Are you implying it's only parti breeders that have non refundable deposits?

And just what does this have to do with the parti and it's right to have a variety class?

That's the whole point of my question. If a parti breeder has a traditional colored yorkie from parti parents, then it could be assumed that the pup is also a parti carrier (3:4 chance). But traditional colored breeders ARE having parti colored pups, too, and continuing their breeding programs, passing the parti genes in to other lines. It could take several generations for a parti pup to show up in those new lines. Without accurate records and honest breeders, this will continue- and parti breeders are unfairly taking the blame.

By registering them (accurately) as traditional pups from Parti lineage, then the onus is put on the new owner to research the lines BEFORE buying and breeding the pup. The first step to doing that is getting the AKC to recognize that Parti Yorkies do exist and making it easier to register them.

And again, no one has answered the root question- is there any other "fault" associated with the Parti gene other than "we've always done it this way, so it's the way we are going to continue to do it" mindset?

:scratchhe

I'm sure I am gonna regret this....but isn't that how they SHOULD be registered, since they are the color they are being registered as? :confused:

Who's whelping these white puppies? I've never heard of them showing up anywhere that could not be traced back to another breed.

Nope, don't think I said that. I do think non-refundable deposits kind of falls in line with this ...... exorbitant prices.

If you want a breed that has a variety class, get a poodle. Yorkies do not have a variety class and never will in my lifetime and I have a lot of years ahead of me.

It is impossible to get a traditional colored puppy from two parti-colored parents. The parents have nothing to offer but the recessive piebald gene unlike a traditional colored dog which could carry BOTH genes.

Well if this held any merit, what about the numerous people that have pets that mate at home everyday. How many of them have shown up as little white dogs out of nowhere? We all know that breeder from all over would be aware or this epidemic over time if this was a concern whatsoever. Isn't it enlightening to any of you that there isn't any history on a white dog in our breed?

If parti breeders are selling traditional colored yorkies that are carriers and not telling the buyers, why should they not take the blame. A biewer breeder stated on one of these forums that if they had a puppy born with traditional coloring they would register it as a yorkie and it not, a biewer. Now how ethical is that?

Most breeders I know do not believe, myself included, that there is not another breed involved in the partis. If you want a mixed breed dog, go rescue one from the shelter. Even the biewer people admit now that they are not full bred yorkies. The DNA testing that everyone thinks is so great shows about 5 different breeds. And who is to say that people are not inter breeding traditional, parti and biewers together? At one point in time they said they had to bring the black and tan in to keep the colors going or they would eventually be too much white.

Did you miss the two or three pages in this thread that shows that CH Hylan Acres Ridin' The Storm produced a litter that consisted of 2 beautifully marked parti pups? The owner of Ridin the storm told the bitch owner to whom these parti's were born too...to pet them out. From what I have read here...the owner of the bitch had the puppies DNA'd by the AKC to prove heritage...and AKC papers were issued on ALL the pups.

Ridin' the Storm was proven to be the sire to those parti pups by DNA..and his pedigree is "supposedly" all clean...top of the line show lines. Where did the parti come from in this instance?

You are correct if it's two parti's. But the question I was responding to suggested the scenario of parti- carriers being bred to traditional colored dogs (2:4) or other parti carriers (also 2:4 - sorry for the quick miscalculation) by breeders who were trying to hide their lines.

A parti colored poodle is a Dis Qualification.

yes they should register them as partis but they should also tell people the traditional colored are carriers and not try to pass them off as purebred yorkies.
If your goal is to have partis, why register the traditional ones at all, neuter them and sell them as pets. They obviously are not as valuable to you. If I ever produced a parti I would be spaying and neutering the sire, dam and every puppy.

I didn't say you said it...but you did imply it.

BINGO!!! So is a parti colored yorkie. I didn't say to get a parti colored poodle, I said it you wanted a variety to get a poodle, they have toy, mini and standards.

and how did I imply it? If I want to say something, I will, I do not rely on implications.

This is true. But the UKC has recently granted the "multi colored poodle" a variety class.

Talk amongst yourselves. I am off to bathe my traditional colored yorkies.

You missed the point, again. It can take several generations or more for a breeder to know they have the Parti gene in their lines because you won't get a Parti pup unless you breed two Parti carriers. So just because a breeder has ALWAYS produced traditional colored pups does not guarantee that they are carrying purely traditional genes. They may be registered and championed, but that doesn't mean jack either. We've read on here time and time again that the "flawed" pups were culled and never registered, and with the best of the breeders- programs discontinued. But that didn't happen until one of the pups appeared. What about the pups that occurred in the line before that? Just because they appeared to be traditionally colored doesn't mean they had the double dominant gene. These pups were sent out to other breeding programs to continue producing pups that carried the recessive gene. And so on, and so on...


It's the (centruy long) head in the sand attitude of the YTCA and AKC who would like to either pretend these pups don't exist or that they have to be the product of some breed mixing that has allowed the very existence of the Parti's as we know them today. If they were recognized and registered as such (which is only beginning to happen with the AKC), then lines would more accurately reflect what could potentially show up.

As to what the Biewer breeder reportedly said, I can't respond to it since I didn't read it. But I will say that particular problem would be resolved if the YTCA would stop putting up walls to the fact that Biewers ARE Yorkshire Terriers with white markings.

But Parti colored cockers aren't. And neither are the dappled dachshunds.

:yeahthat:

That's it in a nutshell folks!!

I thought we already went over this. SIGHS.

Was there a bitch? Oh, that's right. Again another maltese breeder right? How many breeds of dogs do they breed? Yep, we've gone over it. You don't remember her. You jut focus on him.

