Feeling A Little Guilty.

[FlDebra]

Originally Posted by jencar98

Debra, I know we don't agree on the parti subject and that's okay with me. I do believe there are a few good parti breeders and lots of bad parti breeders, just like with traditional color yorkies. As well as, I know there are many bad show breeders and a few good ones. Personally, I think probably 90% or more of all those breeding dogs today shouldn't be doing so.

I am also going to quote the items you added to my post that you quoted: (1) "There are references to the Maltese being in with the original mix of dogs used to create a yorkie. "

(2) "To my knowledge the parti color is not considered a color fault by the AKC, but is a fault with YTCA and they are the determining body for the standard as accepted in AKC shows. "
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay.....where to start......I hope we can disagree on this and remain friends as I do not want a difference of what is going to only be opinion (since neither of us has a genetics lab) to prevent us from talking on other subjects.

(1) There are references by some breeders that the Maltese MAY BE a POSSIBLE breed inroduced that encouraged the long flowing coats as the very early terriers did not have coats like we see today. There was NO evidence of it, no RECORD of it, nothing but supposition. Others like Joan Gordon (the author of one of the most recognized Yorkshire Terrier books around and the History of the Yorkshire Terrier adopted by the YTCA) that believe it is unreasonable to think they would have introduced a white coated dog when they were working so hard on the blue and tan coat.

(2) The AKC site also has made the decision that off-color (any solid color or any white except the small spot on chest) would be a disqualifying trait. This is from the AKC site itself!!!

"Disqualifications:
Any solid color or combination of colors other than blue and tan as described above. Any white markings other than a small white spot on the forechest that does not exceed 1 inch at its longest dimension.

Approved July 10, 2007
Effective October 1, 2007"

There is no proof that the maltese was introduced. It seems unreasonable to me that all the breeders for some 150 years were killing off all the puppies with any white until suddenly in the last 10 years or more this proliferation of white marked pups emerged "en masse." I have heard the argument that suddenly people were breeding for the fault instead of "culling" them as before -- it still does not add up. I can think logically with math and science and it is not computing. Again, anay PROOF to offer? I would be happy to look at it. Give me a reference that is not a parti-breeder site.

[Breezeaway]

I have a 5 page letter from Joan Gordon where she tells me they had a parti and she also talks of the other colors.
Heres a short bit about where she talks about the tri color......

"Dear Ms Mullins
Thank you for your letter, I'm glad you enjoyed our books
I must say however that I'm always fascinated by the amount of misinformation that is placed on the computer and even more so when it becomes exaggerated. WE actually had exactly one tri-color puppy born in all the years we bred Yorkies. After my sister died I gave up breeding extensively as it was what we did together. Since Jans death in 1985. I have bred exactly 4 litters and I stopped breeding completely probably 9 or 10 years ago. I could go look it up but I know Katie and Nicky were the last 2 puppies born.
I have shown several dogs that I purchased from others since then.
Our one tri-color puppy was born Dec. 10, 1976 and was a single puppy. His sire was Wildweir Counterspy and his dam was Wildweir Stitch in Time.
His Recorded name Wildweir Triplicate. He was reg with AKC #: TB426843. This was a first litter for either of his parents. We had the bitch spayed and the male neutered and both were placed as pets. I had heard of Yorkies being born in England that were Tri's but "Trippy" was the only one we'd ever seen.
We kept him until he matured. He was born a white dog with black spots and developed his tan marking as he grew up. His black spots turned to blue-gray and his tan markings came out by the time he was around six months. His temperament was all yorkie and size was very typical around 5 1/2 to 6 lbs. His coat was not as wiry as a fox terrier but certainly not as silky as a yorkie. We placed him with friends who had tried to buy him earlier when he was 2 years old and he lived to be 12 years old.
I don't have a problem writing about our "Trippy" but since the others who bred mismarked dogs that I knew about are deceased, I don't believe I can comment on them. I can only hope that they seek the truth and not just rumors!

[FlDebra]

Originally Posted by Breezeaway

I have a 5 page letter from Joan Gordon where she tells me they had a parti and she also talks of the other colors.
Heres a short bit about where she talks about the tri color......

