I Am Thinking Of Breeding

[txshopper73]

Originally Posted by SoCalyorkiLvr

My hypothetical included only a situation where she bred to a male who did not have the recessive gene for underbite in his DNA. I would never breed the dog under the circumstances you just outlined. That would be too risky.

You're right, it's too risky. However, how can someone guarantee that there are no bad bites EVER in their lines? As I mentioned earlier, don't all yorkies have the same ancestors? Don't they all somewhere even 10-20 generations back carry some type of recessive gene? You can breed to try to eliminate these genes and a good breeder will do that. However, I'd like to meet someone that can guarantee 100% that their lines are perfect without any faults.

[SoCalyorkiLvr]

Originally Posted by wnalegria

I want to breed my dog- come hell or high water. I do not care what the results are- it is my God given right. Yep you are right. It is your right. Go right ahead and breed LP's
Bad bites and liver shunts go the gambit.

People who state I am not wanting to show so that I don't have to follow the standard are just making excuses. Some of us have made the comment that the perfect dog does not exist- that is being thown around as a catch all to make it ok for your bad judgement. Some of you would not know a quality YT if it bit you on the ankle. If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem. .

Kathy~

I totally respect you as a person and as a breeder and I appreciate all the advice you are willing to give and believe me, we LISTEN!

BUT....you are missing what I and a few others are saying if you think we are condoning or encouraging the continued breeding of a dog with LP, severely bad bites or liver shunt. There is no way!

I mean no disprespect with this post and I hope I do not offend anyone as this is just my humble opinion and nothing more.

What we have a problem with are some "arbitrary" rules mostly about Outward Appearance , the so called "breed standard" that includes tail docking and other characterisitics but says little about temperament, as being what "pet" owners want or what they consider a "quality" yorkie! Most companion owners, which is the majority of yorkie fanciers btw, want good temperament over looks with health always first and foremost.

It is insulting to ask if we can sleep at night because we hold this opinion. It is different from yours but your definition of a "quality" yorkie is probably NOT my definition of a "quality" yorkie so it is also a bit patronizing to say that "some of you would not know a quality yorkie if it bit you in the ankle." It sure makes me wonder what you might think of MOST of the dogs on this site.

Personally, I think they are all QUALITY yorkies.....they may not be "show quality" but we who own them and love them do not care. I love floppy years, undocked tails and unique colors. Should I be ashamed of that?

I agree with you that breeders are blamed for way too much when it comes to the ailments these animals may get and I am constantly defending breeders for this from ignorant people who mainly just want someone to blame. I usually get villified for it but I understand how hard it is to be a breeder and I would never want the job. I also argue that people should be willing to pay more so that breeders are more fairly compensated for the time and effort and good qaulity care that goes into producing a litter of pups.

You are off topic in this thread when you talk about major health faults like LP and liver shunt. We are talking a barely discernable underbite in this dog with a vet who proclaimed her good to breed.

[SoCalyorkiLvr]

Originally Posted by txshopper73

You're right, it's too risky. However, how can someone guarantee that there are no bad bites EVER in their lines? As I mentioned earlier, don't all yorkies have the same ancestors? Don't they all somewhere even 10-20 generations back carry some type of recessive gene? You can breed to try to eliminate these genes and a good breeder will do that. However, I'd like to meet someone that can guarantee 100% that their lines are perfect without any faults.

I would say 20 years back at least.

[txshopper73]

There are yorkies out there that fit the standard AND have good temperments. I wouldn't sacrifice one for the other to me, it should be a package deal. But, with an obvious fault, no matter how slight it is, I would not breed that bitch. I would find a female that fit the standard AND has a good temperment.

[SoCalyorkiLvr]

Originally Posted by Yorkieville200

If you don't like the Yorkie standard, don't breed. Period..

I also appreciate the breeders on here who express their opinions and share their experiences everyday but if the breeders who decided to develop the yorkshire terrier abided by this statement 100 years or so ago, there would be no yorkie!

[SoCalyorkiLvr]

Originally Posted by txshopper73

There are yorkies out there that fit the standard AND have good temperments. I wouldn't sacrifice one for the other to me, it should be a package deal. But, with an obvious fault, no matter how slight it is, I would not breed that bitch. I would find a female that fit the standard AND has a good temperment.

What does "fit the standard mean" since I know you are not breeding perfect dogs all the time?

You come as close as you can to everything in the standard but you may be off on in a couple of areas and you hope the combination of the two dogs with different faults will compliment one another so the puppies are closer to perfect......right?

I think it is perfectly acceptable to do this outside the breed standard too if you want red and gold puppies like Julz' for instance or you want the tri-color like the Biewer or you like short short snouts. These breeders are carefully breeding health defects but breeding FOR characteristics that are not with the YTCA breed standard but are perfectly "okay" and actually wanted as traits by some.

