GENERAL APPEARANCE

That of an elegant longhaired toy terrier with the hair parting down the middle and hanging straight and evenly on both sides of the dog.  Although the outline of the dog gives the appearance of a square, the body length can be slightly longer than the over-all height.  The tail is curved over the body and covered with a long flowing plume.

 

CHARACTERISTICS

Uncomplicated toy terrier with a lighthearted attitude and a happy temperament.  Stable and sociable with humans and with other dogs; it adapts perfectly to all ways of life and makes a loyal companion.

 

HEAD AND SKULL

Rather small and flat, with a moderate stop.  Not too prominent or round in skull. Muzzle not too long in proportion to the skull.  Nose black.

 

EYES

Medium, dark and placed to look directly forward.  Not prominent.  Edge of eyelids dark.

 

EARS

Medium, V-shaped, upright, moderately wide set and covered with hair.  Tips should be shaved.

 

MOUTH

Level or scissor bite.  Teeth well placed with even jaws.

 

BODY

Fine to medium boned with a good level top line.  Height at the shoulders is the same as the height at the rump.  Length of the body can be slightly longer than the height of the dog.  The chest comes down to the elbows with a good width.  The rib cage is moderately sprung with the underline being slightly tucked up and a short but strong loin.

 

FOREQUARTERS

Well laid shoulders, legs absolutely straight and covered with hair.

 

HINDQUARTERS

Straight when viewed from behind and stifles are slightly bent when viewed from the side.

 

FEET

Round.  Nails black or white.

 

TAIL

The tail is curved over the body and covered with a long flowing plume.

 

MOVEMENT

Sound movement, retaining level topline.

 

COAT

Long and flowing with a soft silky texture.  Perfectly straight without an undercoat, not woolly or wavy.

 

COLOR

White-blue-gold or White-black-gold.

Head:  White-blue-gold or white-black-gold. Colored symmetrically.

Topcoat:  Blue/black, broken up with white.  No gold present in topcoat. Legs, belly and chest completely white.  Tip of the tail should be white.

 

SIZE

Up to 3.6kg.

 

FAULTS

Any departure from the foregoing points should be considered a fault and the seriousness with which the fault should be regarded should be in exact proportion to its degree and its effect on health & welfare of the dog.

 

NOTE

Male animals should have two apparently normal testicles fully descended into the scrotum.

 

 

 

What constitutes a new breed?
 by Anita E Bridgen, October 2011

A new breed is defined as "A creation of a new breed of dog, usually by the life time work of a single breeder or a group of dedicated breeders". New breeds are created normally for four reasons: Miniaturization, breed enhancement, genetic mutation, or to adapt to the local geographical living conditions. Some of these new breeds now have fixed traits, and breed true to type, some are under breed development.
 
The creators of the Biewer, were Herr Werner Biewer and his wife Gertrud Biewer, who bred and showed Traditional Yorkshire Terriers in Germany in the 1970's / 1980's.

It is said they bred two traditional Yorkie, and in that litter there came 3 dogs with differing colours, namely dogs which lacked pigmentation.

For it is proven the traditional Yorkshire Terrier does not hold a piebald gene, and coat colour in a dog, or lack of it as with a normally Tan dog with a blue saddle, can happen at any mating.

To suggest that colour (or lack of it) would continue within the breeding lines of the Biewers’ other dogs (there were many bitches in the Friedheck kennel, some with no known history or pedigree which were introduced into their breeding programs) holds no foundation.

To suggest that by using a single stud dog, as happened in the case of "Darling von Friedheck" to his many other bitches, and that same lack of coat colour pigmentations (a white dog with a blue/black saddle) would naturally occur is so very very less likely.

As his early breeding bitches were not related to either "Fru Fru Von Friedheck" or "Darling von Friedheck", why would this same mutation naturally occur, again and again, in a Traditional Yorkshire Terrier, a breed which has never in past history shown these colours.

The pedigree of a dog is held in its history, and having researched extensively the Yorkshire conception, there were no White dogs used in its creation. The Paisley/Clydesdale Terrier were Tan/Grizzle coloured dogs. The Skye used were Grizzle.

The history of the traditional  Yorkie as written in many an early book, and newspapers of those times,  of which I hold many original newspaper reports by those early breeders, clearly states these were the dogs used in its creation. (The Stock Keeper and Fancier’s Journal of 1887, as written by Ed. Boothman).

