Originally Posted by OwnedByJezebel (Post 3302496)

I keep on seeing references to Hudderfield Ben being around 30 lbs. Does anyone really know how much he weighed?

I also find this statement on the BBC website: BBC - h2g2 - The Yorkshire Terrier

"It's difficult to believe that before the 1930s, the Yorkshire Terrier usually weighed around 30 lbs, rather than the three to seven pounds of today's Kennel Club Standard for the Yorkshire Terrier. However, as the popularity of the Yorkie has expanded, the breed has started to become larger again; most of today's family pet Yorkies are somewhat bigger than the Breed Standard. In large part due to their size, Yorkshire Terriers are actually classified as toy dogs rather than terriers by the Kennel Club."

I think it is clear that prior to the 1930's there were plenty of the "under 7 lb" Yorkies around, so I'm not sure that I agree with the word "usually" in the first sentence. But I do think it is interesting that they point out that there were plenty of larger Yorkies around in the past, and even more interesting that they are noting a trend to today's Yorkie increasing in size.

ETA: I would love to see Yorkies moved into the Terrier group by the AKC and allowed to officially compete in Earthdog trials. My first Yorkie would have made an incredible earthdog.

Originally Posted by Beamers Mom (Post 3302606)

Found this a while ago in a book published in 1897:

"The Yorkshire Terrier is a cross between a mongrel Skye and a Black-and-Tan Terrier. The coat is very long and silky, and abundant over the whole body, head, legs, and tail; its color is a silvery blue, the ears and legs are of a dark tan shade, and the long beard is of a golden tan, the top of the head almost fawn-colored. This dog is a modern invention and is only fit for a toy"

Originally Posted by gemy (Post 3302630)

[/B]

Wow that seems to read as a rather damning statement of the toy group:(

Originally Posted by gemy (Post 3302650)

I believe for some people no matter what you say, they will go their own way. Be it buy from a pet store, a byber, or a puppy mill.

I personally can't refer anyone to a "reputable cross breeder", because I don't know any people that breed crosses. And I would by nature distrust anyone who is breeding for the "flavour" designer dog of the year. I would be quite surprised if they truly do all the health checks necessary. They appear to me to be playing russian roulette with puppy's lives and health at stake.

One small story, despite hours of conversation that my hubby had with a co-worker, about our breed, about what his needs are, about how to select the breed right for you, he went out and got a "labradoodle". Fast forward six months later and his 8mth old pup is almost uncontrollable. High nervous energy, goofiness personalified, and has turned out to be a rather large dog. Also the coat does shed, and requires a fair bit of maintenance (this he was assured from the breeder that would not be the case).

He has asked for help. They did do one round of puppy classes, and that was it, for training. That is of course paramount problem one. But he did not see the parents of said puppy, did not inquire into their temperaments, and wonders why he has this goofy nervous dog. Dah gee could it be that most Labs don't settle down to about 3yrs old (even with ongoing training and at least 2 hrs of moderate to vigorous exercise a day), poodles can be notoriously high strung and with their sharp intelligence, need lots of mental and physical stimulation. Bah humbug. By the way he was told to look at the characteristic temperament of every breed to see what would fit his lifestyle. And this dog cost him over $1000 dollars. Some deal.

For me it is purebred dogs from a reputable breeder that I will always choose to support.

Originally Posted by QuickSilver (Post 3302096)

When did yorkies start getting AKC registered? Because there are certainly plenty of AKC registered yorkies that are 15 pounds +.

The extreme difference in size is surprising to me if there weren't some larger terriers to begin with. I could see maybe going 50% over the max weight limit, but 3x is a lot to attribute to careless breeding. That would be like have German Shepards that weigh between 40 and 120 lbs.

Originally Posted by OwnedByJezebel (Post 3302496)

I keep on seeing references to Hudderfield Ben being around 30 lbs. Does anyone really know how much he weighed?

I also find this statement on the BBC website: BBC - h2g2 - The Yorkshire Terrier

"It's difficult to believe that before the 1930s, the Yorkshire Terrier usually weighed around 30 lbs, rather than the three to seven pounds of today's Kennel Club Standard for the Yorkshire Terrier. However, as the popularity of the Yorkie has expanded, the breed has started to become larger again; most of today's family pet Yorkies are somewhat bigger than the Breed Standard. In large part due to their size, Yorkshire Terriers are actually classified as toy dogs rather than terriers by the Kennel Club."

