Questions About Golden & Parti Yorkies

[TammyJM]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

And this is the standard for a Parti according to...who exactly? Where is the "official" standard for the parti yorkie published...I didn't think there was one. Or is this just the requirement in order for them to be registered with AKC?

I don't believe Sue is trying to say that there is a standard for the parti color. I think she is saying that the standard is no different than what it is for the traditional coloring...because the parti IS a Yorkshire Terrier.

Just my guess, though...

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by TammyJM

I don't believe Sue is trying to say that there is a standard for the parti color. I think she is saying that the standard is no different than what it is for the traditional coloring...because the parti IS a Yorkshire Terrier.

But that's just it, they ARE different. There either is a standard or there isn't. There is a standard for YTs that call for traditional coloring...the partis do not fit into that category. This isn't something new and is something we are all aware of. But you can't say you breed to a "standard" if there isn't one...and at this point there isn't...at least not that is recognized by any official organization. So it's a bit misleading to those who are not informed and trying to gain information.

[Pinehaven]

Originally Posted by TammyJM

I don't believe Sue is trying to say that there is a standard for the parti color. I think she is saying that the standard is no different than what it is for the traditional coloring...because the parti IS a Yorkshire Terrier.

Just my guess, though...

Thanks Tammy, I guess I should have been more clear in my reply.

Parti's don't have any separate standard because they are yorkshire terriers and other than color, should try to follow the standards for yorkies.

People keep bringing up that Biewers have "color standards", and I was trying to explain why parti's don't have and won't have "color placement" standards, it's because parti's have different spotting genes that can't be controlled like the Irish Spotting gene seen in the Biewers. The irish spotting gene doesn't really cause "spotting" but it produces a regular pattern of white that appears on the dog. Irish spotting is normally very symmetrical, resulting in all white feet and a white tip on the tail. Modifiers or other spotting genes will affect how much white appears on a dog who also has the Irish spotting gene.

[BamaFan121s]

That does make more sense. I knew what you meant, but there is no telling who else was reading that didn't.

[Pinehaven]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

But that's just it, they ARE different. There either is a standard or there isn't. There is a standard for YTs that call for traditional coloring...the partis do not fit into that category. This isn't something new and is something we are all aware of. But you can't say you breed to a "standard" if there isn't one...and at this point there isn't...at least not that is recognized by any official organization. So it's a bit misleading to those who are not informed and trying to gain information.

You say "There is a standard for YTs that call for traditional coloring ..." but the standard doesn't call for "traditional coloring," at all.

The Standard calls for "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"

Any color other than steel blue does not meet the standard.

How many Yorkshire terriers meet the above color standards? Yes, Parti's don't because they have white (though I have a lovely parti with steel blue and tan markings) but probably 70% of yorkies will not meet the above color standards. So do these 70% of yorkies who don't meet the steel blue color or maybe have smutty hairs mixed in with their tan, or who's tan is too light in color or who have black coats - do these yorkies have a different set of standards? No they don't and neither do the Parti's.

If we are misled, it's not by the parti breeders.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by Pinehaven

You say "There is a standard for YTs that call for traditional coloring ..." but the standard doesn't call for "traditional coloring," at all.

The Standard calls for "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"

Any color other than steel blue does not meet the standard.

How many Yorkshire terriers meet the above color standards? Yes, Parti's don't because they have white (though I have a lovely parti with steel blue and tan markings) but probably 70% of yorkies will not meet the above color standards. So do these 70% of yorkies who don't meet the steel blue color or maybe have smutty hairs mixed in with their tan, or who's tan is too light in color or who have black coats - do these yorkies have a different set of standards? No they don't and neither do the Parti's.

If we are misled, it's not by the parti breeders.

Yes exactly, very few yorkies do meet standard, and that is exactly why I always encourage people to support those breeders who breed to standard. If more Yorkies meant standard, this wouldn't be so important. I really think "standard" is an amazing thing to behold, and I'm not sure many people have actually seen one in person. It just seems like all the breeders have an excuse for not breeding to standard, some say their dog doesn't meet standard, but has such a great personality, some say they could only afford the dogs they have, some want to breed rare colors because they have a marketing advantage, and this last reason bothers me the most. Even newbie breeders are encouraged to buy parti carriers to add to their "lines," without any regard for the dogs suitability to breed other then it's a Parti carrier.