No white dogs were needed either for size or coat, as the Clydesdale/Paisley already held that trait. However, to merely speculate a single mutation by a pairing of two traditional dogs could influence an entire breed of dogs, in as much as to suggest that in 140+ years of the traditional Yorkie never showing white in the belly/body/legs/tail (those colours are a standard tan, or silver may occur in some Yorkie). This is not a miraculous conception, as some tri coloured Yorkie breeders are claiming, it was a calculated decision for the breeders to bring the colour white into their Yorkshire.

The Biewer has been in breed development for over 30 years, and still today there are difficulties with stability of coat colour on the body/legs/tail. The standard as per the Biewers’ being a body of only white belly/legs/tail with a black/blue saddle on their backs, shows a definite breeding program and indeed cross breeding with another or other breeds that already held those colours.

The Parti or Tri Yorkshire are not holding the colours of the Biewer, they are bred back to the Yorkie, which does not hold the colour white naturally, and are coming up whiter and whiter, almost to the point of no tan even on their faces and without any colour on their bodies except white?

This is not the creation of Herr & Frau Biewers’ dogs. They were very specific in their requirements. Once they had established the colours they were working towards.

(Why are these same parti Yorkie breeders, breeding their AKC registered Yorkie to a Biewer, are they looking to achieve the Biewer colouring now?)

Lets also take in mind, because of the in-breeding and line breeding (which was acceptable in those days) and the lack of study for the genetic health of the dogs, health issues have occurred.

When unfortunately Herr Werner Biewer passed away, the Biewers’ were not able to continue the path they had envisaged for their dogs. At this point we should remember that the Biewer breed were quickly taken up by other breeders in Germany, without the knowledge or inspiration of the Biewers’. These breeders, seeing Herr & Frau Biewers’ dogs, as primarily a Yorkie with a differing coat colour, took to breeding back to the Yorkie. They had no other information available to them. But as these early types also did not hold the colours of the Biewers’ dogs, many reverting to washed out silvers, or as some claimed, being only a carrier of a piebald gene? What is a carrier really; it's a rather ridiculous statement?. We already know an F1 splitter is a term used for a hybrid. So these new Biewer breeders introduced those dogs whose colours they thought Herr & Frau Biewer had used in their early breeding.

The Mars tests carried out in 2007 in America by the Biewer Terrier Club America, were conclusive in their findings of other breeds within the Biewer breed, these dogs were not specific to only the ladies who had their dogs tested, and they would be specific to any Biewer, even Biewer Yorkshire a la Pom Pon.

Coat colour as proven by many scientists of the 21st century affects many qualities in a dog. It affects their very natures, temperaments (as with the Biewer, which is known to have a different temperament to a Traditional Yorkie).

You cannot simply suggest that because of a single mutation in a pairing, it changed not only the coat colour, but also the temperament of that dog or dogs. To change a characteristic of a breed, whether intentionally or not is something only a breeder could do, because the dog would not change in temperament alone, why just because it was born with a lack of pigmentation.

 However, it would change with the introduction of other breeds. There are very few dogs of the colours of the Biewer who have erect ears; this alone must have some clue to the breeds introduced to achieve the required colours of the Biewer.
 
No other clubs were in the slightest interested in finding out what type of dog this new Biewer Yorkshire Terrier a la Pom Pon was, until Gayle Pruett and Deb Siddle, sort to seek some kind of knowledge. And visited Frau Biewer, who is a member of the BTCA, and signed their standard.

 For years breeders were wandering around, clueless but happy because they were breeding a new type of dog, and selling them easily as a "Rare". All dogs are rare, no two exactly the same...that's the wonder of nature. But for showing purposes and pedigree purposes, there must be a standard. And just how many there are for the Biewer is clear. No one can agree. Why is this?

A new breed that is still in developmental stage will not breed true for many years, even more so if that breed are bred back to dogs used in their original creation, such as a Yorkie. They might as well breed them back to a Havanese, and hope the pups ears will stand up in 50% of their litters, at least they would get a good coat colour.

Why is it, that man puts so little value on the creatures they create, and by value I do not mean money. Why is it, that man is eager to take credit for someone else’s life’s work, without first having the knowledge needed to continue their work.

The Biewer Terrier clubs global, are dedicated to continuing Herr & Frau Biewer's work, and on 26th September 2009, Frau Biewer signed our standard. She is a life time member of the BTCA, which confirms her acceptence of what the Biewer Terrier clubs are striving to achieve.

A E Bridgen

 

The Pure Bred Dog

So let’s just stop and think for a minute here at which way our Kennel Unions/Clubs are going to have to go in the future, with regards to new breeds.
 
Colours are showing up within old established breeds, that have never before shown (The designer dog craze has a lot to answer for).
 
