Parti confussion?????
 

What is this Parti im hearing? Do the akc acknowledge them cause i could not find anything on that site? what are they mixed with? and dosent that kinda damage the yorkshire breed? just questions im wondering? Thanks im confused:confused:

Parti yorkies are NOT the YTCA nor any other standard in any other country for the Yorkshire breed. This color as well as chocolate and blond are color faults and, like in ALL breed standards,faults should NEVER be purposely bred for. The parti breeders will tell you that they are 100% yorkie and have been Dna tested, bla, bla, bla. But the ONLY thing that DNa will tell you is that the parents of the puppies are indeed, the parents of that puppy. It will not tell you that there are most likely a few mixed breedings to create the parti gene in yorkies. Papillon, perhaps. Long before there was DNa testing, required DNa testing and kennel inspections, there were(and still are) indiscriminant "breeders" that would register anything, even a mix, and register it with AkC as a purebred yorkie. It was extremely easy to breed in the parti gene that the Yorkie has never had. The AkC would never know about it. A few generations later, and sha-zam, we have parti breeders. Unfortunately, the damage to the Yorkie breed was done years ago and there is no way of going back to see what breeds were introduced and when or where. The AkC had no choice but to register these dogs. But they cant be shown in conformation which is for judging breeding stock only. Almost all reputable show/hobby/exhibitors NEVER have a parti born. Its only the indiscriminant breeders that perpetuate this color fault. And more than likely, its for the $$$$$$$. Look how much they ALL charge for a parti. Kinda like T-cups.
Look up the YTCA standard for the Yorkie. Read the history of the breed. You will see that the Yorkie is a tan dog with a bluish saddle. Remember, the YTCA sets the standard for the Yorkie, not the AKC.
As you will see, the parti breeders will tell you all about their own version of the history and where the parti gene came from.

WOW..:eek: this post is going to start some trouble..:rolleyes:


TO THE OP.. this is considered a hot topic on this forum. You could search "parti" in the search section at the top of the forum and find all the info you need regarding this topic.

about the parti yorkie
 

I dont know what they are mixed with, but they are beautiful, dont you agree/they should give more on what the breed is that they are bringing into the yorkie. I think they are beautiful.I never see them in pet stores, not that I would buy one.

I agree :thumbup:

Parti yorkies may not be the YTCA standard but AKC in the late 1990's, did extensive DNA testing of parti litters and tested back as far as possible to the related adults (to the parti litters) from the Nikkos lines. AKC also spoke with Old time breeders, who were breeding in the 20's - 70's to see if these breeders ever experienced off color in their breeding program. It was determined that off color, including parti did appear in the earlier days and continue to appear in litters today (much to a breeders surprise).

Many of the new parti lines we see today (parti litters being produced by two traditional colored yorkies) are tracing back to one dog born in the late
1950's, CH Wildweir Pomp N Circumstance, including the Nikkos parti dogs. Wildweir Kennels was one of the kennels AKC interviewed about Parti color showing up and Wildweir told AKC that they had Parti colored pups being born
in their own litters.

It is thought by YTCA that 2 of the foundation stock that began the YT breed was the Scotch Terrier, the Skye (Clydesdale and Paisley being offshoots of the Skye) and the Old English terrier.

These foundation dogs, were not papered, and their heritage was unknown. They may have had a look or color that was desired but as for the recessive genes hiding within, no one can say what genes is or isn't there.

Historical writings and Illustrations indicate that there were "off colors" prior to the Yorkshire terrier becoming a breed ... scotch terriers with white markings, English Terriers that weren't black and tan and Skye terriers that
were brown in color.

If recessive genes are being traced back to a dog born in the 1950's (50 years ago), why can't the recessive genes be coming from dogs that began the breed 70 or so years earlier?

I meant to say the 3 breeds thought to have been foundation dogs to our breed is the Scotch Terrier, the Skye (Clydesdale and Paisley being offshoots of the Skye) and the Old English terrier.

Attached are some Illustrations showing how off coloring in our yorkies today, may have came from dogs similar to the dogs seen in the below illustrations (Circa: mid to late 1800's)

First picture 1881 Cassell's The Book of the Dog shows a golden colored skye terrier along with the more traditional colored blue skye.

Second picture from Cassell's Illustrated Book of the Dog shows a white english terrier along with the traditional colored black and tans.
c. 1870s-1880s - "English Terriers, "Silvio," the Property of Mr. Alfred Benjamin. "Serpolette," the Property of Mr. Tom. B. Swinburne. "Salford," the Property of Sir Wm. E. H. Verner, Bart."

The last picture shows a group of Terriers from the 1860 Book of Field Sports by Henry Downes Miles, is Illustrated by DJ Watkins-Pitchford, are pictured running freely together. The caption reads:

"The Skye Terrier, The Scotch Terrier, The English Smooth Terrier, The Crossed Scotch Terrier, The Dandie Dinmont and The Bull Terrier."

Two of the 6 dogs pictured are parti colored ... The Bull terrier and the Crossed Scotch Terrier. Scotch terriers and Crossed Scotch terriers are recorded as being some of the foundation dogs in our breed.

