"New" NI breed standard, anyone care to discuss, co my head is spinning!!

I dont agree Nes (whats new eh! ) I think all your dogs are totally different, I can see why some people may assume Shunka and Kaliska are related and that would be their markings. Long coated GSD's look different only because of their coat and as you know there are two distinct types of GSD anyway.

There is no consistency with type, size or temperament. kaliska is bigger than your males, Thunders head is blocky with round eyes, Shunka's head is more refined and is longer in the muzzle, kaliska's head is strong for a bitch and she has a broader skull etc... Please dont think for a second Im picking faults in your dogs Im using them as an example because I know you understand where Im coming from and I mean no offence personally to you (or the pooches!!) I have said to you before, to me, Shunka is as near as damn it to what I would assume an NI "should" look like, given the old standard. I personally feel "other" winning dogs are far inferior to him.

Hi Dawn

I am not making it up ref the GSD. Their friend who is female is huge and must be at least the same size her father was, I do have a pic somewhere or other on this comp.

I am saying physical differences happen in that breed and that breed has been around for many, many more years than the NID.

Yes I dont dispute that, but GSD's look like GSD's NI,s look like GSD crosses, Husky crosses, coarse Huskies Husky/GSD crosses. Sorry i should of been clearer.

Some NIDs, I agree do look nothing like the idea most of us would have of what a NID should look like. This is not helped with people simply breeding (from such dogs) because they have a bitch and a male.......it is about consideration for the breed and sadly some lack this and think of the money they can make or so it would seem........

Dawn, if you fancy sending me a list of breeds with individual parts that fit each bit of the `standard` [ ie rib construction, pasterns, etc etc ], I`ll see what I can do to put a pic of single dog together on my artwork program - I will resist putting nuts and bolts and other frankensteinish type seam joiners on it ;-)

That will take some doing patch, but ill see what I can find.

Patch I don't think anything would have the front assembly as described, it would not be able to stand, particularly if the hind quarters were the same construction but in reverse, which, of course, it should be.

Well, it looks to me like Shila will not be having a litter after all. If we do, then clearly very few will allow that her puppies would be Northern Inuits, ("Hey, there's no such thing, is there? No KC, no breed, right?"), or maybe they will just assume that there is some commercial reason for having a litter, ("He's only doing it for the money after all, I reckon he'd call 'em cabbage patch dolls if he could sell 'em for more..."), or in some other way complain about the fact that we have the cheek to let our dog have puppies - and (good God, perish the thought) even to have the downright temerity to use *another* so-called Northern Inuit as a father...

I cannot help but wonder that, were Internet forums around years ago, just how many of todays so-called pure-breeds would have made it?

I stand waiting for the inevitable sh**storm, but I am adamant in my view that were this discussion to have taken place maybe 40 years ago then a whole lot more breeds would be up for a major slating... maybe we need to give a little slack here and remember that this is not about breeders, or even their personalities - it's about the dogs. Shila fits in quite nicely with the "standard" in force when she was born, which is just fine by me... that's the way I am going to leave it now since, if I have no intention of breeding her, any current or future standard alteration will not affect me - effectively I just have a dog I am pleased and proud to own, and who seems to feel the same about me... which is all that matters really.



Arthur

Arthur, there are loads of breeds that are breeds although they are not recognised by the KC, that is not the criteria.

If you are sure about the health status of your dogs ancestors and you want for some good reason to breed then I do not see why you should not, there are loads and loads of dogs breed each year some pure bred some cross bred and others mongrels, if you have reason to join in then who should say you should not.

Some of us believe that you should only breed to help improve a breed or keep it going but that is our opinion and if rescue centers are anything to go by not the opinion of most who breed dogs, so our opinion is defiantly in the minority but we keep plugging on in the hope that one day less dogs will finish their lives either unwanted or being PTS.

All that may be true Pita, but let's be honest here - I don't laugh and poke fun at your dogs, why is it done to mine? OK, there may indeed be an issue with the standard (recently) but people are trying, are they not? Constructive criticism I can understand (even encourage), but to joke about such things is not funny at all...


