Guess what?

If I wanted an Golden/Assie mix ... I'd go to Petfinder or the Shelter !

Oh Grammy!
They're not mixes!
I meant 2 different breeds!
Goldens AND Aussies!!

But just as in any breed, there will be BAD breeders and GOOD breeders. The first breeder you see CANNOT form your basis for ALL breeders of miniature aussies.

My point is, I don't understand how we can argue that since these groups allow the mini aussie, that makes it more of a "recognized" breed, when the first three of these allow mixed breeds. And the fourth, I couldn't find any reference to them recognizing mini aussies. And it's no suprise that there's a breed standard written out, on the Mini Australian Shepherd Club of America website.

I really do love the mini aussies, though, they're definately on my short list of breeds I might own one day - great at agility, flyball, etc. But, like any dog I'd get, I'd definately look for a rescue (unfortunately there already ARE mini aussie rescues).

I want an assie mix.

Yes, and the same standard is also posted on the NAKC site. I looked.

ASCA DOES NOT recognize the "Miniature Australian Shepherd" OR the "North American Shepherd". NAMASCA is forming their own club and has nothing to do with ASCA. ASCA does allow dogs of different registries to run in their agility/tracking/obedience events, but they are NOT recognizing mini aussies.

That doesn't change the fact that NAKC/rarities is recognizing them.

Well we see what that says about NAKC/Rarites then, doesn't it.

I think the quality of the breeder should be the issue. Miniature Aussies/North American Shepherds are in that grey-area of not-quite a breed, not-quite a fad either. Some of them are serious competitors in fly-ball and agility. They are, one could say, a breed in development. And the controversy about size is appearently fairly old. I'd see how the breeder is OTHERWISE before condemning him or her.

Now, toy aussies, on the other hand . . .

NAKC is hardly a reputable registry. They don't even have thier own standards for their breeds, they are all ripped off of the AKC or FCI.
Once you click on any breed link the other registry's name is still up there bold as day.

I'm sure the APR recognizes them too, it doesn't mean anything.

I agree with Lilavati. Mini aussies to me are a grey area. Some breeders are just.... blegh and then there are others that seem to be trying to do something legitimate. Kind of like doodles for me as well....

How can they rip standards off the AKC and FCI if they have breeds that aren't yet recognized by either club?

What she's saying is that NAKC lifted the standard written for the Australian Shepherd and copy/pasted it to apply to the mini...they changed like three words of it. And what's even more amusing is how they kept in the whole part about toy features being cause for DQ...and yet the majority of dogs you will find labeled as Minis exhibit those exact characteristics.

MASCA isn't exactly an accepted registry either.

The breeder I'm talking about seems to be doing something good. Breeding Aussies in a smaller body. They do agility, obedience, her kids to 4-H with them..

With any of the breeds in general, if they are recognized by AKC/FCI, Nakc just STOLE those standards and posted them up. Click on any of the breeds and check.

Plus, what sort of registry uses *I* on thier intro page?

Why is that good? Aussies can already do all that stuff.

Would mini Pit Bulls be acceptable?

Hillside has a good point.

Now you got to me using my heart breed, LOL.

No, they wouldn't..

You got me.

But the thing is, mini aussies have been around as long as aussies themselves... while mini pits don't even exist.