Breeding for Improvement?

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

I not sure how you got all that out of my statement; I realize for some, dog breeding is a business; many people don't believe it should be. How this relates to the Nazis, I don't understand. Show breeders' dogs are often much less expensive than pet quality dogs, and a real bargain, if you can obtain one. Most show breeders believe that puppy placement is more important than money received. I don't think it's imperative for every breeder to show, but I believe that a good breeder should work closely with others to insure that their breeding dogs are great examples of the breed, for many people can't properly evaluate their own dogs. When we have a pet, we often overlook its flaws, and only see its beauty, and I believe that's the way it should be. This is a difference in philosophy and I accept their philosophy, obviously you don't. I truly believe there are breeders out there who's only goal is to better the breed, not to make money from their dogs. Most show breeders are lucky to break even.

The reason that I used the Nazi analogy, it is one group of people telling another group of people that only WE are fit to do this. As the Nazis told the Jews that they were not fit to procreate, so does the YTCA tell us non show breeders that we are not fit to breed dogs, eventhough they know nothing about us, they lump us all into a sub standard category.

That is why I use the Nazi example.

[iLuv Reeses]

I really think it would be nice if instead of seeking acceptance to be included in the standard, which is quite impossible since YTCA is for the yorkshire terrier standard representative of the true yorkshire terrier breed, parti breeders can have their own group. In this way they can seek to protect their breeding against those who simply breed for money and for puppy milling since parti yorkie breeders would just want to share their nice experience for those who want something unique. They can also further any studies about parti specific concerns if there's any on top of the general yorkie breed concern. It won't be an official club as compared to the YTCA, but it would definitely be a nice move against puppymillers and such. At least, they can educate well that partis are not of standard coloring and be able to choose to which hands these parti carriers (those with full registration and breeding rights) and promote responsible breeding without threatening the existence of the true and standard yorkies. In this way, the parti lines will be controlled and they can improve other aspects aside from the color. JMO.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

Agreed. And when the ethical breeders are more than just a small handful and there has been extensive research on the Partis, I'm sure lots will see things differently.

I hope so, but if it wasn't for the small handfull fighting the opposition, for the right to do that we would never accomplish our goals.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by Golden Parti

Just looking for some sort of an answer as to what was to much and what amount you thought was OK to pay. You must have some opinion on this because you yourself have a Biewer. I have not done any research into what Biewers are going for but no one seems to be screeming about the price of them the way they are about Parti's.

If there was no one willing to pay the price the price would then drop to a rate that someone was willing to pay. This is part of suppy and demand and also something our economy is based on. You wanted a Biewer so you paid whatever it cost. I wanted Parti's so I paid what they cost. Everyone else who wants them pays what they cost or waits till the price drops. That is a personal choice. No, I do not really care what you paid, Just trying to understand what you think justifies a reasonable price and if you think a free market economy is a bad thing?

I'm really not sure how much clearer I can make my opinion. I have no problem with people charging for a dog what it takes to justfify REASONABLE costs incurred. The issue is when the price being charge far exceeds what they are putting in to their programs. When the money they are profiting takes on the "I'm charging this because I know I can get it" vs "I'm charging this because I have to cover the costs of xyz," that is where the issues come into play and were people worry about the $$$ they can profit vs what is right by the dogs. Generally speaking, I would never "pay whatever it costs" for ANY dog if I didn't think there was just reason for a breeder charging that amount.

In short, I think it's "OK to pay" what a breeder can justify with costs they've put in. And again, there are so many many many factors that I think placement of dogs hinge on--I don't think it's really as black and white as you are trying to make it seem.

Your comments about it being a "free market economy" and all the talk of "supply and demand" give the impression that of these dogs as "marketable comodoties" as "items and property" rather than living things that should be cared for as such. It's really a bit unsettling, if I'm being honest. Yes, I took economics in college, but I don't recall discussing breeding dogs in class...that was more of a Comtenporary and Moral Issues type subject.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

I did not mean to imply that everyone who breeds partis doing nothing but trying to pocket a huge profit. I know that not every breeder out there is selling their dogs for the ridiculous prices you see some being sold for. My apologies if it came accross that way.

And you are right--the best defense is educating people on choosing an ethical breeder--I think that is the overall goal on all 'sides.'

No I did not take it personally, I just added to what you had said. i am very excited about the future of the parti and all the other colors.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

So why is it that they do not want to recognize them? Is it because they claim they are not Yorkies? A few posts ago it was said that is was because of the money being charged for them....or is it both? The reason seems to keep changing. EXACTLY what statements or stance of the YTCA's are upsetting so many?

The money issue was over the wording of their reason for disqualifying. the non recognition is that they state that the piebald gene was never a part of the yorkie make up. two different statements.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by Golden Parti

Correct me if I am wrong, but would it not make more sense for the YTCA to recognize them and to set a seperate standard for them if they truly want to make sure they are being bred to proper standards? just a thought

I made that same comment a few months ago.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by JeanieK

Of course it is supply and demand because if there are lots of them for sale then you would have to lower your price to get people to buy from you instead of someone else.

what I can't understand is that some puppymills sell cheap to to get rid of them and make a quick buck and the next one comes on with all the hype and convince people that their puppy mill dog is worth thousands more than somone elses puppy mill dog.

