Beyond some old historical mentions of off-colored dogs and generic explanations of the piebald gene, there's not really much to say about partis that doesn't get into opinions. One curious thing...there's mentions of off colored dogs early on, then no mention at all for many years, and then they pop up again in recent years. I'm pretty sure what parti fanciers would say to this, but the re-emergence of these dogs after so many years makes me wonder.
The thing about the pure bred dog world is that there are standards for each breed and, IMO, those standards should be followed.
This was posted earlier from Webster's.....
"Definition of PUREBRED according to the merriam-webster definition is:
bred from members of a recognized breed, strain, or kind without a mixture of other blood over many generations".
I would just say that the 'recognized strain', as pertains to the Yorkshire Terrier, has always been that of a blue and tan dog. There has never been a standard for this breed that included any other colors. My belief is that, when in doubt, always refer back to the standard.
One other thing about this subject is the decision by the AKC to allow a parti designation in registering Yorkies. It goes against the parent club, which sets the standard. To me, this only fuels the debate and muddies the water on what the average person should make of this. |