you


----------



## moggie14 (Sep 11, 2013)

^^ This 
Welcome to the forum again John and please don't be put off - I am looking forward to hearing more about you and your new friend. Please do let us know how the settling in goes and feel free to ask for any advice on this through the cat behaviour forum


----------



## Howl (Apr 10, 2012)

moggie14 said:


> I guess so for some people. I don't bother telling anyone outside of this forum (aside from F&F) that my cats are Tonkinese - there is no point - Your average Joe wouldn't know what the hell that meant anyway :lol:


I let people tell me mine is all kinds of things including cross breeds. I have wondered if its safer to tell everyone that. It doesn't bother me. I know in the past most of the hounds have been lovingly cross breed or have roots in established breeds to widen the gene pool or as a result of pack monkey business. 
Love the responses to this, especially given that some people responding are breeders and linked to showing/judging. 
Is it because dogs genetics work a bit differently in terms of variation? Is it easier to visually spot if a dog has been cross-breed at some point than a cat? 
You see OP l know nothing about cat breeds but the blue persian looks very similar. Are a few people saying there is a good chance of it being a cross despite looking like this breed. You see with a dog I would put money on it if my eyes told me it was a pug/basset etc. Even within a breed you are close to you could put money on who the breeder is/the breed lines by appearance in some breeds. With cats is this not the case? 
The features in a cross stand out just looks different, even if its a beautiful dog but a pedigree just looks like its ancestors were of that breed.
I just find it interesting because I don't trust papers 100%. 
I think it is important because my experience of rehoming dogs is that there are usually a devoted breed rescue linked to most breeds who usually move mountains to find homes for their breed often. Of course there are some people who get upset by this but my thinking is rescue dogs hopefully neutered are not adopted as show animals. 
Glad OP loves there cat, I just brought all this up because perhaps like OP I thought it looked like a pedigree.


----------



## wicket (Aug 22, 2012)

I think your cat in the first photo looks like a british longhair and is absolutely gorgeous  he looks like he is from pedigree lines and not like your average "moggy" (I love moggies)

I think the pedigree thing is a bit like a passport - if its says you are British then thats what you are, and there are many variants of people holding british passports  it doesnt mean thant any one is more "british" than the next

If your dont have papers to confirm you are British it doesnt necessarily mean you are not, but for official purposes you are not a British citizen - sometimes with cats it can be a similar scenario - no papers and you cant confirm what you are even if you look very much like something


----------



## Treaclesmum (Sep 26, 2011)

jonnyjonnyuk said:


> Hi all, new to the forum and would like help in knowing what breed my cat is that arrived yesterday if anybody knows I would be so grateful.
> 
> I will put some photos now but be ready for a shock as his hair was so matted from the previous owners so he had to have a lion cut but I will put some before and after photos to hopefully help a bit more. Thanks in advance and he's around 3 years old.


To be honest, going by this cat's face and of course its coat, it looks much more like a British Longhair than a Persian to me!! (I own a British Shorthair blue with papers and if she were fluffy, she would look just like this!) :smilewinkgrin:


----------



## carly87 (Feb 11, 2011)

Oh John, I didn't mean to imply that you wanted bragging rights, not at all.


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

Currently in the UK the British Longhair isn't an established breed. To me the cat looks to have the wrong sort of coat - full & puffy like a Persian, not shaggy - for a BLH. Personally I think he might be a Persian cross, or possibly a Persian from a long line not bred to the standard as his nose is far, far too long. It looks to be longer than a show quality BSH would have.


----------



## carly87 (Feb 11, 2011)

OS, there are plenty of breeders producing BLH in the UK. GCCF just won't allow them to be shown. They are recognised and shown with TICA though.


----------



## gskinner123 (Mar 10, 2010)

Howl said:


> Funny how cats differ with how people see them. I might be wrong but if someone bought a cocker spaniel with no KC papers in dog chat and asked what it was most people would just say it was a cocker spaniel, not a mongrel or a pooch. Without paperwork it would be a given that they couldn't show but why is it different when it comes to identification? Not starting a bunfight BTW just curious.


I think it's probably because a specific breed of dog without pedigree papers is most often instantly recognisable as whatever breed it actually is. Cats, even those that are "pure bred" (and certainly with many of the more intermediate, for type, breeds) can vary hugely in how they look. There may be no mistaking, for example, a "properly" bred Persian or Siamese but with so many other breeds even when bred to the correct breed registration policy they can and do vary enormously in look.

There have been many threads on PF in the cat section where people have posted photos of cats where even experienced breeders (of the breed that is being questioned) have disagreed about whether the cat in question is, actually, a full pedigree... or even a pedigree cat at all!


----------



## gskinner123 (Mar 10, 2010)

Howl said:


> Is it because dogs genetics work a bit differently in terms of variation? Is it easier to visually spot if a dog has been cross-breed at some point than a cat?


Yes, this exactly  Much more succinctly put than my own offering!