I think it is clear that prior to the 1930's there were plenty of the "under 7 lb" Yorkies around, so I'm not sure that I agree with the word "usually" in the first sentence. But I do think it is interesting that they point out that there were plenty of larger Yorkies around in the past, and even more interesting that they are noting a trend to today's Yorkie increasing in size.

ETA: I would love to see Yorkies moved into the Terrier group by the AKC and allowed to officially compete in Earthdog trials. My first Yorkie would have made an incredible earthdog.

Originally Posted by FlDebra (Post 3302685)

That site is INCORRECT. I do not know where in the world they came up with that 30 pound statement. This is how so much dis-information gets spread online. Another site will pick this up and use it as their source reference and before you know it they are trying to rewrite history. Have to be careful wht you use as a reference.

The Yorkshire Terrier Standard of 1890 divided the weight into two classes, one under 5 pounds and the other over 5 pounds but not to exceed 12 pounds.

Best to read respected experts on Yorkshire Terrier history like Joan Gordon. The link I listed earlier in this thread to the YTCA.org will give a nice history synopsis. For more, you can check out Joan's books.

I have one that has a picture of a 3 pound show winner from the 1800's. I have not found a definitive weight for Huddersfield Ben. He did not live long, but was very prolific and had a lot of winners among his pups. But to be fair there were not very many registered to compete at that time! Huddersfield Ben's owner, Mrs. Foster showed Yorkshire Terriers in both of the classes of the time: Toy Terrier under 5 pounds and Class XXXII Broken Haired Scotch. Ben was shown in the latter so we can assume he was over 5 pounds but I m guessing no where near 30!

Originally Posted by Mardelin (Post 3302687)

:thumbup:
And no where in the standard does it state 3 to 7 pounds. It says not to exceed 7 pounds. What the AKC does reference too (and not in the standard) the purpose of conformation showing; to gain approval of our breeding stock. So, common sense would lend to the fact we would not breed a 3 pound dog.

Originally Posted by QuickSilver (Post 3302690)

Thanks for the info, Debra. Some other questions for you if that's okay: how did the dogs that were originally registered qualify? Did someone write a letter stating, "my dog is a yorkie"? Did it have to be shown and judged? Do you happen to know how many yorkies were registered in the first few years?

Originally Posted by QuickSilver (Post 3302693)

I'm confused. If a 3 lb dog was a show winner, wouldn't that indicate it was going to be bred?

Originally Posted by Woogie Man (Post 3302453)

Here's a little something I found about a couple of examples of cross-breeding.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"In dogs, closed registries and a ban on crossbreeding may be the rule, but the rule is not universal. Under the right circumstances, even major dog registries can accept crossbreeding.

About fifteen years ago a researcher crossed a pointer with a Dalmatian and then back-crossed to Dals in subsequent generations. He successfully met his goal of eliminating inherited urinary problems that are present in almost every Dalmatian. The board of the breed club petitioned AKC to admit some of the products of this breeding program � dogs which had only one Pointer in a five-generation pedigree full of Dalmatians. Two of the dogs were admitted, but the breed club�s membership raised a hue and cry, voting to rescind the request. AKC refused any further registration of the �cross-bred� dogs.

The membership of the breed club rejected these dogs because they were often mis-marked, allowing a cosmetic problem that might have been corrected in subsequent generations to take precedence over the elimination of a significant breed health problem.

Another crossbreeding effort received a registry sanction � this time from the Kennel Club. The English registry is at least as conservative in its practices as the AKC. Another scientist wanted to create Boxers which did not need to have their tails docked. He crossbred to a Corgi. (The bobtail gene in Corgies is different from that in Aussies and does not produce serious defects.) After five generations he had Boxers that looked like Boxers and produced like Boxers but had naturally bobbed tails. Those dogs were allowed to be registered."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here's the link... Australian Shepherd Health & Genetics Institute, Inc.

This article is primarily about Australian Shepherds, but the same logic could be applied to any breed with endemic health issues. If a given problem can't be solved within the breed, going outside the breed can be a viable option.