At AYK - the Red puppy is Gobo who is owned by Steven and Judy. Turnout wise we had about 25 people, 9 Japanese Akita, 1 American Akita, and 2 shiba. Considering that it was going to rain so I'm happy with the turn out.
Hoshi (Kita X Ayame) The brindle male in the fourth photo is only 6 months old. I really like his personality.
I know it doesn't look like it but Kaeda is officially taller that Ayame her mother(By a hair) She still has a puppy face
Gobo
Sakura?
Gojira
Kaeda
Hime and Hiko I love these two JAs. All they do is sit next to each other in pure bliss. When we are at the shows, their owner puts them in the same crate. Instead of fighting all they do is snuggle.
I gotta say, though, I really don't understand why the Akitas aren't split as a breed here in the US when they are so obviously NOT the same breed....These JAs are gorgeous, and so very very different from my big AA boy!
eta: and I love the pic of the red head girl with golden Akita--what beautiful hair color on both of them!
Kaeda does still have a puppy face. I have always adored her pics. All of them look great. I'm in aww of the dog love going on between those two.
As much as my Kais love eachother I don't think I could put them in the same crate like that. Koda would be kissing Maymay but Maymay would probably teach him how to escape and get into something. Then they would wrestle....it would be a mess.
@SM - The sad part is that the breed to gets hurts the most from a non split is the American Akita. Back in 2000ish a request was submitted to the AKC requesting a close to the Akita studbook back to 1992. It was written by Jane Creason, Kay S Greisen , and Liz Harrell. It was title "Endangered Breed - The AKC Recognized Akita" . All three were American Akita breeders and Kay S Greisen was one of the founders of the AKC stud book. In it, they showed how the Akita has split into two breeds, and also showed how quickly the American Akita traits jumped out of the JA lines. Not only is the document a great support of the AA, it is also a fantastic written account on the restoration of the JA. This thing is unreal, everything is supported with quotes, photos, you name it. The comments from the ACA people are unreal.
I hope to someday speak to the authors and get permission to reprint it.
Loved seeing the pictures. Very cute of the handsome Hime and Hiko.
Does the Los Angeles Branch of AKIHO still have their annual Febuary Show?
I noticed a couple of comments wondering why the Akita breed is not split in America. It is a complex subject so I thought you might like to read about the issues in this article I was requested to write for the England magazine Akita Annual. (be sure to click on the 'Teller Report' update since the article was written) http://www.northlandakitas.com/update/splitting.htm
Thanks Loren...I'd actually read those articles on your website before!
I think my comment about why isn't the breed split is more my opinion phrased as a question: I mean, I believe the breed should be split, and it seems to me that all anyone has to do is look at the two types of Akitas and see they are not the same. What is even more frustrating for me is the fact that the Akita doesn't get split, but the AKC is willing to have, say a smooth coated fox terrier and a wire haired one, and THREE kinds of cockers....so it really doesn't make sense to me.
I am not, however, privy to the politics of those that vote on this, so I don't know about that, and am actually kind of glad I don't!
Why push 75%/25% It's a blend just plain and simple.
Why not follow what the kennel club did with in the UK? Do it exactly the same way except remove the judge requirement.
I may be off on the exact wording but these basic idea is this.... If you dog has the following:
1) An export pedigree from the parent nation. In this case JKC. 2) A pedigree from any FCI nation stating the breed of the animal. 3) A pedigree from a non split nation that shows full heritage to the Japanese Akita.
That pretty much covers an JA that imported to the US. Plus AKC dogs that can show number three are covered as well. Number two covers all the FCI dogs that fell under that four generation pedigree rule as well.
BTW who said ACA is the parent club of the Japanese Akita in the US?
I would be in favor of a breed split done the same way as the FCI did theirs. But that will not happen no matter what side of the issue a person sides with. Differing opinions about how the breed should be split is in my opinion why members of the ACA have been voted the split down. There seems to be no compromise. Some who would accept the JKC thinking about a split had to vote against the split just to be on the safe side.
For the most part, when the breed was split in FCI countries, the majority of Akitas that were included in the Japanese type Akita breed were what you would refer to as blends. Though there were judges, for the most part the owners decided which direction and what dogs would remain Akita and which would become Great Japanese Dog (later renamed American Akita). It was done by the dogs looks rather than pedigree. All this with JKC's blessing.