What if someone likes floppy ears? Is it not okay to breed FOR this trait since we know that these dogs are more prone to ear infections even though some breeds have that as part of their "standard"?

[sylvan]

Originally Posted by txshopper73

You're right, it's too risky. However, how can someone guarantee that there are no bad bites EVER in their lines? As I mentioned earlier, don't all yorkies have the same ancestors? Don't they all somewhere even 10-20 generations back carry some type of recessive gene? You can breed to try to eliminate these genes and a good breeder will do that. However, I'd like to meet someone that can guarantee 100% that their lines are perfect without any faults.

This is an excellent point. Unfortunately as breeders, we are still limited by the knowledge available regarding the background of each line. It sounds simple to say that you just don't breed a dog with a poor bite to one that may carry a recessive DNA trait for this same fault. DNA research has not reached a point in regard to dog breeding that allows us to look at the DNA strands and say "OH, there is the gene for an underbite" . We must rely on getting very familiar with the traits shown and produced by each dog in previous generations of a prospective breeding dog's pedigree as far back in the line as possible. This is the only way to proceed with any confidence that you will not have a nasty surprise in a litter you produce. Even with this extraordinary amount of painstaking research. Mother Nature can still toss a curve ball in your direction, but as Kathy said, it's easier to sleep at night if you know you did your utmost to produce a healthy, quality pup.

[txshopper73]

Originally Posted by sylvan

This is an excellent point. Unfortunately as breeders, we are still limited by the knowledge available regarding the background of each line. It sounds simple to say that you just don't breed a dog with a poor bite to one that may carry a recessive DNA trait for this same fault. DNA research has not reached a point in regard to dog breeding that allows us to look at the DNA strands and say "OH, there is the gene for an underbite" . We must rely on getting very familiar with the traits shown and produced by each dog in previous generations of a prospective breeding dog's pedigree as far back in the line as possible. This is the only way to proceed with any confidence that you will not have a nasty surprise in a litter you produce. Even with this extraordinary amount of painstaking research. Mother Nature can still toss a curve ball in your direction, but as Kathy said, it's easier to sleep at night if you know you did your utmost to produce a healthy, quality pup.

very well said.

[sylvan]

Originally Posted by SoCalyorkiLvr

the so called "breed standard" [/B] that includes tail docking and other characterisitics but says little about temperament.

It is not a so called breed standard, it is the breed standard and it does describe temperment, which is an important trait for show AND pet.

[dawneo]

When searching for a pet, attributes of both the dam/sire is what the puppy will be. A visable bite issue, coat issue or size issue in a parent has more than a 50% chance showing up in an offspring.

[Snow Yorkies]

Well, with this post I think we have found out who breeds for what reasons. I know if I am looking for a new yorkie to bring into my home who I will be contacting in the future, as well to whom I would ever consider giving breeding rights to and who I wouldn't, from any sales of my pups. Who says you can't learn something everyday. lol !!! You can all keep the debate going but I think the record has already been set....

[PinkMartini]

Originally Posted by sylvan

It is not a so called breed standard, it is the breed standard and it does describe temperment, which is an important trait for show AND pet.

Exactly! I really, really don't get how this could be so difficult to understand

[SoCalyorkiLvr]

Originally Posted by sylvan

It is not a so called breed standard, it is the breed standard and it does describe temperment, which is an important trait for show AND pet.

99% of the yYTCA standard is "conformation" or appearance and there is not even one full sentence on temperament.

It is not the LAW...it is a group of hobbyists... a club's idea of what makes the perfect yorkie. I do not belong to the club and yorkies are so much more than my hobby! I do not think there is a single YTCA member on this board so why are you all acting like their "standard" is the yorkie law? I just do not choose to adhere to their "standard" as I have my own characteristics and traits I like.

[SoCalyorkiLvr]

Originally Posted by PinkMartini

Exactly! I really, really don't get how this could be so difficult to understand

Summer~ I thought you might start understanding after the trouble you have had recently even getting a YTCA member to talk to you because you are a newbie. They do not like new people and don't let them into the "club" very often. Why associate with people like that?

[diva pup]

Originally Posted by SoCalyorkiLvr

99% of the yYTCA standard is "conformation" or appearance and there is not even one full sentence on temperament.

It is not the LAW...it is a group of hobbyists... a club's idea of what makes the perfect yorkie. I do not belong to the club and yorkies are so much more than my hobby! I do not think there is a single YTCA member on this board so why are you all acting like their "standard" is the yorkie law? I just do not choose to adhere to their "standard" as I have my own characteristics and traits I like.

Kim,What is with your obvious contempt for the YTCA and what they stand for and the standard? It is wearing a little thin, nobody can say anything about the standard or the YTCA without you coming back with this yorkie law crap.
What standards are you adhering to anyway? You don't breed, you buy pets.