Quote:
Originally Posted by capt_noonie  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. |
The Standard is in place as a guideline to follow for those that exhibit/breed. Just because Uni does not meet the standard, doesn't make her less desirable. By the way I love long legs on a yorkie, as a matter of fact other than a dead level topline and great movement....it's one of my criteria. Nothing more gorgeous to watch in the ring than a yorkie in full coat with long legs.....