The ACA is the parent club of the breed known as Akita in the United States. (only the UK has a breed named Japanese Akita) If in the event of a breed split, the ACA (affiliated with AKC) would initially, in all likelyhood, be the parent club of the new breed, but that is not set in stone. A new breed club could also be formed for the new breed. Madeliene B. Smith's website has most all the info from JKC and AKC regarding the split issue.
Loren
An Akita from America can be registered as an Akita of Japanese type in an FCI country. In fact, just one example, an Akita going back to our 100% old American lines was registered as an Akita (Japanese type) in Mexico.
My understanding is there are a few registered FCI nation Akitas that have pedigree with pre-split dogs in their pedigree. I have seen that in a few coming out of Croatia. They seem to focus at dogs born pre-1992 Now IMO that is the exception and not the norm. If the dog registered in mexico has a four generation pedigree that contains AA within the four generation pedigree then it would be a tweenie and should not be registered.(I would love to see the pedigree for that dog).
"For the most part, when the breed was split in FCI countries, the majority of Akitas that were included in the Japanese type Akita breed were what you would refer to as blends. Though there were judges, for the most part the owners decided which direction and what dogs would remain Akita and which would become Great Japanese Dog (later renamed American Akita). It was done by the dogs looks rather than pedigree. All this with JKC's blessing."
The above was a product of the four generation rule. I am aware of Madeliene B. Smith's website and I also have a copy of "Endangered Breed: Request to Close the AKC Stud Book..." By Jane L Creason and Kay S Greisen.
In the US there wouldn't be a need to grandfather in blends. JA dogs could be tracked to the following sources. 1)JKC 2)FCI JA (with few blends coming through that route. 3) Akiho (Crowley has already stated that if the split happend within AKC, they would take Akiho dogs without export pedigree 4) AKC registered dogs who could trace back to the above mentioned numbers.
Plus the WUAC does not recognize the ACA as the parent club of the JA in the states. If the WUAC(which is chaired by the JKC), saw the ACA as the parent club wouldn't Sohpia Kaluzniacki be a delegate and not an adivsor? Maybe another parent club and another kennel club might be the way to go.
Keep in mind that FCI countries did not have an 18 year period in which they could not import Akitas from Japan. That only happened in America.
The dog I was speaking of was what you would call an American Akita since the entire pedigree contains no post 1992 pedigrees but contains all pre 1992 pedigrees, so no tweenie. Several years ago the world show youth champion was also 100% American lines. He was a brindle faced brindle bred by Sandy Jauch (Foster) and I recall it was a Japanese judge who was surprised to find out his American heritage afterward. The number one Akita in Denmark several years back was American lines. The fellow that owned him is who we placed an Japanese import female we co-owned and imported. Also a few years ago, a Cindy Carlson bred male of 75% post 1992 Japanese import lines and 25% American lines went Best In Show in an FCI country. I must admit that I don't keep up on such things like I used to.
You keep mentioning a 4 generation rule. There was no such rule when determining the dog's breed during the split years in FCI. Also, some countries were given an additional 5 years after the split to continue breeding in the direction of the Japanese type. All the inconsistencies of the FCI split make my head spin. I have forgotten some, but they include artificial insemination with sperm from non FCI countries.
I don't recall a 100% promise by James Crowley about accepting the AKIHO pedigrees and by passing the JKC reciprocal agreement without JKC's consent. Lots of possibilities were mentioned, but also lots of hoops to jump through to ever make them happen. It is good to check out Madeleine's website to refresh our memories. But if I recall correctly, the Creason/Greisen thing seems irrelevant and was treated as such. (they even used evidence that countered their argument)
The WUAC can do or think as they wish about almost anything, including how they use Sophia. I don't understand what they would have to do with a breed split by AKC. I am unaware of the WUAC having any relationship with the AKC. But I haven't thought about that for a while. Are they still fairly active?
ACA controls the standard of the Akita in the United States, even if a dog's pedigree is 100% post 1992 import lines from Japan. AKIHO being the exception of course since that club wants nothing to do with these other all breed clubs.
You are correct there was no official name for it but the quote I quoted from your article is what I have been told is the four generation rule. Could have a different name. I actually see no problem with the example you used above for the pre-1992 dogs. There is going to be some mix-match. By restricting it to the FCI side of things the US would minimize it. Your quote about the Japanese judge being surprised by the 75% tweenie just highlights why a split would need to be based off of pedigree. Using the criteria above will cover the vast majority of pure Japanese Akita. Don't worry about a Judge and try to limit as much subjective criteria as possible. In fact maybe go with a different Kennel club.
