When I was about 10 years old my family decided to get a Poodle. It was really our first experience buying a purebred dog although a breeder had given us a Boxer a few years earlier. Like many people we assumed that if a dog was AKC registered we were getting a good dog. Well, he was a good dog. No major health issues, nice personality but he was not a prime example of a poodle. We loved him anyway. He was a great pet. I think most people buy a purebred dog with little knowledge about what goes into producing these dogs. As I have stated there are all kinds out there. Just because someone shows dogs it does not mean they are "bettering" the breed. Showing dogs is majorly political and trendy. If you want to win you have to be breeding according to the trend and not necessarily the standard. That is why you see so many changes in breeds over the decades. Too many people have had their hearts and pocketbooks broken because of the purchase of a dog with health problems. A pet store pup is very likely to have issues but purchasing from a "show" breeder can also be problematic. We all love our pets no matter how far from the breed standard they may end up. Buying a purebred animal is just not as simple as most people think and by the time they find that out many times it is too late. Most people buy a purebred because they want a certain look and personality type. When they get something all together different they end up wondering why. It's so easy to fall in love with that innocent little puppy looking up at you with the sweet puppy dog eyes not knowing the heartache and pain it may cost you down the line. You may not be concerned about your dog being close to the breed standard but please be concerned about the breed it's self. Supporting puppy mills or unethical breeders guaranties that more dogs and people will suffer in some way.

I consider a puppy mill breeder unethical. I also consider any person who puts two dogs together to mate without regard to the genetic defects in the background of those dogs unethical. There are many other items that I could add to the list but that is a starting point.

The puppies that are taken from puppy mills that are shut down are taken care of and get good homes if at all possible. We don't need to worry about them getting homes. We don't need to keep buying them in order to give them a home. Yes, they need homes but let the humane society and rescue agencies help them. Don't continue to financially support the people who promote the suffering of these animals.

Genetics are weird...that's why I love to research them.
My aunt and uncle have three sons together one has jet black hair olive skin and deep brown eyes he's about 5'6 lean but muscular, next red hair pale white skin and green hazel eyes built like a tank barrel chested but more big bones than muscular, their third son had blond hair blue eyes and golden skin he's super tall and super slender...it's a roll of the DNA dice each time...one of my dear friends has Italian roots way back but on both parents sides for like three generations everyone is blond with blue eyes light skinned her oldest daughter deep olive tones dark brown hair everyone made jokes to her husband...:rolleyes:

Genetics are like a box of chocolates...

Isn't it odd that the "standard" became less than 7lb when originally Yorkies were bigger so I guess THEN it was the "standard".

I know to those of you that show, it is a big deal. For me, I feel that I'm so blessed that I have two healthy, sweet pups, one "Teapot" at 13 lbs and one tiny one at 4 pounds.

To the OP: My prayers that life will again be more pleasant for you and your family...


I believe in the UK they are trying to 'reverse' breed out many of the harmful characteristics common to many breeds, ie: smushed faces, health problems, etc. Hopefully that trend will trickle across the pond.

Now I do wish that is what will happen even though I am a believer in breeders breeding to the standard. When I look at the overall health of yorkies I have to ask is it more detrimental that some yorkies are bred to be 15 lbs as adults or is it more detrimental that they are bred to be 2 lbs. Which maintains the yorkie as a capable able dog. Well it is obvious it is the bigger yorkie. So I wouldnt mind seeling the standard changed to like 5-12 lbs I really wouldnt. That is the starting size that is safe to breed anyway so why should any yorkie be any smaller than that. I would love to see the yorkie go back to being a terrier able bodied dog rather than a purse puppy.

Oh, I meant that they are looking into or are changing the standards to produce heathier dogs, as health has become the priority.

Well I do too but I also think there should be a minimum weight and a little bit larger yorkie should be included

I agree.:D

Smokey has a huge, tough dog terrier personality and if he does bulk up accordingly, then on a pound for pound basis that's simply just more Yorkie for my dollar. Thank you for this very realistic response to my original question.:animal-pa

The breed standard has been not to exceed 7lbs since before my parents bought their first Yorkie in England 1970 when my father was stationed there. IMO a 5-7 lb dog is very capable of being a ratter. I think that the real problem is that too many people see $$$$ and breed Yorkies with no thought as to the health of the puppies,let alone the breed standard. I was very surprised when I started looking for my own Yorkie two years ago at how many off-standard pups are out there. Apple heads, huge eyes, down ears.... all puppies are cute, but half of them don't even look like Yorkies to me.

Yes I agree to an extent because Im a believer in following the standard even if I dont agree with it. However the yorkie was originally a bigger dog so what was the reasoning to make deviate so much and make it a much smaller dog. Was health and the dogs ability to be an able capable dog considered? Did they consider that a trend would start towards the breeding for a 2 or 3 lb dog. These are the questions I ask. Just because something has been a certain way for a long time doesnt mean its for the best for the dog

I don't think health was considered back then, because there was no evidence that downsizing would be harmful like we see today.

I agree if they knew things like liver shunt and hydrocephalis were going to be prevalent in the breed would their decision be different. Its just like the other dogs that have been bred to have very smushed face and now have sever breathing problems

A dog by the name of Huddersfield Ben was responsible for producing most of the foundation stock of the Yorkshire Terrier. Although he weighted between 9 -12 lb, he regularly sired stock that competed in the under 7 lb limit. This was over 100 years ago, so this isn’t really a new thing. Regarding raising standard over 7 pounds; I believe 7 pounds is the limit for if you want to compete in the toy breed. So all this only applies to breeders not pet owners, we can purchase the size dog we want. If I had children, I'd be looking for the biggest yorkie I could find! ;) A bigger dog is such a joy to hug.

Oh I see I didnt know 7 lbs is the limit to be considered a toy dog. I dont know Im on the fence on my views about weight because of the reasons Ive given but I do see the purpose of them being in the toy grouping