YorkieTalk.com Forums - Yorkshire Terrier Community

YorkieTalk.com Forums - Yorkshire Terrier Community (https://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   Yorkie Showing & Information (https://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/yorkie-showing-information/)
-   -   Parti Color? YTCA? (https://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/yorkie-showing-information/211769-parti-color-ytca.html)

bjh 09-02-2010 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Breny (Post 3260096)
Hey! What happened to the OP??? :D

She is probably reading this and eating popcorn. :D

bchgirl 09-02-2010 08:01 PM

Here's one reference....scroll down pg 6.

New breed varieties

http://www.akc.org/pdfs/about/board_minutes/1105.pdf

Breezeaway 09-02-2010 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bchgirl (Post 3260175)
That reads like the same thing to me. A variation is a variation.

I am trying to find it on the AKC site. I read it there also.

There are only 9 breeds with accepted varieties. The ones which denote color as a variety the coloring is also acceptable within the breed standard.

American Kennel Club - Facts and Stats

Just so there isn't any confusion...there has been discussion where AKC has considered adding another variety of the present groups....herding, working, toy, etc.

Where does it say on that page that they dont accept variations anymore?

bchgirl 09-02-2010 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Breezeaway (Post 3260185)
Where does it say on that page that they dont accept variations anymore?

It didn't...it just gave the list of breeds which have them. See the link above

yorkiekist 09-02-2010 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeanieK (Post 3260149)
Talk about SAD. That is really sad, and it is all politics. It isn't about who has the better dog, it's who knows the right people.

Its funny how when someone cant get their way it becomes all about politics and money.:rolleyes:

Woogie Man 09-02-2010 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kpstoybox (Post 3260163)
Jim..you know as well as I do that many breeds have successfully added varieties of size, color, and coat many times over. And the original varieties were not ruined because of it. How will adding a variety class for the parti be detrimental to the standard blue and tan? Nobody seems to want to answer that...but they sure do keep beating that dead horse.

Besides...you can't just wipe out a recessive color that has been in the breed for years. If the serious breeders of the color give up and quit...you will still have as many parti's being born...but they will be horrible quality.
But wait..that is exactly what the YTCA and their members want. It's ok if pet parti's are bred by the hundreds..as long as they don't affect the show world. They can be pets...but heaven forbid you want to take one in the ring. Then it becomes personal. LOL

The parti is here whether everyone like's it not. Why can't those who want to better it and show it be allowed too? If a variety class is allowed...soon...just like with the color varieties in the cocker spaniel...reputable breeders will breed parti to parti, and keep the show lines of each separate for the most part. And those in the show world know this to be true. They just will not admit it.

Yes, i know that there are other breeds with varieties. No argument there. Not all breeds are the same, however, and not all are bred the same so you can't automatically assume what is true for one breed is true for another.

I know you've heard it as often as I that you breed Yorkies genotype to genotype in order for it to breed true to type. With some other breeds you can breed phenotype to phenotype and get predictable results. It's not that way with Yorkies. They are a young breed and the undesirable traits have not yet been weeded out. Some Yorkies are so out of standard that it's sometimes hard to be more specific than that they look like a terrier of some sort.

With some of the older breeds, you can put just about any 2 dogs of that breed together and get pups that look like the breed. Maybe not ideal representations, but even a casual observer can recognize the breed. That isn't true for Yorkies and I feel that, until that day comes, breeding for any variation is detrimental to the breed. It's not like all faults will magically disappear overnight, but unless we attempt to breed them out they will crop up more and more often. That is the crux of the argument in breeding to the standard....so a Yorkie will look like a Yorkie.

To me, getting the Yorkie to breed true to type should be the goal of every breeder. We will have all left the breed better than we found it when even an 'average' Yorkie is a good representation of the breed. It may make more sense to breed for varieties after that is accomplished, but any variations (and I like teapots myself) at this time only makes that goal more difficult.

It's nothing personal against partis for me. They are easy to identify if one wants to avoid them. The carriers, however, will cross over into the standard gene pool and make it even harder to breed true to type for the breed overall. The goal for a breed, any breed, is to breed true and carriers will be just one more wild card in a deck with too many wild cards already.

kpstoybox 09-02-2010 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woogie Man (Post 3260212)
Yes, i know that there are other breeds with varieties. No argument there. Not all breeds are the same, however, and not all are bred the same so you can't automatically assume what is true for one breed is true for another.

I know you've heard it as often as I that you breed Yorkies genotype to genotype in order for it to breed true to type. With some other breeds you can breed phenotype to phenotype and get predictable results. It's not that way with Yorkies. They are a young breed and the undesirable traits have not yet been weeded out. Some Yorkies are so out of standard that it's sometimes hard to be more specific than that they look like a terrier of some sort.