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

carly87 said:


> OS, there are plenty of breeders producing BLH in the UK. GCCF just won't allow them to be shown. They are recognised and shown with TICA though.


Work on progressing them with the GCCF seems to have ground to a halt, no idea why - several other breeds have come along in the past few years. I've never knowingly seen one at a show, so presumably they haven't got as far as the initial stages or the group of breeders progressing them are not at the shows I go to. However that would be surprising since the dialling codes for some of the people on the only website I've found that mentions them are Glasgow, and I go to the Scottish shows.

The Niebelung shows on the GCCF stats for 2013, I'm sure it will get Championship status before the BLH does which is a sad. So probably will the Australian Mist and the Ragamuffin. What seems to be missing with the BLH is the will to get on with promoting the cats.

The BSH is the most popular breed registered with the GCCF, with over 5,100 cats registered in 2013 - the next most popular is Ragdoll with half that number. That the BLH isn't on the list of breeds suggests to me that they haven't reached even the first step on the ladder.

Also, that 5,100 kittens registered probably represents about 1,300 litters. Some breeders have lots of litters, some few, my guess is about 400 people have breed one or more litters of BSH. Not sure how many 'plenty' is, but in the context of 400 I personally wouldn't think of 50 as plenty.

To me this is sad - the BLH looks a really worthwhile cat to me, but it seems to be in the wilderness at least as far as the GCCF (the main UK registry) is concerned. It also looks like BYB heaven to me at present as it's giving unscrupulous breeders the chance to be economical with the truth, just as the 'birchilla' breeder was.


----------



## gskinner123 (Mar 10, 2010)

OrientalSlave said:


> Work on progressing them with the GCCF seems to have ground to a halt, no idea why


Draft proposals for breeding/registration policies were submitted last year and refused. There has been at least two meetings since, when a revised proposal could have been submitted but it wasn't. I'm not involved in trying to gain their recognition so can only speculate as to why more of a push hasn't been made.

There was considerable feeling that what was wanted with the British Longhair (or whatever it is to be called) was a kind of dual purpose cat for registration/show/breeding purposes. That was an alarming prospect for those breeding BSH's where the longhair gene is problem enough already. I think some breeders were forgetting that when and if recognition is gained, that when breeding specifically for longhairs (from, say, a LH x BSH) that any shorthair kittens born become the variants and cannot be shown/used in SH breeding programme in the normal way. Have your cake and eat it springs to mind.

Sorry for going off topic, OP.


----------



## gskinner123 (Mar 10, 2010)

Just wanted to also point out that GCCF, as a body, have nothing to do with the recognition or otherwise of the 'British Longhair'. It's purely down to those interested breeders, the clubs and the relevant BAC's. All GCCF do is facilitate a new breed's (or variation thereof) registration, etc, on their systems. It isn't just a case of, as with the computer, "GCCF says no".


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

gskinner123 said:


> Draft proposals for breeding/registration policies were submitted last year and refused. There has been at least two meetings since, when a revised proposal could have been submitted but it wasn't. I'm not involved in trying to gain their recognition so can only speculate as to why more of a push hasn't been made.
> 
> There was considerable feeling that what was wanted with the British Longhair (or whatever it is to be called) was a kind of dual purpose cat for registration/show/breeding purposes. That was an alarming prospect for those breeding BSH's where the longhair gene is problem enough already. I think some breeders were forgetting that when and if recognition is gained, that when breeding specifically for longhairs (from, say, a LH x BSH) that any shorthair kittens born become the variants and cannot be shown/used in SH breeding programme in the normal way. Have your cake and eat it springs to mind.
> 
> Sorry for going off topic, OP.


I have seen shorthair Oriental Long Hair variants being shown in the normal Oriental SH classes. If the LH gene is a problem, gene testing to find & eliminate it (or make sure LH kittens won't come along) is cheap and easy. They can also be used breeding Oriental SH so long as they don't carry the LH gene:



> Oriental Longhairs and Oriental Longhair Variants of all colours and patterns except white; Balinese and Balinese Variants of all colours and patterns and Oriental Bicolour Longhairs of all colours and patterns are accepted in the pedigrees of Oriental Shorthairs, _provided that the Oriental Shorthair has been shown by genetic testing to be free of any FGF5 mutation (i.e. not to carry longhair)._ This may be either by a test of the cat itself, the result of which must be supplied with the application for registration, or by the line of descent from any cat in this group being broken by a cat which has been so tested.


Nothing to stop BSH having a similar policy, being too restrictive narrows the gene pool which is not a good idea. This policy will prevent inadvertent introduction of the LH gene where it's not wanted.


----------



## gskinner123 (Mar 10, 2010)

Considering the size (numerically) of the breed in the UK it can be surprisingly difficult to find a stud that doesn't carry longhair, considering you will have needed to rule out many on the basis of blood group, then the restrictions of not being able to mate certain colour/pattern x colour/pattern, then the stud must actually BE available to use (many are closed or come with onerous restrictions), of suitable quality and pedigree, etc. So for much of the time, it unfortunately doesn't come down to simply DNA testing for LH carriers.

