Yorkshire Terrier Club of Ethical Hobby Breeders

[Disney]

Said before and say again, very interesting, informing thread!

[Micah my love]

Originally Posted by Disney

Said before and say again, very interesting, informing thread!

Disney i agree with you while the traditional yorkie is not new to me, i have only owned the Biewers for around 3 yrs so i am always looking for more info
on both and have learned so much from YT.

[Disney]

Originally Posted by Micah my love

Disney i agree with you while the traditional yorkie is not new to me, i have only owned the Biewers for around 3 yrs so i am always looking for more info
on both and have learned so much from YT.

Me too! Honest, I thought Silky and Yorkie same for long time!

[Micah my love]

I have never owned a silky but the ones i have seen look like the yorkie except for size

[Disney]

They also has longer snout and different shape body

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by Micah my love

I have never owned a silky but the ones i have seen look like the yorkie except for size

The silky has longer legs, and shorter coat. I don't think they are nearly as cute as the yorkie. About the only thing that is the same is the coloring.

[Disney]

Silky has amazing disposition but. I agrees with JeanieK (shocking! ) They not as cute as yorkie but they very fun doggie!

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by AMD

If there's no difference, it's not impossible. partis COULD be recognized as a new breed whether or not they are purebred Yorkie from the beginning. Breed type has changed.
Look at Donna's example.
Difficult? Absolutely!
But well worth the effort to have a chance at obtaining full recognition and open the door to improve the breed....if that really IS what partis want.

With the testimony of members, I don't ever see the YTCA giving in to partis in this lifetime, whether or not they're going away...that's not the issue anyway. But if they truly believe the parti is not fit for the Yorkie standard, the AKC may listen and be willing to accept a new standard. Seems like the YTCA has made clear it is a dead-end for partis, but that may not be the only way for partis to get their cute lil’ butts fully recognized and showin’ Seems like the Biewers are making progress...

If you work toward a parti standard, you won’t have to change the Yorkie standard and make many passionate breeders feel you’ve destroyed their lovely breed, but still have recognition and qualification to show. Like I said before, there will be many more reputable breeders jumping on the band wagon to better the breed if partis quit driving against the standard. Seems like a more attainablegoal to me...in the favor of partis.

just saying...

NO as long as they are pure bred yorkies they cannot be a separate breed. You cannot trake any breed fand breed for a different color and then make it a breed of it'sown.

In order to start a new breed you have to use 3 different breeds and it takes years and years to get it to the point where you are just breeding your nesw breed togetherand the results are opredictable.

It is impossible to get the parti color yorkie accepted as a breed other than a yorkie.

if you do not believe me, contact the AKC and ask them.

Just because the YTCA has DQ'd them, does not mean it is a dead end. The YTCA is not static, it is constantly changing members, so in the future a vote might bring entirely different results. mabe not in my lifetime, but it can happen.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by disney

silky has amazing disposition but. i agrees with jeaniek (shocking! ) they not as cute as yorkie but they very fun doggie!

lol.

[Disney]

Originally Posted by JeanieK

lol.

Miracle can happen!

[Rhetts_mama]

So how did breeds like Cocker Spaniels and Poodles get their different color classifications and dachshunds get 3 recognized coat textures? I honestly don't see how partis or biewers are excluded when the AKC recognizes color variations in other breeds.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by Disney

Miracle can happen!

Yes they can happen.

not wanting to start an argument, but it's not that I disagree with all that you say. I do believe that people should not voice strong opinions on ethics until they thoroughly understand both sides of the controversy.

It's not always so black and white, so unless one is personally involved they do not understand all they grey areas, so they cannot form an opinion based on experience, they are just making judgements based on hearsay.

You have to know a persons motive before you can judge them.

For example, it has been said, right here in this thread, that breeders will sometimes breed dogs, that do not meet the standard, in order to correct a fault in their line.

Breeding a dog with a fault is said to be unethical, unless it is being done for a good reason.

Dogs that carry the parti gene are said to have a fault. But if they are being exhibited in order to find out if they are worthy of being bred, so the breeder can improve their line, that should not be considered unethical.