Clearly the Akita has American Lines in it. I really do not know what type of lines they are. However, they came from pre-1992 stuff and pre-FCI split. It looks like the FCI grandfathered them in. Since the FCI accepted it then it slips in. We can't run around an police everyone. However in the case for the US we don't need to do that.
Seems pretty simple to me. Something may get through but like somewhat said to me once "You could register a pig in AKC as a dog if you really wanted to"
Like you said above in the US we have Akita. Keep it..it's yours - my understanding is that AKC/ACA don't like to split breeds. New breed(Japanese Akita) with new parent club. That way if you want to blend -go for it. If the kid down the street doesn't like to share the ball, then the best thing to do is buy a new ball.
WUAC seems fairly active to me. They are still hold bianual conferences. Sophia, is listed as a consultant from ACA not AKC. Hence my point of WUAC does not view them as the parent breed club of the JA in the US. As far as Akiho goes... I am a member and a somewhat active one at that. Yes you are correct, I want very little to do with the AKC. I have had the chance to meet some really neat people from the ACA might even be a member someday -and- I like my involvement with JACA.
At the end of this, all we really have is two opinions on a difficult situation. For most Akita buyers, they should be focusing on finding a good breeder regardless of what type they want. Making sure they do health checks and communicate with potential owners. For the most people buy a dog that is way way more important. I love a classic AA as much as I do the JA... and for me splitting the two gives me the best chance to enjoy both breeds.
Just a correction of understanding. The judge that I mentioned was surprised at the American heritage of the young brindle male had to do with 100% American lines, not the 75% Japanese lines Akita. That was a different show and country. The reason the dog looked so Japanese even though 100% American lines is because the ACA original foundation stock also had oriental Japanese type Akitas along with the more so called American type. Of course all pedigrees go back to Japan.
Besides AKIHO, the United States has a couple Japanese Akita groups, and 2 or 3 American Akita groups. The American Akita groups insist on 100% American lines with no post 1992 Japanese import lines in the pedigree, much like but just opposite JACA philosophy. Here is where the difficulty in obtaining a split that works come into play. If both the JA and AA groups get their way, that would leave all Akitas that have any combination of lines from both countries without a breed to be grouped in, unless the Akita was split into the AA, JA, and the Akita (three breeds). AKC will not split into 3 breeds nor leave registered AKC Akitas without a breed to be part of.
In light of the above, I agree with you that Pedigree is the right way to split the breed, but the opposing forces for the 100% JA and 100% AA will not compromise, so since both can't have their way, they are at a stand off.
A compromise that will work much like the FCI split is to compromise on the percentage so the breed can be divided into two breeds without harm coming to anybody's breeding program, something James Crowley insisted on. Much like FCI countries, it will all work itself out in the breeding box and show ring in the USA as well.
It is an interesting discussion, but after 19 years and the climate at hand, it looks like we will have to get used to the fact that there will not be two Akita breeds in America.
Comments
Hoshi (Kita X Ayame) The brindle male in the fourth photo is only 6 months old. I really like his personality.
I know it doesn't look like it but Kaeda is officially taller that Ayame her mother(By a hair) She still has a puppy face
Gobo
Sakura?
Gojira
Kaeda
Hime and Hiko
I love these two JAs. All they do is sit next to each other in pure bliss. When we are at the shows, their owner puts them in the same crate. Instead of fighting all they do is snuggle.
Is Gobo the pup that was at the last AKIHO show?
I gotta say, though, I really don't understand why the Akitas aren't split as a breed here in the US when they are so obviously NOT the same breed....These JAs are gorgeous, and so very very different from my big AA boy!
eta: and I love the pic of the red head girl with golden Akita--what beautiful hair color on both of them!
As much as my Kais love eachother I don't think I could put them in the same crate like that. Koda would be kissing Maymay but Maymay would probably teach him how to escape and get into something. Then they would wrestle....it would be a mess.
I hope to someday speak to the authors and get permission to reprint it.
havent been on this forum in months.
so much change (:
Does the Los Angeles Branch of AKIHO still have their annual Febuary Show?
I noticed a couple of comments wondering why the Akita breed is not split in America. It is a complex subject so I thought you might like to read about the issues in this article I was requested to write for the England magazine Akita Annual. (be sure to click on the 'Teller Report' update since the article was written) http://www.northlandakitas.com/update/splitting.htm
There is also an interview of the JKC General Secretary about the breed split. http://www.northlandakitas.com/akitahistory/divakita.htm
Hope this helps.
