Reputable Parti Breeders?

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

I understand what you mean. And yes, I'm sure it will take time, but with numbers and persistant, passionate people, I'm sure it's an obtainable goal. So I am still wondering as it has not been addressed or answered:
* Are parti breeders trying to get the dogs recognized as a separate breed, or just a different color variation?
* If it is going to be recognized either way, won't there have to be a group of people, with common united goals, an agreed upon standards, like beliefs and practices working together? I mean, how will it ever happen if you just have individuals working out there on their own and not on the same page?
* Specifically, how are these things being achieved? How have the efforts been organized to be presented to AKC for acceptance?
* Is there a uniform way of tracking lineage, health research, genetic research and records for the partis being bred?

I would *think* these to all neccessary issues that would need to be addressed in order for this goal to be obtained... I actually find this very interesting and can only imagine the hard work and time and research that would have to be put into it. That is why I think that it will be interesting to learn how it's being done because if it's ultimately accepted then that will be HUGE



Not sure how to take that really...hopefully it was a joke? Or hopefully that at least means there IS a plan?

LOL yes it was a joke. Currently we are a very small group of very busy people that have not even gotten our first litters yet, so as of right now we are each working on getting our own lines started. We do want to get stadards set for them so we are all working towards the same goal.

Many people are still afraid to come forward with their partis. Especially show breeders because it couild get them banned by the YTCA. So they are forced to make some tough choices.

The breeder that I got my partis from used to be a show breeder, but she decided not to let them dictate to her on what she could and couldn't breed.

I personally do not want to show, I just want a standard to strive for, even if I have to set my own.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by JeanieK

LOL yes it was a joke.

I thought so, but you never know...especially the way things have gone around here today.b

Originally Posted by JeanieK

Currently we are a very small group of very busy people that have not even gotten our first litters yet, so as of right now we are each working on getting our own lines started. We do want to get stadards set for them so we are all working towards the same goal.

Is the group you are working w/ united in their efforts? So you guys have set a common standard to work towards at least among yourselves...or are you just working towards your own individual ideas in regards to standards right now? What do you (and your group) feel like the standards should be?

Originally Posted by JeanieK

The breeder that I got my partis from used to be a show breeder, but she decided not to let them dictate to her on what she could and couldn't breed.

Are you all trying to get parties recognized as a breed itself, or a variation of color that qualifies to be shown. If it is it's own breed, wouldn't that cut all ties w/ the YTCA? Do you forsee AKC as requiring extensive genetic testing on original parti breeding stock to prove that they were from standard colored Yorkies? (To disprove the theory that there was Maltese or other breed blood intigrated?)

Sorry for bombarding you with questions, but honestly, I really appreciate your input on the subject. Like you said, many are afraid to come forward right now and it's not common that you find someone who HAS actually researched them and is actively working towards making them 'official,' for lack of better term and trying to get their program organized. (And it's even more unusual to be able to keep a thread civil long enough to be able to discuss it in a civil manner. ) Thanks for taking the time to share.

[Ashley V]

Usually I try to stay out of all of this stuff, but I can't.

Why is it so bad to have a "parti" or an "off" color. Seriously, that's like saying that a child with blond hair has "off" color hair because both their parents had brown? It's genetics. Get over it. So what if the YTCA says that yorkies have to be blue and tan? What's wrong with the "off" colors. They are just as beautiful, just as loving and just as much of a yorkie as the standard ones.

I don't think parti's or off colors should be shown as yorkies because there is a set "standard". I do however think that creating an off breed with different color variations other than the blue and tan would be ideal.

I hope my next yorkie pup is a parti or off colored teapot. What is everyone going to say next? I'm an irresponsible owner because I love my dogs no matter what they look like?

[Brooklynn]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

I thought so, but you never know...especially the way things have gone around here today.b



Is the group you are working w/ united in their efforts? So you guys have set a common standard to work towards at least among yourselves...or are you just working towards your own individual ideas in regards to standards right now? What do you (and your group) feel like the standards should be?




Are you all trying to get parties recognized as a breed itself, or a variation of color that qualifies to be shown. If it is it's own breed, wouldn't that cut all ties w/ the YTCA? Do you forsee AKC as requiring extensive genetic testing on original parti breeding stock to prove that they were from standard colored Yorkies? (To disprove the theory that there was Maltese or other breed blood intigrated?)

Sorry for bombarding you with questions, but honestly, I really appreciate your input on the subject. Like you said, many are afraid to come forward right now and it's not common that you find someone who HAS actually researched them and is actively working towards making them 'official,' for lack of better term and trying to get their program organized. (And it's even more unusual to be able to keep a thread civil long enough to be able to discuss it in a civil manner. ) Thanks for taking the time to share.

I can answer or at least what I think...it would have to be it's own breed to be able to show because YTCA will not recognize a parti colored yorkie for the show ring. I don't think there would be the 2/3'ed's vote for that to happen. So to be recognized in the show ring it would have to go through AKC to be it's own breed and I know it takes ALOT and a long process to get a breed recognized. If I'm wrong please those with more knowledge let me know.

Donna Bird

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by Brooklynn

I can answer or at least what I think...it would have to be it's own breed to be able to show because YTCA will not recognize a parti colored yorkie for the show ring. I don't think there would be the 2/3'ed's vote for that to happen. So to be recognized in the show ring it would have to go through AKC to be it's own breed and I know it takes ALOT and a long process to get a breed recognized. If I'm wrong please those with more knowledge let me know.

