No one said his dogs were second class, but he felt that is what he was being told since they are not show dogs.

Yes you are correct my objection is to the color DQ.

The fact that you are still here tells me that you do want to learn. People do tend to get defensive and begin to feel like everyone is ganging up on them.

I know it is not meant to come across that way. Everyone means well, every one that has posted on here is very knowledgable and their advice is definitely worth listening too, even if you don't agree with everything right now. The more you learn, the more it will all begin to fall into place.

But everyone needs to stop and think about how they would feel if they were in a room full of people and asked a question, and suddenly eveyone started telling them how little they knew and how many mistakes they have already made.

Maybe not everyone has been there. When I first came to YT and asked about breeding, I got the sme response, and I would have quit if it had not been for a few kind members that PM'd me and told me to hang in there.

Danny I believe you want to learn, Just hang in there.

BTW sorry about the loss of you wife. your lovely dog must be a bitter sweet reminder of her.

I'd love to see pictures of your momma and her babies.

This is an excellent comparison:

Backyard Breeder vs. Reputable Breeder

It looks like I opened a fine kettle of worms yesterday when I posted that only a dog that possessed the qualities to make it outstanding in the show ring should be bred. That is not exactly what I meant, I did not want Danny to feel that I thought his dogs were inferior in any way to mine. My problem is with the reasons that people breed. I think that your dogs must be your passion. I love to show my dogs, however, I also do agility and obedience with my dogs. If I can breed for the entire package, beauty, brains and athleticism and health, that is my goal. Would I breed an excellent agility dog that did not have the qualities needed for the show ring, maybe, but only if my goal was to produce the next great agility dog for myself, not to produce pets for others. Also the whole package tends to go together. Dogs with poor structure don't tend to do well with athletic pursuits. If your passion is obedience and you have a yorkie with exceptional brains, by all means go ahead and breed. Once again if that dog has poor structure or health problems, chances are that it won't excell in obedience either. Producing puppies just because your dog is cute, or Auntie Joan would like one just like it, or so your children can have the experience, or because your female dog needs to be fulfilled, or your male dog needs to experience a sex life, or because you want to recuperate the money you spent on your dog or make a quick buckand then send a bunch of puppies out into the world where others are going to do the same thing
well that is just wrong. Forgive the last sentence, it rambled on forever.

Audrey

If you did open up a can of worms, it was a can that needs to be opened. ;)

You bring up an excellent point. The breed standard shouldn't be mistaken for an arbitrary list of physical attributes that are only important for looks or beauty.

The way a dog is put together is very important to it's overall health. A straight topline and legs that don't turn in or out, etc. are important to the overall soundness of the dog. Bad knees in the back put stress on all the other joints and can cause skeletal changes and arthritis later on. A dog whose back is too long can have disc problems as he gets older.

The standard for any purebred dog is the blueprint that should be faithfully followed in order to produce a healthy dog who looks and acts like the breed is supposed to. The hallmark of a reputable breeder is someone who loves the breed enough to carefully breed to its standard.

This is exactly why I take the time to respond. I give my point of view from the non breeder/shower/exhibitor side. In recent memory, we YTers have dissuaded two newer members from breeding and studding their dogs. :thumbup: We gave the same info, in the same manner, but b/c of their personality/attitude, they listened and didn't call us bashers b/c we didn't give them the answer they initially thought they wanted to hear.

And myself, I was one of those who thought I would breed my dog b/c she is so cool and everyone loves her. Now, I am more educated about the subject. Sometimes people do listen and learn and change their minds. That in itself is worth getting the info out there. i don't care if people think I'm bashing.

I see from your link that it is from the UT website but I can't reconcile it with the actual data of Dr. Tobias that I posted. That one sentence (which is all there is) appears to be in stark conflict with the research of Dr. Tobias The research clearly shows 3.2% of Havanese in the program affected while it is 2.9% for the Yorkshire. Statistically, it may not be a significant difference but it is a far cry from the Yorkshire Terrier having a 36 times greater risk. Any breed having a higher % of LS than the Yorkshire Terrier belies that one sentence from the UT site.

