Questions (What are Northern Inuits like as pets) Questions

I imagine it take years to be accepted by the KC when I say years I mean many, many years. To be honest as long as the breed is going in the right direction which I believe it is with the NIS then it doesn't bother me how long it takes and I am sure many other owners feel the same.

I wrote this page before I knew the full truth about the health of the breed, all I can say is I will update it asap and thank you for highlighting it.

I have not claimed that the breed was not created for it's wolfish appearance, as far as I'm aware this was one of the reasons, bearing in mind I was not there.

As for the pic's of me of a visit to meet and learn about wolves what is wrong with that? :?

This was never denied, although I personally wouldnt have called it cruelty, the person who dumped the reptiles is the one who was cruel imo, anyhow, this is old news and has been on here before where it was all explained. so why rehash it again

Great info. Don't suppose when you got that score you managed to find out how many (what number) of dogs had been scored do you? Just curious!

I don't sorry, but Iwill find out I'm curious too

Another reputable breeder????
Under rescue/rehome:
[FONT=geneva,arial] my name is **** i am looking for a nice pet home or if you have other norterhn inuits i can be a stud dog i have sired 3 litters now all good looking might i add, i can live indoors or out my birthday is ******* please call if interesed[/FONT]

thanks sutty,it wasnt classed as crulty,the said reptiles were in my shop for three days,and were beeing treated,the rspca,s argument was that i should havegiven them double the dose of medication i was giving them[ which would of over dosed them,highly dangerouse].but the court case to defend are selfs was ALMOST £20,000,and we were faced with a deal from the rspca, admit guilt to two smaller charges and get a short ban on keeping reptils or go to court to fight it out costing me a lot of money i didnt have and if they won on even a tecnicality they would go all out to get me banned from keeping all animals for a short periord.NO I WASN T GUILTY OF CAUSING UNNESSESARY SUFFERING,but made the dissition i did for the sake of 1] my dogs 2] my pocket.

I think you will find that particular breeder is also with another group.

That may be so but it doesn't make it right. Thats like saying its ok to hit my child because others do it.

Not getting into this one except to say, I posted some video footage [last year I think] from a v show from the mid nineties, which had the lady Julie Kelham herself, with dogs..which she referred too as WOLF HYBRIDS, and the feature was about WOLF HYBRIDS, and how she was defending the WOLF HYBRIDS for the speight of attacks they had been responsible for, and how she would sell you a WOLF HYBRID from her market stall according to the tv presenter.
It's still on my old photobucket account, which means it is still viewable via the thread I started for it sometime ago. Maybe worth a viewing for anyone interested who didn't see it last time.
I myself am quite unbiast, despite the way the above comes across. My ethos all along has been ultimately, it is these dogs that suffer-regardless of what the 'eck they are!

I was going by this :


"A Nottinghamshire couple has been banned for five years after admitting causing unnecessary suffering to two lizards at their Newark pet shop. Kevin Kelham (45) and his wife Julie (43) from Newark pleaded guilty at Newark magistrates in October to two charges of unnecessary suffering to a sand agama and a leopard gecko. The Kelhams kept the reptiles at All Pets pet shop in Cartergate, Newark, which they ran until about 12 months ago. However, magistrates heard that they still run a market stall selling reptile accessories and offering 'advice'. The court also heard that Julie Kelham had received a five-year ban in the late 1980s for causing unnecessary suffering to a dog. The Kelhams were each fined £300 and ordered to pay a further £300 costs."

This is the website url below for you as you will presumably need to get them to correct the information they got in the courtroom, [ and presumably have the court correct their records ]

http://nwhsa.redblackandgreen.net/vermin_patrol_2005_part_3.html

HTH :smt001

The media are often known to distort the truth.

But thing is, the media in this case were merely echoing what Julie Kelham herself was saying!
Timewise it doesn't fit right for me, that was the mid nineties-say 94/95, which is just 12/13 years ago..yet the N.I has been in existence for much longer according to records, which to me means these wolf hybrid dogs WOULD have been in the N.I breeding program. Or that N.I's haven't been in true existence of breeding as a "breed" for aslong as claimed, or maybe [just playing devils advocate] the N.I was "invented" to cover up the wolf hybrid title when they become banned/unpopular/classed as dangerous?
It just doesn't sit right.
I have no problems with these dogs, have known a few who have been really nice. Bit of a ute preferer myself though, found them a bit more affectionate but thats probably just to do with the dogs!

Again, Julie cant comment on what is an ongoing court case, i hope she sues their asses off personally, and then you wont be able to rake up thise Bull once again

Luke ref the affectionate thing it does depend on the individual dog. One of mine is hardly affectionate, well he has his own way of being affectionate, the other two are really, really cuddly and affectionate.

are you gonna go find your little video again Luke, i thought it was innocent until proven guilty.

Nothing wrong with it, that was the context of my post. That BOTH groups have/are making claims and have certain interests not just 1 as some other posters were making out.

I like wolves too, nice pics either way ;-)

This as many of you know has always been my gripe and it still is. You are asking us to believe that there is an ongoing court case lasting, what? 20yrs??!! When JK said herself she didnt have the money for legal fees in the other case, how on earth can we be expected to believe she has the money to sustain such a long and drawn out process in which nobody has ever seen any results from?


Im being serious now, I havent mentioned this at all since the original thread, but now its here again, I still dont understand?

I'm not trying to prove ANYONE guilty thank you very much. The video was posted as it cropped up in conversation and was quite relevant at the time, and personally, I felt it was relevant to this discussion.
Maybe, just maybe, if someone chose to actually share the true origins of the Northern Inuit, we wouldn't have to speculate and rely on informative sources from over a decade ago. Personally however, I feel there MAY [not being Judge and jury here] be some truth behind the interview.

like i said ive never ever ever been banned from keeking dogssol thats bull****,as for you video luke,i had to get special permition to take two of my dogsto work that day off the market inspecter,so sorry no i didnt sell dogs on the market,more bull****.a year ago i got a speeding ticket,was i speeding??????????????????? i dont drive have never driven a car in my life.but if you think im guilty fine i really dont give a ****,you belive what you want to belive.