Quote:
Originally Posted by maryeverett1  I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. I don't have one nor do I want one. I'm glad to hear that there are those of you who recognize partis and biewers as a breed of yorkie. I was told by someone on YT who will remain nameless that anything but a blue steel and gold yorkie is not a true yorkie and in fact a mutt and anyone who breeds them is unethical. She was basically saying that my dogs are mutts because they aren't blue steel and gold (Paris has a parti dad and a biewer mom) and that my breeder is unethical for breeding them. That's what I take issue with. The word mutt doesn't belong to a parti or biewer and those that breed them and love them properly don't breed the standard yes but aren't unethical just because they breed them either! As far as other ones like morkies go I can understand your point! Just hate it to be applied to yorkies. And find it facinating that she said most of YT felt the way she did concerning biewers and partis. Glad to discovery she was bluffing! |
I've read the thread you are referring to and I don't think that's what was said at all. I think what she was trying to say (and this is from how I took it) is that if a yorkie isn't steel blue and gold, or doesn't meet standard as the akc states, they should not be bred, NOT that they are mutts and not yorkies. To say that is so ridiculous. The yorkie is a very hard breed to breed correctly, and from what I understand, most of the desired yorkie traits (according to akc standards) are mostly resessive genes. That's why you see SO many yorkies with differing looks.
My Uni is a purebred yorkie, but she has very light grey hair and long legs, among other things that are not to standard. I'm sure this person you are referring to would NOT say Uni is a mutt, but this person would say she is NOT a good candidate for breeding, in which i would agree.