Yorkshire Terrier and the Parti/Tricolor

[DamSweet]

ok - now is the time for a totally ignorant person to ask a question. I would like to know if someone can recommend a GOOD book about the history of the Yorkie and how the standards are decided upon. There are a million books out there, but I'd really like to read correct facts, not opinons of the author. I'm fairly sure that the Yorkshire Terrier wasn't placed on this earth by God as we see them today. I think I read they are a mix of 3 other breeds, and over the years have changed considerably....again, I'm just getting bits and pieces and would love to learn more about their history and the change of the standards. I probably should have started a new thread, but most of the members here seem pretty knowledgable about this. Thanks for any inormation you can share.

[Breezeaway]

Originally Posted by Mardelin

In addition; let it be known that it is now a YTCA requirement to obtain CHIC # for a dog to obtain selected top dog awards.

Originally Posted by FlDebra

I do not believe I am stating merely an opinion. I was speaking solely on the subject of color when I said parti's were not selective, that was clear. I believe that is fact and NOT opinion. [/I]It may sound subjective, but when those breeding parti's say ANY 2-3 colors and ANY placement is acceptable, then how COULD THAT POOSSIBLY be selective. You say that some parti-breeders do strive for placement. What do they use as a goal? There is no standard, no generally accepted placement requirement, no established goal for all to strive for. I never said that any breeder was not being selective in anything other than color. I hope ALL breeders are selective in health & structure (even though there are some who don't care in all walks). The subject though was COLOR.

When you say that show breeders are putting color ahead of health, that is opinion, false, and totally ludicrous. Those yorkshire terriers in the ring are obviously healthy, vetted, well cared for and most, if not all are OFA/CERF certified. All of the show breeders here do the testing and often describe removing a dog from their breeding program if any pup is ever thrown with a health or structure problem. Do you have an example of a Yorkshire in the ring that has not had their eyes, heart, and joints tested?

Just because some breeders were caught enhancing color does not mean in ANY way they or the majority of breeders put color ahead of health! I color my hair, does that mean I am not concerned with my health or that I put my hair color above health concerns? That is just crazy talk! You lose credibility when you use ludicrous statements like that. "Someone, somewhere colored their dogs hair so show breeders don't put health first" Really???? Come on! You have been so reasonable in presenting your side until this.

Mardelin, What Selected Awards?

Yes, I feel health testing in the most important when it comes to breeding. But how truthful are those tests?

FlDebra, It was only a few months ago,on 9/14/10 that there were only 38 yorkies that were certified. Now you are stating all YTCA dogs in the ring have been certified...where is that documentation or is that just your opinion?
I also have to ask why the AKC is not even requiring (just recommending) bile acid tests with the Yorkie even though they have one of the highest % of liver shunt dogs in all the breeds? Where is the health concern there?

The following is just one small part of the two articles...

”Who would admit that their OFA certified dog became crippled or the CERF certified dog went blind? Not the vets, not the breeders, and least of all, the burgeoning health registries that were raking in $millions. OFA doesn’t care that less than 5% of owners ever re-certify a dog's hips or elbows due to expense, radiation exposure, or anesthesia risk. That alone makes a mockery of hip certification. But it gets worse. The priceless clear-hips certificate may not belong to that dog. Substitution has become so common that breeders joke about dogs that "glow in the dark."

HEALTH CERTIFICATION (1) PERSPECTIVES, by Barbara J. Andrews

CERTIFYING HEALTH CERTIFICATION & TESTING, by Barbara J. Andrews

[gemy]

Originally Posted by Breezeaway

Mardelin, What Selected Awards?

Yes, I feel health testing in the most important when it comes to breeding. But how truthful are those tests?

FlDebra, It was only a few months ago,on 9/14/10 that there were only 38 yorkies that were certified. Now you are stating all YTCA dogs in the ring have been certified...where is that documentation or is that just your opinion?
I also have to ask why the AKC is not even requiring (just recommending) bile acid tests with the Yorkie even though they have one of the highest % of liver shunt dogs in all the breeds? Where is the health concern there?

The following is just one small part of the two articles...

”Who would admit that their OFA certified dog became crippled or the CERF certified dog went blind? Not the vets, not the breeders, and least of all, the burgeoning health registries that were raking in . OFA doesn’t care that less than 5% of owners ever re-certify a dog's hips or elbows due to expense, radiation exposure, or anesthesia risk. That alone makes a mockery of hip certification. But it gets worse. The priceless clear-hips certificate may not belong to that dog. Substitution has become so common that breeders joke about dogs that "glow in the dark."