The presence of the LH gene undoubtedly has an influence on the quality of a BSH's coat which may or may not (I don't know) be the case with Orientals. Its presence in BSH's all too often means the coat is completely of the wrong quality and it's not until you see/feel the coats of (the very few remaining) lines of SH breeding that ARE homozygous that one appreciates the difference.

It speaks volumes that the foremost prefix in British Shorthairs for the last 10 years or so are struggling badly to eradicate the LH gene (overly long, soft coats has been the only fly in their ointment for years) and it has so far proven virtually impossible for them to find/introduce lines into their breeding that are homozygous for SH, without taking a VERY retrograde step in other 'departments' and compromising badly on what they've achieved so far.

What we really don't need are shed loads of yet more LH carriers thrown back into the breeding gene pool which WILL happen without a very tight breeding/registration policy.



OrientalSlave said:


> I have seen shorthair Oriental Long Hair variants being shown in the normal Oriental SH classes. If the LH gene is a problem, gene testing to find & eliminate it (or make sure LH kittens won't come along) is cheap and easy. They can also be used breeding Oriental SH so long as they don't carry the LH gene:
> 
> Nothing to stop BSH having a similar policy, being too restrictive narrows the gene pool which is not a good idea. This policy will prevent inadvertent introduction of the LH gene where it's not wanted.


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

I had forgotten about blood group issues in BSH and also the limiting registration policy WRT colours & patterns, so the gene pool is getting restricted regardless.

In Orientals neither of these exist though obviously breeding for a nice clear self coat and striking tabby patterns can't be done at the same time. The only no-no is a foreign white which is a Siamese in white and that's a bit of an anomaly. 

Otherwise all colours of Oriental Shorthairs and Siamese can be used along with OLH & Balinese variants, the only restriction being that the variant cat has been shown to not carry LH - that is if one's aim is OSH. 

So, we don't get OLH springing unexpectedly out of shorthair matings. I have no idea how the coats on the carrier variants compare to OSH. Being soft is fine - the coat should be soft. If it makes it longer that is an issue.


----------



## moggie14 (Sep 11, 2013)

Interesting stuff 
OK stupid question time - would there be BLH breeders in Russia because that's where OP is from 
That's a small part of the reason I thought Persian, because they are found all over the world


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

There might be but they've not got the right coat if that's what it is. I still reckon it's a Persian cross.


----------



## Treaclesmum (Sep 26, 2011)

But that's a Brit face, not a Persian face! Of course Brits are Persian crosses by definition so of course they will look alike


----------



## huckybuck (Jan 17, 2014)

I'm going to go off on a tangent here about paperwork... I have 2 "pedigree Maine coons" with certificates that I just don't believe are true. If it matters..they are just names on a bit of paper. 

At the end of the day, really, how do you know? Unless you do genetic testing of the parents, babies etc you'll never really know if a breeder is telling the truth.

Only need to look at the human race and watch Jeremy Kyle and his DNA tests!


----------



## jonnyjonnyuk (Sep 14, 2014)

Guys you have made this such an interesting discussion and you all know so much and me so little hence why I'm just reading and digesting all your comments and thanks so much for help and advice! This is now the fourth day of Nani being with me and no matter what breed to me he's the best and I adore him


----------



## carly87 (Feb 11, 2011)

And that's just the way it should be John! Perfect!

And, HB, that's also true. That's why you need to choose your breeder carefully though.


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

Those are not Persian _or _British ears! It's the apparent texture of his coat that makes me think of a Persian cross.

Regardless, now the thing is to get him used to being groomed. Right now a baby brush is more than enough, once his coat is coming in try combing him. As it gets longer you need to do it in sections, either with the lie working forwards from his tail or against it working backwards from his head. Once he has a full coat a brush won't get right through it, and trying a complete sweep from head to tail with a comb will bunch up any tangles and make them worse.


----------



## spotty cats (Jul 24, 2012)

Treaclesmum said:


> But that's a Brit face, not a Persian face!


If there is any pedigree mix in there, it's probably not a top show quality cat. Could be a pet quality Persian with the longer nose mixed in a generation or so ago, who met up with a moggie and eventually produced the cat in question.

Gorgeous boy regardless of what may or may not be mixed in.


----------



## colliemerles (Nov 2, 2007)

_looks more like a British long hair than a Persian, but whatever he is, he is gorgeous. _


----------



## Soupie (Sep 2, 2008)

OrientalSlave said:


> Currently in the UK the British Longhair isn't an established breed. To me the cat looks to have the wrong sort of coat - full & puffy like a Persian, not shaggy - for a BLH. Personally I think he might be a Persian cross, or possibly a Persian from a long line not bred to the standard as his nose is far, far too long. It looks to be longer than a show quality BSH would have.