How are these pure breed Kennel Registries/Unions going to move forward with the 21st century dog? In the 18th century when the pure breed was coveted, business men saw an opportunity to create new business, in the form of dogs. I speak for our Mr Cruft, the originator of the United Kingdom Kennel Club, still here today.(I remember a so called American breeder claiming she was going to email DFS (a sponsor of the show, who sells furniture!) to ask if a Tri coloured Yorkie had won Crufts in 1984 or not...I corrected her and said, should you not call the UK Kennel Club, CRUFTS  is their show, and how could a dog that does not meet breed standard/colours win at Crufts...this is the silliness of un-knowledgeable breeders, Mr Crufts’ aim was to create dog shows first and foremost, for people to be able to show off their pets (normally only people with money were able to do this, so the poorer mill worker, working class breeders dogs, were not given the opportunities, whence their breeder’s were not given the credit, even though the wealthier breeders, sort most of their original stock from those working classes). When these first shows were held, there was all number of dogs coming together under one breed heading. They looked totally different in many instances, yet all claimed to have the original article. Rules were set up FAST and FURIOUS to classify the many different dogs entering his shows.
 
And here we have the conception of the new pure bred  18^th Century dog!
 
Now I am not an expert, however I see clearly the loop holes available to any breeder who would wish to (let's say) register a dog, as having a litter of pups, when in fact it was an entirely different dog who either whelped or sired that litter. The Unions/Registries claim it is not their responsibility for the accuracy or indeed honesty of a breeder, registering a litter. So they take your money, but hold themselves not at all responsible for the accuracy of that registration. Why would that be, if they are the protector of the pure bred dog. Many pet owner/buyers look to these registries for guidance. Do the registries even know if the dogs that breeders have registered are fit for purpose/healthy and to breed standard conformation?
 
It is up to the breed club (they say) to set the guidelines/standard for their breed (OK got that), members only are allowed to show their dogs in the show arena (remember in the UK, we only have KC RULE run shows...NO ARBA etc), and their dogs will not win if they don't meet breed standard (OK got that), so why then do the Unions/Registries allow a non breed club member to register a litter of a particular breed of dog? Well, I suppose the answer would be: You cannot force a person to be a member of a club if they should wish not to be (and some clubs are so very exclusive...I wonder why? no doubt lots of answers there). So these people have no fear of retribution from a breed club they are not even a member of? So what if my dog does not meet breed standard exactly, dogs are living creatures, evolving all the time (much like us two legged human apes!).
 
So here we have the answer: very cleverly these Unions/Registries set themselves apart from the breed clubs they claim to represent, by professing they are representing or protectors of all dogs and perhaps impartial. This impartiality allows them to continue with their business, unscathed for generations, that was until, dogs were highlighted as being (unfit for purpose/with inherent illnesses, through in-breeding etc/ dogs were changing within a particular breed, breeders were breeding traits in they LIKED and breeding out traits they didn't like, many unaware of the health issues gaining momentum in the dogs. It could be said this is changing a breed standard, as originally set, however a dog is a living creature and as such of course they will evolve through time.  I am not saying Unions/Registries do not work for the welfare of the dog, and I understand some of the money they receive goes into research and charity.
 
So, the conclusion as to when our BT's will be accepted as a new breed, in some ways is in the hands of the Unions/Registries, BUT....as they are neither willing nor able to protect our dogs purity (any dogs for that matter), it is up to us ALL. Unions/Registries will shrewdly accept new breeds (it's their business after all) but they must be seen to be acting conscientiously. Like I have always said the mutt of the 18th century, was very quickly the pure breed of the 19th century.
The designer dog of the 20^th Century, is now the pure bred dog of the 21^st Century, and so it will continue.
  
However, we do all have a choice as to how we wish to take the Biewer terrier breed forward:

Always act in a responsible manner, the health and welfare of our dog’s paramount, in our breeding programs (white tip tail/ black tip tail?). DNA test all breeding pairs and their pups for authentication of Sire & Dam. Use the facilities of organisation like AHT (Animal Health Trust), who are breaking ground everyday, in their genetic studies of deceases in the modern dog. Good breeders reputations are earned in blood sweat and tears, I believe. If people want to join us, because they believe in our ethos that's great, if not I don't believe we are in a race to prove the BT are in anyway different than any other breed of dog. (After all they are dogs! not trophies) Lets just make sure we do the very best we can to protect their ancestry and history. Let’s make sure we continue to educate the public in whatever way we are able, and let’s not be complacent about why we are doing it?

Anita E Bridgen (9/11)