YES. Insulting juvenile comments like the one you were referencing don't even deserve a response. Even those of us that are debating are more respectful of each other than ( "r u slow". )

Yorkiekist said that this is what she would do, she didn't say it was the only reputable thing to do, but she would know more about which traits are considered more serious flaws. She also said that she would tell others about the fault. You are the one from whom I learned that breeders want to keep this a huge secret, before that I didn't think it was any worse than any other fault. Speaking of secrets, I do hope the Parti breeders will share their knowledge if a trait such as deafness is found in their offspring, and they will inform others about this too. Deafness and the recessive trait has been linked in some dogs, but you are correct there are those breeders who would keep this quite because they didn't want to destroy their line.

I do not believe any breeder would continue to breed a dog that was producing offspring with health issues. Now there might be some that do, but I know nothing about that.

I know for a fact that breeders kept the color issue a secret and that is how the gene stayed alive. T he parti gene is what is being discussed here that is why I focused on that one.

Yorkiekist's post stated that she would do that and I responded with a question, asking if she would do this with any fault or just the parti color fault. she as yet to reply to that question.

You responded with surprise that I would even ask that question. After her statement why is the question so surprising. it's a legitimate question to someone who would spay/neuter for a fault that is not a health issue.

That comment was meant for me, I wasnt going to stoop to thier level but I had too, I couldnt let something like that go, to call me slow (esp. when they wrote it like that :rolleyes:) when I was replying to a question was just rude.:thumbdown Not to mention in a later post she/he replied something about being done with this thread cause they were being critcized??? It was alright when they did though :mad:

This thread has been very informative and I appreciate everyone that has put effort into proving thier sides, not to mention for the most part you all have respected each other. :D

It is difficult to ignore those types of comments, and believe me I have let myself drop to their level many times. Her last two posts on here indicate that she is approximately 13. Not really even worth your time getting upset over. Just consider the source.

Sorry you had to experience the ugly side of forums.

I didnt relize that she was only 13 :eek: now it all makes since. Thank you.

LOL Not sure how old she is, but her comments are consistent with the mentality of 13 year old.

LOL Which one are you talking about? I don't want to have to read back through all the pages of this to find out who said that

The OP. but you can't find her comments because they have been deleted. Refer to post #89.

I dont know how to multiple quote but its all mostly on the first page. She made a comment about partis' being nothing but Mutts,
I replied back to her about the yorkie once being a mutt too, she replied back saying pretty much that I was "slow" I commented back, she later commented that she had gotten all the info she needed and her original question was answered and that she was leaving the thread because of the negative comments.. She could dish them out but not take' em.

Here is some one the converstation, the comment about me being slow isnt there but thats the gist of it. :)

OH.. oops :p and I agree with you :thumbup:

Some of her juvenile comments were deleted.

I do remember seeing that, but, guess that's why it was gone when I went back to find it and just skimmed through the pages. I remembered reading that, but, didn't remember who had posted it

What dog are you referring to?? Your statement of, "Deafness and the recessive trait has been linked in some dogs", is quite broad and seems that you are trying to imply that there is a link with the tri-colored Yorkie and deafness.
:confused:

Yes, it is quite board, but as JeanieK pointed out some breeders might keep certain traits quiet, in order to protect their line. We have had members ask the question about the link, stating that their dog was deaf, this of course wouldn't prove anything, but I'm not sure if any breeder wants to really look for the link, if it could affect their bottom line. Here's a link to discussion about deafness and the piebald gene. DEAF PUPPIES. Here's another link into the discussion of breeding recessive genes. http://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/yor...nbred-dog.html The member whose dog was deaf asked the question on one of the parti threads, in the past year, sorry, but there is no way, I'm wading through the Parti threads. :D I have no vested interested in this; I'm not a breeder, just someone who's interested in the elusive truth.

So there's a member that has a parti colored deaf Yorkie but you are not digging through all of the posts to find it?? YOU are the one making this claim...trying to prove some sort of point. To say that, "there is no way, I'm wading through the Parti threads" but to to throw out such a broad statement is not good enough...YOU made the statement, YOU should be the one to prove it! Is this member, with the deaf dog, a long-time trusted member?

And for someone that says, "I have no vested interested in this", you sure do post in any and every parti thread that you can find.

I'm not trying to "prove" anything. There was a member who asked the question in the past year because her dog was deaf. I actually am trying to learn something. I try to share with others, what I have learned. I don't believe there has been shown any correlation between the Yorkshire terrier parti and deafness, but the purposeful breeding of this parti trait is rather new, and I just hope breeders will be honest about it, since the piebald gene has been linked to deafness in other breeds. I really love the Yorkshire terrier breed, and it really bothers me what breeders have done to other breeds. I post on nearly all the threads that deal with good breeding practices, for this is something that holds a place, close to my heart.

It seems that you are now trying to lessen what you originally wrote and what you were trying to insinuate about the parti Yorkie by saying that you were talking about the parti as a whole. You even said that there is a member here that owns a parti and claimed it to be deaf. You say that you are only to learn and that's great, if that's really your point to all of your posts in part threads...so if this is truly the reason, why did you feel the need to embellish to prove a point about the parti?

By the way, I just now looked through some of the parti threads and the first one that I looked through about deafness and a parti Yorkie was this one:
http://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/gen...dilly-o-2.html
I only see this topic briefly discussed and it certainly was not the tri-color being predisposed to deafness...to the contrary actually.