[QuickSilver]

On second thought, never mind. Don't want to start an argument.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by Pinehaven

You say "There is a standard for YTs that call for traditional coloring ..." but the standard doesn't call for "traditional coloring," at all.

The Standard calls for "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"

Any color other than steel blue does not meet the standard.


How many Yorkshire terriers meet the above color standards? Yes, Parti's don't because they have white (though I have a lovely parti with steel blue and tan markings) but probably 70% of yorkies will not meet the above color standards. So do these 70% of yorkies who don't meet the steel blue color or maybe have smutty hairs mixed in with their tan, or who's tan is too light in color or who have black coats - do these yorkies have a different set of standards? No they don't and neither do the Parti's.

If we are misled, it's not by the parti breeders.

When I stated "traditional coloring" I meant the blue/tan described by the standard, obviously.

I don't think that anyone is trying to argue the fact that the majority of Yorkies being bred these days are not perfect representations of the standard. But bottom line is, there IS a set standard for the breed, and Partis do not meet it, or any standard at this point as one does not YET exist. (I believe that in time with the right effort, one day it easily could.) You cannot 'breed for a standard' if there isn't one. That was my only point.

[bchgirl]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

On second thought, never mind. Don't want to start an argument.

This particular one has gone on for years.

LOL..

Sorry, gals...continue.

[Pinehaven]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

When I stated "traditional coloring" I meant the blue/tan described by the standard, obviously.

I don't think that anyone is trying to argue the fact that the majority of Yorkies being bred these days are not perfect representations of the standard. But bottom line is, there IS a set standard for the breed, and Partis do not meet it, or any standard at this point as one does not YET exist. (I believe that in time with the right effort, one day it easily could.) You cannot 'breed for a standard' if there isn't one. That was my only point.

Yes, there is a set standard for the breed and not only do Parti's not meet it but 70% if the Yorkshire terrier breed does not meet it.

Standards are a goal for breeders to strive to meet, especially for the show ring, but if a yorkie is born from two championed parents and it doesn't meet the standards due to being off colored, over or under sized, bad bite ..., these dogs are still Yorkshire terriers. Same is true of any other AKC registered yorkie who does not meet the standards, they are yorkies and normally they are not required to or asked to make a "new" set of standards that will more accurately reflect their type, color, size or whatever sets them apart from the standard.

Why are parti's being asked to make "standards" for their coloring? Black and tan coated yorkies are not asked to make new standards are they?

I would be very happy if the AKC required all new litters to be DNA'd as a requirement prior to being registered ... that way, 50 years down the road, when a parti pup appears in a litter of traditional parents, they'll have 50 previous years of DNAing to prove parentage. Horse registries have been requiring Bloodtyping and DNA in a number of breeds for years - maybe it's time to get the dog world to do the same too.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by phfgkl

As far as I'm concerned, a biewer and a parti are NOT the same. The biewer is now considered a breed of their own

That is only partially true, go back and read what i said.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

Yes exactly, very few yorkies do meet standard, and that is exactly why I always encourage people to support those breeders who breed to standard. If more Yorkies meant standard, this wouldn't be so important. I really think "standard" is an amazing thing to behold, and I'm not sure many people have actually seen one in person. It just seems like all the breeders have an excuse for not breeding to standard, some say their dog doesn't meet standard, but has such a great personality, some say they could only afford the dogs they have, some want to breed rare colors because they have a marketing advantage, and this last reason bothers me the most. Even newbie breeders are encouraged to buy parti carriers to add to their "lines," without any regard for the dogs suitability to breed other then it's a Parti carrier.

Why do you assume that those who breed for the off colors are doing it for marketing advantage and not for the love of the color?

I do not believe that the YTCA has the right to dictate which colors live and which colors die. They have the right to dictate whcih ones they will allow in their club and in their shows but beyond that they have no rights.

The parti colors have been showing up in champion lines tracing back to the Wildweir lines. At a time when most purebred dog breeders were show dog breeders, they were forced to cull the off colors. It does not mean they weren't producing them, it just means they were not admitting to it. And you can bet that they did not neuter their champion sire just because there was a white puppy in the litter. Perhaps thast is where the practice came to limit registration. they did not want their nasty little secret to get out.

Times have changed and the non show breeders have freedoms that the show breeders do not have. That does not mean that they are breeding inferior dogs.

