[yorkiekist]

Originally Posted by Woogie Man

This argument could go on forever. It's like a dog chasing its tail. No one knows what would happen if he actually caught it.

What I see lately with this argument is that it's getting more strident. (Some) parti breeders are coming on offering 'proof' of the parti's legitimacy when no real proof is possible. DNA only proves parentage and Mars testing is only to discern what breeds are present in a mixed breed dog. It's all a moot point, really, since variations have not been allowed for many years. The recent recognition by AKC can't be seen as proof either. AKC is just a registry that has shown itself to be creative in building revenue (witness their association with millers) and Parti registration is just another source of revenue. It doesn't constitute proof or legitimacy to the partis.

The historical references don't hold any weight in my mind either. So what if this or that trait is present in a Yorkshire terrier. There are many traits still being expressed in these dogs that are not to the breed standard. They are all true historical traits in the breed but don't fit the standard so shouldn't be bred for. Why have a standard at all if all random traits are given the blessing of the parent club? The basis for the parti argument is the same as could be made for oversize, flop ear, wire coat, roach back or off colors of any type. if you sanction these traits, all you're left with over time is some generic terrier type dog.....a terrier stew. The standard for any breed is written to weed out traits and produce an identifiable 'breed'.

I think what gets the hackles up of purists (and this is JMO) is the things being said of late. We hear "we're not going away so get used to it", "what are you afraid of", "you're a bunch of hypocrites", "we'll breed partis back to standard dogs and put carriers in the ring" and on and on. Not exactly the way to get things done and why should anyone be surprised at the response to that? These statements do bring into question just how well understood is the genetics of breeding and is there much thought given to the betterment of the breed.

I KNOW there are sincere devoted parti breeders. That isn't the point. The point is what could this do to a breed that is already in trouble. I don't think you can just brush off the criticisms as some of the strongest ones comes from those with many many years of devotion to the breed. Can you assume they are wrong until you have chalked up an equal number of years of experience, study and hard work? I can't say I have that many years but I do see the sense in preserving a standard.

Since it's been a very long time that a variety class has been added, I think the whole thing is mostly an exercise in egos and all this arguing serves no purpose. I do think if parti breeders want to continue, and do care about preserving the Yorkshire Terrier, that they will only breed parti to parti. If they did that, it would keep the lines separated and would at least maintain the status quo. To repeat myself from an earlier post, "east is east and west is west, and never the twain shall meet".

I hope we can stop all this arguing and nip all these bad feelings brewing in the bud. This serves no purpose as we all know by now each other's feelings. I do wish that anyone that's breeding off standard dogs of any type, whether by convenience or design, would ask themselves whether or not thieir breeding contributes to the betterment of the breed.

great post!! Well said!!