"Dear Ms Mullins
Thank you for your letter, I'm glad you enjoyed our books
I must say however that I'm always fascinated by the amount of misinformation that is placed on the computer and even more so when it becomes exaggerated. WE actually had exactly one tri-color puppy born in all the years we bred Yorkies. After my sister died I gave up breeding extensively as it was what we did together. Since Jans death in 1985. I have bred exactly 4 litters and I stopped breeding completely probably 9 or 10 years ago. I could go look it up but I know Katie and Nicky were the last 2 puppies born.
I have shown several dogs that I purchased from others since then.
Our one tri-color puppy was born Dec. 10, 1976 and was a single puppy. His sire was Wildweir Counterspy and his dam was Wildweir Stitch in Time.
His Recorded name Wildweir Triplicate. He was reg with AKC #: TB426843. This was a first litter for either of his parents. We had the bitch spayed and the male neutered and both were placed as pets. I had heard of Yorkies being born in England that were Tri's but "Trippy" was the only one we'd ever seen.
We kept him until he matured. He was born a white dog with black spots and developed his tan marking as he grew up. His black spots turned to blue-gray and his tan markings came out by the time he was around six months. His temperament was all yorkie and size was very typical around 5 1/2 to 6 lbs. His coat was not as wiry as a fox terrier but certainly not as silky as a yorkie. We placed him with friends who had tried to buy him earlier when he was 2 years old and he lived to be 12 years old.
I don't have a problem writing about our "Trippy" but since the others who bred mismarked dogs that I knew about are deceased, I don't believe I can comment on them. I can only hope that they seek the truth and not just rumors!

Thank you for sharing that. I appreciate you going to the trouble of finding it and writing it here. I am surprised she did not include anything like this in her published writings. Still, she explains she had the parents spayed & neutered so no further offspring resulted from that mating. It was the first breeding of the pair and she had gotten them from another kennel. The tri-color dog did not have Yorkie hair so it would make me wonder again if another breed had emerged from some mismating way back in the line years and years before either of these breeders got them. I mean there are two pretty significant traits NOT found in the yorkie line -- I would think first of a mistaken mating instead of thinking it evidence of some long lost maltese connection. Finding evidence of one in the line of a breeder as prolific as this.....well....still not telling me it is happening naturally from yorkie alone or that maltese ever had anything OFFICIALLY to do with our breed.

I do appreciate the information, but it is still not convincing me that maltese was in there from the beginning. I think there is probably a LOT of maltese in our breed now as sad as I feel that is. But it is from recent "parti" breeders making their own. I think those of you that come here to plead your case and try to undo anything said against the white-coats genuinely have bred your partis with other parti's or at least carriers. But that is not the case with many. I just see a HUGE problem coming in the next century when we may not be able to count on a yorkie line to throw what has long been one of the most beautiful breeds around.

[Breezeaway]

Originally Posted by FlDebra

Point me to a VALID reference that says the maltese was definately mixed in earlier years!!! I do not believe it exists as I have found absoltely NO evidence of maltese being bred into the Yorkshire Terrier as it was originated. I looked -- I did not form my opinion out of thin air and we had some lively discussions 2-3 years ago on this subject. Never once is a reference produced showing this was realistically done.

Some have GUESSED MAYBE there was a Maltese simply because of the long flowing coats. That could also have come from selectively breeding the best coats each time over the years. I don't think you can use Joan Gordon to support this as she writes:

"Joan Gordon

According to many present-day writers Yorkshires were the result of
a number of breeds being bred together to produce the desired points. How anyone could believe, or even imagine, these early fanciers would have bred from a Dandie Dinmont, a breed with an uneven top line; a Maltese, a totally white breed lacking any blue or tan markings or from a smooth coated Manchester Terrier (originally a smooth coated Old English Terrier) is not being realistic." this is n excerpt from the Yorkshire Terrier History.

She does talk of "off-color" yorkies in her book but I believe she is talking about the chocolate, gold, and red pups that do occasionally get thrown from purebred yorkies. The genetic science to understand that is solid -- WHITE is not. I did not see anything about her having a parti. Do you have a reference for that? Since she does not believe white is a genetic component of the yorkie, I find this hard to fathom.

I am always open to reading any VALID scientific evidence that shows the maltese was bred into that early Yorkie. I don't close my mind to it -- but as long as the professionals writing the Yorkshire Terrier history say it is not so and I can find no evidence that it was, I think I will stick with the YTCA accepted history -- NO WHITE, NO MALTESE.