They are an established breed (just not recognised by GCCF yet) and they don't have shaggy coats but full thick coats which stand out from the body..... the longhair version of the shorthair coat.


----------



## Soupie (Sep 2, 2008)

Treaclesmum said:


> But that's a Brit face, not a Persian face! Of course Brits are Persian crosses by definition so of course they will look alike


Er no. The British Shorthair is a breed in its own right which has been around a very long time. Persians have been used as outcross post war and to bring in new colours but British Shorthairs are NOT by definition Persian crosses.


----------



## Treaclesmum (Sep 26, 2011)

Soupie said:


> Er no. The British Shorthair is a breed in its own right which has been around a very long time. Persians have been used as outcross post war and to bring in new colours but British Shorthairs are NOT by definition Persian crosses.


But they do share alot of characteristics with the Persian, such as round faces, snub noses (not as much as the Persian of course), and a very round shape, plus the laid back personality, which they couldn't have from being crossed with just moggies, so I would say those typical Brit traits have come from the Persian! Plus the thickness of their coat (and when a Longhair BSH is born the 2 genes causing the longhair have come from way back in the Persian gene pool, as far as I understand).

Gracie's coat may be short but it's much, much thicker than any of my moggie's coats and sheds alot more, which must come from somewhere.


----------



## Soupie (Sep 2, 2008)

You might want to read up a bit more on Brit history but they are quite different in personality from Persians too.

They are a distinct breed which has been selectively bred for well over a century. You are not correct to call them Persian crosses as they are not.


----------



## Treaclesmum (Sep 26, 2011)

Soupie said:


> You might want to read up a bit more on Brit history but they are quite different in personality from Persians too.
> 
> They are a distinct breed which has been selectively bred for well over a century. You are not correct to call them Persian crosses as they are not.


<snip>"After the war, breeders dedicated to preserving the British Shorthair gained permission from the British Governing Council of the Cat Fancy to interbreed their Brits with other cat breeds to rebuild the gene pool. Persians were bred into the existing bloodlines, and shorthaired breeds such as the Chartreux were also added. These efforts transformed the Brit into its current form: a large, powerful mini-teddy bear with a full, round face and a placid disposition."<snip> From............
History of the British short Hair - British Short Hairs in Swindon


----------



## carly87 (Feb 11, 2011)

So does this mean that colourpoint Persians, or Himalayans, are basically Siamese crosses? Or that Selkirk Rex are basically British crosses? Or that every breed ever invented where a new trait has been brought in is a cross?

I know it was initially before anyone says it, but if I was a Brit breeder, I'd quite frankly be insulted that they are referred to as Persian crosses.


----------



## Soupie (Sep 2, 2008)

I had actually already stated Persians were used as outcrosses post war before you quoted that snippet 

The British Shorthair existed as a breed for decades before this with many of the same characteristics already in place. Whilst Persians have been used in the past as outcrosses this does not make our wonderful native breed nothing more than Persian crosses......


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

Treaclesmum said:


> <snip>


You are quoting one person's history of the BSH and taking it as fact. It might be, some of it might be, or it might be largely BS.


----------



## Cats cats cats (Feb 4, 2011)

He is absolutely beautiful :001_tt1: :001_tt1: :001_tt1:

I vote BLH


----------



## Tigermoon (Apr 2, 2013)

Birmans still use Persians as an outcross ... they are not Persian crosses either


----------



## Cats cats cats (Feb 4, 2011)

huckybuck said:


> I'm going to go off on a tangent here about paperwork... I have 2 "pedigree Maine coons" with certificates that I just don't believe are true. If it matters..they are just names on a bit of paper.
> 
> At the end of the day, really, how do you know? Unless you do genetic testing of the parents, babies etc you'll never really know if a breeder is telling the truth.
> 
> Only need to look at the human race and watch Jeremy Kyle and his DNA tests!


huckyB ....what do you mean by you don't believe their certificates are true ? 

Great thread this


----------



## NorthernDarkness (Jan 9, 2013)

IMO the cat looks like a Scottish Fold (LH), possibly a mix. The ears look like they were originally folded, but straightened up when he was younger (that does happen). So genetically I think he'd produce fold ear kittens.



gskinner123 said:


> The presence of the LH gene undoubtedly has an influence on the quality of a BSH's coat which may or may not (I don't know) be the case with Orientals. Its presence in BSH's all too often means the coat is completely of the wrong quality and it's not until you see/feel the coats of (the very few remaining) lines of SH breeding that ARE homozygous that one appreciates the difference.


As a person dealing with BSHs & BLHs, I can tell you that being a longhair carrier doesn't IMO most of the time affect badly in the coat texture. No one could ever tell that my BSHs have a longhair mother if I wouldn't tell them. One of them has a bit too soft coat, but the other ones have excellent coats.
(I have smoke, silver tipped and self black, and silver spotted Foldie from Fold x BSH mating).