Now that is truely not supply and demand. It's unscrupulous marketing practices.

What I can't understand is that you can see this is unscrupulous marketing, yet can't see that's it's unscrupulous marketing to breed a fault, and call it "rare and unique."

Originally Posted by JeanieK

The reason that I used the Nazi analogy, it is one group of people telling another group of people that only WE are fit to do this. As the Nazis told the Jews that they were not fit to procreate, so does the YTCA tell us non show breeders that we are not fit to breed dogs, eventhough they know nothing about us, they lump us all into a sub standard category.


That is why I use the Nazi example.

No the Nazis, told the Jews they were not fit to live. No one is suggesting that these dogs be put to death. Some of us believe that if a dog doesn't meet standard he shouldn't be breed. There is a huge difference.

[BamaFan121s]

No offense meant to anyone, but if the talk of "Nazis" and implications of similarities could stop...it would be really apprecitated. The comparisons are being tossed around rather freely and I don't think people realize how truly offensive the implications of being "like the Nazis" really is.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

Why would the YTCA set a standard for them? None of the members breed them? If that is something that Parti breeders want to see happen, then they need to coordinate their efforts, put in the time to research and do genetic testing and work towards that goal. Not just expect the YTCA to do all the footwork for them so that they can breed their dogs with recognition and acceptance. In any case, would you really want an organization who is not in support of your goals to be governing what 'standards' you breed to?

No one has asked anything of the YTCA, and if i were personally to ask anything of them it would be to leave us alone and not to make unproven negative statements about them.

this is not going to be accomplished in a month or a year, perhaps not even a decade or in my lifetime. But we have to start somewhere.


As I have said, the YTCA did not create the yorkie, why do they think that they are the only ones that have an interest in their well being and that they are the only ones fit to say who can breed what. takes us back to the Nazi mentality.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

I think they've made it pretty clear that they have no interest in controling it or having anything to do with it.



."

Yes if it were up to the YTCA they would all spayed/neutered and woulod cease to exist. Brings us right back to the N word.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by JeanieK

No one has asked anything of the YTCA

I was answering the post by Golden Parti who asked why the YTCA didn't just make up and regulate a Parti standard--I'm not sure what the issue with my comment is...

Originally Posted by JeanieK

takes us back to the Nazi mentality.

So should Parti advocates be referred to as Klan members? Really, I think there is probably a better, less offensive way to get the point across.

[Golden Parti]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

I'm really not sure how much clearer I can make my opinion. I have no problem with people charging for a dog what it takes to justfify REASONABLE costs incurred. The issue is when the price being charge far exceeds what they are putting in to their programs. When the money they are profiting takes on the "I'm charging this because I know I can get it" vs "I'm charging this because I have to cover the costs of xyz," that is where the issues come into play and were people worry about the $$$ they can profit vs what is right by the dogs. Generally speaking, I would never "pay whatever it costs" for ANY dog if I didn't think there was just reason for a breeder charging that amount.

In short, I think it's "OK to pay" what a breeder can justify with costs they've put in. And again, there are so many many many factors that I think placement of dogs hinge on--I don't think it's really as black and white as you are trying to make it seem.

Your comments about it being a "free market economy" and all the talk of "supply and demand" give the impression that of these dogs as "marketable comodoties" as "items and property" rather than living things that should be cared for as such. It's really a bit unsettling, if I'm being honest. Yes, I took economics in college, but I don't recall discussing breeding dogs in class...that was more of a Comtenporary and Moral Issues type subject.

So you would be fine with parti breeders producing an itemized cost to justify the cost of the puppy. So the first litter should cost $10,000 per puppy and following litters about 250 a pup. Somehow I don't think this is going to work very well. I think I will stick to spreading the cost out over several litters and then lowering the price with time as it is currently working.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by Golden Parti

Just looking for some sort of an answer as to what was to much and what amount you thought was OK to pay. You must have some opinion on this because you yourself have a Biewer. I have not done any research into what Biewers are going for but no one seems to be screeming about the price of them the way they are about Parti's.

If there was no one willing to pay the price the price would then drop to a rate that someone was willing to pay. This is part of suppy and demand and also something our economy is based on. You wanted a Biewer so you paid whatever it cost. I wanted Parti's so I paid what they cost. Everyone else who wants them pays what they cost or waits till the price drops. That is a personal choice. No, I do not really care what you paid, Just trying to understand what you think justifies a reasonable price and if you think a free market economy is a bad thing?

And we paid a higher price to make sure that we got a good one from a good breeder and a good line, not something that might or might not be a yorkie.

Those people with the cheap ones had no idea where the partis even came from or what line the dog came from. so and so told them it was a parti colored yorkie and they were registered with the XYZ registry.

[Golden Parti]

Originally Posted by JeanieK

No one has asked anything of the YTCA, and if i were personally to ask anything of them it would be to leave us alone and not to make unproven negative statements about them.

I second that