Tiny Yorkies

[cheryl000]

Originally Posted by Athina

A standard is a standard. You can't say it's ok to break a standard one way and not the other.
And that will be all i'll be adding to this thread

I didn't say it was "okay" to break the breed standard. IMO it is WORSE to breed a tiny female and put her life in jeopary just to get tinies. I believe that lots of the bigger yorkies were the result of throwbacks more than people breeding 8+ dogs. Also, back in the day bad breeders used to breed yorkies and silkies together.

[shelbysmom]

Originally Posted by cheryl000

IMO it is WORSE to breed a tiny yorkie because it is harder on her, so the breeder has more of a disreguard to her life than the standard. Since when are standards worth more than the dog's life? I think that people keep pushing the envelope and wanting smaller and smaller, not nessasarily better. I believe that breeders should aim to have puppies within the standard. I did not say bigger yorkies are more healthy, but it has been written that tinies have attendancy to be "more suseptable to health problems:

March 2006 issue of Dog Fancy. Every month they do a several page article on a specific breed. This month's breed, THE YORKSHIRE TERRIER!!!!!!!
they have a section called No Teacups. It reads:

"The tiniest of the tiny Yorkies, weighing less than the standard size of 4 to 7 pounds as adults, are sometimes called "Teacup Yorkies." The term doesnt technically exist, according to the Yorkshire Terrier Club of America or the American Kennel Club, and refers to dogs who, rather than being rare or special, are actually just dangerously small, more susceptible to injury and accidents, and particularly vulnerable to health problems, says Shirley Patterson, corresponding secretary of the Yorkshire Terrier Club of America. She urges potential owners not to be fooled by breeders trying to sell these extra-small Yorkies for extra-large prices.
'These dogs need constant supervision, become dehydrated very easily, and get sick frequently,' Patterson says. Responsible breeders will not charge more money for these smaller dogs, who can naturally be born in any litter."

The last Yorkshire Terrier Magazine (Dog Fancy Magazine) refered to "teacups" as those under 3 lbs. (page 10 volume 16) "Most breeders recommend that Yorkies weigh between 3 and 7 lbs."

Just like this board, the definition of tiny keeps changing.

Remember the standard is under 7lbs. (not 4 - 7 lbs.) People that are uncomfortable with that might be better off with a larger breed.

[cheryl000]

Originally Posted by shelbysmom

The last Yorkshire Terrier Magazine (Dog Fancy Magazine) refered to "teacups" as those under 3 lbs. (page 10 volume 16) "Most breeders recommend that Yorkies weigh between 3 and 7 lbs."

Just like this board, the definition of tiny keeps changing.

Remember the standard is under 7lbs. (not 4 - 7 lbs.) People that are uncomfortable with that might be better off with a larger breed.

I don't think finding a tiny yorkie should be the number 1 factor. People can still love yorkies for other reasons than just thieir size. They are affectionate, energetic, and smart as well. Some people might look for a bigger yorkie because they have kids or other dogs. Others still bought a yorkie from standard parents and it just became bigger than the standard. I think I'm done at these arguments as well. It seems like YT is so obessed with size.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by shelbysmom

The last Yorkshire Terrier Magazine (Dog Fancy Magazine) refered to "teacups" as those under 3 lbs. (page 10 volume 16) "Most breeders recommend that Yorkies weigh between 3 and 7 lbs."

I am wondering, did they say this was the recommended weight for one period, or for one that should be bred?

Originally Posted by shelbysmom

Remember the standard is under 7lbs. (not 4 - 7 lbs.) People that are uncomfortable with that might be better off with a larger breed.

If the standard is "under 7lbs," that would mean ANYTHING under 7 lbs, 1 pound, 2 pound, etc. Surely no one thinks it would be a good idea to breed a 1 pound female just because it "fits the standard?"

[SoCalyorkiLvr]

[QUOTE=cheryl000]Since when are standards worth more than the dog's life?

Originally Posted by cheryl000

March 2006 issue of Dog Fancy. Every month they do a several page article on a specific breed. This month's breed, THE YORKSHIRE TERRIER!!!!!!!
they have a section called No Teacups. It reads:

'These dogs need constant supervision, become dehydrated very easily, and get sick frequently,' Patterson says. Responsible breeders will not charge more money for these smaller dogs, who can naturally be born in any litter."

Unfortunately, purists have valued the "standard" more than the dog's life since the beginning. Puppies are "culled" or killed who are the wrong color or for whatever other reason do not conform to the "physical standard" and it has nothing to do with health. It is all appearance driven which i feel is wrong. Why dock tails? How is that in the best interests of the puppy of their health for goodness sake?

I have NEVER seen any proof of the statement that tinies are less healthy than other sizes so after I read the article I emailed Shirley Patterson of the YTCA twice politely and professionally asking for her sources for her statements and she did not respond.

