[QUOTE=yorkielady06;3211159]That is correct he is standard colored according to the written standard. But if I am showing him in the ring to evaluate breeding stock then I am doing what I should be doing. That was just my point on that. It is what I do afterwards that will determine ethics. If I use him on my breeding stock to improve my lines then I have done as the AKC lists. If I use him with other quality females that have weaknesses where he has strengths and vice versa then that is good, right? So if I am honest and ethical up to this point I would then, if ever approached by a show/hobby breeder to use him at stud, would disclose his parentage.

Everyone is assuming that just because I have him in the ring I intend to be unethical and stud him if he champions to the "pure blue and tan" line;). Which may have never been my intention in the first place.
But lets look even further. How many show lines out there are "pure BLUE AND TAN" ? How many have the Nikkos lines? or other proven parti producers in their lines? How about black and tans or black and golds? What about the blues? the chocolates? the golds?

The Yorkies have so many serious life threatening conditions and debilitating conditions that are linked to genetics, I for one wish people were as passionate about stopping those as they are about keeping the colors out of their lines or in them for that matter.

How many of the breeders or exhibitors on here have done testing on all their stock? If so, what tests? When you go into a ring with a dog or breed one , have they passed OFA or Penn hip, CERF, bile acids, LFTs, ect? On every dog? Should that not be mandatory? If we preach about health being of utmost importance then put your money in that dog and prove it before showing as part of the evaluation of breeding stock. But alas that is my opinion.[/QUOTE]

I assume you mean their breeding stock. but I wholeheartedly agree, although OFA your dog needs to be 2yrs old, and yes as an exhibitor if you show earlier than 2yrs old, you do take the risk that they might not pass OFA, and then you have sunk dollars into a dog/bitch that you won't breed. CERFS should be done annually, so your dog can pass clear two or even three years in a row, and whoops year 5 after having been bred x times doesn't pass.
There are good reasons to show pups, some of which is to provide showring experience, training if you will for that venue, get some evaluations from fellow breeders etc on your pup.

Question I'm not sure what a LFT is?

And I do know heartache of having invested lots of time and money, only to have one of what I hoped would be a great bitch not mature to our expectations. She still will be OFA'd and all health checks done, because this information then forms part of the database on our breed. And just so that no-one is confused my breed is the BRT.

I do own and show a Yorkie, but as far as breeding goes, my breeder will determine (along with me) who and when he will be bred. And he will have all the health checks done too. He is my agility dog, and why I bought from my breeder and this one particular "working" dog line.

Penn hip can be done at 4-6 months and is very accurate for hips. They are costly (350.00 and can only be done by accredited vet hosp) but will give you true predictions of the future hip soundness of a dog. Then you would do the knees and elbows with OFA.

LFT is Liver function Tests...done before BAT (bile acid tests) to get a whole picture.

As far as CERFs go I get that one. Pass for 3 years then not on the 4th. Then the responsible thing to do is neuter and cull out any of the breeders or show prospects you have held back, and start making calls.

Some will say the BATs and LFTs mean nothing. Not true if your champion male who just finished is tested and does not pass. If you spent the 100 bucks before showing him, you would have saved a whole lot of entrance fees, handling fees, and so on. I could argue that OFA means nothing too. How about Leggs-perthes pups being born from an OFA'd excellent male and female? Happens but the minimums should be set.

But at the least we should make sure that show prospects are passing these test and have proof prior to stepping one paw in the show ring. They are to be the best representatives of our wonderful breed, so let them prove it. And breeders alike same thing, you should be doing at least the testing to prove your stock is healthy. I ask the YTCA(my mother club) as an owner yorkies to please make this MANDATORY of all members.

I thought you did bats at what is the new protocol 4months? So for BATS that certainly can be done.

You know that other countries do things differently; for example, in some European Countries what is in essence a provisional CH is awarded until all breed specific health tests are done, and for some breeds until they are old enough to show their "true" coat and our muscular development etc.

With this you get to show your dog, if you so choose to do so, and then earn the "final" CH title.

As I said before I am a huge supporter of health checks being done on a breed specific basis, and one day we may see the standards change across the board to provide for this.

Unethical is a pretty strong word. I can understand why people would get upset over it. But I can also understand why it is being done. It really depends on the motive. However if there is nothing in the standard then they really are doing nothing wrong.

How ever "just because you can", does not mean you should.

For example there is nothing in the YT rules against joining and pretending to be someone whom you are not. But just because one can doesn't mean one should.

Exactly. Motive is the real indicator of ethics.

You know I think you people should give this a rest; I can't believe how much this girl is harassed. If you don't want to believe that she's a Russian living in Australia, then don't, but I'm tired of reading of yours and others suspicions. Is she selling something, here at Yorkietalk? Does she want to buy a dog from you? This is harassment!