Being a little ruthless (and *please* treat the next bit lightheartedly - as intended) I don't point out the back end of your dog looks like the front end of a Pug do I? It may be in your breed standard and I may think it's wrong, (which, incidentally, I don't think), but I would keep that sort of thing to myself. Maybe a little reciprocity?


Arthur

When have I poked fun at your dogs, I don't know them as far as I know. Anyway I appreciate dogs far too much to poke fun at them.

It is you who changed the subject, we were talking about the impossibility of a dog, any dog being built to fit the description as now laid out in the NI standard.

Arthur.
Its never about poking fun at the dogs, never, its the people behind the dogs, always has been. Its the breeders that have ruined them, made them what they are in looks, beahviour and health, they are to blame. When these people sit down and rewrite a breed standard that when thought about with basic canine knowledge, reads like a dog that couldnt walk, move or function with such construction, then its bound to cause comments.

I actually didnt see the "new" standard, one of the NIS members sent me the link, I knew I wouldnt be able to talk about it on the NIS foum and given we have a lot of NI owners on here, I bought it up.

You have to question the ethics and morals of NIS committee etc.. when you know what they done, and when they write a "standard" like this it becomes clear that MUCH more research is required. Whats worse is that these people are breeding dogs!!!

I would NEVER ever take it out on the dogs, and if one needed my help and I could give it, I would without hesitation, that would go for ANY dog of ANY breed or type.

Many comments have been made about the NI breed and the new standard (workable or otherwise) that have been, at least to me as an owner of one of these dogs, hurtful to say the least... yourself included (remember the comment about JK's dogs being deformed? Or the "sounds like a standard for a rocking horse" one?). I *did* ask you to take my comments about your dogs in the manner intended (lighthearted), but it seems you cannot take such comments, no matter how they are given. Yet it seems you still expect others to do so? And incidentally, I never said that you personally had poked fun at the dogs, mine or otherwise. Past replies to comments I have made have forced me to be particularly specific and precise in the posts I make here.


Arthur

Arthur,
I've been on this forum a while and when I was first caught up in the NI bashing it did get to me im not embaressed to admit it but saying that I did involve myself into the arguement (i cant remember what it was about now) the best thing you can do is not take it personally, Unless Shila is actually being slagged off which she hasn't been.
A lot of people are concerned about the breed, some go about it the right way some dont but dont take it personally.
If you want to breed Shila nothing on here will stop you but hopefully it will make you do things correctly.

Not a problem, my software has the option to stretch or squish bits of images or I can just trim or add to suit the required shape ;-)

Arthur, as I said before there is no way I am poking fun at any dog, I love dogs but I am concerned when people set themselves up as a committee and produce a standard for people to work to when they obviously have less knowledge that the most basic dog lover would have. My worry is that people would actually try to follow the advice of those who make such pronouncements.

If you already own a dog that does not match the new standard you could be worried but don't be, no dog possible could.

If it makes you happy to poke fun at my dogs poke away why would it worry me.

I give up...

rubbish...you all hate NI dogs and typically say things derogatory towards the breed...not just the breeders, but that seems to be a good fall back...what happen to "just stop the breeding and let them all die out" or "they just look like poor huskies/mal/gsd" and all that talk when trying to convince new members that are interested how "horrible" the breed is. Heck, the very title of this portion of the forum shows how little the moderators feel about this 'breed'. You, undoubtedly, have a problem with the breeders, but you would be lying if you said you had no problem with the breed. And if you truly believe you don’t, then just look back at some of the posts you put and ask yourself “does this sound like someone who really likes this breed?”

I am happy to critisise the people who are responsible for making anti dog decisions but never the dogs themselves so as this thread was about the standard lets not be offended, comments are is not directed at your or anyone else's dogs.

Rest assured Arthur unless asked for an opinion on your dog I would never give it and even if asked I would never be unkind.

please point me in the direction of a derogatory comment I have made about the dogs?