There are no easy answers. But you can bet the ytca is busy coming up with a more strict standard concerning color as we debate, which means they will have to do more enhancing coats to show their own dogs.

No, that post was intended to address another issue. Here's what I said on post 220.

Okay this seems to be a very hot and emotional topic. So I would like to clarify a few points and hope for some education here.

The Yorkshire Terrier has been a breed with a standard for approximately 150 years or more? Is that correct?

At this point in time, there are "purebred" Yorkies with a recessive "parti gene" that if two recessives breed together will produce "faithfully" a certain colour pattern.

These partis have no more health risks associated with them then the traditional Yorkshire Terrier? If so please quote Health Stats and links to a reputable agency such as OFA.

Beyond the answers to these questions; I would like to point out that if you want to support the Yorkshire Terrier breed you should breed to the standard, and then do all the work necessary to get another color approved. After all there are many breeds with different colors off the top of my head, Poodles, Bouviers, Spaniels etc. Is it too early to introduce a different color into the standard and if so, why so?
I'm sorry but I can't agree with any Parti breeder knowingly going into the show ring, to finish a dog, and then go on to again disillusion reputable standard color Yorkie breeders into putting with them a breeding dog. These breeders are trying to protect the Yorkie standard as written and approved.

Should there be health checks mandatory in the breeder code of ethics by YTCA? I'm sure that is a hotly debated topic. I believe ALL breeds should have mandatory breed specific health checks as part of the requirement to be an ethical breeder/member.

I have posted before in different threads on here the ramifications of PureBred Dogs exposed, which aired on BBC about 2years ago, which was a damning although one sided view of purebred dogs, generated a whole rework of the standards at the British Kennel Club. The Kennel club. This rework included mandatory health testing on a breed specific basis. The USA and Canada will not in the long term be immune to this change.

And yes we as breeders of purebred dogs have a huge task ahead of us. Our first and paramount responsibility is to breed healthy dogs, to help fund research to find genetic markers and tests for our breed. We then have the responsibility to breed to type, to temperament, to colour and all the other factors we want to preserve in this wondrous breed.

Again I stated that the half dozen or so YTCA members I know are not like that. They only breed for themselves and they are very very selective who their dogs go to. I think the larger the breeding kennel the more apt you are to find fault in some of the dogs. A show breeder can be producing very nice dogs then suddenly they may develop problems in their lines and they have to start over or go in another direction. When breeders outcross you don't know what you will get. There are no perfect lines and there are no perfect breeders. Again it comes down to ethics and you can't let a few rotten apples spoil the whole barrel.

Again it is not the club that is hypocritical of breeders that do not show, it is some of it's members. The first rule in the YTCA rule of conduct states:

BRAVO Donna!...Very well stated!...I couldn't agree with you more!

I wonder how the color patterns of poodles, cockers, poms, danes, on and on.. started? Where they only one dominent color, then breeders developed other colors...or did they always have them in a variety of colors..

Hey Pat you want to see something that has surprized us.:D

I think so...
Is it fit for mixed company...LOL?

I hope I didn't send the wrong pictures!:eek::D

These pups are 5 weeks old, Melissa has been really working hard with them. I know you can't tell much at this age, and we weren't expecting it from this litter, but let me know what you think, are we on the right course of action. She has been putting them on the grooming table for a couple of weeks now.:)

Attachment 322435 girl
Attachment 322436 girl
Attachment 322437 boy

I think we will be ok, but who knows:p

Right there lies the problem. We cannot get the coloir approved withlout breeding them, we cannot breed quality dogs without quality stock.

The original registered parti colored dog, Nikko's Mickey Spillane, was sired by a champion. I imagine he was a very well built dog, with silk coat and all. But over the years they have been bred to some poor quality dogs.

We would like to try to get them back to the standard, in every way except the color. in order to do that we need some quality dogs to breed to. Silly me I was going about it the hard way, by looking for someone to sell me a nice dog. apparently others are trying to champion their carriers in order to get quality dogs.