I thought we already went over this. SIGHS. Was there a bitch? Oh, that's right. Again another maltese breeder right? How many breeds of dogs do they breed? Yep, we've gone over it. You don't remember her. You just focus on him.

Top of the line showline? Really? What year? By who? How do you rank a showline? Is that the breeder, owner or in this case kennel or the dog? That's news I was not aware of. I'm pretty sure I'd know. But I do get clutter mind. So please fill me in.

There are only two breeds that have coloring as a variety of the standard within AKC. Cocker spaniels and Bull Terriers.

The dapple coloring for dachshunds has always been included in their standard. The Dachshund Club of America applied to add 8 varieties to AKC and were turned down because AKC has not added varieties to any breed since 1942.

I don't remember anyone that you refer to, but it doesn't matter. The implication by the poster that I was replying to was that parti's are showing up because unscrupulous Parti breeders are sneaking their dogs in to new, traditional, lines. And what I'm saying is that the genes are there in those lines because traditional colored breeders chose to hide the fact, with the blessing of the YTCA and AKC, that they had the parti gene in their lines.

The fact is, the Yorkshire Terrier, as we know it today was bred from several different breeds of dogs, some of which had different coat colors. One of those may or may not have been the Maltese:

British dogs, their points, selection, and show preparation, by William D. Drury, pg 582 published 1903, L. Upcott Gill, London, and Charles Scribner's Sons, New York (no ISBN) Quote: "I think the Yorkshire gets the softness and length of coat due to Maltese blood".


That being the case, it is only logical that some of those early ancestors continued to carry the gene for the white coloring. That would be carried on through their progeny, but only expressed when bred with another dog who also carried the gene.

I thought we already went over this. SIGHS.

Was there a bitch? Oh, that's right. Again another maltese breeder in the picture too right? How many breeds of dogs do they breed? Yep, we've gone over it. You don't remember her. You just focus on him.

Top of the line showline? Really? What year? By who? How do you rank a showline? Is that the breeder, owner or in this case kennel or the dog? That's news I was not aware of. I'm pretty sure I'd know. But I do get clutter mind. So please fill me in.

You'll find this frustrating Darby. No matter how the white spotted yorkies started the breed was developed as a blue and gold dog. Huddersfield Ben did not have white patches on his head, legs or sides. And YTCA is going to keep parti color dogs out of the AKC ring. Period. The DQ will be ammended one more time and then AKC will be done with our changes to it. According to AKC a standard cannot be opened or ammended more than once every 5 years. BUT, it is up to AKC whether or not it can be opened that often. They call the shots and they are giving YTCA one more chance to write a DQ that will cover not only parti colors but off color yorkies.
One contributor here said that the people in YTCA will get old and die off so in the future the standard will be changed. I feel pretty good...how bout you?
Why don't the parti color people change the name of their dogs, take yorkshire terrier out and apply to AKC as a new breed or separate breed. Like the Norwich and Norfolk Terriers? They refuse to do this so endless exchanges like this thread will continue. But more importantly, parti color yorkies will stay in the shadow of the blue and tan yorkie. They'll corrupt our gene pool, that we can't stop. But ethical breeders will work to keep the Yorkshire Terrier what it was intended to be.

Ok now I keep hearing that everyone believes these partis to be from a mixed breeding years back.
How many mixed breed pups have you seen? Meaning I have see quite a few Morkies (yorkie and maltese) mixes? Any look like a parti colored yorkie?
Shorkies (s**tzu yorkie)? Any look like parti yorkies?
Yochons (yorkie and bichon)
and so on...
Anyone? Now I am not saying mixed with a parti yorkie, I mean mixed with a traditional colored one?

Their coloring isn't listed as a variety as it is with the cockers (black variety, ASCOB variety, Parti variety). Instead it's described as a pattern, which I guess makes it more acceptable to purists:

Dappled dachshunds - The dapple (merle) pattern is expressed as lighter-colored areas contrasting with the darker base color, which may be any acceptable color. Neither the light nor the dark color should predominate. Nose and nails are the same as for one- and two-colored Dachshunds. Partial or wholly blue (wall) eyes are as acceptable as dark eyes. A large area of white on the chest of a dapple is permissible.

American Kennel Club - Dachshund


Again, it comes down to the recognition by the parent club that a variety exists within the breed. And, this is just my opinion only, it's the refusal of the parent club to acknowledge that the coloring exists naturally within it's lines is the reason for this divide.

Not to mention that AKC standards have always been about the "look" of the pup and rarely about the health of the breed. You can show and champion a yorkie that has LP or liver shunts in the line, but not a healthy one with white markings. That makes no sense to me when their mission statement says:


Founded in 1884, the AKC® and its affiliated organizations advocate for the purebred dog as a family companion, advance canine health and well-being, work to protect the rights of all dog owners and promote responsible dog ownership.


I just don't get it...

How are you determining the health of your parti color dogs. Do any have CHIC numbers? That's a start. If you want to prove your dogs don't have LP, for example, OFA the hips in addition to the OFA patella exam and the CERF.

Hmm, thought I answered this one either I forgot to hit enter (most likely) or it was deleted.

I have no idea who either person is in your post. I was responding to the poster who said outright that it was all the doing of unscrupulous Parti breeders that Parties keep showing up in traditional lines.

Like it or not, what we consider to be Yorkies today have multiple breeds in their roots, some of whom have different colorings. It's only natural and logical that some of those multiple genes would still be carried in some lines. One of those breeds may or may not have been the Maltese- IDK, I wasn't there.

"I think the Yorkshire gets the softness and length of coat due to Maltese blood". British dogs, their points, selection, and show preparation, by William D. Drury, pg 582 published 1903, L. Upcott Gill, London, and Charles Scribner's Sons, New York (no ISBN)