Parti Color? YTCA?

[Elle]

Originally Posted by kpstoybox

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

We do not participate in UKC. I've heard some things that sound favorable about this arena but IMO AKC events are the best place to suit our needs. I don't know anything about UKC.

[kpstoybox]

Originally Posted by Elle

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.

Does it really matter who the bitch was? It takes two to tango in the parti world...so to speak. The recessive gene has to come from both parents for it to be expressed in one of the puppies. Meaning...the sire has to be a carrier as well.

Maltese breeder? If you say so. However, I have no idea if she owns or breeds Maltese. LOL But...just so you know..the bitch in question was sired by CH Durrer's Mighty Obsession.

[Breezeaway]

If there were no such thing of any tri colors being born into yorkies why did Joan find it neccesary to write about it and include it in her book ? Why would she state that they can be born of all these other colors if it wasnt so?
From her book Page 205
"A large amount of white marks on the chest, paws, jaws or skull place a yorkie into a tri-color classification and it is very wise to guard against this possibility."
"It is not unusual to find small white marks on one or more toes or a fine white line in the lower fore jaw. These will not be visible as an adult. A large amount of white marks on the chest, paws, jaws, or skull, places a yorkie into a tri-color classification and it is very wise to guard against this possibility. Yorkshire terrier puppies can be born of colors that automatically deprive them of the necessary qualities to become the proper colors of the breed. They can be born all black: all tan: tan with black points; tri-color: black, white, and tan; all blue; bluish grey with tan points; and so remain or change to another shade of their newly born colors. These mismarked Yorkie puppies are not the result of the mis-alliances or throwbacks but are rather the net product of incorrectly inherited genes which have failed to activate the pigment glandular system to providing what they require to be in accord with the yorkshire terrier standard. Puppies incorrectly colored or marked should not be sold as rare, they should not be registered Yorkshire Terriers but should simply be found a loving home If one cannot bring oneself to having them put down."
The fact of the matter is that other colors of yorkies are born from traditional color yorkies.
Nikkos line is one line that Crownridge and Summit promoted and bred for tri's
Wildweir had a tri color puppy born from traditional yorkies, No Nikkos in their line.
Same thing for Kokopelli, Hylan, Durrer and the Biewer line of yorkies. No Nikko's in their lines
The Facts are that the Tricolored Yorkshire Terrier is AKC registered. Is it allowed to show in AKC ? No, but that certainly does not stop us from enjoying and sharing our beautiful tri color Yorkshire Terriers with people all over the world.

[darbygale]

[B]These mismarked Yorkie puppies are not the result of the mis-alliances or throwbacks but are rather the net product of incorrectly inherited genes which have failed to activate the pigment glandular system to providing what they require to be in accord with the yorkshire terrier standard. Puppies incorrectly colored or marked should not be sold as rare, they should not be registered Yorkshire Terriers but should simply be found a loving home If one cannot bring oneself to having them put down."

If you are going to take part of what Joan Gordon says, take all of it.

I don't know who posted that YTCA breeders would not admit to having a parti yorkie but if they admit to having born blue puppies why would they not admit to a parti color one? I admit it, I had two born blue puppies about 25 years ago. Spayed and neutered the entire litter of 4 pups and the sire and dam. Never another one.

[Woogie Man]

Partial Quote

Originally Posted by Rhetts_mama

"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)

That is one person's opinion. You may want to check out Joan Gordon's history of the Yorkshire Terrier online to see a differing one.

There have been many who've said the Yorkie may have been bred to the Maltese for structure, but there was no need to do so for coat. The Paisley/ Clydesdale terrier had the silky coat and was blue and tan, to boot, so is a much more likely candidate. In many ways, the Yorkshire could be considered an improved Clydesdale.

If you look into Joan Gordon's book, you'll see from photos that the early 20th century Yorkshire champions really didn't resemble the Maltese in structure so that, too, discounts the theory of the book you cited. These are the dogs the author would have been seeing in making his reference.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by Raymond's Mom

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.

W don't do that because they are yorkies. You can't just change the name and start another breed. som e of the biewer people have tried that. it didn't work too well for them.

You don't know what the YTCA or the AKC will do in the future. All it will take is for some very influencial, person with money to take a fancy to the parti and things will change.

[OwnedByJezebel]

I'm not a breeder, nor do I ever intend to be one, but I have had three Yorkies and three Maltese. Their temperaments are quite different. The Maltese is very gentle and laid-back.

My understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) was that when the various terrier breeds were mixed in the 1800's and the Yorkie breed was developed, one thing that was highly prized (maybe more than any other trait) was the dog's ratting ability. If that were what I was trying to achieve by breeding, it would never occur to me to throw a Maltese into the mix to influence some other trait (coat texture, etc), for fear of eliminating the ratting instincts in the offspring. I would stick with dogs that have that bold, terrier, ratting attitude.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by Woogie Man

Partial Quote


That is one person's opinion. You may want to check out Joan Gordon's history of the Yorkshire Terrier online to see a differing one.

