Utonagans and Northern Inuits ????? Purpose ! Discussions

Of course, providing all future breedings are done with the utmost care in research etc that goes for any breed

When I said the word wild I meant the natural termperament of the native Wolf, but didn't want to type all that !!

When I said "If you follow that" ..........I meant 'if you see what I mean, if you followed that better that me, I'm confusing myself' !!! It was meant to be casual.

Don't take this personal, but this is why I said in the beginning that people with this breed seemed very defensive. If I was going to push buttons to be nasty I would, but that is not my intention. My intention is to talk to people about this breed and find out things I want to know.

You personally didnt say your dog was perfect I know, but many who are promoting this breed seem to try and force the notion on people that they ALL have 100% temperament, etc with no flaws. People that are buying these dogs also say the same and become very defensive.
It just seems that if people were more honest about the warts and all, they would be more readily accepted.

Zoundz? ... ZOUNDZ - WAKEY WAKEY!

*yawn* sorry! was feeding the ratties

am back now!

xx

Hi my breed doesn't make me the person I am...If I can be defensive at times it is purely my own personality, the dogs didn't change me honest...lol

I had no issue with 'wild' but I did read the 'if you follow that!' as being sarcastic. Thank you for explaining that it wasn't meant that way.

Also honestly I have never seen the dogs 'portrayed' as perfect and regularly see breeders with internet presents (sp?) describing the nature warts and all, as well as owners.

The traits obviously make them more or less suitable for a person...They are however a big dog and all big dogs are hard work, anyone would be a fool to think different...That is the very reason I took offense at the 'robot' comment...I put a hell of alot of work into my dogs...diet, exercise, grooming, training etc...I'm not some silly bint toting them around as my fashion accessory...anyone wanting that from any big dog is out their mind. The traits that the NI and Ute do have however make them the dog for me, hard work and all included

I think that although breeders have concentrated on particular looks the termperament thing is a very grey area. Afterall if you look at the breed standards for all the breeds that were included to create the Ni/UTE they all have different standard temperaments, and to which one comes out 5 or 6 generations down the line or 10 or 12 for that matter is something only experience will tell and I personally couldnt take the chance on.

I have no problem with the dogs, it's not their doing afterall, I just don't really believe that temperaments were initially in the thinking when creating these dogs or other less problematic breeds would have been used.

Thanks for all your replies Myschievous (sorry don't know your name), Its interesting to me and to get a civil person's point of view as yourself is enlightening, thank you ;-)

Mods and everyone else, sorry fot his OT.

So, the same standard includes the herdling line suomenlapinkoira which indeed is a true working dog. As in many breeds (like the siberians) the standard gives freedom but my point was that not all standards are created by the looks only. You said "The standards are written, in most cases, by show people who have little experience of working dogs, or expertise in anatomy. For this reason there is a distinct difference in show and working type in many breeds." So it does not really matter who the actual writers were as long as the dogs they were looking at were of working type and possessed the mental capasity to do the work. A herder standard can give even more room for different types as (IMHO) a herding dog does not "need" to be physically as defined as a long distance sled dog MUST be.

.

This is not what I critisised in your firts post. You said: "I do believe that Siberians have changed considerably from the original type and there are different types to suit various disciplines like sprint racing and show type". Which is not true. Some have and some havent. Have you seen any SSS? Even they have many kinds of types to them and mostly because people having them LIKE the certain type. The Sibe standard also gives freedom to accept different types. There is no such thing as "correct type". There are only dogs that CAN and dogs that CANNOT. And those that please your eye and those that dont. If you had seen a team of 9 working line dogs with 1 show sibe (the "Continental European" type) believe me, you would know the difference and why form follows function. They may well have the motivation (I have seen a few show line dogs with great motivation) but if they cannot do it because their legs are too short, they just cant. No magic can cure that. Even the original Seppala dogs were very different from each other. See Tserko & Kreevanka for example. To me, the Sibe standard (I'm talking about the FCI standard) is correct for many types and that is ok as long as the JUDGE knows which conformational aspects to emphasise. If they havent ever seen a working sibe, how would they what to look for? And please remember, the very light type (many modern SSS are) isnt "correct" either if we think about the original purpose of sibes. They are not sprint runners, they are mid-long distance runners, i.e. too light type is a sprint type in contrast to the "correct type" of mid-long distance runners (e.g. Alaskan's of Anadyr, Vargevass, Northome etc etc).