Wwe are not breeding just to breed, we are trying to develop the parti into a great dog.

Does that make sense?

Also being fairly new on YT, you do not know what parti breeders have been told in the past. We were told, show your dogs, to find out if the are worthy of being bred, and so on. Now that they are showing they are being told they are unethical.

So you see there is a lot here that a new person does not understand, and therefore, in my opinion, are not qualified to make judgements.

That is just my opinion and do not want to start an argument.

[AMD]

Originally Posted by JeanieK

NO as long as they are pure bred yorkies they cannot be a separate breed. You cannot trake any breed fand breed for a different color and then make it a breed of it'sown.

In order to start a new breed you have to use 3 different breeds and it takes years and years to get it to the point where you are just breeding your nesw breed togetherand the results are opredictable.

It is impossible to get the parti color yorkie accepted as a breed other than a yorkie.

if you do not believe me, contact the AKC and ask them.

Just because the YTCA has DQ'd them, does not mean it is a dead end. The YTCA is not static, it is constantly changing members, so in the future a vote might bring entirely different results. mabe not in my lifetime, but it can happen.

Not impossible- as there are other examples. Once one purebred breed, now two.
Supposedly the AKC sees Biewers as Yorkies, but they seem to be working with them toward recongition.
And if you need three breeds, go back to the breeders who knew their mix registered as AKC purebred parti Yorkies for your documentation. You could probably easily find three breeds in partis if you wanted. As for DNA, sounds like you can dilute the gene pool enough to get purbred results back.

But if partis are not willing to put the time and effort in...that's every bit their choice. I do wish they would get a standard so they would be bred for the betterment and qualified to show.
Maybe that's not your goals IDK.

Even if the YTCA would ever remove the DQ, you still couldn't show a parti bc the colors are clearly described as blue and tan while the coat is of great importance. Some might be too light or too dark but they're still blue, while white isn't even close. And I wonder if it's true the AKC won't accept any more varieties. You'd need a complete standard revision.

[AMD]

Originally Posted by JeanieK

Yes they can happen.

not wanting to start an argument, but it's not that I disagree with all that you say. I do believe that people should not voice strong opinions on ethics until they thoroughly understand both sides of the controversy.

It's not always so black and white, so unless one is personally involved they do not understand all they grey areas, so they cannot form an opinion based on experience, they are just making judgements based on hearsay.

You have to know a persons motive before you can judge them.

For example, it has been said, right here in this thread, that breeders will sometimes breed dogs, that do not meet the standard, in order to correct a fault in their line.

Breeding a dog with a fault is said to be unethical, unless it is being done for a good reason.

Dogs that carry the parti gene are said to have a fault. But if they are being exhibited in order to find out if they are worthy of being bred, so the breeder can improve their line, that should not be considered unethical.

Wwe are not breeding just to breed, we are trying to develop the parti into a great dog.

Does that make sense?

Also being fairly new on YT, you do not know what parti breeders have been told in the past. We were told, show your dogs, to find out if the are worthy of being bred, and so on. Now that they are showing they are being told they are unethical.

So you see there is a lot here that a new person does not understand, and therefore, in my opinion, are not qualified to make judgements.

That is just my opinion and do not want to start an argument.

Jeannie, this is where I see the difference.

Breeding a too-light or too-dark colored dog with another dog that you're confident will produce the right color is different than breeding a parti carrier because it will not correct a fault but produce the fault.

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by Rhetts_mama

So how did breeds like Cocker Spaniels and Poodles get their different color classifications and dachshunds get 3 recognized coat textures? I honestly don't see how partis or biewers are excluded when the AKC recognizes color variations in other breeds.

There are several variations/breeds in the Spaniels, each with their own color standard. The Poodles do have different colors, however, they are not parti colored and they are bred pheno type to pheno type.......

Each breed has developed their standard in accordance with how the breed was developed. Each mother club makes the decision of what they will accept and what they won't, not the AKC. The AKC will then decide whether or not they will accept the breed as a recognized breed.