Parti History discussion
 

First of all, i want to wish you all Merry Christmas and a Happy new year. :)


This topic refers to http://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/4516157-post14.html


I will explain why and on what I disagree with the "History of Parti" written by Sue White
HISTORY OF PARTI`S

My basic objection concerns this quote :

First of all the Yorkshire Terrier's color from the very beginning of the breed till now, has always been BLUE AND TAN. Any other color is considered a fault. A FAULT THAT YOU SHOULD NOT BREED.

I frankly don't understand why some people trying to make virtues out of faults. Faults not in minor traits but in THE ULTIMATE trait in our breed : color and texture.

I don't understand the reason why they are quoting old books with the history of our breed in order to convince their audience that these traits were desirable. These traits were FAULTS then and are FAULTS now.

No dog is perfect. Actually no living creature is. Every dog, even grand and multi champions, have faults. Faults and of course virtues.

A purebred Yorkie is any yorkie bred by purebred parents. This doesn't mean that it possesses all the desirable traits - according to the standard.
Its the breeder's responsibility to evaluate these traits (faults and virtues) and respect the gene pool. Disrespecting the standard and breeding faults simply leads to something else, similar to yorkie, but certainly not the breed we are striving for.
Partis carry faulty genes, genes that a Yorkshire Terrier should not have in its genotype. And because they express these faulty genes in their coloring they do not model the standard and they are not correct in TYPE.

Mrs White advertises them as "RARE" in order to sell them more expensive. For me this is not different from all the other "RARE" yorkies that some irresponsible "breeders" bring to this world to make a fast buck. Merles, Goldens, Chocolate, Creamy and God knows what else they will come up with in order to make money. The problem at least in my point of view is that all these people, are not just breeding to supply an unhealthy demand, but they support these breedings with theories to fool their audience. And thats even worse.

How would you all feel if I found the dropped eared Yorkie cute and sold them as the "rare" "FlopyYorkie". I could easily support my breeding with the first standard that required "semi erect" ears and could also provide historical facts to justify all this...



As far as the standard is concerned.

The standard is a written description of the ideal yorkie. The PERFECT dog that does not exist and never will. The standard was written in order to serve as a guide to dedicated breeders. Breeders that will strive for perfection in every aspect. Conformation, health and temperament. This is the healthy purpose of breeding dogs. Without these breeders the breed wouldn't survive and be admired as it is in our time.

Joan Gordon wrote that "The standard abides as a GUARD. If we loose the concepts tailored by those who originated the breed's identity, we wind up with dogs that -albeit sound - are lacking in the qualities that distinguish them as Yorkshire Terriers."

Color and texture historically were of prime importance. BOTH were the "trademark" of the breed. Long, straight, silky hair, blue and tan in color.

Henry Webb in his 1872 book "Dogs: Their points, Whims, Insticts and Peculiarities" wrote that
"the blue and tan should contrast so well as to please the eye, rich and decided in color, and not a sickly silver color all over".


According to Joan Gordon's research there was disagreement among the fanciers of the breed in the North and in the South, concerning the saturation point of the blue color. The Northerners believed that the color should be bright steel-blue and that this represented the ideal yorkie. "Bright" was used because it gives illumination to steel-blue, thus reflecting light.

On the other hand, the Southerners believed that the desired color should be a dark steel-blue (as it was showed then in the South of England) and that it was a great improvement over the pale colored dogs which were preferred in the North.

All these were written on the book "The Twentieth Century Dog (Non Sporting) written by Herbert Compton in 1904.

Mr Compton in his book, shared both opinions; Mr Fred Poole's opinion, who represented the Northerners and the "Halifax and District Yorkshire Terrier Club", and Mr. F. Randall's who represented the Southerners and was the first Secretary of the Yorkshire Terrier Club.

| The Yorkshire Terrier Club |

In 1891, Mr P.H. Coombs wrote the Yorkie article in the book "The American Book of the Dog". In this article he provided us with a standard that was accepted by the "Yorkshire Terrier Club of England". The standard that Mr. Coombs provided us with, was the one of the Northerners.

https://archive.org/stream/americanb...arch/yorkshire

Other writers claim that the first standard was accepted by the "Yorkshire Terrier Club" in 1898 without mentioning the other club that Mr Coombs is referring to. Others that the first standard was drawn up by the "Yorkshire Terrier Club" in London, in 5 January 1911.