Donna Bird

Donna,


I believe that the new AKC recognized breeds began by a large body of people banding together....breeding and documenting historical data.....in addition a dog to become AKC accepted it must have a functional purpose. In other words...working breeds, herding, etc....even though there is a toy class is now recognized as a companion dogs originally each of the breeds within it served a function

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by Ashley V

I don't think parti's or off colors should be shown as yorkies because there is a set "standard". I do however think that creating an off breed with different color variations other than the blue and tan would be ideal.

I understand your point and agree with you (I think ). I think that the problem you have is when you have people who breed the off colors just because they are "different" so that they will have something "rare." With no long term goals for the variance or efforts to do anything other than have a few 'odd' litters that they can sell quickly. And sadly, that happens alot. What I think gets to people sometimes is when the excuse "I'm working to get it recognized" is used as an excuse to try to prevent the breeder from being criticized. Sadly, that happens alot too.
For the people who ARE making a valiant, continuous effort and taking the time to understand the history of the parti (or any off color), trying to work with others to get a set standard, working towards the right to participate in shows either as a separate breed or color variation--those people who ARE trying are being dealt a great injustice by those who are just hiding behind their work and using the long term goals of others to hide behind while they try to produce something 'different' for a quick buck.
Just others trying to capitalize out of breeding dogs with little regard to the dogs themselves. That is why I applaud for people like Jeanie who are working hard for the partis and am so interested in knowing what steps they are taking as a coordinated effort to set themselves apart.

[Brooklynn]

Originally Posted by Mardelin

Donna,


I believe that the new AKC recognized breeds began by a large body of people banding together....breeding and documenting historical data.....in addition a dog to become AKC accepted it must have a functional purpose. In other words...working breeds, herding, etc....even though there is a toy class is now recognized as a companion dogs originally each of the breeds within it served a function

Thanks Mary I knew someone would have the answer And I know the YTCA will not recognize a parti in the yorkie show ring so to answer Bama's question it would have to be seperate from the yorkie am I correct?

[daisy mae06]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

I understand your point and agree with you (I think ). I think that the problem you have is when you have people who breed the off colors just because they are "different" so that they will have something "rare." With no long term goals for the variance or efforts to do anything other than have a few 'odd' litters that they can sell quickly. And sadly, that happens alot. What I think gets to people sometimes is when the excuse "I'm working to get it recognized" is used as an excuse to try to prevent the breeder from being criticized. Sadly, that happens alot too.
For the people who ARE making a valiant, continuous effort and taking the time to understand the history of the parti (or any off color), trying to work with others to get a set standard, working towards the right to participate in shows either as a separate breed or color variation--those people who ARE trying are being dealt a great injustice by those who are just hiding behind their work and using the long term goals of others to hide behind while they try to produce something 'different' for a quick buck.
Just others trying to capitalize out of breeding dogs with little regard to the dogs themselves. That is why I applaud for people like Jeanie who are working hard for the partis and am so interested in knowing what steps they are taking as a coordinated effort to set themselves apart.

I agree

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by Brooklynn

Thanks Mary I knew someone would have the answer And I know the YTCA will not recognize a parti in the yorkie show ring so to answer Bama's question it would have to be seperate from the yorkie am I correct?

I do know that canine geneticists were involved too, so it isn't an easy process and it will take time....but, it can happen if the right people get together and do it correctly via the AKC guidelines.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by Brooklynn

Thanks Mary I knew someone would have the answer And I know the YTCA will not recognize a parti in the yorkie show ring so to answer Bama's question it would have to be seperate from the yorkie am I correct?

That's what I'm thinking, which brings up 2 points:
1) If the goal for partis (or any color variation) is going to be for it to be a separate breed, why would you give a rat's butt about what the YTCA thought? Being a separate breed, they would have nothing to do w/ one another, right?
2) How can something be declared a separate breed if it IS just a color variation of 2 purebred Yorkies?

Hmmm....one brings you back full circle to the other.

[EmrldShdwQueen]

Wow, while I did get more than I bargained for when I asked the question, I certainly feel much more well informed than I ever have before...I don't mind a debate, as long as it doesn't turn into name-calling and immature comments. I find this all to be quite interesting...

[daisy mae06]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

That's what I'm thinking, which brings up 2 points:
1) If the goal for partis (or any color variation) is going to be for it to be a separate breed, why would you give a rat's butt about what the YTCA thought? Being a separate breed, they would have nothing to do w/ one another, right?
2) How can something be declared a separate breed if it IS just a color variation of 2 purebred Yorkies?

Hmmm....one brings you back full circle to the other.

It is Late.. LOL
Good night and Happy New Year to All

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by EmrldShdwQueen

Wow, while I did get more than I bargained for when I asked the question, I certainly feel much more well informed than I ever have before...I don't mind a debate, as long as it doesn't turn into name-calling and immature comments. I find this all to be quite interesting...

Especially if they are educational.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by EmrldShdwQueen

Wow, while I did get more than I bargained for when I asked the question, I certainly feel much more well informed than I ever have before...I don't mind a debate, as long as it doesn't turn into name-calling and immature comments. I find this all to be quite interesting...

Ha ha ha...and that so rarely happens. :P

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by Mardelin

Especially if they are educational.

That rarely happens either.