Yes, I have done my anatomy. Down to the bone actually :smt002 I wasnt saying I thought scapulae were the withers, I was answering to your question of why it says withers in the standard and not shoulders. I.e. they use the term withers because most people know that is the highest point between the neck and the rest of the back. Maybe I wasnt clear enough. Not the first time .

Is this thread going round in circles by any chance?

Tuuli, my point in referring to standards is to illustrate that they are, though based on historical writings, tailored in most cases, for the showring. There are of course variations within all breeds and this is no bad thing but here we have a standard allowing such extreme variation in type as seen in the Siberian. Sprint type enthusiasts might well consider the continental type incorrect but they still conform to the standard in the opinion of top judges.

This quote should illustrate the significance of 'form follows function' and that the former is dictated by the latter, not the other way round.

"There was the Seppala path, started by Harry Wheeler and continued primarily by McFaul and Shearer. And then there was the conventional Siberian Husky path, which occassionally borrowed from the Seppala side but never the reverse. Two very different types of dogs resulted from these two different paths. The conventional Siberian Husky was created by the purebred exhibition crowd where cosmetic considerations dominated the selection process. Havoc was rendered on the physical and mental characteristics essential to pull a sled rapidly over moderately long distances. On the other hand, the Seppala path was throughout its history motivated by work and racing."

http://www.seppalas.com/page3.htm

The misunderstanding over ‘withers’ illustrates one of the many the failings of written standards and there are many more blunders across the breeds. The significance of this to the thread is that with the NI and Ute having no specific, physically demanding purpose, its all the more important to define a functional type that does not lend itself to the exaggerations of the show world.

Maybe some of the people who created the dogs that were later to become N.I and Utes did have ulterior motives, ie: to make a quick buck, but things have moved on, for several years people have turned more to regulating breeding, health testing,hip scoring and so on, the societies are dedicated in this, not just promoting looks and temperament, I personally never, ever sell a puppy without pointing out their faults, and they do have em, as do most breeds, and if , for some reason, the dogs dont meet the peoples expectations, i will always take them back, so far this has never happened. some of you have not liked the temperaments of the N.I/Utes you have met, surely you cant condemn the whole breed on that basis. As for health, my dogs have never been to the vets other than for wasp stings and a neutering and advice on hand rearing. Maybe ive been lucky. I dont know all the answers, but i did my research before getting into this breed, i didnt wander in blindly because i wanted a fashion accessory, im 47 years old and trends and accessories left me behind a long time ago. I love all dogs, all breeds, all shapes and sizes. I dont know what it is that makes the N.I appeal to me more than others, does anyone know why with their chosen breed. I dont ask that everyone accept us with open arms, im not that naieve, but i also dont expect constant critisism, we are doing the best we can with the dogs we have, using the best of our breeding stock to better the breed, so, i reiterate, we are here and here to stay,que serra serra

Most cases maybe, but not all.

Your quote represents the view of the ISSSC which is not shared by all sibe people world wide. Doug Willet has said about this view that they oppose the AKC & CKC registered sibes (i.e. mostly show line) called the same breed as the working line OR the SSS. Hence your quote and hence the SSS. The ISSSC has no problem accepting the REAL working line dogs (like scandinavian working lines for example) as a working sibe and some would reg them as SSS. The SSS only means that the dog is 93% or more of decendant of the Wheeler dogs (i.e. Kreevanka, Tserko, Harry, Smoky, Togo, Kolyma, Nome, Pearl, Dushka & Sonia). Which most working line sibes in fact are.

This may be problematic for you to understand as you may not have any experience on how the working line here looks like. The ISSSC is a way to battle the growing show line market, not true working line sibe. And thus, the working line sibes are not at all that different from the original Seppala dogs. I have seen many pics and old films of Seppala and his dogs, many of which would fit nicely any modern working line team. Also e.g. Willet's dog Boris of Sepp-Alta is very similar to any working line sibe here. See e.g. http://www.siperianhusky.fi/valiot/cartman.html who is FIN CH and also a working CH. So to most sibe people in Finland and scandinavia the SSS represents the same working line as all our working line dogs are. In Finland Seppalas are reg in the same FCI/Finnish Kennel Club reg as all other sibes. We dont see a difference.