On a side note, I've heard that it is preferred to breed BLHs with BSHs that are LH carriers, as it gives the LH offsprings' coats a better texture. Don't know if that's true though. Both of my BLHs are from BSH parents, the older one has way too Persian-like coat, the younger one has much shorter coat.


----------



## sharonbee (Aug 3, 2011)

He's beautiful isn't he? He resembles a Blue Persian to me and maybe he is a Blue Persian in his own rights but as others have said without papers you just don't know. He's gorgeous, you must be proud of him.Hope his fur doesn't take too long in growing back.


----------



## dagny0823 (Oct 20, 2009)

jonnyjonnyuk said:


> A Moggy? I understand this is a general term for a cat but is this bad?))


Not bad at all. It's just that there are some people who find it deeply offensive if you try to call any cat without papers anything but. For some reason it is considered very bad form in some circles to ponder your cats heritage for, if you really cared about things such as heritage, you would have purchased one with papers so you would just know. These folks aren't necessarily against moggies. They just want you to remember that without papers, you just aren't allowed in polite society to call your cat anything other than "moggy". To do otherwise undermines the work of pedigree breeders and, I suppose on some level, elevates the work of bark yard breeders. I do believe that even if your cat were the product of a pedigreed Siamese and a pedigreed Persian and you looked at their papers, you would be frowned on for calling your cat a Persian x Siamese. You must simply call it "moggy" or, our own PF coined term, "justa", as in "just a cat".

So, while some find it fun and interesting to look at their mystery cat's features and personality and wonder where it came from and what its parentage is, not everyone does. I tend to believe some find it actually harmful to deliberate in this way, that you wished you had yourself a pedigree. I know that's not necessarily the case with most people.

Anyway, I think your cat looks like he's got a bit of Persian in him. And I totally understand your curiosity. All of mine are moggies and I do wonder about not only how they ended up in the shelter as tiny kittens, but what's in their genetic past as well. It's pretty natural to wonder about your new baby. And he's quite handsome, even with the lion cut. Looking forward to seeing him fluff out again!

Edit: I read the first page and posted, then went back and read the entire thread up to this point. I see the debate kind of raged and fizzled in those 6 pages, and I didn't want to renew it or look like I was pointing fingers at anyone in particular. I agree there are people out there looking for bragging rights--I could fill pages with stories about dogs and cats. But I also just feel like it's fun to ponder how each little unique snowflake of a moggy cat came to be.


----------



## carly87 (Feb 11, 2011)

Absolutely! If there's genuine interest, that's one thing. It's the bragging rights that really make me mad. Notice that nobody has a go at JR when she refers to Spooks as a Siamese. Why? Because she didn't care one jot whether he was or not, and chose him for who he was and continues to love him for who he is. I've seen other people on here who just have to slip into every post that their cat might have a bit of BSH in them, or Ragdoll or whatever, and it's just not relevant. That dooes wind me up, I'll be honest. Your cat should be your cat because they're them, not loved any more or less for what may or may not be behind them. If it doesn't change how you feel or talk about your cat, then I have little issue with it.


----------



## Treaclesmum (Sep 26, 2011)

carly87 said:


> Absolutely! If there's genuine interest, that's one thing. It's the bragging rights that really make me mad. Notice that nobody has a go at JR when she refers to Spooks as a Siamese. Why? Because she didn't care one jot whether he was or not, and chose him for who he was and continues to love him for who he is. I've seen other people on here who just have to slip into every post that their cat might have a bit of BSH in them, or Ragdoll or whatever, and it's just not relevant. That dooes wind me up, I'll be honest. Your cat should be your cat because they're them, not loved any more or less for what may or may not be behind them. If it doesn't change how you feel or talk about your cat, then I have little issue with it.


So every person (apart from JR) who queries their cats' ancestry and mentions it more than once because they don't understand why some people take issue with it, doesn't actually love their cat then??  Strange conclusion to come to if you ask me!!!!

Who is anyone on here to make such a suggestion, unless the person is a newbie who has come onto the site purely to discuss their cats' genetics and perhaps with a view to not buying or rehoming a cat/kitten who is "just" a moggy? Any cat owner surely has every reason to be curious about where their cat may have got their looks and behaviours from.
Sounds more like snobbery from breeders who secretly wish everyone would buy a purebred and pay them some money - even if the cat in question was a rescue cat! Now THAT makes me mad...


----------



## Code (Sep 18, 2014)

I don't know but he's lovely, he looks very unimpressed with his new hairstyle :001_rolleyes:


----------



## Polski (Mar 16, 2014)

I really don't think many people want bragging rights, its curiosity. Mine are all moggies, the majority chose me so they are rescue cats in a sense. I'm curious about some of their bloodlines but not for bragging rights...just because I see certain traits. 