The first standard that was laid down by the Yorkshire Terrier Club that was represented by Mr. F. Randall, was described in Leslie William's book "A manual of toy dogs" written in 1904.
A manual of toy dogs; how to breed, rear, and feed them


With the exception of the ears, the weight (please read Weight History Of the Yorkshire Terrier ) and the "silver yorkie" which was never a desired color, the standard has not changed over the years. It has remained basically the same with slight changes in the words used. This concerns the FCI standard and the (English) Kennel Club's standard.

As far as the color DQ is concerned for the American Standard, I couldn't agree more. This was established in order to protect the ONLY TRUE COLORS of the breed; BLUE AND TAN.

Ann Seranne, wrote a wonderful book in the 80s called "The Joy of breeding your own show dog". Like Julia Gasow, I was also touched by her unselfishness when I read that :

Why can't we just strive for perfection and keep this wonderful breed alive?
Why can't we just respect the breed that some dedicated breeders entrusted us with?
Why can't we just BREED TO THE STANDARD???
Is it so difficult?

WE keep in our hands the fate of Yorkshire Terriers. The future of the breed. Its up to us to keep this breed alive and hand it to the next generation better or at least the same as it was entrusted to us.

We are to strive for perfection as defined by whom?" Yes, of course I know that is the breed club, in US that would be the YTCA. So, we have "perfect" Yorkies that are blue and tan. We also have technically "imperfect" ones,parti colored, that have a lot of white in the coat. We have a growing group of people who like the "imperfect" partis and want to promote them rather than kill them off as the YTCA and their international counterparts would do.
I guess what offends me most is the constant dismissal of people who like the parti color Yorkie as a no-good breeder lusting after financial profits for selling a rare coloration. It's a blue and tan world and we need to kill off anything that doesn't fit that description.
Some people like partis. Why can't we find a way to make room for them in the Yorkie world?
Personally, I breed for blue and tan but find it hard to live in a rigid world that doesn't have room for natural variation.

THANK YOU!! What a wonderful post.. very informative and nonjudgmental. Exactly the way a discussion should start.

You expressed your opinion but stated that it was your opinion.. perfect! Your post was spot on. It was correct in history, quoted well know breeders and it was easy to understand.

When Sue wrote the piece that started this discussion, the Parti’s and the other colors were harder to find, she used the word “rare”.. they are now much more common place. The colors have grown considerably in popularity and AKC registration. Sue is very knowledgeable regarding color genetics and she is someone to whom many of us go to when we have a question regarding color combinations, recessive genes or just basic questions. We are learning things every day on the color “front”, it is a fascinating subject and adds another whole dimension to the breeding equation.

Yes, these “colors” are considered a fault based on the Yorkshire Terrier Standard, they are a COLOR fault, not a structure fault, not a health issue, not a character issue, they do not cause blindness, lameness or any other life threatening problems. But yes, they ARE considered a fault.
These dogs are able to be registered through AKC. They have been DNA’d as full Yorkshire Terriers. They have been proven to be full Yorkshire terriers. We are not breeding mutts, we are not mixing other breeds together to “make” a dog. Even Joan Gordon, who you quoted in your post, produced a tri colored puppy in 1976 with her sister named Wildweir Triplicate and registered him AKC (TB426843).


I totally understand and applaud your dedication to keeping the Standard. The Yorkshire terrier is a magnificent dog. Believe me when I tell you no one is trying to lessen the beauty of this breed. Allowing the colors to flourish will not harm the beauty of the traditional. Even if a traditional “carried” the piebald gene (which some do) it is not expressed unless bred to another that also carries. If you know your lines, and you know your breeders, by reading pedigrees, you will know what is in your dog. Color Testing is also available for those who are unsure.

I do have to disagree with you on one point however, not ALL breeders of colored yorkies are out there breeding these dogs for a “fast” buck. We show are dogs where we can, we do health screening, we do not sell to breeders,(unless we know them personally) we know our lines, we only breed top quality dogs, we don’t breed the females until they are two years old and stop breeding prior to 6, we check references on all of our placements, we don’t PUMP out puppies, we strive for the best, we don’t keep our dogs in cages, we feed top quality raw food, the dogs live in the house etc etc etc..