Truthfully, I hate responding to the parti threads, I just don't think all our information should be from the people who actually sell the dogs, its similar to doing research on the safety of cigarettes, and only reading about the studies conducted by R.J. Reynolds.

You have a good point there. Which is exactly why I believe interested people need to here something other than the misleading information on the YTCA site.

I'm still waiting for an answer to my question to yorkiekist. It seems like when they questions get tough they all disappear.

In Post # 59 some very valuable documentation that validates what the parti breeders have stated about early parti colors showing up in the Wildweir lines, was posted by a Biewer breeder not an AKC Parti breeder.

In reference to people hiding their Parti puppies my personal opinion is that many breeders (not all) did ...the same way many breeders hid/hide Liver Shunt and went to war with Terri Shumsky when she went to bring it out of the closet. Even today it is still hush/hush. It might be one of the reason's Yorkies are 36 times more prone to get LS.

I'm not being snot, but I don't know what your post means exactly. I know many of you think the same old things are being posted, but I'm still learning. From what I gather, there is no actual real proof of anything, and until genetic testing is more advanced, I'm keeping an open mind. It took me a long time to even understand the arguments involved in this debate, my argument has never been about whether or not the piebald gene exists in a Yorkie, it didn't seem relevant to my belief that a breeder should breed to standard. I also have real concerns about breeding for the recessive gene, inbreeding is more likely to occur when this trait is desired, not that inbreeding never occurs with standard yorkies, but only among really poor breeders. I'm also concerned that many new breeders without any real experience in breeding, or an even basic understanding of genetics are being persuaded to add a parti carrier to their "line." I see this happening to Biewers as well, and I have concerns for their future too.

I don't think that any discussions that we have on here about breeding responsibly and not in-breeding etc is going to make one bit of difference in the big picture.

I Agree with you that breeders should first and foremost breed healthy dogs.

The following comments do not apply to ALL show breeders, nor do they apply to any PASRTICULAR show breeder.

In my opiniomn, show breeders would be more likely to breed dogs, with health issues, than the casuasl breeder. The reason I think that is because they would not want to spay/neuter a champion dog.

They tell themselves that it is OK because they sell on spay/neuter contract only, so the fault is not being spread.

Now I know that show breeders claim to be bettering the breed, and many of them really do try, but for others it is all about the trophy. those people will do anything to get that championship.

they use hair dye, they try to disguise a long body by making the dog scrunch up when they stand. They tie strands of hair from their ears in to the top knot to make the ears higher, and various other things to improve the looks of their dogs.

If they would go to all that trouble they probably would not care if the dog had a geneetic health issue.

Not all parti breeders care about the dogs either. in fact there are partis out there that are frauds, those people are in it for the money.

Others of us, believe that the color was in the initial makeup of the yorkie and should not become extinct. We are trying to develope the color in healthy dogs.

What the future holds for them, as far as show potential, is unknown. But they are so showey, I cannot see them being ignored for long. All it would take is someone with some clout and some money to want the YTCA to accept them, and it will happen.

Apparently it is your opinion that shows breeders are breeding for the purpose of selling puppies. I disagree with the strongly. I really believe that most are actually trying to improve the breed, and they don't sell their dogs, they adopt them. Lets face it, for what they charge, they are barely breaking even. I think a good measure of the "why a breeder is breeding" is the prices they charge.

Furthermore if you think the reason that:

this makes me think that this is the way you think, and you would not want to spay/neuter a parti with health issues. We tend to think others will do the things that we would do.

Do not read any underlying message into what I write. I say what I mean and I mean what I say. If I thought that show breeders were doing it for the money I would have said exactly that.

You totally twisted everything that I said. No I do not believe that show breeders are in it to sell puppies. Where did I write that? I believe that they would not want to spay/neuter a champion because they would hope to produce more champions. As I clearly stated, some, NOT ALL, it's all about the trophy.

Where did I indicate that I would not spay/neuter a dog with health issues. I clearly stated that I am only interested in developing the parti and I'll also add the golden color in the yorkshire terrier.

I also find it amusing that we parti breeders are repeatedly accused of being in it for the money. I personally have yet to even get a parti puppy. so not sure where you think I am hauling in the $$$$$

call it selling, adopting, or rehoming, it is transfering ownership of a puppy for money. I do the same thing, seeing as I have yet to get a parti puppy, I have yet to sell, adopt, or rehome one. but I have sold fadopted or rehomed all of those that have not been partis.

I don't think it really matters what I say or do, you are going to twist it or translate it into what you think I meant or do.

You do not know me, you do not know my lifestyle, which clearly is not one of a high dollar dog producer. so why do you assume that I am only in it for the money.

What does a Parti baby look like? Here's a beautiful Biewer Terrier.

[quote=TammyJM;2437278] Is this member, with the deaf dog, a long-time trusted member?
/quote]

I know this is off topic, forgive me. But i a bothered by this post. Do you not except new members words? Just because somebody doesnt have 1000 posts and have been around for years, does that mean they dont know anything or that they cannot be trusted and you do not take them seriously? You say this like new members, and what they have to say does not matter.

[quote=k9trainer;2439940]Why be bothered by this??? I was asking Nancy questions, trying to figure out who she was referring to. It wasn't intended for anyone to read anything into....

But I will tell you, if you are truly bothered by this (even though it wasn't intended as you took it), you will have hay-day with sooooo many threads on YT. :D ;)

Tammy