My point being, that just because a dog looks to have the correct steel blue and tan coloring, that doesn't mean that they do not carry recessive genes from their off colored descendants. It's not until one dog who carries the recessive off color gene, is bred to another dog carrying the same recessive gene, that they will produce off colored pups.

Many, many, many generations can go by with these genes being passed down. A dog who carries a recessive off color gene, will pass that gene onto 50% of his offspring, those carrier pups will then pass that gene onto half of their offspring ... so until a line completely dies out, that gene continues to be passed on.

Genes for off color have been in our dogs since the beginning and they will continue to show up (from traditional colored breedings) in the future. The difference now is that AKC will allow off colors to be registered, but prior to the year 2000, off colored pups were kept in the closet (so to speak).

I agree! They are simply GORGEOUS! I would love to own one myself. :)

Either way, I think they are beautiful dogs! Their colors are lovely!

:yeahthat:

There is a whole section from the Yorkshire Terrier Club of America's website on Parti Yorkies. Scroll down about halfway:

Yorkshire Terrier Club of America (Awards)

Thank you but i would think there is more to a dog than just it being beautiful!!!! I mean now i understand its not a breed more of a mixed what that call a "mut"!! Not cool to me how desperate people are to make money thank you

and apparently you didnt read all of pinehaven's posts :rolleyes:
ALL PUREBREDs except for the maltese are mixed with something.. so yeah your beautiful yorkie was once considered a "Mutt".. :)

*sits back and grabs :2popkorn: *

Unfortunately the YTCA's website doesn't tell the whole truth about off colors.

Under the YTCA article titled "An Important Note About Color in Yorkshire Terriers," the site leads you to believe that all off colors may/can be affected by the health issues they've listed, which is untrue, only blue born dogs will suffer the posted health problems. Parti, chocolate and goldens are no more prone to health problems than standard yorkies are and their off coloring is a result of recessive genes and not genetically defective genes.

Under the YTCA article "Parti-Color Yorkshire Terriers" A brief history has been given saying that "All of these original breeds were grizzle, tan, blue, blue and tan, or black and tan. No white dog or dogs with white markings were involved in the process of developing the breed."

I've shown you in previous pictures that colors other than the accepted colors listed above, have been seen in the 3 main dogs who helped begin this breed.

The article also talks about Scotch terriers being introduced in the breed. Please read this excerpt from the diary of W.W. Mackie, and his quest in the 1870's to find prime specimens of the Scotch Terrier. He notes several times (in this short excerpt) that in his travel, he sees Scotch terriers with white feet and white faces.

Captain Mackie's Scottish Terrier Travel Diary

I have tried to show the other side of the story through historical drawings and writings, through information uncovered during the AKC parti investigation and through science and how recessive genes work.

My opinion is that off coloring shouldn't make the Yorkie any less a yorkie. Maybe Parti's will never enter the AKC show ring but they are as full blooded as their traditional colored ancestors are.

that was a great article, very informative. However why does the pictures that pinehaven posted clearly shows that some of the breeds that were mixed to create the yorkie were parti colored?? Is that picture wrong?

Just so you all know.. Im just trying to understand what the big deal is myself. AKC registers these pups so there had to be some proof that these dogs were pure yorkies right? I honestly dont care either way, mixes or purebred.. as most of you know all ready Im a "mutt" fan :D and they are beautiful dogs. :animal36

The information on the YTCA site is totally out dated. what they have written there has been proven wrong. Yorkie breeders from way back, show breeders, the leading authority on yorkies in the United States, have admitted to the AKC that they had parti colored yorkies showing up in their Champion line for many decades before anyone even knew of their existance.

The YTCA has the right to tell their members which colors they can breed, but they do not have the right to dictate to the rest of us which colors should live and which colors should die.

Sue (Pinehaven) has done extensive reserch on the history and the genetics of the yorkshire terrier. Any dog that was created from various other dogs is going to carry all of the genetics of all of the other dogs. And there is always the possibility of those recessve genes showing up.

What would you know about anything being outdated?? Its only "out-dated" if it doesnt agree with you and sues agenda. I believe that the YTCA has done more research than you will ever know about. YTCA also does not dictate to anyone about life and death of any puppy. Its up to the breeder if they want to cull the pups or not. Most reputable breeders that have a faulty puppy will place it in a pet home only, not to be bred.
And I am sure that you have written public undeniable proof that the old time breeders had partis. Records are easy enough to skrew up now and I bet even easier way back in the dark ages.
And by the way, ALOT or Yorkie bloodlines go back eventually to Pomp n Circumstance so that must mean, according to your theory, that most Yorkies carry the parti gene.