Floss, possibly part ragdoll as shes so floppy and fluid, whether she has or not would not make any difference to me...just would explain her floppiness. She turned up a rather tatty, smelly, knotted one eyed fluffball...if I was going to be snobby about things I wouldn't have instantly fallen in love with her.

Tilly, vet said shes BSH cross, short face, double coat. *shrugs* I just wish she didn't moult as much!

I believed Mac was part Siamese. The fact that he may have been Siamese was only important because it went some way to explain his leanness and muscle tone despite my best efforts to get him to fatten up as he lived outdoors

I really don't get this bragging rights...why can you brag about a pedigree but not a pedigree cross or a moggie? Pedigrees are just cats that humans have manipulated the breeding of...I think I would rather celebrate the good old, as nature intended, Moggie.


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

Why should a cat be part ragdoll because its floppy or part Siamese because its long & lean? Ragdolls aren't especially floppy either, that was marketing puff on the part of Ann baker.


----------



## Polski (Mar 16, 2014)

Most of the ragdolls I have known have been floppy...its supposedly a known trait. Obviously Flossie may not have any in her but if I was to describe her it would be floppy, like a ragdoll...wheres the harm in that. What is it about that that gets breeders knickers in a twist? 

Siamese tend to be long and lean and well defined muscle wise, I was fighting to fatten him up a bit but failing. Much like my mums siamese...couldn't get her to gain weight which was fine as she was indoor but Mac was feral who lived outdoors so I would have preferred more weight on him. It didn't matter whether he was or wasn't but it kind of went some way to explaining his litheness.

Strange how you don't get this crap with dog lovers. I had a dog, part GSD part Irish wolfhound....I don't mention his parentage as bragging rights, just as a way of explaining certain traits...mainly his size and his hairiness. No one would say..."can't say its a GSD x Wolfhound...its just a mongrel without papers" Why?

They are ALL just cats at the end of the day regardless of breeding, if someone believes their cat has certain traits purporting to belong to a certain breed whats the harm in them asking about it or even mentioning it when talking about their cat? I really do not get it?


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

OrientalSlave said:


> ...
> Personally I think *he might be a Persian-cross, or possibly a Persian from a... line not bred
> to the standard, as his nose is far, far too long. It looks to be longer
> than a show quality BSH would have.*


Tsk!  I *despise* Peke-faced Persians, they are a pathetic sight to me, the poor creatures can't even
groom themselves properly, humans have to do it for them. They have difficulty eating ordinary cat-kibble
& eat narrow diamond-shaped "pillows" of kibble, rather than the star or X-shape sold for cats with
*normal* forefaces.

I think this fella is a very-handsome specimen, & i'd much rather have that foreface than one that looked
as if the poor beast had been whacked in the face with an ice-cream scoop. :nonod:

BTW, one of my recent PCA-clients had an elderly white Persian with bicolor eyes [copper & green],
who was a SIGHT - an ugly shade of yellowing cream, with grey, greasy, grubby face & legs.
The vet had to sedate & shave her. 

Then we ran out of dry food, & i gave her ONE tiny 3-oz can of wet-food; she got more of that meal
on her face & forelegs than down into her gullet, i swear. She looked hideous, goo clumping
her hair into wads, her eyes looking like pop-eyed headlamps surrounded by a raccoon-mask of slime.
.
.


carly87 said:


> ...plenty of breeders produce BLH in the UK.
> GCCF just won't allow them to be shown. They're recognised & shown with TICA, though.


Good for TICA! - long-haired Weims aren't recognized by AKC, either. Narrow-minded eugenicists,
that lot. :thumbdown: The more diversity, the better, i say. :thumbsup:

BTW, to the OP - if he's not neutered, i'd get that done ASAP.
Tomcat urine really *reeks*, & toms are also inclined to mark. 
Plus they're very prone to fight with any other Ms they encounter, & bites or scratches are very prone
to abscess - antibiotics are SOP [Std Operating Procedure] for cat-inflicted injuries, as they almost
invariably grow infections.
.
.


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

Polski said:


> <snip>
> Strange how you don't get this *crap *with dog lovers.
> <snip>


That word isn't nice.

The vast majority of cats (over 90%) have no pedigree blood at all.

BYBs often describe kittens of dubious parentage as 'breed x' or some portmanteau work like the Birchillas to try to get more money for their kittens. Surely you don't want to indulge in the same way?

I'll stick to saying that nearly all the time the only way to be sure of the breed of a cat is to have it's pedigree & registration. Very occasionally a cat comes along which clearly is breed x - a cat with a pelt and rosettes is probably a Bengal - but the various breeds of cat have far less variance in their appearance & size than the breeds of dog do.

If you take vague similarities as defining a cat of being of breed x we are going to find every tabby is a Bengal, or every vaguely spotted tabby is a Mau, or every long lean cat is a Siamese (why not an Oriental or some other long lean breed?), or every fluffy cat is a Persian.

If you want a human example, the Inuit are usually short and stocky. Are we going to suggest that every short stocky person has some Inuit in them?