This is a passion, not a business to most of us. We have goals we are striving to achieve, and to lump us all together and say that we are all in this to capitalize on “an unhealthy demand” is unfair.

To me there is Beauty in the well bred Black and Tan Yorkie, but if you can produce a Well bred Parti with a thicker coat and good color or a Chocolate with a silk coat and a sweet face or a Golden with good texture…AND the health and structure was there well, now that would be saying something!!

In our standard.. the FIRST thing the dog needs to follow is the yorkie standard.. EVERYTHING except the color is the same.. the temperament, the size, the character, the structure. A good breeder of colored yorkies looks for the same thing in their litters as any good Yorkie breeder does, they are just open to all of the wonderful color possibilities this breed has to offer.

Diana :animal-pa

Mike: One definition of *rare* is not easily found, has a very low population etc. Probably by that definition Parti Yorkies are rare. So this can be construed as a statement of fact.


And as fact, breeding a rare breed (which I do), you do incur a lot more expense to show train and find a breeding match. I am not sure where Parti Yorkies compete in the show ring - maybe UKC - I just don't know. The Parti breeders here can tell us where they show. But I find it reasonable to assume given the small pool they might incur more expense.


I have no idea if the additional expense justifies what-ever her selling prices are. In the same way I have no idea what *profit* breeders to the standard can make. Selling price does seem to be a function of market demand (or lack thereof).


Now having said all of the above; I will only support breeders who breed to the standard. I absolutely want to maintain the lovely blue n tan Yorkie for-ever.


It does seem pretty clear that Parti Colored Yorkies are Yorkies based on their DNA. And for me whilst I won't condemn those breeders who actually do do, the health testing and post the results for all to see, I actually can't support their choice to breed Partis.


It is the same in my breed the Black Russian Terrier. We occasionally have *off colored* dogs, and as far as I am aware, no breeder actually tries to breed these off colored dogs. And in this day n age they are not culled. Actually some of the *off colors* can be very pretty. But Black is the only acceptable color for the show ring, in the same way Blue and Tan is for the Yorkie.


The indiscrimate breeding of Yorkies is embarrassingly obvious. Yorkies who barely look like a Yorkie. Terrible coats, disposition/temperament, coloration, you name it. You have every BYBer trying to make a quick buck. Selling supposedly purebred YOrkies for $400 or $500 dollars. I can almost guarantee they do NOT do the health testing, and very obviously do not breed high quality dogs.


We as pure-breed dog breeders have a duty to uphold the standard that has been passed down to us in trust. If you don't like the Standard, don't breed that breed!

"I frankly don't understand why some people trying to make virtues out of faults. Faults not in minor traits but in THE ULTIMATE trait in our breed : color and texture. "

:thumbup::thumbup: I couldn't agree more!

Every breed was created/tweaked by man, and a standard developed for each breed. The standard is set for a Yorkshire Terrier. If you are reputable, you uphold it.

As defined by the breed's standard. The standard describes the ideal specimen of the breed, the one that we are striving for.


There is a huge difference between imperfection and wrong genes that have no place in the Yorkie's genotype like the sp, the si allele or the e allele. A yorkie should be SS in S Locus and EE on E Locus. Furthermore you don't breed these faults in, but you try to breed them out. Its the breeder's responsibility to do so.

There will always be group of people that like super tiny yorkies, chocolate yorkies, double merle yorkies, orange yorkies or maybe someday green yorkies. Whats that suppose to mean? That breeders should follow the masses and breed what these people want? Of course NOT.
The breeder, the dedicated breeder, the one that respects the breed that he/she is committed to, should breed to the standard. The standard of the breed, not the standard of the masses.

No one said to kill the parti puppies. For God shake...


Well, why don't they (the parti fanciers) create a new breed?

We can certainly find room for them in the dog world as a separate breed from the yorkie and keep the Yorkshire Terrier breed with its traditional unique colors. :)

Dianna, it wasn't my intention to insult you or other dedicated breeders of parti/biewers and lump you all together.