[Itspuppyluv]

It really says must not exceed seven pounds. Maybe I'm reading too much into that but it was approved by the AKC forty years ago. Back then would they have thought "must not weigh less than - three, two (pick a number you think of as tiny) pounds" would ever be needed?

[rrosenberry]

In all the Yorkshire terrier books I have,, the breed standard is 5-7 pounds.

[Princessyorkies]

[QUOTE=SoCalyorkiLvr]

Originally Posted by cheryl000

Since when are standards worth more than the dog's life?




Unfortunately, purists have valued the "standard" more than the dog's life since the beginning. Puppies are "culled" or killed who are the wrong color or for whatever other reason do not conform to the "physical standard" and it has nothing to do with health. It is all appearance driven which i feel is wrong. Why dock tails? How is that in the best interests of the puppy of their health for goodness sake?

I have NEVER seen any proof of the statement that tinies are less healthy than other sizes so after I read the article I emailed Shirley Patterson of the YTCA twice politely and professionally asking for her sources for her statements and she did not respond.

So many people have their own opinions on everything which is just in their own eyes.
But I agree with the above because I do not believe that there is any proof that tiny yorkies are less healthy than the bigger ones. That would be to me like saying because my neighbor is bigger than I am I would have more health issues. I know were talking about dogs and not humans here, but in reality is there such a big health issue. It would be wrong to breed any size if they were not in good health. I have spoken to several breeders and vets and they say as long as you are breeding and are not endangering the health of the dog and are actually breeding to better the breed then who is to tell you what you should and should not do if all is well. In the wild I wonder if the male says to the female...hey I can't do this because you are too big or too small...What did they do before humans came along and made the decissions for them? Makes you think doesn't it...
Well they are posters on here who say it makes them sick and they are so angry when they hear of someone breeding one under 5 pounds, then there are others on here who say they have no problem with it at all. Different opinions is all it is. Take head and listen to what everyone has to say then figure out for yourslelf what is right and what is wrong. Only you know your fur babies, not everyone else. So you know what's best. Talk to other breeders and talk to your vet then determine what to do.
But I am telling you my opinion and if you do breed a smaller yorkie just know they do need allot more attention then a bigger one, not to say bigger ones do not need attention or anything like that it is just the smaller ones need it more. As they are more fragile. ( now remember this is my opinion)

[Itspuppyluv]

Originally Posted by Princessyorkies

What did they do before humans came along and made the decissions for them? Makes you think doesn't it...

Before humans came along they were much larger. They would have never gotten this small on their own.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by Princessyorkie

But I agree with the above because I do not believe that there is any proof that tiny yorkies are less healthy than the bigger ones..)

Originally Posted by Princessyorkie

But I am telling you my opinion and if you do breed a smaller yorkie just know they do need allot more attention then a bigger one, not to say bigger ones do not need attention or anything like that it is just the smaller ones need it more. As they are more fragile. ( now remember this is my opinion)

Um, sorry, not understanding you? Which one is your opinion? Looks like you believe both sides of the story...

[Princessyorkies]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

Um, sorry, not understanding you? Which one is your opinion? Looks like you believe both sides of the story...

All I am saying here is I do think the smaller ones need more attention because they are more fragile than the bigger ones. Therefore they do need more attention than a bigger one. Because they are smaller.
You know no matter what size in yorkies you breed at some point in time you will get a smaller one than what the dam and sire is.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by Princessyorkies

All I am saying here is I do think the smaller ones need more attention because they are more fragile than the bigger ones. Therefore they do need more attention than a bigger one. Because they are smaller.

Ummmm, well then...wouldn't this classify as a health issue? It is in regards to their health and well-being...

(I agree with you on this, BTW. )

[Princessyorkies]

Originally Posted by Itspuppyluv

Before humans came along they were much larger. They would have never gotten this small on their own.

Right you are. Without the help of humans they would be what ever size. I heard yorkies started out being about 35 pounds and over time have gotten to where they are now. Not a fact just what I have heard and read in different places.
So who is to say with down sizing them over the years that that was healthy?

[Princessyorkies]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

Ummmm, well then...wouldn't this classify as a health issue? It is in regards to their health and well-being...

(I agree with you on this, BTW. )

Who is to say about their well being other than their owner and vet? Not everyone on here knows everything as we can all learn something from people. It may or may not be right but we can learn. Every breed has something in it as far as health issues go. And is what I am learning here is that everyone has their own opinion. right or wrong it is their's.

[Breeze]

Originally Posted by Princessyorkies

Right you are. Without the help of humans they would be what ever size. I heard yorkies started out being about 35 pounds and over time have gotten to where they are now. Not a fact just what I have heard and read in different places.
So who is to say with down sizing them over the years that that was healthy?

I'm confused to which side of this you are on. Are you saying that it may not of been healthy to breed them down to 7 from 35 pounds? But also saying that since they have been its fine to breed them even smaller.

Even if "it was wrong" to breed them smaller in the past, if people now know the risks shouldn't they stop and do whats best for the breed and these poor tiny babies being bred and stop this?