There have been many who've said the Yorkie may have been bred to the Maltese for structure, but there was no need to do so for coat. The Paisley/ Clydesdale terrier had the silky coat and was blue and tan, to boot, so is a much more likely candidate. In many ways, the Yorkshire could be considered an improved Clydesdale.

If you look into Joan Gordon's book, you'll see from photos that the early 20th century Yorkshire champions really didn't resemble the Maltese in structure so that, too, discounts the theory of the book you cited. These are the dogs the author would have been seeing in making his reference.

The understanding that I have, from what I have read, is that there was not just one person working on developing the yorkshire terrier, or broken haired terrier, as it was called at the time. So it is entirely possible that some of the lines had maltese bred into the mix, and others did not.

At this point, it really doesn't matter. it is what it is, no matter how many times it gets discussed.

There will always be those who do not believe. So be it. Believe or don't believe, it isn't going to chnge the facts.

The YTCA and the AKC will do what it will do. None of us has a crystal ball. We do not know what they will do.

Things change, life goes on. YTCA members come and go.

The partis will be developed into a beautiful show worthy dog, of that yhou can besure. There are many breeders working on this, so it will happen. And they will be noticed.

[Breezeaway]

Originally Posted by darbygale

[B]These mismarked Yorkie puppies are not the result of the mis-alliances or throwbacks but are rather the net product of incorrectly inherited genes which have failed to activate the pigment glandular system to providing what they require to be in accord with the yorkshire terrier standard. Puppies incorrectly colored or marked should not be sold as rare, they should not be registered Yorkshire Terriers but should simply be found a loving home If one cannot bring oneself to having them put down."

If you are going to take part of what Joan Gordon says, take all of it.

I don't know who posted that YTCA breeders would not admit to having a parti yorkie but if they admit to having born blue puppies why would they not admit to a parti color one? I admit it, I had two born blue puppies about 25 years ago. Spayed and neutered the entire litter of 4 pups and the sire and dam. Never another one.

I posted it all, TYVM. We were not discussing what should be done with them. We were discussing the part about you saying they are mixed breeds. I think her book plainly states that tri's can be born from traditional yorkies. She doesn't say they are mixed breeds.

[Breezeaway]

Originally Posted by OwnedByJezebel

I'm not a breeder, nor do I ever intend to be one, but I have had three Yorkies and three Maltese. Their temperaments are quite different. The Maltese is very gentle and laid-back.

My understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) was that when the various terrier breeds were mixed in the 1800's and the Yorkie breed was developed, one thing that was highly prized (maybe more than any other trait) was the dog's ratting ability. If that were what I was trying to achieve by breeding, it would never occur to me to throw a Maltese into the mix to influence some other trait (coat texture, etc), for fear of eliminating the ratting instincts in the offspring. I would stick with dogs that have that bold, terrier, ratting attitude.

They were highly prized as ratters until they started showing them and they became the fashionable pet of the ladies of aristocracy and of wealthy families.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by Breezeaway

I posted it all, TYVM. We were not discussing what should be done with them. We were discussing the part about you saying they are mixed breeds. I think her book plainly states that tri's can be born from traditional yorkies. She doesn't say they are mixed breeds.

De,
You really just need to consider the source and move on. these people just show up out of the blue to spew their nonsense without having read the zillion other threads on this same topic. Ask yourself, Why. What is their agenda?

If they wanted to learn, they would be researching, not just coming on here to argue the same old subject that has been argued fa zillion times before.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by OwnedByJezebel

I'm not a breeder, nor do I ever intend to be one, but I have had three Yorkies and three Maltese. Their temperaments are quite different. The Maltese is very gentle and laid-back.

My understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) was that when the various terrier breeds were mixed in the 1800's and the Yorkie breed was developed, one thing that was highly prized (maybe more than any other trait) was the dog's ratting ability. If that were what I was trying to achieve by breeding, it would never occur to me to throw a Maltese into the mix to influence some other trait (coat texture, etc), for fear of eliminating the ratting instincts in the offspring. I would stick with dogs that have that bold, terrier, ratting attitude.

The maltese was shown in the same group as all of those other dogs, they were all considered to be broken haired scottish terriers. So it is very possible that it was in the mix. But it is something that can be neither proven or disproven. At this pouint it really doesn't matter. the gene is there. When, where, or how it got there no one will ever know.