HEALTH CERTIFICATION (1) PERSPECTIVES, by Barbara J. Andrews

CERTIFYING HEALTH CERTIFICATION & TESTING, by Barbara J. Andrews

To what I bolded, perhaps some dogs don't have a CHIC number yet. You have to submit the paperwork in for it to be listed on the CHIC site; however OFA hips, elbows, knee testing should be listed on their site, if the owner agreed to post the results.

[Wylie's Mom]

Originally Posted by FlDebra

NO ONE CALLED PARTI-OWNERS SUCKERS!

Here are her exact words. When she says they, she is referring to Parti owners:

Originally Posted by Raymond's Mom

They cost so much because there truly is a "sucker born every minute". They cannot be shown in AKC conformation shows. The parti color yorkie and off color yorkie is a DQ in this breed.

Originally Posted by FlDebra

I think personalizing and twisting comments into saying something never meant makes it EVEN HARDER. Just asking for a little temperance.

Debra, I feel very calm about this whole matter and have all day. However, you keep shouting using all caps (as above) at anyone who seems to step into this thread with a thought that differs from your line of thinking.

If you're asking for temperance, it would seem appropriate to give it as well. I haven't seen anyone behave 'intemperately' yet. I'm not sure how to ask people not to feel *personal* about their opinions/thoughts/feelings about a subject....so I can't really offer anything there.

All members are welcome to post on this thread. Members are also welcome to having different opinions, as I've stated innumerable times. I too am a member, and have the privilege of expressing my opinion on this thread. Thanks.

[gemy]

Oh yes and CERF should be posted on their website.


In terms of the links you posted, interesting reading, but not new. There has been anecdoctal evidence around for years that substitute dogs go in for CERF, HIP, ELBOW,etc. It is a travesty that permanent identification markers are not mandatory for any specialist and or vet doing the screening for same.

There are also antagonists for the reading, and the procedure for doing the Xrays. I have posted in another thread about CERF needing to be repeated, and frequently too, the recommended from one source is yearly. The unfortunate truth is that PRA can occur at 4 or 5 yrs old with clear CERF;s till then.

As far as patellar sublaxation, it is probably polygenetic, and Xrays can clear the breeding dog, but is little guarantee for it's progeny.

What should be a concern for breeders and potential dog owners is where are the long term studies, on just how LP1 versus LP2 dogs do clinically over the years. What if any are the restrictions to movement, to a healthy life? What practical additives to food, exercise regimens will help insure a happy and healthy life?

There are also studies that show over the long haul on certain breeds the incidence of hip dysplasia has not reduced significantly over OFA reporting life. We are left to wonder why

[Ringo1]

I must be totally stupid because I cannot get into this whole 'Parti vs. Yorkie" thing. Why don't they just make a new color? The King Charles Cavalier has three colors: blenham, black and white, and tri-color. Are they all not recognized?

Some people prefer the traditional yorkie colors and some prefer the Parti colors.

What's not to like?

[shamrocks]

Originally Posted by Ringo1

I must be totally stupid because I cannot get into this whole 'Parti vs. Yorkie" thing. Why don't they just make a new color? The King Charles Cavalier has three colors: blenham, black and white, and tri-color. Are they all not recognized?

Some people prefer the traditional yorkie colors and some prefer the Parti colors.

What's not to like?

[RachelandSadie]

Originally Posted by Pinehaven

Just so people reading this can understand the genetics behind many of the parti yorkies ...

The majority of parti yorkies have either the piebald gene or extreme white piebald gene. These genes have a random and unpredictable spotting pattern, so it would be nearly impossible to set a standard indicating placement of or quantity of spotting - thus the standard for parti, is the same as the blue and tan yorkie, with the exception of color.

Now, if parti's all had the irish spotting gene, like some of the Biewers have, it would be possible to list the markings in a set standard. Irish Spotting gene has a predictable spotting pattern, characterized by white legs, white on belly, chest, chin, muzzle and tip of tail.

i find this interesting, would it be the same in a bridled dog. brindle seems like it comes in so many patterns.

[lisaly]

I started writing my post a few hours ago, and have had to come back to it. Thankfully, I am seeing more people speaking up for breeders who do so because of their passion and love for their dogs and who hold the health of the dogs in highest regard. I find that I will now be reiterating some things that have already been said.