Your first point was: "I do believe that Siberians have changed considerably from the original type and there are different types to suit various disciplines like sprint racing and show type".

Which is NOT the case, as I have tried to demonstrate. There STILL is the mid-long distance type, among others. Most of the Finnish/scandinavian sibes are of this type as Doug Willet has said himself.

Then you said: "The point is Tuuli, that there are many show type Siberians, that are considered to be correct according to the standard, but are very different in construction from the original Seppala dogs. "

Which is true and nobody can argue against that.

One could also argue that an excellent mid-long distance dog (i.e. motivation & conformation are correct) would be a good sprint dog. Maybe not excellent (i.e. compared to Eurohouds & Alaskans) but very good. This only a matter of training them for different purpose. As all sibe racers do every year. ;-)

Thank you

i know it won't interest anybody but i chose my dogs for the same reasons as myschievious! ... i'm glad i have bought them and that they are happy rather than getting another breed and not being able to suit their needs and have them unhappy (not judging anyone, just what i think!).

My 2 monsters would follow any strangers if i let them! (bless!). They are very nosey dogs and will run to anyone or to any dogs to say hi and have a play!
They can be pain in the rear end at times but hey! nobody's perfect so why my dogs should be?? !! I don't expect them to be either (would be great but... !!!! )

They can be impressive;2 big dogs running toward you can be scary to some people; but they won't attack (unless felt threatened?...). I noticed that Indy can havea mean look (i can see that on most pics i take of him) but really past the 'evil mean eyes' he is as gentle as a teddy bear! (or maybe i scare my dogs as they gave in to me??!! ...)

My dogs are very clever but also very stubborn, they will hear what they want to hear!! They tend also to be jealous of each other if one get more attention than the other from anybody and might start ''fighting''/wrestling each other ... it is a bit embarrassing in front of people who see them for the first time but most still find them nice!
They are very possessive and won't live me alone a minute! (talking about privacy hey! ... not anymore for me, they even follow me in the toilets!!!)

There might be other dogs that have great temperaments and have been created long long time ago but if it's to own a dog like where i don't particularly like their look ... it will reflect on the dog and this could be a recipe for disaster ... (the dog will feel it and might not have any respect for you???... don't know but i won't take the risk).

Am i shallow having a dog for his temperament AND its good look? I don't think so but everyone thinks differently so if anyone thinks i am, so be it!

Sorry to hear that some of you didn't have a great experience with the dogs you have met ... but i guess and think you can't just judge an entire breed on a few dogs met ...

I am interested

i know i said i wouldnt post again on this topic but i came accross thia which some might be interested to see..


http://www.dogstuff.info/northern_inuit_ripoff.html

i've seen that article before it is very interesting, however, as one person rightly said before - you can't always believe everything you read on the internet though.

in the end all you can do is gather as much information as possible, and bse your own judgements on what you read/experience i think that's what most people do anyway, like minihaha was saying earlier in the thread

xx

o my god, i wondered when that old tat would surface again, everytime someone wants to have a poke they bring this flamin article up, cant you find any new derogative articles

As the above article is almost 5 years old I dont know why its resurrected itself now. Throw it away its well passed its sell by date.

Who is she? Are these just her personal opinions? I've seen that she breeds and that she has opinions on wolfdogs, cross breeds and the NI but is she 'someone'?

She's part of a group called the Fan Hitch Inuit Sled Dogs. We obviously posed a threat to her and her group. Its very old history Linda. Shame people have to go dredging archives to find stuff on our lovely dogs.

It's normal for there to be different opinions on type within breeds, and all this information is very interesting, but hardly relevant to the point....which is that the written standard is not sufficient as a means of defining the phenotype of a working dog. The only sure way to define correct form, is for it to follow function.

I’m not sure how you can disagree with my first point but agree with the second, unless I'm misunderstanding you. You can't argue that there isn't a wide range in type in Siberians between the sprint, and the heavy continental type, and obviously there will be a range of types in between.

I haven't said that all Siberians are different from Seppalas, but many are, and certainly most of what I see in the UK showrings is.