[Woogie Man]

Originally Posted by JeanieK

The understanding that I have, from what I have read, is that there was not just one person working on developing the yorkshire terrier, or broken haired terrier, as it was called at the time. So it is entirely possible that some of the lines had maltese bred into the mix, and others did not.

At this point, it really doesn't matter. it is what it is, no matter how many times it gets discussed.

There will always be those who do not believe. So be it. Believe or don't believe, it isn't going to chnge the facts.

The YTCA and the AKC will do what it will do. None of us has a crystal ball. We do not know what they will do.

Things change, life goes on. YTCA members come and go.

The partis will be developed into a beautiful show worthy dog, of that yhou can besure. There are many breeders working on this, so it will happen. And they will be noticed.

I agree with that. One breeder may have been doing this and another doing that. It was pretty much like the Wild West in those days until standards were firmly in place. The Maltese certainly was around and was being shown in the broken haired Scotch terrier class, along with the Yorkshire and others. If I'm remembering right, there was a very early Yorkshire breeder that also bred Maltese. That doesn't prove anything one way or the other, but anything's possible from that time. No matter the possible mixes that may have occurred, the standard has always been that of a blue and tan dog. Who knows what the future will bring.

[OwnedByJezebel]

Originally Posted by Breezeaway

They were highly prized as ratters until they started showing them and they became the fashionable pet of the ladies of aristocracy and of wealthy families.

That is true of the Maltese's ancestors, but by the time the Yorkie breed was being developed the Maltese had already been a lap dog for several hundred years. From: About the Maltese Breed -- Maltese History and Origin


"Descended from a Spitz-like dog which was bred for hunting rodents in the marsh and wooded areas,"

but that was the Maltese's ancestors, and not the Maltese itself. In later times (and still a very long time ago):

"As civilization rose in Europe, references are seen to the tiny, white dog. An indirect reference by Aristotle about the Maltese clearly indicates its co-existence along with other varieties of dogs indigenous to Southern Europe. Aristotle refers to the small dogs as "Canis Melitae . . . of the tiny sort, being perfectly proportioned, not withstanding its very small rise." During these times, the Maltese was a favorite lap dog of fashionable men and women about town, being carried wherever their masters went. Roman women carried them in the sleeves of their garments, and took them to bed with them. "

They've been a lap dog for a long time. Not what I would want to introduce into breeding if I prized ratting instinct.

Can a Maltese hunt? Absolutely. Mine have all been wonderful at pointing, flushing, and retrieving, but they had / have absolutely NO kill in them. Maybe you can find a ratter among them here and there, but I would classify that dog as having an improper temperament for a Maltese.

[Pinehaven]

Originally Posted by Woogie Man

That is one person's opinion. You may want to check out Joan Gordon's history of the Yorkshire Terrier online to see a differing one.

There have been many who've said the Yorkie may have been bred to the Maltese for structure, but there was no need to do so for coat. The Paisley/ Clydesdale terrier had the silky coat and was blue and tan, to boot, so is a much more likely candidate. In many ways, the Yorkshire could be considered an improved Clydesdale.

If you look into Joan Gordon's book, you'll see from photos that the early 20th century Yorkshire champions really didn't resemble the Maltese in structure so that, too, discounts the theory of the book you cited. These are the dogs the author would have been seeing in making his reference.

Here's a few more early opinions:

Toy dogs: the history, points and standards of English toy spaniels, Japanese spaniels, pomeranians, toy terriers, pugs, pekinese, griffon bruxellois, maltese and Italian greyhounds, with instructive chapters on breeding, rearing, feeding, training and showing ; and valuable information and treatment in sickness by Lillian C. Raymond-Mallock, 1907
Http://books.google.com/books?id=Mzg...errier&f=false

The American book of the dog: The origin, development, special characteristics, utility, breeding, training, points of judging, diseases, and kennel management of all breeds of dogs by George O. Shields, 1891
Http://books.google.com/books?id=14J...errier&f=false

American farming and stock raising: with useful facts for the household, devoted to farming in all its departments, Volume 3 by Charles Louis Flint, 1892
Http://books.google.com/books?id=tk7...errier&f=false

The dogs of the British Islands: being a series of articles on the points of their various breeds, and the treatment of the diseases to which they are subject by John Henry Walsh, 1882
The dogs of the British Islands ... - Google Books

The illustrated book of the dog by Shaw, Vero Kemball, 1881
Http://www.archive.org/stream/illust...e/154/mode/2up

In addition, the KC club says that the Maltese were probably used too. So how did we go from the early writers saying the Maltese was used in the makeup of the breed, to the present day thinking that the Maltese were not used?

The YTCA says the Clydesdale or Paisley were used for the length and texture of the coat but how readily available were those dogs to the average breeder? Possibly the Maltese was an easier dog to obtain in order to improve the length of coat.