With some of the older breeds, you can put just about any 2 dogs of that breed together and get pups that look like the breed. Maybe not ideal representations, but even a casual observer can recognize the breed. That isn't true for Yorkies and I feel that, until that day comes, breeding for any variation is detrimental to the breed. It's not like all faults will magically disappear overnight, but unless we attempt to breed them out they will crop up more and more often. That is the crux of the argument in breeding to the standard....so a Yorkie will look like a Yorkie.

To me, getting the Yorkie to breed true to type should be the goal of every breeder. We will have all left the breed better than we found it when even an 'average' Yorkie is a good representation of the breed. It may make more sense to breed for varieties after that is accomplished, but any variations (and I like teapots myself) at this time only makes that goal more difficult.

It's nothing personal against partis for me. They are easy to identify if one wants to avoid them. The carriers, however, will cross over into the standard gene pool and make it even harder to breed true to type for the breed overall. The goal for a breed, any breed, is to breed true and carriers will be just one more wild card in a deck with too many wild cards already.

It's already here..and has been for years. Just more people purposely breeding for it now. But one that knows pedigree's can certainly try and avoid it for the most part. However, as Joan Gordon recently admitted...she and others breeders she knows of, have had the parti babies show up out of the blue in their litters.

As far as the yorkie not breeding true. For the most part...any popular breed...has the same problem of pet bred bred not looking like the show bred. It's just a fact that pet bred dogs are not bred the same as show bred. Look at the show poodle compared to the pet poodle. The pet poodle for the most part looks mixed in most cases. They resemble the poodle..but look NOTHING like what is shown in the ring. The same can be said for cocker spaniels, doxie's, chi's, collies, shepherds, maltese and many other breeds for that matter. And yes...yorkies too.

Woogie Man 09-02-2010 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kpstoybox (Post 3260235)
It's already here..and has been for years. Just more people purposely breeding for it now. But one that knows pedigree's can certainly try and avoid it for the most part. However, as Joan Gordon recently admitted...she and others breeders she knows of, have had the parti babies show up out of the blue in their litters.

As far as the yorkie not breeding true. For the most part...any popular breed...has the same problem of pet bred bred not looking like the show bred. It's just a fact that pet bred dogs are not bred the same as show bred. Look at the show poodle compared to the pet poodle. The pet poodle for the most part looks mixed in most cases. They resemble the poodle..but look NOTHING like what is shown in the ring. The same can be said for cocker spaniels, doxie's, chi's, collies, shepherds, maltese and many other breeds for that matter. And yes...yorkies too.

Karen, though we don't see this issue the same, it's fun discussing it with you. You're right in that the Yorkie's popularity hasn't done it any favors. I don't think the parti has benefitted from its new found popularity, either. The greed factor can ruin any dog and greed is the worst influence on the Yorkshire today. I think that every breeder, exhibitor or not, prolific or not, has some effect on the breed and therefore some responsibility.

If parti breeders only bred parti to parti, there would be no issue for me. From posts here on YT, it's obvious that parti breeders want to acquire high quality standard Yorkies to improve their parti dogs. So, in general, what partis are at this time are dogs that have largely been bred for a single trait and the quality is not so good overall.The problem is that the carriers, which may themselves get championed, carry not only the genes of the standard Yorkie that got them championed, but those of the parti parent that wasn't the quality of the standard parent.

While this may be a good thing for the parti breeder, it's not good for the breed IMO. The carriers are registered as standard Yorkies and their influence will depend on how widely they are bred. It's likely the results of any such breedings will be hit or miss at best and it's doubtful these dogs will breed true. It would be the same as if I took an open pedigreed, off standard bitch and bred it to a nice male. I might get lucky and get a nice pup that possibly could be championed but it shouldn't be bred due to all the wild cards on its dam's side. The same with the parti carrier. Neither breeding would be for the good of the breed.

I don't know where all this will lead, but the breed can't afford to take one step forward and two steps back. I understand that there are true parti fanciers but I fear that any progress the partis make will be at the expense of the breed as a whole. One good thing. With the AKC allowing partis to register as partis, breeders who wish to avoid them in their lines can at least find out through pedigree research.

Brooklynn 09-03-2010 03:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bchgirl (Post 3260175)
That reads like the same thing to me. A variation is a variation.

I am trying to find it on the AKC site. I read it there also.

There are only 9 breeds with accepted varieties. The ones which denote color as a variety the coloring is also acceptable within the breed standard.

American Kennel Club - Facts and Stats

Just so there isn't any confusion...there has been discussion where AKC has considered adding another variety of the present groups....herding, working, toy, etc.

Yes you'd be correct a variation is a variation and to add a variation it has to be done with the parent club and the standard would have to be changed in order to add a variation for it to be shown and accepted. That isn't going to be done. I'll have to do some more research on AKC to see where I read that they were not going to add anymore variations to a breed. A variation is a variation and it has to be accepted by the parent club and the standard also changed to allow for a color variation. Just like in Chi's some are wanting to add the color merle to the chi standard for showing and the parent club had to present it to the membership to vote on it. It's not a DQ in the breed of Chi's but I believe they are in discussions to have it a DQ as well. I have a Chi friend so I will find out on it. So, the DQ isn't going anywhere.

