Northern Inuit and Ute Discussions

That was the impression I was given - eight and a half years ago.

With regard to a breed standard for a wolf - you can't have a standard that is so loose it will cover any variety of wolf.

Somewhere you have to make a decision of whether you go for the pointed ears or small round ears, tight feet or splayed feet, etc.

The standard has to be very specific, not vaguely looking like an impression of a wolf.

I'm butting in on this thread very rudely, but this stunning dog has a definite look of my Hal about him/her. Is it one of my old git's offspring, or grandchildren perchance ?

O sorry, I expected the piccy to come out, but it didn't. It's the lovely dog on page 6 of this thread I think it was, originally posted by Tawneywolf.

so what you're saying is you were lied to. mmmm

We were all lied to - I was told the same thing over 8 1/2 years ago when I got my first NI. I found out years later that no one had even applied to the KC, so I did it myself and have all the relative paperwork (the clubs have copies).

So are u saying the whole time you were with the NIS you never knew anything underhanded at all was going and you never participated?

Your unbelievable, Sandra's came forward with more information than anybody else has this past year. Try asking your questions in not so intimidating a manner.

Don't worry Liz - some people just don't have very good memories for things that have already been explained.

Unfortunately for those people I don't have the time or inclination to keep repeating myself.

This thread is about the similarities or differences between Utes and NI - not about me and I am not going to be drawn into another slanging match.

The answers are on the net - she will just have to trawl for them.

Huge variey of dogs shown in this thread, but all utterly gorgeous

The northern inuit will never be recognised as long as there is a northern inuit society. There is no trust amongst any of the committee.

I am surprised someone has stood up and made a break and a stand and people like Tracey Fowler have followed JK had originally assumed she was one of the better ones but obviously not.

You'd be surprised who you can and cant trust.
Ive had my eyes opened.

Luz I am glad your eyes have been opened.

People need to open their eyes and minds and not be brainwashed or blinkered.

History continues to repeat itself and that should tell people something - and there is ALWAYS one common demonimator/catalyst.

Well done Luz anyway.

on that very basis they will never recieve recognition then.

Dogloverr, how long have you beed involved with NIDs

This is what was put about:

'....Northern Inuits are registered with the NI Society and we have a database where we have more detailed records and information than the KC requires. I am in constant communication with the KC and it WILL only be a matter of time before we are recognised. There is a distinct type now and the approved breeders are only breeding from the very best....' CP, NIS , 2006


So, us owners are victims of lies, DL, but get your facts straight as to who was the instigator of the deceit

Have you left Laura?

Hi Werewolf
May i ask if you believe the NIS society is acting in the best interests of its members at this present time?

That statement was put out on the instruction of JK who wanted everyone to think we were making progress. If you care to look at the thread on CW you will see copies of letters I received from the KC and also the Irish KC, where JK had informed the committee that an application had been made. When correspondence failed to be produced I had my doubts that any application had been made at all, so wrote to the IKC myself - the reply is also on CW and it says quite clearly that no applciation had been made.

Yes it is true, we did compile a database and I did have more info than the KC required in some respects. As I said on here earlier, I still have all the correspondence and it was freely available at AGMs for any member to peruse.

BUT there were contradictions in the history, as you all know, which started to cause concern. By which time the database had grown and it wasn't easy to see where these discrepancies were. What finally showed them up was by simply clicking a button to see the picture in date order -that threw the whole thing out and made it impossible to believe. As I said earlier, it showed dogs as having produced litters before they were even born!

The database at that time was based on info given to us by JK, but following that major discrepancy we started following leads back to past breeders, who would remember the dogs they bred, and it didn't compare favourably with what we had been told.

Info still comes to light which contradicts what has been given in the past and there are no less than 5 databases in my possession, all different, and I expect that there are many more in existence. So what will the KC make of that?