We are told over and over to show your dogs, so you know you are breeding quality dogs. Oh but don't show them in our show ring.

So that leaves us in a bit of a pickle. I guess the YTCA will have to figure out a way to identify and DQ the carriers.

Sorry :lol tears I know this is a serious thread but these two posts just cracked me up LOL.....ok back to reading...

I will PM you tomorrow...just saw the pic's..I think they have lots of promise..exciting to watch their progress.

But that is the sole purpose of producing carrier's nice enough to show and finish. To set a foundation capable of producing a parti with the quality and conformation of today's show yorkie. When and if we are given a venue to show our parti's...there will be some parti's with the quality to step into the ring...and go head to head with the traditional's in the group ring.

One thing I'm curious about is have the parti breeders given any thought to what the standard would be should a parti color be accepted, I mean how would it be written? Would the white be all through the coat, or would the head have white, how about the saddle and legs?

Standard : Parti Standard - THE PARTI YORKSHIRE TERRIER CLUB

There is not set color pattern, just as there is no set color pattern at this time. I'm guessing if the parti was accepted those who did the accepting would set the pattern.

At this time we are more concerned with getting a silk coat and good structure.

It says:


This just doesn't seem to be much of a description, does this mean that they need no blue at all? How would a judge even attempt to judge a parti with this description? It seems to me, if you're serious about showing, you would need more of a written standard than this. For example, here's the written standard;



Colors
.
Puppies are born black and tan and are normally darker in body color, showing an intermingling of black hair in the tan until they are matured. Color of hair on body and richness of tan on head and legs are of prime importance in adult dogs, to which the following color requirements apply: BLUE: Is a dark steel blue, not a silver blue and not mingled with fawn, bronzy or black hairs. TAN: All tan hair is darker at the roots than in the middle, shading to still lighter tan at the tips. There should be no sooty or black hair intermingled with any of the tan.
.

.
Color on Body
.
The blue extends over the body from back of neck to root of tail. Hair on tail is a darker blue, especially at end of tail.
.

.
Head fall
.
A rich golden tan, deeper in color at sides of head, at ear roots and on the muzzle, with ears a deep rich tan. Tan color should not extend down on back of neck.
.

.
Chest and Legs
.
A bright, rich tan, not extending above the elbow on the forelegs nor above the stifle on the hind legs.

Compared that with the parti standard, which is: Parti-Color --Two or more solid colors, One of which must be white. This just doesn't seem descriptive enough. If you're waiting for the YTCA to write a standard for the parti, I think you'll have a long wait.

Well thanks for that response which in no way answered any of the questions I asked. I find it interesting, that there is no informative responses to my post (yet).

So not to belabor the points I made above but only to re-iterate, why is the YTCA so against moving to a subsect of the breed in terms of colour?

Are there any concerning genetic reasons for this? \WHERE is the data?

As I see it...when a breeder joins the YTCA they make a pledge to adhere to a code of conduct and ethic's. They pledge to protect the breed..how is this done?
By adhering to the standard as best they can..this is not done by breeding none standard colors..Parti's. There is big difference in breeding a Yorkie that is too light or too dark and breeding a parti into the gene pool. The Wildweir sisters wrote about color dilution and why a diluted color Yorkie is useful in a breeding program.
So if these are the rules and a member agrees to abide by them, would you respect a member who decides after joining the YTCA to not adhere to them?

I have always agreed the majority rules...and the majority voted, the vote was, no at this time.

The Parti color Yorkie has the same health risks as the traditional color because it is a yorkie. The word Parti means 2 or colors. Color does not make it a separate breed.
Nancy you need to go back to the parti site and reread the standard.
We would love to sit down and talk with the YTCA about the parti, but as of right now they will not even speak, email or acknowledge us.
Taking the wrongful parti information off the YTCA website would be a nice start.
The YTCA openly bashes the parti-color but yet we are the bad ones for speaking up about it.
It is sad that the YTCA cant find in their hearts to openly discuss adding a variation for the parti color, A truly amazingly, beautiful Yorkshire Terrier.

