Just because a few find the color undesirable...doesn't mean everyone does. If my parti carrier is a good example of the breed and meets the standard in terms of color and conforamtion...he has just as much right to be shown regardless of the fact that he can produce a parti. If a judge decides to put him up over all the non carrier yorkies...then I know I am going in the right direction as far as conformation is concerned. It is a tool to be used to help a breeding program.

:thumbup:

This video was made by the PurePaws company, it's to sell a product. Will there be breeders who use it so they can sell more dogs? Probably, but a good breeders objective should never be to sell more dogs.

Thanks for clarifying. I understand what you mean...a dog either meets the breed standard, or it doesn't, enhanced or not.

I absolutely agree...it has EVERY right to be shown and to earn it's titles, regardless to if it's a carrier of a fault or not. If it meets the standard, then it meets the standard. Point is, what good does that title really do if every generation after that does does NOT meet that same criteria? How would having a CH sire make any difference if bred to a very poor example of the breed?

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:
Exactly!

Is your name Chubby Checker? Cause you sure know how to twist!! ;)

I took my dancing lessons from the master. ;);)

Good point but let me ask you this.
What good does it do to Ch a regular yorkie with a faulted color, when the color is passed on to the offspring ???

There is no guarantee that any dog Championed will also produce offspring that meet or exceed that of the dog who was Championed.

We know the Parti gene can be taken recessive by breeding to another standard colored dog or be expressed if breed to another carrier.

Since showing is to evaluate breeding stock and a tool used by those who are looking to breed better dogs.
Isn't that the whole point to showing to producing dogs with sound structure, movement.. etc ???

I will post one more time in this thread and then I'm done....Those that tear apart those that "enhance" a dog and claim those are the bad people and then those of you who take a parti carrier in the ring "knowing" it's wrong are no different than those that enhance. Maybe if you stop tearing down people trying to justify breeding outside the standard maybe there wouldn't be any arguments.
Why do some need to find reasons to pick people apart just to try and prove a point when I've seen many posts in this thread saying how enhancing is cheating, lying and getting away with something and then it's ok to bring in a parti carrier so how is that not cheating, lying and getting away with something? I see no difference....
Just saying....

Those that breed Parti's are never going to agree with those of us that stand behind the standard of the Yorkshire Terrier and visa versa but I see no difference in enhancing for show and knowingly taking in a Parti carrier in the ring because we all know what will show up in our breeding program whether or not it has that championship title. This should be for the betterment of the breed and passion for the breed and not profit.

Whether you enhance or show a parti carrier you know you are showing something that will crop up in your breeding program. Can I live with a lighter yorkie in my breeding program? Yes! Can I live with a Parti carrier or Parti in my breeding program? NO! Lighter yorkies are accepted in the show ring but Parti's are not so there ya have it! From my perspective at least.

I could give away many secrets when is comes to enhancing your dog for the show ring. There can be many traits enhanced on a yorkie along with color. Anyone who shows would know this to be true! I have been in a ring with a member of the ytca showing a yorkie with a bad bite and obtaining their championship. I have been in a ring and seen ytca members showing a yorkie with bad patellas, low fronts, low rears, roach backs and obtaining their championship. What makes this right? The fact they are members of the ytca? When all the members of the ytca practice what they preach the breed will be better off. The last thing you should be worried about is a parti color issue.

There will never be any club where everyone follow the rules, unethical people want to join the YTCA for the wrong reasons, and many are good at "talking the talk." The YTCA is often criticized for being too fussy or elitist in allowing people to join; yet you have pointed out the problem, if one bad apple joins the whole group is vilified. As they say, "a chain is no better than it's weakest link, but that doesn't mean that all the links are weak. There are poor breeders among AKC breeders; does that make the AKC bad, or can you generalize anything from that knowledge? A person doesn't have to belong to the YTCA to have ethics; the ethics should come first, and no group or club will make you ethical.

If people are joining the "Yorkshire Terrier Club of Ethical Hobby Breeders" in order to sell pups, then in my opinion, they wouldn't be ethical; I believe we already have enough pets.

I think I've said the exact same thing many times over....not only YTCA but non YTCA members does that so you are preaching once again to the choir with me. The color issue is just a small part of the problem as I think, once again, I've said many times over :)

Where did I ever say that it did? :)

First off I will state I am not a member of the "Yorkshire Terrier Club Of Ethical Breeders" nor do I desire to be.

There is good and bad in everything, including the ytca. So my issue is this plain and simple. There are breeders in the ytca with little to no ethics, but they have the right to vote on the breed standard and what is shown in the ring. Which is a slap in the face to the breeders who are not members of the ytca, but breed for better health and conformations. When every members of the ytca can produce the medical testing done on their breeding stock and prove they are all breeding healthy stock, I will show them respect.

This is exactly why I stated the following:
Looking past whether or not breeding partis is "ethical", and strictly for hypothetical purposes...On an argument based on what may or may not be considered a 'fault',

The point I was trying to make, didn't have anything to do with whether or not the dogs were parti carriers or whether or not it's a desireable trait. I tried to word it in a way that would make that clear, but should have known any attempt to do so would be futile. I could have just as easily substituted that for size, ear set, bite, etc to try to make the same point==> Yes, I believe that your dog would have just as much right to be shown and CH--a dog deemed as a quality representation of the breed, per the breed standard. But I don't see how it would really "validate" one's breeding program if the dogs produced by that CH were something different.

What would it matter if you have a 4 lb CH sire if bred to a 10 lb female that resulted in 8 lb pups? How would that CH be validating one's program? I mentioned that I saw it done with people breeding the standard colored Yorkies all the time....so it cleary, as far as I concerned, was not about the Partis. It was about misrepresenting one's program by using the "CH lines" marketing ploy.