I don't even understand why you all want to change the AKC/YTCA stance. You all have started your own breed clubs -- many of them. In fact until you all agree on what the dog is supposed to be, it is difficult to try to bring the AKC/YTCA to your side.

She does mention the tri color in her book, as shown below

"It is not unusual to find small white marks on one or more toes or a fine white line in the lower fore jaw. These will not be visible as an adult. A large amount of white marks on the chest, paws, jaws, or skull, places a yorkie into a tri-color classification and it is very wise to guard against this possibility. Yorkshire terrier puppies can be born of colors that automatically deprive them of the necessary qualities to become the proper colors of the breed. They can be born all black: all tan: tan with black points; tri-color: black, white, and tan; all blue; bluish grey with tan points; and so remain or change to another shade of their newly born colors.

[Breezeaway]

Originally Posted by FlDebra

Thank you for sharing that. I appreciate you going to the trouble of finding it and writing it here. I am surprised she did not include anything like this in her published writings. Still, she explains she had the parents spayed & neutered so no further offspring resulted from that mating. It was the first breeding of the pair and she had gotten them from another kennel. The tri-color dog did not have Yorkie hair so it would make me wonder again if another breed had emerged from some mismating way back in the line years and years before either of these breeders got them. I mean there are two pretty significant traits NOT found in the yorkie line -- I would think first of a mistaken mating instead of thinking it evidence of some long lost maltese connection. Finding evidence of one in the line of a breeder as prolific as this.....well....still not telling me it is happening naturally from yorkie alone or that maltese ever had anything OFFICIALLY to do with our breed.

I do appreciate the information, but it is still not convincing me that maltese was in there from the beginning. I think there is probably a LOT of maltese in our breed now as sad as I feel that is. But it is from recent "parti" breeders making their own. I think those of you that come here to plead your case and try to undo anything said against the white-coats genuinely have bred your partis with other parti's or at least carriers. But that is not the case with many. I just see a HUGE problem coming in the next century when we may not be able to count on a yorkie line to throw what has long been one of the most beautiful breeds around.

It DOES NOT say she got them from another kennel.

[FlDebra]

Originally Posted by capt_noonie

I've always wondered this. You send in the papers when they are puppies right? How will you know what their adult color will be? At that point they would still be black and tan puppy colors. Do you go off the parents?

I wonder this every time I register a pup. I have held Annie's registration just for that very question. I have always just registered them as black and tan as that is what they are at the time I send in the papers. But .... I hope she shows me blue coat soon and I can have that on her papers, since color is becoming more important for show and breeding. If she has not shown blue by 11 months, I'll send it in as black & tan because I don't want to wait over the year and have to pay the penalty for late registration.

We have had this question on here before and I don't think it was thoroughly answered. When CAN you register a yorkie pup as blue & gold or blue & tan? Can you send in for a correction if they turn blue? Does it matter?

[jencar98]

Originally Posted by FlDebra

.I hope we can disagree on this and remain friends as I do not want a difference of what is going to only be opinion (since neither of us has a genetics lab) to prevent us from talking on other subjects.

Most definitely we can remain friends, even if we do disagree on this subject I have many friends and we don't always agree on everything...lol....that would be boring

[RachelandSadie]

Originally Posted by jencar98

Most definitely we can remain friends, even if we do disagree on this subject I have many friends and we don't always agree on everything...lol....that would be boring

wonderful job you too. i'm proud to know you both and that you can disagree and I can learn some amazing things from each of you and not see you upsetting each other over it

[jencar98]

Originally Posted by FlDebra

I wonder this every time I register a pup. I have held Annie's registration just for that very question. I have always just registered them as black and tan as that is what they are at the time I send in the papers. But .... I hope she shows me blue coat soon and I can have that on her papers, since color is becoming more important for show and breeding. If she has not shown blue by 11 months, I'll send it in as black & tan because I don't want to wait over the year and have to pay the penalty for late registration.

We have had this question on here before and I don't think it was thoroughly answered. When CAN you register a yorkie pup as blue & gold or blue & tan? Can you send in for a correction if they turn blue? Does it matter?

I don't know what other breeders do and don't know if it really matters but, Reno's breeder listed him as Blue and Gold on his registration papers (that part was filled out by her). He was only 14 weeks old when I got him and still had his mostly black puppy coat.