Do they really? (No seriously, I'm asking because I honestly don't know.) I have heard from many many people about a higher rate of genetic issues showing up with the Beiwers, whether as a result of poor breeding or because they were selectively line bred so heavily during their origination, who knows. So I would assume the same could be possible with the Partis? Maybe that could be raising a red flag? IF that is the case and IF that is a viable possibility, then I could see where the YTCA would be concerned with opening the door for a whole new variation of dogs bringing these issues in. With Partis being as "new" as they are..."new" as in not very common, I realize they've been popping up for a long time...I find it hard to believe that there has been a large enough coordinated effort amongst reputable Parti breeders where the issues have been thorougly examined and compared in a manner that would allow for such a possibility to be addressed.

Import--
 

My best dogs are imports. The shut-out and control issues I felt early on, mostly by YTCA, sent me overseas to get good dogs. There are not many in the US I would even consider bringing into my breeding now. Foreign breeders are more professional and businesslike, and the price is usually high enough to keep the mills and BYB away. My dogs and puppies are consistently in excellent health and beautiful. Getting the exact blue and gold described in the YTCA standard is hellish and one has to be careful not to compromise health to get it. People should go to shows and see with their own eyes the pretty little correct blue and gold specimens some politically connected YTCA members are stringing up and dragging, limping, around the ring, and winning titles with this unsound junk.
I've enjoyed this thread very much, learned a few things, and remain open minded and tolerant of differences.

And the fault lies squarely in the lap of the judges...refuse to put up a dog as you descibe and see how fast breeders get their act together...try pulling that on an Edd Bivens etc...

The partis are just like traditional yorkies, one must be careful and selective about breeding, screening and testing for livershunt, lp etc etc. The biewers are having issues because some believe only biewer to biewer breeding and IMO they dont have enough dogs to close off the breeding like that.
The Partis continue to get better and better because they can be bred with any AKC registered yorkshire Terrier. So we can be very selective about breeding.

This has been a very nice thread.. although it has strayed from the original post a bit. I don't believe the minds of those of us who already firmly believe one way or the other on this issue will ever change.. however, there has been some good information presented to help those sitting on the fence to at least understand both sides of the issue.

I believe if you want excellent yorkies to bring into your Parti lines, there are wonderful breeders who will sell them to you.. I have been approached on many occassions for my Biewers from VERY reputable yorkie breeders who are
extremely interested in the color variations of the Yorkie. I think we only hear from a very small community on this forum, but there is a vast group of YTCA members who are either thinking seriously about "Joining the Parti" or have already "crashed it" ...

I understand wanting to cover your eyes and hope these "spots" go away; but I don't think that's going to be the case. We are going to show where we can.. we are going to breed the BEST dogs we can using the Yorkie standard in every way but color.

We are yorkie breeders and we put every bit as much of our heart and soul into our programs as any other good, ethical yorkie breeder does. We set goals, we make sacrifices, we work hard. Many of us have earned respect from our peers .. it may just take a bit longer to earn respect from the rest of you... but we'll get there too.. it's one of the goals.

-Diana :animal-pa

I think some people think there difference between Biewer and parti, and has more respect for Biewer as it's own 'breed' maybe? Whereas parti is colour fault, yorkie breeder may see Biewer as different dog.

Well, then they would be mistaken.. a Biewer is not it's own breed.. a color variation does not make a breed. A Biewer is a LINE of Parti colored yorkies.. nothing more. Both the Biewers and the AKC Parti's can be traced back to the same original kennel to the same traditionally colored Yorkshire Terriers. It is a color variation that the YTCA has choosen to declare as a fault, which of course, is there right.

-Diana :animal-pa

It get confusing, I read so many different story of how the Biewer and the parti came to be..But I guess what it come down to is the standard, and the standard say they not allowed so far, so I guess just too bad. I say follow the standard, and if the fault ever accepted in, then it everyone choice whether breed traditional or parti or biewer or both, yes?