But, I would like you to understand that yorkie texture and coloring is unique in the dog world. And all I want is to protect this wonderful trait that unfortunately is beginning to fade.

Wrong texture (woolly, cottony, mix) and dyed hair are at this time the biggest problem for this particular trait. You see, color and texture are related with each other. You can't have the one without the other. The genes that determine colors also determine texture.

We very often see dogs that become silver at a very early age and very pale tans. In addition black woolly dogs seem to be preferred by judges that can't distinguish the true silky texture and the cottony/woolly texture.

Color and strong pigmentation in the correct silky texture is so hard to find and so hard to achieve.
And if you do, you don't have other desirable traits.
Since we already have so many problems we don't need to add the sp or the si allele too. :)

The white spotting alleles are thought to be examples of incomplete dominance. If this is correct, means that a heterozygous dog [Ssp] will express its most dominant gene, but may also be affected by the more recessive one to a lesser extent. In other words a carrier of the ressesive [sp] will PROBABLY have white color in some parts of its body.

The question that arises is how much white does a heterozygous dog [Ssp] show in its phenotype, if any.
Does a small spot on the chin or the chest mean a dog is a carrier [Ssp]?
Can a Blue and Tan dog WITHOUT any white spot, be a carrier of the sp gene?
These questions can only be answered through genetics and dna tests on S Locus in blue and tan specimens of the breed.

Finally, its strange that we know the genes involved for OFF colored Yorkies but we don't have enough data for the genes involved for the blue and tan.

I believe in breeding to better the breed but realize there needs to be a place for the parti. But as long as parti breeders are breeding to goldens and chocolates to create the newest color fade I feel there is no place for them in the yorkie world. I know thats not all the breeders but we dont need any more more confusion on what colors make the yorkie in my opinion

The reason we can't MAKE it a new breed is because it ISN'T a new breed, the color variations simply don't meet the standard that is presently written!! Heavens sakes.. the basic genetics of the dog is still the same.. logically.. if a puppy is born from two yorkshire terriers, would not that puppy be a yorkshire terrier.. what would you have us call that dog?? It is a yorkshire terrier pure and simple, it can not be anything else. Just because a dog doesn't fit a standard does not make it a different breed.

Take for example Cocker Spaniels, There are a variety of colors, they show separately BUT they are all called Cockers. You would never say the black and tan cocker is a cocker and the Buff is not. If you bred a Black/tan cocker and a Buff together, their offspring would STILL be a cocker, not a NEW BREED.

The AKC already has proven Parti's, and Chocolates and Goldens as Yorkies and they are fully registered AKC yorkies. It would be so much simpler if we COULD just make it a new breed.. wish we could!

We show them in Rare Breed Shows, IABCA and ICKC, some show with ARBA but I have personally never shown with that venue. (IABCA is just recently accepted the PARTI although the Biewer has shown with them for years.)

I believe it is FAR worse to breed the HUGE, (or small) big nosed, drop eared, wooley, poor coated, poor excuse for a yorkie mutt looking dog that many people breed as a black/tan yorkie than it is to strive to breed the best possible, healthy, structurally sound, beautifully coated, gorgeous representation of a yorkie we can with a different color to it's coat. I do understand the uniqueness of the texture of the coat.. difficult to achieve and a lofty goal we all strive for.

Parti breeders are not breeding Parti's to Golds and chocolates to create new "fashion" colors.. the "Parti" gene is a spotting gene, not a color gene..The Parti gene has nothing to do with the COLORS.. we are not "creating" colors. There are only so many naturally occurring colors in the yorkshire terrier and those are the ones the AKC recognizes and the ones we work with.

You can have Chocolate Parti's and you can have Gold Parti's or you can have traditional Parti's. The traditional Parti's are from the Black/Tan Yorkies. This is just a point of clarification.

Diana :animal-pa

PS. I have had many "carriers" that had no white "spots" anywhere on their bodies and I have had black/tans that had white spots that were not carriers.. the only way to tell is through testing. (or of coarse breeding to know carriers)

For me it is quite simple really. The breed I breed is called BLACK Russian Terrier. It is a BLACK dog, not grey, or golden, or piebald, or having brown noses or feet. That is the breed I want to preserve and protect as a BLACK dog, along with all its very wonderfull other traits.