It seems to me that someone was being creative with the data to arrive at the 36 times figure. I would rather just see the data myself and draw my own conclusion as that stand alone sentence on the UT website is at odds with the data from the research and seems misleading and alarmist to me.

Here's the link I used for any that want to see the data.

http://www.vet.utk.edu/clinical/sacs...breed_assn.pdf

Was reading on the web on how Dr Tobias came up with her figures......since the majority of her research was conducted on yorkies.....she used several data basis, one breing Breeder's Standard (coefficients). I'll see if I can find the link again.

Audrey,

You didn't open a can of worms at all, information needs to be shared, some will absorb, others will balk.

Years ago when I started I listened to the same blah, blah, blah, blah......yeah!, right. Not until I got completely involved in this breed........and wanting to know everything about it, did I change my mind.....the mind changing came slowly, but the light went on....I'm known not to do anything by half measures....or how my husband describes me......compulsive, obsessive, anal retentive.

I don't think everyone will go to the extent some of us do, but we can try and feed them all the information we can and hope they make some educated decisions.

I'm not sure that sentence on the UT website came from Dr. Tobias..it could have easily been someone else. The only way I could imagine to come up with that figure of 36X would be to average the incidence among all breeds and you might arrive at some high figure for the Yorkshire, since some breeds have a very low incidence. I don't even then see how it could that much higher than all breeds combined, but rather the average for all breeds period. Still, the % for the Havanese sticks out like a sore thumb and makes the 36X figure misleading because, if by some logic the Yorkshire is 36X what must the Havanese be?

And I started off as a backyard breeder, I bought the best dogs I could,but I couldn't convince anyone to sell me the dogs I really wanted. I was educated regarding the breeding and whelping process, I didn't hesitate to get vet care for my dogs, but I wasn't showing and didn't care about the breed standard. The light came on for me when I tried to buy a girl with breeding rights and the breeder asked me "Can you think of any reason to breed a dog that is not a Champion?" and I couldn't think or a darn thing that wasn't a truly selfish reason. I don't really 100% agree that every breeding dog has to be a champion, I won't bypass a female with structure just because I don't love her coat,for example, but every breeding dog should IMO be an excellent example of the breed.

Audrey

I think this might be what you were referring to, Mary. After reading it, I still don't get the conclusion since Dr. Tobias cites the odds ratio from her research in using the 35.9X greater chance for Yorkies having LS. In her research, the Havanese has an odds ratio of 64.9 while the Yorkie has an odds ratio of 58.7. It's still a head-scratcher for me to see how she came up with the figure unless she excluded the Havanese. Anyway, here it is....

"A hereditary basis for congenital portosystemic shunts (PSS) in Yorkshire terriers was explored through record and pedigree analysis and a breeding trial. The odds ratio for PSS in Yorkshire terriers was 35.9 times greater than for all other breeds combined. Wright’s coefficient of inbreeding was approximately twice as high for Yorkshire terriers with PSS as compared to normal members of the breed (P=0.09). No common ancestors were found that were significant to the PSS group. Two affected Yorkshire terriers were bred and produced two normal puppies. Congenital PSS appears to be hereditary in Yorkshire terriers; however, the mechanism of inheritance has yet to be elucidated."

...and here's the link

Determination of Inheritance of Single Congenital Portosystemic Shunts in Yorkshire Terriers -- Tobias 39 (4): 385 -- Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association

To me, the statement conflicts with the research still but I accept it for what it is.

Ladymom, I wasn't attacking you in my earlier post but I think you can see my point just as I can see yours. LS is the big bug-a-boo for the breed, to be sure. I'm not sure I would have ever gotten my first Yorkshire if I had seen that statement early on. The actual data is concerning enough but that one statement is downright alarming taken by itself.

:thumbup::thumbup:

thank you, JeanieK! yes, she is a very bitter sweet reminder of my wife.

i posted pics of the momma and the babies in the baby nursery forum and theres pics of the mommy and daddy in the my yorkie pictures forum.

Thanks I'll check them out.