----------



## gskinner123 (Mar 10, 2010)

Treaclesmum said:


> So every person (apart from JR) who queries their cats' ancestry and mentions it more than once because they don't understand why some people take issue with it, doesn't actually love their cat then??  Strange conclusion to come to if you ask me!!!!
> 
> Who is anyone on here to make such a suggestion, unless the person is a newbie who has come onto the site purely to discuss their cats' genetics and perhaps with a view to not buying or rehoming a cat/kitten who is "just" a moggy? Any cat owner surely has every reason to be curious about where their cat may have got their looks and behaviours from.
> Sounds more like snobbery from breeders who secretly wish everyone would buy a purebred and pay them some money - even if the cat in question was a rescue cat! Now THAT makes me mad...


I agree, I think a lot of people are just naturally curious; nothing wrong with that. But as others have said, what most people don't realise is that behaviors/breed traits, etc, are a bit overblown.

I've never understood why some people get uptight over the term moggy and I also don't think that prefixing the word with "just a" (moggy) is meant to be in any way derogatory. To me, using the word 'just' implies the exclusion of any pedigree parentage... not to imply that the cat is inferior to a pedigree cat.

Incidentally, most breeders wish that a fair proportion of people who enquire about their kittens actually hadn't. I really don't think that has anything to do with it. Most breeders I know adore all cats, pedigree or not - a breeder/friend has spent more on feeding a stray/feral cat this summer (who has twice been pregnant/raised kittens) than she has her own cats. Getting the cat health checked, spayed, wormed and flea treated will also be paid out of her own pocket. It's very unfair to suggest that for breeders its all down to money.


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

leashedForLife said:


> <snip>
> Good for TICA! - long-haired Weims aren't recognized by AKC, either. Narrow-minded eugenicists,
> that lot. :thumbdown: The more diversity, the better, i say. :thumbsup:
> 
> ...


Lots of breeds with small numbers leads to diversity of breeds, not diversity of the genetics within a given breed. The later is very much needed in a number of breeds.

Yes, he needs neutering ASAP.


----------



## Polski (Mar 16, 2014)

OrientalSlave said:


> That word isn't nice.
> 
> The vast majority of cats (over 90%) have no pedigree blood at all.
> 
> ...


But I still don't get the harm in it as long as they are not planning on breeding and claiming its something not proven. I just don't get why it matters so much to some to breeders or pedigree owners.

And yes, I'm redhaired with blue eyes and I get "you must have Irish blood" comments all the time so yes...it does happen with humans and I see no harm there either (they're right in my case)


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

Polski said:


> But I still don't get the harm in it as long as they are not planning on breeding and claiming its something not proven. I just don't get why it matters so much to some to breeders or pedigree owners.
> 
> And yes, I'm redhaired with blue eyes and I get "you must have Irish blood" comments all the time so yes...it does happen with humans and I see no harm there either (they're right in my case)


If they were wrong about the Irish blood I imagine it could get quite irritating...

One of the ways BYBs thrive is by persuading people that a cat that looks vaguely like 'breed x' is 'breed x' regardless of the absence of papers. That in my view is where the harm is.


----------



## gskinner123 (Mar 10, 2010)

Polski said:


> I just don't get why it matters so much to some to breeders or pedigree owners.


It doesn't matter. Not to me anyway nor any breeder I know. I do think that some breeders appear to become a little OTT in describing how and why, when the question is asked, a certain cat isn't a pedigree/cannot be termed such, etc. That's usually because they're pretty fed up with seeing innumerable free-ads, placed by people who are misrepresenting the cat/kitten they're selling as a pedigree and all the resultant purchasers who get legged over as a result.


----------



## Polski (Mar 16, 2014)

OrientalSlave said:


> If they were wrong about the Irish blood I imagine it could get quite irritating...
> 
> One of the ways BYBs thrive is by persuading people that a cat that looks vaguely like 'breed x' is 'breed x' regardless of the absence of papers. That in my view is where the harm is.


No, I get scottish quite a bit too...doesn't bother me but then maybe i'm more laid back, probably comes with being a ginger kid...you learn to toughen up. I use "Polski" quite a bit on various things so i'm always being spoken to in Polish too...*shrugs* I've learned a bit of the language so not a bad thing eh.

As for BYBs maybe directing anger/angst at them instead of the moggie/cross breed owner wondering about their cats heritage would be better. Or lobby for tighter breeding regulations...This I would like to see with all animal breeders. Theres some very suspect ped breeders out there, some worse than your average BYB. Having papers does not guarantee a kitten has been bred or raised right as I'm sure most will agree.

As for idiots being persuaded that if it bears a resemblance to X breed then it must be X breed and being sold a cross breed at an inflated price...thats a whole 'nother issue, but you can't educate stupid so not worth it.


