Thank you!! :)

im sorry, but :lol tears

You caught me off guard and I about fell out of my chair :lol tears

Way to go Karen.

Well we now have facts of a parti color puppy that was born into the Wildweir Kennel in Dec of 1976 from their lines. Joan and Janet did AKC register this puppy. His name was Wildweir Triplicate (named after his tri colors). One would ask why did they register him?
Parti colors have been around thru-out history, Yes they can pop up in any line.
The parti owners understand that the YTCA does not want to change the standard to include these dogs, We don't want the standard to be changed we just want a variation of the yorkie. Change is good every now again. Just think what the world would be without change.
Nothing lasts for ever.

I understand from a YTCA breeders perspective that a parti isn't desired within their lines. It is agreed that even show breeders have had an off color appear in a litter, if they are sold as a pet why should they not be registered? Is it because the breeder doesn't want anyone to know of the off color in their lines?

Thank you for this information. It's good to know of his registration and I wish all breeders would follow this example and be honest about their lines.

Exactly. No one from the YTCA will even address this. They keep preaching about protecting the standard. Just how would adding a variety class hurt the blue/tan standard Yorkshire? Seriously...can someone who believes this please answer that question.

Adding a variety class for the parti will not change the original standard of the breed one bit. They would not even show in the same ring until group. I just do not understand the rampant fear and bigotry the YTCA and it's members have concerning the parti being allowed a variety class. Especially after all the evidence that the color has been in the breed for years and years now. If Joan Gordon had parti's show up in her lines...that just about kills the notion the YTCA holds that the color is the result of a designer or mixed breed.

Unless Joan owned Shih Tzu's too. :rolleyes:

LOl Me too! Sad thing is, its true.

:thumbup: Very nicely said :)

Well first of all I would register the litter if it threw a parti but it would be spayed or neutered and then the parents as well. I don't breed for parti's nor would I "KILL" "CULL" as you call it, any healthy living, breathing animal just because of color!
I'm sorry but as I see what's being posted is just trying to justify breeding off colors to please the public hence the words supply and demand. You can't show them so therefore your doing it for the pet population. I, on the other hand do it for the love of the breed and breed standard and the show ring for "myself" not the pet or showing population. I've stated before I don't even sell show dogs and if I have a pet amongst my litter when I have one it goes spayed or neutered to a loving pet home. If it's of show quality and I don't need it because I have enough "again" it will be spayed and neutered and placed into a loving pet home!

Donna

I would interested to read responses to your question too, bc I've never quite understood that reasoning either.

I do understand the traditional color yorkie breeder wanting to preserve the traditional colors but don't see how allowing parti yorkies to be shown AKC would be detrimental to them? Has that been true with other breeds and class variations?

Donna, I don't agree that all who breed parti yorkies do so just to supply a pet market bc they can't show. To know that for some, you would have to know the individual and what is behind their heart. Perhaps they breed partis for the very same reason you are in love with yorkies and continue to strive for a better yorkie, in their case a better parti color yorkie.

So then, in your opinion, the ONLY valid reason a dog should be bred is to show?

Not trying to be a smartalec here, but I am trying to understand correctly. One of the reasons I've heard stated that the YTCA is against parti's is because of the concern that messing with colors could potentially result in unhealthy dogs because we don't know exactly what else the parti genes control. Correct? Is there any data backing up the claim? Are parti's more prone to any of the diseases that are so prevalent in the yorkie community? If not, then why the animosity towards a color variation?

Yorkies didn't start out looking the way they do now. Somewhere along the line there were variations that made the breed what it is. Imagine where the breed would be now if the early breeders and parent clubs had been resistant to change.

Jen, I know you have a good heart and some parti breeders have a good heart and have dogs they love and care for but being a person that breeds and shows to the standard I stand behind the standard and the YTCA. Until that changes I won't stand down my convictions. As it stands now the YTCA is not and will not now or in the future allow for a variation. If I understand it correctly AKC isn't allowing anymore variations added to a breed in the show ring. I could be wrong but I think I read that somewhere on AKC.

Donna

I breed to the standard as closely as I can and the standard doesn't include parti colors for the show ring so therefore I strive for what the standard calls for and if one is not breeding to standard for what the parent club of any breed has set forth in my opinion is not doing it the right way ( remember this is my opinion only, I can't speak for others). Health is a big concern in the yorkie community and should be. I'm not taking it as a smartalec comment at all and I try to answer the best to my ability :) I never heard of a Parti until I joined YT so I can't answer your question about what the color will do. I do know that a white Dobie does cause health issues within the Dobie breed as well as the Boxer so if the YTCA says it could possibly do the same thing within the yorkie breed then there has to be something that has been documented. I think one should breed repsonsibly and be reputable. I will always stand behind the parent club of any breed if it's not hurting the animal in anyway. I will stand behind my convictions. And I personally like the standard color yorkie better or if I wanted a tri color I would be in a different breed :)

Donna

I get wanting to breed to standard. I just don't understand the resistance to a variation of standard (by the parent club) if there isn't any proof of (physical) harm to the breed.