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by FlDebra

I wonder this every time I register a pup. I have held Annie's registration just for that very question. I have always just registered them as black and tan as that is what they are at the time I send in the papers. But .... I hope she shows me blue coat soon and I can have that on her papers, since color is becoming more important for show and breeding. If she has not shown blue by 11 months, I'll send it in as black & tan because I don't want to wait over the year and have to pay the penalty for late registration.

We have had this question on here before and I don't think it was thoroughly answered. When CAN you register a yorkie pup as blue & gold or blue & tan? Can you send in for a correction if they turn blue? Does it matter?

The longer your girl holds off on breaking blue, the better. I prefer them not to have them begin to break until about 9 months of age.

Since the pups I keep are for show, I usually send in their registration in at 5 months of age. You can no longer show on the litter registration and the pup must be registered individually before sending in entries for an AKC show.

No, you can't send in a correction if they turn blue. Does it matter? It should to the exhibitor that is showing the dog.

Let me add, by 5 months of age you can tell at the topline the coat texture. If it reflects light, you have a silk coated dog and more than likely break blue. I've only seen one true black silk coated yorkie.

[FlDebra]

Originally Posted by Breezeaway

It DOES NOT say she got them from another kennel.

Sorry -- I mispoke-- your ltr does say the parents were both Wildweir. I was surprised she did not admit in a published book having the one tri-color in all of her very prolific years of breeding. I have "The Complete Yorkshire Terrier" she wrote and will get it out again. But I think we keep arguing different points. You said the Yorkshire Terrier originally had Maltese in it and that is what I try to speak to but you keep bring it back to Joan Gordan having one tri-color. I will concede that since you have the letter from her. I trust that. But it just does not lead me to believe the other things we are in contention over.

I will admit you threw me a surprise there as I had not remembered that if I had know it before. I definately don't have it all down, but I know I read plenty trying to find any justification for white in the breed and could not find it. Supposition is just not enough to convince me.

[capt_noonie]

Uni was breaking very early,, even when I just got her. however she is not akc, and I did not know about the off registries before and sent in her worthless papers as black and gold. She's super light now. i was just wondering for my own wonderment.

[FlDebra]

Originally Posted by Mardelin

The longer your girl holds off on breaking blue, the better. I prefer them not to have them begin to break until about 9 months of age.

Since the pups I keep are for show, I usually send in their registration in at 5 months of age. You can no longer show on the litter registration and the pup must be registered individually before sending in entries for an AKC show.

No, you can't send in a correction if they turn blue. Does it matter? It should to the exhibitor that is showing the dog.

Let me add, by 5 months of age you can tell at the topline the coat texture. If it reflects light, you have a silk coated dog and more than likely break blue. I've only seen one true black silk coated yorkie.

Thanks Mary -- I had a feeling you would answer! She reflects light. I had noticed in the sunlight outside and just took her in the dining room where the light is brighter and she shines. I also get none of that almost brownish look that a cotton coat shows. I think she is a silky coat-- she is from the same line as Ben, he is silky & blue. So, I guess I will send in her registration as blue & tan then. Thanks!

[FlDebra]

Originally Posted by jencar98

Most definitely we can remain friends, even if we do disagree on this subject I have many friends and we don't always agree on everything...lol....that would be boring

Originally Posted by jencar98

I don't know what other breeders do and don't know if it really matters but, Reno's breeder listed him as Blue and Gold on his registration papers (that part was filled out by her). He was only 14 weeks old when I got him and still had his mostly black puppy coat.

Thanks Jen! That is the way it should be.

I am going to register Annie as Blue & Tan. She does seem to be developing a silky coat and reflects light. Glad Capt Noonie asked the question here! I learn something everyday on this site!

But I am getting tired and making mistakes -- thought Breezeway said a dog came from England -- going too fast and misreading -- So, I think my debating time is over for tonight.

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by FlDebra

Thanks Mary -- I had a feeling you would answer! She reflects light. I had noticed in the sunlight outside and just took her in the dining room where the light is brighter and she shines. I also get none of that almost brownish look that a cotton coat shows. I think she is a silky coat-- she is from the same line as Ben, he is silky & blue. So, I guess I will send in her registration as blue & tan then. Thanks!

Remember at times a brownish cast to a coat can mean an harmonal imbalance. I've had it with a couple of my bitches and once in full coat the cast had grown out and they were a dark steel bue and silk.....sadly to say with each Season and litter they lightened.