The fact that the parti colors come from champion lines indicates that they have come from some of the top specimens of the YT breed.

The Biewers have a standard because the German YT breed club did not deny them the right to start their own club, like the YTCA does. Not because they are any better or different than the partis. I find it interesting that you approve of the Biewer, which is also clearly against the YTCA. It DQ's the color not the name.

The AKC does not accept the Biewer as a breed of it's own, because the YTCA would not allow that either. Biewer breeders cannot even agree among themselves if they are yorkies or not.

And finally, we do have a standard set for the parti, it just does not limit the color. Everything else is the same as set by the YTCA. There are many breeds that do not set a color standard.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by Pinehaven

Why are parti's being asked to make "standards" for their coloring? Black and tan coated yorkies are not asked to make new standards are they?

Because otherwise, what are you trying to achieve by breeding them if there isn't any goal "type" that you are trying to match. I really think you are missing the point...or just trying to change the subject and make a different point altogether. No one is claiming that Partis are the only non-standard dogs being produced or bred. Just that you can't breed a dog to a standard when a standard for the dog doesn't exists. To state such, as was done earlier, is misleading to those who are uninformed. The rest is really irrelevant as far as that fact is concerned.

Originally Posted by JeanieK

I do not believe that the YTCA has the right to dictate which colors live and which colors die. And finally, we do have a standard set for the parti, it just does not limit the color. Everything else is the same as set by the YTCA.

Wow, I didn't know that the YTCA was adamately promoting and calling for the death of those dogs that don't meet the standard. I repeatedly see that "breeders were forced to cull these dogs" and I'm just curious as to who exactly forced them and why that seems to be a brought up as if it serves as some sort of justification for the practice.

Also, you state that "we do have a standard set for the parti". So my question is, "who" exactly is "we", when did this set standard come about and which official organization or registry has adopted it. In short, show me where is has been recognized as an official standard.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

Because otherwise, what are you trying to achieve by breeding them if there isn't any goal "type" that you are trying to match. I really think you are missing the point...or just trying to change the subject and make a different point altogether. No one is claiming that Partis are the only non-standard dogs being produced or bred. Just that you can't breed a dog to a standard when a standard for the dog doesn't exists. To state such, as was done earlier, is misleading to those who are uninformed. The rest is really irrelevant as far as that fact is concerned.



Wow, I didn't know that the YTCA was adamately promoting and calling for the death of those dogs that don't meet the standard. I repeatedly see that "breeders were forced to cull these dogs" and I'm just curious as to who exactly forced them and why that seems to be a brought up as if it serves as some sort of justification for the practice.

Also, you state that "we do have a standard set for the parti". So my question is, "who" exactly is "we", when did this set standard come about and which official organization or registry has adopted it. In short, show me where is has been recognized as an official standard.

My statement was "which colors live and which colors die" it said nothing about calling for the death of those dogs. it was carefully worded so as not to be twisted.

When you want to start a new breed club, you do not go directly to the AKC and say hey we just started a new breed club let us in. You have to have a membership and records established. Rome wasn't built in a day. These things take time. We (The Official Colorful Yorks**te Terrier Club) have mistakes to make and obstacles to overcome.

We know that we may never be recognized as a separate club, and that is OK. But we do have standards set. We have adopted the same standards set by the YTCA, except that we do not limit color. All of these colors were a natural part of the Yorkshire Terrier makeup and should not be allowed to die off.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by JeanieK

My statement was "which colors live and which colors die" it said nothing about calling for the death of those dogs. it was carefully worded so as not to be twisted.

So what exactly was meant by "which colors live and which die"? Didn't mean to twist anything, it just didn't seem like there were that many different possible meanings behind the statmenet.

Originally Posted by JeanieK

You have to have a membership and records established. Rome wasn't built in a day. These things take time. We (The Official Colorful Yorks**te Terrier Club) have mistakes to make and obstacles to overcome.

We know that we may never be recognized as a separate club, and that is OK. But we do have standards set. We have adopted the same standards set by the YTCA, except that we do not limit color. All of these colors were a natural part of the Yorkshire Terrier makeup and should not be allowed to die off.

Thank you for answering the question as to "who" was breeding to this standard. I had no idea that you guys had formed any sort of club (although now looking, I see it). That was all I was trying to figure out by asking the question in the first place. So there is a standard for partis that has been adopted by the Colorful Yorkshire Terrier Club...correct?