For the Yorkie it is also quite simple from what 1900 or so the Standard called for a blue n tan dog with a SILKY coat. BLUE n TAN and SILKY.


Not tri colored not brown not chocolate not golden. For those breeders who do do their ultimate best to breed healthy partis I commend you for bringing into the world healthy dogs. But you are not breeding to the Standard, and I see no over whelming reason why we should allow *different colored* Yorkies into the ring.


And I do remember reading somewhere maybe CKC maybe AKC, they will not anytime soon be recognizing different colors for any breed to compete in the ring.


Coloration is an important part of any breed, it does serve to make up one easily seen definition of the breed. I think that is important. Parti breeders do not.


So where does it end Parti Breeders? Does any coloration go? Black - Golden - Brown - Grey? Purple, white piebald?

The colors that are naturally occurring in the yorkie and recognized by AKC.. golds, chocolates and Black/blue/tan are also the colors that can be "Parti" colors.

Diana:animal-pa

All this reminds me the Skye/Clydesdale/Paisley case back in 1880...
The Skye fanciers couldn't accept the soft coated dogs and they were sending letters to complain.
Like this one that was send in Stonehenge

https://archive.org/stream/dogsofbri...e/198/mode/2up

"The new variety appears even to have been credited with all the merits of the old, and, as a natural consequence, connoisseurs, fanciers, ladies, and even gamekeepers went in for the fashionable and pretty silky Skyes. So in this way the old breed, especially on the mainland, has been reduced to a parcel of mongrels. "

A little more history as provided by Mrs Gordon

http://www.theyorkshireterrierclubof...TCAHistory.pdf

"First we have the Skye known as such since at least 1576. For years there existed within this breed two types of coats; the long harsh haired coat and the long silky coat. The allowed colors were dark or light blue, gray or fawn with black points. As time went on and dog shows came into being they were all shown as broken haired Scotch Terriers even the silky blue and tan ones. There even existed a class for Skyes under 5 lbs.

The breed was finally allowed a class for Skye Terriers. In due coarse friction arose among the Skye fanciers as to which texture was correct for the breed. After much contention the silky coated blue and tan, and the all blue silky coated ones were disallowed, partly as they continually took the prize over the harsh coated dog. The breeders of the silky coated variety wanting to continue showing and breeding their dogs renamed them Clydesdale (blue and tan) and Paisley (all blue). Thus we have two new breeds. "

Anyway...


Cocker's unique trait is not their color and texture.
If this happens to yorkies we will definitely loose the concepts tailored by those who originated the breed's identity! Color and texture.

ACK also stated that:

"The AKC would like you to understand that the correct color and marking pattern of the YT is considered to be one of the breed's most distinctive physical traits. The standard for the breed places the coat's texture and color of the utmost importance when evaluating specimens of the breed. The AKC would like to advice you to take this into consideration before choosing to breed your dog"

akcaccept.png Photo by Partiyorkies | Photobucket

Sorry Dianna, but these colors are not naturals for the Yorkie.
These colors is clearly a sign that the breed standard and history are totally ignored and breeders gone wild.

"The new variety appears even to have been credited with all the merits of the old, and, as a natural consequence, connoisseurs, fanciers, ladies, and even gamekeepers went in for the fashionable and pretty silky Skyes. So in this way the old breed, especially on the mainland, has been reduced to a parcel of mongrels. "

:thumbup:

That's is my fear with the yorkie. The repetitive breeding of off-standard dogs will move us further away from how we know the Yorkshire Terrier to be, and years down the line will result in mongrels with little to no resemblance to a yorkie.

Maybe I have to drill down farther but this is from the AKC website just moments ago: I see no mention of Chocolate or Goldens or for that matter Partis.


Below is a list of the colors and markings available for this breed. Please refer to the breed standard for descriptions and the difference in types.
Description: The name of the color and/or markings.
Type: Standard or alternate. This is the classification of the color for show purposes. Please refer to the breed standard for specifics regarding this breed.
Code: This is the code entered on an application for registration of a dog.
Colors DescriptionTypeCode Black & GoldS234Black & TanS018Blue & GoldS041Blue & TanS044