*blink* *blink* *re-read* *blink* *blink*

yeah Im slow :rolleyes: this coming from someone who can't even write in full sentences.
You asked a question and it got answered. Enjoy your standard yorkie Im sure its beautiful!! :)

Great post!! I loved your explanation of the Parti color yorkies.
Sue Hentschel
Harrison Twp. Mi.
Crown Royal Yorkshire Terriers

The only agenda that I have is to give a complete view of how off colors show up in our breed (and other breeds), scientific reasons, documented reasons, logical reasons. Unlike the information on the YTCA's site which, in my opinion, tells the reader what "they" want you to hear - it tells their agenda and the reasons why they don't want these colors in the breed. They lead one to believe that these colors are genetically defective and basically that there was never, ever, ever, any foundation dogs that ever carried any off color recessive genes. That type of thinking is old and outdated ... maybe that was the thinking back in the early 1900's when the Breed club was formed but in the year 2000 with the advances in science and genetic studies, we know that outdated way of thinking is just that - outdated.

We (Jeanie and I) have spoken to the breeders involved in getting the Nikkos parti line registered, we have purchased our dogs from these breeders and we have written correspondence from the breeders about the parti investigation. One letter gives a synopsis of what happened during the AKC investigation and what AKC specifically said to this breeder during the investigation.

We have a copy of the letter from AKC's special services department addressed to this breeder, that says after they conducted research into the breed history and receiving information of dogs contained in the parti dogs pedigrees, it was determined that this color can be produced in otherwise normal litters of Yorkshire terriers.

You say: "ALOT or Yorkie bloodlines go back eventually to Pomp n Circumstance so that must mean, according to your theory, that most Yorkies carry the parti gene".

No, only about half of his offspring would carry the gene, and since I'm told that most reputable breeders sell their pups on a spay neuter contract, many of those carriers' lines would have died out because they did not go on to reproduce.

Yes I guess that would.



Their information is outdated because the AKC has given written proof that the parti gene did go back to those lines. they got that information right from the horses mouth.

The YTCA site does not give any of this information. They also do not explain how Champion yorkies have produced parti colored off spring.

In one sentence they deny the existence of the parti yorkies, and in another sentence they disqualify the color. Why do they need to disqualify the color if it is not even part of the yorkie makeup?

I feel the people asking questions about the parti colored yorkies deserve to get all of the information that is out there on the subject. One should not stop with just one website.

When you look at all of the information, a preponderance of the evidence shows that it is more likely than not, that the parti gene was part of the original make up of the yorkshire terrier.

Back in the dark ages when Pomp was around, almost no breeder put a spay/neuter agreement on their dogs. That how alot of these dogs ended up in indecscriminate breeders hands. In fact alot of the dogs being shown today go back to Pomp, some even go back multiple times. I even had dogs with muliple crosses to Pomp. Funny how none of the exhibitor breeders dont have parti's, even back in Pomps day. And dont tell me its a "dirty little secret" and its always "swept under the rug". Thats a bunch of BS and hersay.

I dont suppose, since you are the parti guru, you can tell me about any breeders in Britain that are purposely raising partis. There should be tons of parti breeders there since that is where the Yorkie originated. Are they exhibitor breeders of the byb type breeder.( I am not referring to Biewers in Germany)

Sometimes I get the feeling that you parti breeders are just a little miffed that YTCA will not allow different colors to be included in the standard. I think that your agenda is to eventually challenge the YTCA to change the standard so that you can also show your dogs. I am sure that the white german sheppard owners feel the same way.

Actually the YTCA doesnt need to justify anything or its standard to the parti breeders. The standard is the standard period. I believe as does the YTCA that a mix was introduced by indescriminate breeders wayyyyyyyy before DNA and kennel inspections. A parti colored mix was registered as a regular Yorkie and no one was the wiser.This is one reason why they will not change the standard. Too many questions and not enough evidence. How in the world would YTCA or AKC even know which lines were the "real thing"(if there is one) or which lines were a mix? Its hard enough with the standard colored Yorkies being produced by bybers. Lots of falsifying papers there also. So now that AKC damaged the breed by registering the off colored Yorkies, the YTCA had no choice but to disqualify the off colors. YtCa has never believed these parti colors existed but now have to include the disqualification in the standard.

You raise an interesting point; there should be Parti's in Great Britain if it is indeed part of the make-up. I guess I've always accepted the word from some that it was a recessive gene, and haven't really questioned this part so much as it didn't really seem important. To me it was like saying floppy ears are recessive, so it's OK to breed for them. I believe good breeders should always breed to standard, no matter what their personal preferences are.

Always does!! Parti posts gets alot of views though!!:D

Hiya, from Great Britain, got to be honest, I have not heard of Parti till I read this thread, but them again, I had not heard the term 'tea pot yorkie' before. I have just had a quick look on the kennel club web site and I dont see the word 'parti' anywhere, hope this helps

Thank you it does, that makes me see this in a different light, and thank you Yorkiekist for bringing this to my attention. See, and nobody thought we learned anything in the Parti threads. :D

The "big deal" is that if you keep trying to change the parent breed standard, the breed will no longer look like the breed anymore. Reputable breeders breed to the breed standard and not to the latest popular fault being purposely breed most likely for the $$$$. The parti/off color breeders are doing just this all the while spouting their version of the history of the breed and basically telling you that the parent club(YTCA) is full of sh*t. Lets say that drop ears are now the big popular rage. You will then get irresponsible breeders breeding for that fault as well. Popularity=$$$. Simple economics.I guess you have to be a breed fancier to completely understand it. I am not saying you arent and I hope I explained this ok.