Donna

kpstoybox 09-03-2010 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brooklynn (Post 3260310)
Yes you'd be correct a variation is a variation and to add a variation it has to be done with the parent club and the standard would have to be changed in order to add a variation for it to be shown and accepted. That isn't going to be done. I'll have to do some more research on AKC to see where I read that they were not going to add anymore variations to a breed. A variation is a variation and it has to be accepted by the parent club and the standard also changed to allow for a color variation. Just like in Chi's some are wanting to add the color merle to the chi standard for showing and the parent club had to present it to the membership to vote on it. It's not a DQ in the breed of Chi's but I believe they are in discussions to have it a DQ as well. I have a Chi friend so I will find out on it. So, the DQ isn't going anywhere.

Donna

The only "change" to the standard would be to add a color variance. The blue and tan would keep it's present standard..even the new DQ for the blue and tan would not have to be lifted, as the parti would show in it's own variety class. You are leading people too believe that by adding a color variance...it would change the blue and tan standard...and it's just not true.

For those of you who do not understand standards and color variations...look at the American Cocker Spaniel standard. It has three color varieties. And they are not having any problems breeding and showing (separately for the most part) black's, buffs, chocolate's, parti's, roans, black and tan's. Every color shares the same standard EXCEPT for color.

American Kennel Club - Cocker Spaniel

AS far as the merle Chi is concerned...the chi standard simply states...Any color - Solid, marked or splashed. And if my sources are correct...the parent club voted in 2008 that merles would NOT be disqualified from showing and AKC reg. However, there is a growing anti merle movement within the Chi community that is trying to gain support for a DQ. But what does that have to do with the topic at hand? More propaganda I suppose. ;)

bchgirl 09-03-2010 07:36 AM

I can appreciate the tenacity of the debates, but isn't it a moot point? Since 1942, AKC has had a policy in place of not accepting any additional varieties for any breed.

Breezeaway 09-03-2010 08:05 AM

I guess we have to work on that then don't we.
I do understand what your saying Bchgirl.

GreenwoodBiewer 09-03-2010 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bchgirl (Post 3260460)
I can appreciate the tenacity of the debates, but isn't it a moot point? Since 1942, AKC has had a policy in place of not accepting any additional varieties for any breed.

Yes, I understand there are hurdles to overcome, but maybe with enough support, goals can be accomplished. It may take the Parti contingent and the Biewer contingent getting together to support their comman purpose to get this done. It may not look exactly how anyone invisions it right now.. but I can't believe with the numbers of people who are drawn to these tri colored yorkies, with the passion both the Biewer and the Parti fanciers/breeders have for these dogs.. that if they join forces, they can't get a whole lot further than either group can alone.

Once people make the step and realize that they are the same dog, with the same history and that they are both just a color variation of the Yorkie, maybe we could all work together.. at least talk about it. Each "group" has very dedicated supporters..together we may have a better chance. (IMO) I know this is a big step for some and many just aren't there yet. I hope that day will come.

Diana :animal-pa

Brooklynn 09-03-2010 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Breezeaway (Post 3260185)
Where does it say on that page that they dont accept variations anymore?

The Board has maintained a policy since 1942 of not approving additional varieties for any breed. Following a motion by Mr. Merriam, seconded by Mrs. Strand, it was VOTED (unanimously) to direct the Executive Secretary to advise the Dachshund Club of America that the Board would not consider the approval of breed standard changes that provided for any additional show varieties

This is from the AKC website link that was provided....

Brooklynn 09-03-2010 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kpstoybox (Post 3260437)
The only "change" to the standard would be to add a color variance. The blue and tan would keep it's present standard..even the new DQ for the blue and tan would not have to be lifted, as the parti would show in it's own variety class. You are leading people too believe that by adding a color variance...it would change the blue and tan standard...and it's just not true.

For those of you who do not understand standards and color variations...look at the American Cocker Spaniel standard. It has three color varieties. And they are not having any problems breeding and showing (separately for the most part) black's, buffs, chocolate's, parti's, roans, black and tan's. Every color shares the same standard EXCEPT for color.

American Kennel Club - Cocker Spaniel

AS far as the merle Chi is concerned...the chi standard simply states...Any color - Solid, marked or splashed. And if my sources are correct...the parent club voted in 2008 that merles would NOT be disqualified from showing and AKC reg. However, there is a growing anti merle movement within the Chi community that is trying to gain support for a DQ. But what does that have to do with the topic at hand? More propaganda I suppose. ;)

The topic has been adding the Parti as a variety and well the DQ in yorkies have been brought up so it another breed club is joining the ranks of the YTCA in adding a DQ I think it fits the topic at hand....AND another reason it's part of the topic is it's also been addressed in your post about the cocker spaniel ect...so I provided another breed that is trying to prevent the same thing we've prevented :)

Donna


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:52 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2003 - 2018 YorkieTalk.com
Privacy Policy - Terms of Use


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168