I respect those who believe in breeding to standard, and I understand those feelings. There are people who breed off-standard, however, who truly love their dogs and are not doing so to attract a pet buyer with a huge, inflated price tag. I've never personally seen a Parti or Biewer, but I understand what it is to truly love a dog. That kind of love became very apparent when I followed a thread in the Sick/Emergency forum when Tammy's Livi had her babies and their health was in danger. So many of us grew to love Livi and her babies, and we felt a great sigh of relief and happiness as we watched those babies grow and thrive. You bet I was thrilled when I learned whose homes those babies were going to. It wasn't so much that they were respected members of YT but that I knew that they were going to so loved and taken care of. Every time I read about those babies, there is such a tone of love running through every thread about them. They may not have been bred to standard, but I know I'm not the only one who finds their breeder to be great. It's difficult when you talk about little ones who are so loved not to take it personally, whether you are the breeder or the owner of the dogs. Not everyone who is breeding Partis or Biewers is doing so because of the demand and the chance to get a higher price tag. For many, it is about passion and love for the dog. I think because of passion and love for this breed, for some there is also fear of change, but I agree with Gail that the breed is in much greater danger due to byb and puppy mills. When the Yorkshire Terrier started to climb in popularity, I became fearful of what was to become of a breed that I've loved since childhood. With that popularity came those who wanted to breed to capitalize on that popularity. As much as I love the looks of this breed, it's much more about the temperament than the looks. The Yorkshire Terrier is a very beautiful dog. I know my little ones weren't true breed standard, but they were close enough to the look of the Yorkshire Terrier I know and love. I think it was a little easier for me to accept a Biewer looking different than a Yorkie looking different, because at least they didn't have to fit an image that I have in my head of what a Yorkie is supposed to look like. In the end, when you love them and they are yours, looks become so unimportant in the scheme of things. My first Yorkie Jolie was black and tan, Kiwi had one floppy ear, Gracie was almost perfect (to me) but too tiny, and I still haven't figured out how Ashley started to get curls (that I found beautiful) only as she started to age. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and those we hold dear aren't because of how they look. We love this breed, however, also because of the image that it holds for us, so the standard is still very important. I hope as more time goes by that more Yorkies are bred to standard with health and temperament being a priority. However, I think the Partis and Biewers are beautiful, too, and hope there will be more opportunities to those who are breeding healthy tri-colored Yorkies to have a venue to show their dogs and to be treated with respect that they deserve.

[RachelandSadie]

i just wrote a huge huge statement that didn't come through. rather than write it again i'll just state that i am forming my own opinions and basically so far it is that i wish to see the yorkie standard stay blue and gold only and the white varieties of the dog to be known as a seperate dog breed NOT as a variation in color to the existing yorkie. this would be a great compromise to make everyone happy. i think as long as a breeder breeds to health and quality, they should be able to breed to a standard they as the breeder are looking for. someone who puts their life into changing the traits of a dog and creating an entirely new breed of dog should be able to do so. i don't think yorkies should be bred off standard for sales and pet industry, but breeding for the white traits in a dog and considering the end results a new breed of dog seems ok to me. if people don't change the traits in a dog's lineage then how will we ever get new dog breeds. every year the AKC recognizes more breeds. i just think a yorkie is a blue and gold dog and a white variety should be a new breed. we may never truely know if it's a gene that naturally happens in yorkies or if it's another dog breed that leaked into the line, but either way it can and prob. in the future will be a whole new breed of dog a white dog with blue and gold and brown and black colors in it's coat called something other than a yorkie and has the yorkie as it's ancestor. that's my opinion and i'm sticking to it.

[Pinehaven]

Originally Posted by RachelandSadie

i just wrote a huge huge statement that didn't come through. rather than write it again i'll just state that i am forming my own opinions and basically so far it is that i wish to see the yorkie standard stay blue and gold only and the white varieties of the dog to be known as a seperate dog breed NOT as a variation in color to the existing yorkie. this would be a great compromise to make everyone happy. i think as long as a breeder breeds to health and quality, they should be able to breed to a standard they as the breeder are looking for. someone who puts their life into changing the traits of a dog and creating an entirely new breed of dog should be able to do so. i don't think yorkies should be bred off standard for sales and pet industry, but breeding for the white traits in a dog and considering the end results a new breed of dog seems ok to me. if people don't change the traits in a dog's lineage then how will we ever get new dog breeds. every year the AKC recognizes more breeds. i just think a yorkie is a blue and gold dog and a white variety should be a new breed. we may never truely know if it's a gene that naturally happens in yorkies or if it's another dog breed that leaked into the line, but either way it can and prob. in the future will be a whole new breed of dog a white dog with blue and gold and brown and black colors in it's coat called something other than a yorkie and has the yorkie as it's ancestor. that's my opinion and i'm sticking to it.