I'm not aware of any physical problems associated directly with color variations in poodles, cockers or doxies. Yet breeding to standard has led to a myriad of health problems in breeds like bulldogs and pugs to name a few.

I guess I'm a "show me the data" kind of gal. And anytime anyone makes the argument "we do it this way because we've always done it this way", it always makes me want to question the reasoning behind it.

I don't think I've seen a parti poodle LOL, not to make light of it but I'm sure they would have a problem with that variation too IMHO. Not sure I've seen white in a doxie either...
The parent club wants the traditional standard color yorkie not a parti yorkie.
I think I said as long as the breed standard doesn't harm the animal in anyway I stand behind the parent club. I do have problems with a few breed standards, guess that's why I'm not in that breed. And I think I read on the AKC website at some point they will not be adding anymore variations to a breed in AKC, correct me if I'm wrong :)
Again, if I wanted a parti breed I would be in those breeds that have it in their standard and support it. I'm, however, in a breed that is suppose to be Blue and Gold and not a Parti color and I think the parent club feels the same way...,

Donna

Examples of parti's in doxies and poodles. In the doxies, they are called piebalds. There's no description of it in the AKC standards, but they are recognized on the registration papers. I'm not sure about the poodles.

What I don't understand is why would you register it then?
If you are a to the standard kind of person, I don't understand why you would go ahead and register , whats the point? Double standard?

Because I register the litter? It would be up to the new owner whether or not to register the individual pup. I don't see it as a double standard.

Because I register the litter I breed? It would be up to the person to register the individual pup. I don't see a double standard...

So then, if a black and tan yorkie doesn't meet standard, for what ever reason, should it not be registered either?

My black and tan bitch is registered and so is my cotton coated dog and both are "my" loving pets. But yet my first yorkie had papers but I never registered her. Acutally all my spayed/neutered yorkies are registered. What is that a double standard?

Donna, What is your purpose of registering a litter with AKC?

Sorry- I meant to quote Mardelin in my last post. She's the one who said that parti's shouldn't even be registered.

Ummm because I show and I register a litter because they are AKC? Want me to register with ACA, CKC or the other off registeries? What is your point ane what is wrong with registering my dogs? I do show and they have to be registered to be able so show?

I am asking why you said you would register a litter if it had a parti in it, if they are all to be neutered and spayed and you dont believe in the parti, why would you have it registered? You say they cant be shown, so I am confused?

I keep track of my dogs through AKC is one reason and some pet owners want a papered dog...I register a litter but doesn't necessarily mean I would register anymore pets I would decide to keep but I breed for show and in hopes that the litter I produce will produce a show dog so it's already registeed with AkC with a number and all I would have to do is give the one I keep a name so I could show it...obviously your not understanding the concept or don't want too. But of course that is only my opinion.
I don't care if the new pet owner registers it but when it's registered I'm more apt to keep tabs on the dog. AKC does make sure I records are accurate if I were one to have an AKC rep come inspect my breeding program and you have to have records of the litters produced. However, I breed on a very limited basis as everyone is well aware of.

Just because it's a parti doesn't mean the new owner wouldn't want it registered. I'm not one of those that would keep something a secret, they do deserve a loving home as a pet. Just like the black and tan is not quality for the ring but I register them in case that loving pet home wants a papered dog. I love all dogs I just wouldn't keep it in a breeding program. Registering with AKC does have good recording keeping and tracking. I'm not against registering it just against breeding it. Just like I have two neutered champions that have never sired a litter. No double standards.

No problem. All breeders do different things. If the new pet puppy owner wanted it registered with papers I have no problem with it. I just wouldn't breed the parents again.

I'm not a heartless person when it concerns my dogs, I just do the right thing when I'm suppose too. My dogs are my top priority and again, just because they are pet quality doesn't mean they can't be a great and loving pet for a loving new owner, it's what I do when something comes up that is not within standard is where the ethics and morals fall into place within my breeding program.

I have no problem with Parti's, and they would make nice pets. Just not to be shown or bred. If one comes from a litter, place it in a pet home, and no more breeding for the parents. Even the cane Corso has color standards that can be shown. Only BYB's would accept an off color, and the clueless would buy one.