I'm not saying they should. But I can understand why. If it is being done to help to better their own line I can understand, if it is being done to sell more puppies then it is being done for the wrong reason.

If someone is enhancing their dog in order to win, then that is not right

Deb he is a very gorgeous one :) i love him

But the point still remains...you can't show a Parti in the show ring and it can't obtain a CH title. There is still no way to have a judge evaluate a Parti to see if it's of breeding quality without going in a show ring so what is the objective to have just the carrier to have the approval without having the Parti color being approved. Just because the parti carrier was proved in the ring doesn't mean the parti color being bred and produced is a proved seciman of the breed isn't that correct? Just because a standard yorkie receives a CH title still doesn't mean it's worthy either as we all know some obtain a CH title that shouldn't....so if it's for bettering a line having the CH title isn't going to help if you can't show the Parti color your producing or breeding unless it's to supply the pet market or for money. I'm not saying you do it but I'm just saying you can't have a judge evaluate the Parti because they aren't allowed. Seems to me it's still deceiving or trying to justify the breeding of Parti's. I'm not I'm talking about anyone in particular.

Thank you, he is out of Multi Ch. Moonlights Two Times Bad

Which Moonlight Kennel may I ask?

Anyone remember how YT got popular? We were all on Moonlights forum and found out it was a puppymiller...forum folded in one day..we all came here.

I didn't have time to complete my post earlier Disney. Thank you Bama, you're right again.

I think there are two Moonlights am I not correct....I'm just shaking my head

Just for the record, I did NOT pay her to say that. ^^^^^ But I always like hearing that phrase, no matter what it's in response to. :D Now if someone could teach those words to my husband...:rolleyes:

Whatever, I am sure you can google it.

[QUOTE=JeanieK;3211304]Unethical is a pretty strong word. I can understand why people would get upset over it. But I can also understand why it is being done. It really depends on the motive. However if there is nothing in the standard then they really are doing nothing wrong.

How ever "just because you can", does not mean you should.

For example there is nothing in the YT rules against joining and pretending to be someone whom you are not. But just because one can doesn't mean one should.[/QUOTE]

And it is ethically wrong to accuse someone of something you have no proof of.


You've mentioned your suspicions many times and many threads, privately and publically. Give it a rest, it's obvious what your motives. are.

Yep you are correct!

tread softly---
 

Moonlight's Two Times Bad is Connie Conn's. She's YTCA and has an impeccable reputation!

This Moonlight is the one I am talking about.
Moonlight Yorkies

they can create another category for the parti color.. But they won't if no one pushes for it.

We are told to show and get professiolnal opinions on our dogs, but when someone does it they are told they are unethical, for doing it.

I know who Connie Conn is and yes she's a YTCA member but I don't know her personally, I just wonder if she knows her lines are going to be bred into the Parti lines? I don't know her so I can't commenet on reputation.

Yes we say get professional opinions but when it's a DQ and not what the standard calls for it's not doing it the right way. Am I not correct?

Donna,

I spoke to Parkside a couple of years back and the subject of Lake Buena Vista. Her words were she was highly disappointed and upset in how Lake Buena Vista used her lines. One of the reasons breeders are clamping down with their pedigrees.

I'm sorry but all the pushing in the world is not going to get the members of the YTCA to accept this as a color variation...At least not in my lifetime...

This is so sad Mary...Things like this is what makes it so difficult to obtain nice dogs...

Yes, it does make it very hard to obtain nice dogs. There is this one line I really want but I'm in the process of gaining her trust because of things like this and being betrayed because she trusted and I don't blame her! I will be patient and continue to gain her trust in me and I'll never do her lines injustice! I will protect it like my own child!!! I'm just that type of person.

Donna

WOW !!!! I am impressed i think she has some of the greatest all so beautiful

Connie Conn is not the Moonlight kennel forum we were all on...

Why is it inconceivable that it is being done to produce better dogs in hopes that in the future they will be allowed in the ring.

We cannot present a very good argument for competing if we don;t have dogs worth of competing.

We hear constantantly that even without considering the color, that they are poor examples of a yorkie. At one time they were produced by champions, then they went comercial and lost a lot. We are trying to bring them back to looking like yorkies of a different color.

Let me ask you this. Are you personally against the YTCA creating a category for the parti color?

How are we to get another color classification started if we don't first breed the dogs?

Everytime some someone has started a new breed or coloer, no doubt, they have met with opposition. They were not deterred.

In your eyes we are doing wrong, in our eyes we are pioneers. Nothing would change if people didn't go out on a limb and push for it.

Motive is what separates the unethical breeders from the pioneers. our main objective is to produce quality dogs, the only thing we are trying to do is to get another color classification.

the standard for the traditional would not change