AKC will not register Parti's as a sperate breed because they are yorkshire terriers and new AKC breeds must be a mix of 3 different breeds.

Definition of PUREBRED according to the merriam-webster definition is:

bred from members of a recognized breed, strain, or kind without a mixture of other blood over many generations

Synonyms: blooded, full-blood, full-blooded, pedigreed (or pedigree), pure-blooded (or pure-blood), thoroughbred

My parti's are purebred and they should have the same rights as the traditional blue and tan has. Color does not make a dog purebred, it's the years of uninterrupted purebred bloodlines in that's dogs breeding that make it a purebred.

I don't feel that a yorkshire terrier, who's coat is not the perfect shade of steel blue (or who's ear is down, or has some smuttiness mixed in it's tan or is parti colored ...), is any less a purebred than what the standard calls for because it's his generations of purebred breeding, that makes that dog a purebred.

[yorkiegirl2]

Originally Posted by RachelandSadie

i just wrote a huge huge statement that didn't come through. rather than write it again i'll just state that i am forming my own opinions and basically so far it is that i wish to see the yorkie standard stay blue and gold only and the white varieties of the dog to be known as a seperate dog breed NOT as a variation in color to the existing yorkie. this would be a great compromise to make everyone happy. i think as long as a breeder breeds to health and quality, they should be able to breed to a standard they as the breeder are looking for. someone who puts their life into changing the traits of a dog and creating an entirely new breed of dog should be able to do so. i don't think yorkies should be bred off standard for sales and pet industry, but breeding for the white traits in a dog and considering the end results a new breed of dog seems ok to me. if people don't change the traits in a dog's lineage then how will we ever get new dog breeds. every year the AKC recognizes more breeds. i just think a yorkie is a blue and gold dog and a white variety should be a new breed. we may never truely know if it's a gene that naturally happens in yorkies or if it's another dog breed that leaked into the line, but either way it can and prob. in the future will be a whole new breed of dog a white dog with blue and gold and brown and black colors in it's coat called something other than a yorkie and has the yorkie as it's ancestor. that's my opinion and i'm sticking to it.

Not going to happen since the Parti is a variation of the standard yorkie.
Akc does not recognize a variation of one breed as a different breed.

[Pinehaven]

double posted - sorry ...

[shodanusmc]

Originally Posted by yorkiegirl2

Not going to happen since the Parti is a variation of the standard yorkie.
Akc does not recognize a variation of one breed as a different breed.

On Target. How many different Yorkies do we need? One is enough. Variations should be sold as pets. There are standards for a reason.

[shodanusmc]

Originally Posted by gemy

Yes I was referring to you. The dilution of the Yorkie breed is going on, in a much more intense, and devastating way with all the bybers, and puppy mills, who supposedly breed Standard Yorkies. And they do it for the money! the money to be had from one of the most popular breeds.

BYB's are also doing a disservice by just breeding for the dollar. No different than a parti Breeder per se, not breeding to the written standard. If not bred to the standard it is wrong.


Your Cane Corso didn't get recognized by AKC until what 2years ago? Does that mean your breeder was breeding for the money because this breed wasn't recognized yet? My breed wasn't recognized in AKC until 2007, does that mean the few breeders here in North America were doing it for the money??? Or was it for the love of these unique breeds?

Back then, 11 years ago, there was only one breed, and an American and Italian Standard. Very similar, colors had to be the same, but slight differences in structure and weight. My breeder bred to the American Standard. Old Carlo comes from a nice line of old Champs, ARBA, not AKC. Now they are AKC, and they have one Color Standard, not 2. Black, Brown, Brindle, a small patch of white...small.....Some were doing it for the money. That is why there are problems with some dogs from some CORSO breeders, breeding for size, drive, and not health or temperment. With any breed, there are those only for the money. If I ever get another Corso, I know who it will come from. A lady in CO who has more Champions than anyone, that breeds to the written standard of the AKC, that is active in the breed, and that is above board.

I do not support your opinion that ALL Parti breeders are in it for the money. As I said before there is much room for passion, and belief, and a willingness to buck the "standard quo", to breed to their passion, with their intellect, their knowledge, and yes take the knocks along the way.

Why not just breed to the standard. If you want to deviate, then you are not breeding a Standard Bred Yorkie. WHy would one do that? If they did not want to sell them that would be one thing, but sales sales sales.



For me personally, I don't know if the Partis should be recognized or not. I just know that the road will be a long haul for those passionate breeders.

Very long. My feeling is they should not be recognized, and get back to the standard. Will that happen? Not at all. We all have our own opinions.