The Yorkie but not as we know it.....

[Karrie]

I would like to see the AKC incorporate temperament and health qualities within its "standard" - as opposed to only aesthetic traits. Then, and only then, will "AKC Registered" symbolize quality.

I don't see it happening, tho - because it would mean limited registrations and loss of revenue.

[Kybaby]

Loved that story!!!! Thanks for the link

Leo's Mom

[FlDebra]

Originally Posted by roxies_mom

I wonder if there are pics of them from way back then? I'm going to google it and see what I come up with.

There are -- Check out this site for a lot of pictures of the Yorkie history: History of the Yorkshire Terrier by Joan Gordon

I believe the breeders have done an excellent job over the years at refining the best of the Yorkshire Terrier qualities. I like the standard just as it is written now. The only think that might be a nice addition would be a range of weight. Instead of under 7 pounds -- something like 4-7 pounds. Or we could go back to the standards of 1890's when there were two classes, one under 5 pounds and one 5-12 pounds.

I do not know where this article posted by the OP got the idea that there were standards of 7-23 pound in the 1920's. No history I have read suggests we had any such thing! I think someone got their weights confused in that article. Read through the history!

[yorkiekist]

Originally Posted by Karrie

I would like to see the AKC incorporate temperament and health qualities within its "standard" - as opposed to only aesthetic traits. Then, and only then, will "AKC Registered" symbolize quality.

I don't see it happening, tho - because it would mean limited registrations and loss of revenue.

Who would test temperments of all the bybers and mill dogs? How would AKC accomplish this? AkC does have a Canine Good Citizens Award that you can temperment test your dog. So AkC is doing their small part already. The dogs at the shows are usually pretty good. They have to be as if they bite the judge, they are disqualified. I havent met very many Yorkies with bad temperments. And they should have a very firery temperment as they are terriers after all. Limited registration and loss of revenue?

[yogurtbear]

JMO, the weight issue or appearance is not nearly as important as the faulty eugenics guide that some breeders follow. breeding grandpa to granddaughter, mother to son, father to daughter, sibling to sibling !!
personally, i am disgusted by eugenics principals of selectively breeding to "better" species. in a biological point of view when theres a lack of variance in a specie, it could be fatal.
i think inbreeding should be banned from pedigree dogs
we know the dangers of inbreeding can cause on the genetic pool and variance.
i just dont want the prospects of our babies to be so inbred that they would become extinct because they will be so genetically similar that they can no longer reproduce

[JoshieBoy]

It is interesting how we change the breed's standard to fit our needs in such a short time span.

[roxies_mom]

Originally Posted by FlDebra

There are -- Check out this site for a lot of pictures of the Yorkie history: History of the Yorkshire Terrier by Joan Gordon

I believe the breeders have done an excellent job over the years at refining the best of the Yorkshire Terrier qualities. I like the standard just as it is written now. The only think that might be a nice addition would be a range of weight. Instead of under 7 pounds -- something like 4-7 pounds. Or we could go back to the standards of 1890's when there were two classes, one under 5 pounds and one 5-12 pounds.

I do not know where this article posted by the OP got the idea that there were standards of 7-23 pound in the 1920's. No history I have read suggests we had any such thing! I think someone got their weights confused in that article. Read through the history!

That was interesting, thank you for the sharing this.