----------



## carly87 (Feb 11, 2011)

But we encourage that on here when we say "oh, your cat is a Birchillamese Bengla long-hair with a bit of Sphynx in there too!" I think it botheres me a lot because cat breeds are so diccicult to tell apart, but people just throw out suggestions anyway, and it smacks of BYB to me. As I say, I have no problem with it at all when it's curiosity. For example, Polski, if you were to post something asking "Just curious, but what breed do you think they might look like?" then I'd not have an issue. It's folks who come on here, ask "What breed is my cat? as their first question, then just disappear again with not even a backward glance.

I get so fed up of seeing adverts from people advertising cats as breeds when they're not, and think that encouraging it on here in part adds to that delusion. I'm not a snob. I've said to friends on occasion that XYZ cat feels like X breed because of body structure or coat type, but that's to people who aren't interested in asking just so that they can tell the world that "I have a Ragzotic!"

And people overblow the breed traits anyway!

Ragdoll flop: I have 5 Persians, but by this logic, 4 should be Ragdolls, and 1 definitely a pure-bred as he literally goes boneless when you pick him up. Perhaps the flop is more to do with trust than a breed characteristic. As OS said, the flop was crazy marketing by the breed founder.

Siamese leanness: I must also own a meezer as one of mine is distinctly long and lean and I struggle to keep weight on her. Her coat is also close lying and silky when she molts, and she's also a colourpoint, so definitely meezer, right? Except there's the small issue of her paperwork and the fact that I bred her, so know she's from two Persian parents.

Siamese/Burmese/Bengal vocalisation: I have 5 of all of these breeds who obviously have a personalitiy crisis at this point. All of them yell, cry, whine, scream, howl, burble, chirp, converse, etc, almost all of the time!

Turkish Vans love water: I own one of these. She screams when I turn the shower off her.

Persians are quiet lap cats: I own none of these. They are lap cats, sure, but they certainly are not quiet!


----------



## Polski (Mar 16, 2014)

carly87 said:


> "I have a Ragzotic!"


I LOL'd! love it!!

Ok, I get that certain traits do not guarantee anything, or indeed knowing the parentage doesn't guarantee a certain look and I think most people would think similarly...or maybe i'm more trusting, less suspicious?

Ultimately it doesn't matter to me and I hope to others that wonder about it. I love cats be they one eyed furballs of mixed heritage or Gr Ch papered peds ...they all purr, poo and pee the same as one another... It also doesn't bother me if someone wants to think or kid themselves they have a "Ragzotic" as long as they don't intend to breed from them and sell them because you can get many a ragzotic in the sanctuaries and I'd prefer they were homed instead of BYBs lining their pockets at the expense of idiots with more money than sense or kitties languishing in pens


----------



## carly87 (Feb 11, 2011)

Hmmmm, perhaps you've hit the nail on the head for me. Idiots see the Ragzotic as more desirable than the moggy, and that really, really angers me. That's the crux of it for me in a nutshell, and I've probably explained it very badly up until now, but I'm struggling to put into words exactly how I feel about it. Your cat is no more special just because it's a pedigree. If it's clear that people get that, then I don't care if they own all the Ragzotics or Burchillas in the world! Well, I probably would, but more because it's a bug bear than because I was really cross about it. If you get a moggy from a rescue or from the street or from your friend, it should be seen as the best cat in the world, no matter who its parents were. If you get a top pedigree Singapura from a breeder who has Supreme grand champion parents, who then goes on to win every show he's entered in, he should be seen as the best cat in the world. He is no better or worse than the moggy. Why? Because he's your cat, and that should be enough.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

OrientalSlave said:


> Lots of breeds with small numbers leads to diversity of breeds, not diversity of the genetics within a given breed.
> 
> The later is very much needed in a number of breeds.
> 
> ...


Huh? 
I wasn't asking for "diverse breeds" - we have some 600 breeds & landraces of dogs, worldwide.
That's plenty, IMO.  Equally, we have many healthy, attractive cat-breeds around the world.

I was criticizing the AKC's narrow-minded habit of allowing breed-clubs to split breeds WITH diversity into itty-bitty,
narrow slivers of the original -breed- ... as in long-haired & short-haired varieties, or the asinine decision to split 
4 *varieties* of Belgian Shepherd [Groenendahl, Malinois, Tervuren, & Laekenois] into 4 entirely-separate
BREEDS, which was truly admirably, astronomically stoopid.

I strongly-support genetic diversity *within* breeds as individual breeds, & *among* breeds in dogs
as dogs - genetic diversity begins in individuals, & must be maintained in gene-pools collectively. The same
hold true for cats - or horses, hogs, chickens, pigeons, what-have-U.

Matador-studs, ignoring COI, inbreeding to whatever degree including "line-breeding", are all at fault.
When everyone & their brother wants to breed to *this* Stud-Of-the-Month, diversity goes down the drain,
fast.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> Idiots see the Ragzotic as more desirable than the moggy, and that really, really angers me


Me too. Nail, head, exactly!


----------