Loren
I think my comment about why isn't the breed split is more my opinion phrased as a question: I mean, I believe the breed should be split, and it seems to me that all anyone has to do is look at the two types of Akitas and see they are not the same. What is even more frustrating for me is the fact that the Akita doesn't get split, but the AKC is willing to have, say a smooth coated fox terrier and a wire haired one, and THREE kinds of cockers....so it really doesn't make sense to me.
I am not, however, privy to the politics of those that vote on this, so I don't know about that, and am actually kind of glad I don't!
Why not follow what the kennel club did with in the UK? Do it exactly the same way except remove the judge requirement.
I may be off on the exact wording but these basic idea is this.... If you dog has the following:
1) An export pedigree from the parent nation. In this case JKC.
2) A pedigree from any FCI nation stating the breed of the animal.
3) A pedigree from a non split nation that shows full heritage to the Japanese Akita.
That pretty much covers an JA that imported to the US. Plus AKC dogs that can show number three are covered as well. Number two covers all the FCI dogs that fell under that four generation pedigree rule as well.
BTW who said ACA is the parent club of the Japanese Akita in the US?
For the most part, when the breed was split in FCI countries, the majority of Akitas that were included in the Japanese type Akita breed were what you would refer to as blends. Though there were judges, for the most part the owners decided which direction and what dogs would remain Akita and which would become Great Japanese Dog (later renamed American Akita). It was done by the dogs looks rather than pedigree. All this with JKC's blessing.
The ACA is the parent club of the breed known as Akita in the United States. (only the UK has a breed named Japanese Akita) If in the event of a breed split, the ACA (affiliated with AKC) would initially, in all likelyhood, be the parent club of the new breed, but that is not set in stone. A new breed club could also be formed for the new breed. Madeliene B. Smith's website has most all the info from JKC and AKC regarding the split issue.
Loren
An Akita from America can be registered as an Akita of Japanese type in an FCI country. In fact, just one example, an Akita going back to our 100% old American lines was registered as an Akita (Japanese type) in Mexico.
"For the most part, when the breed was split in FCI countries, the majority of Akitas that were included in the Japanese type Akita breed were what you would refer to as blends. Though there were judges, for the most part the owners decided which direction and what dogs would remain Akita and which would become Great Japanese Dog (later renamed American Akita). It was done by the dogs looks rather than pedigree. All this with JKC's blessing."
The above was a product of the four generation rule. I am aware of Madeliene B. Smith's website and I also have a copy of "Endangered Breed: Request to Close the AKC Stud Book..." By Jane L Creason and Kay S Greisen.
In the US there wouldn't be a need to grandfather in blends. JA dogs could be tracked to the following sources. 1)JKC 2)FCI JA (with few blends coming through that route. 3) Akiho (Crowley has already stated that if the split happend within AKC, they would take Akiho dogs without export pedigree 4) AKC registered dogs who could trace back to the above mentioned numbers.
Plus the WUAC does not recognize the ACA as the parent club of the JA in the states. If the WUAC(which is chaired by the JKC), saw the ACA as the parent club wouldn't Sohpia Kaluzniacki be a delegate and not an adivsor? Maybe another parent club and another kennel club might be the way to go.
-Sean Nollan
The dog I was speaking of was what you would call an American Akita since the entire pedigree contains no post 1992 pedigrees but contains all pre 1992 pedigrees, so no tweenie. Several years ago the world show youth champion was also 100% American lines. He was a brindle faced brindle bred by Sandy Jauch (Foster) and I recall it was a Japanese judge who was surprised to find out his American heritage afterward. The number one Akita in Denmark several years back was American lines. The fellow that owned him is who we placed an Japanese import female we co-owned and imported. Also a few years ago, a Cindy Carlson bred male of 75% post 1992 Japanese import lines and 25% American lines went Best In Show in an FCI country. I must admit that I don't keep up on such things like I used to.
You keep mentioning a 4 generation rule. There was no such rule when determining the dog's breed during the split years in FCI. Also, some countries were given an additional 5 years after the split to continue breeding in the direction of the Japanese type. All the inconsistencies of the FCI split make my head spin. I have forgotten some, but they include artificial insemination with sperm from non FCI countries.
I don't recall a 100% promise by James Crowley about accepting the AKIHO pedigrees and by passing the JKC reciprocal agreement without JKC's consent. Lots of possibilities were mentioned, but also lots of hoops to jump through to ever make them happen. It is good to check out Madeleine's website to refresh our memories. But if I recall correctly, the Creason/Greisen thing seems irrelevant and was treated as such. (they even used evidence that countered their argument)
The WUAC can do or think as they wish about almost anything, including how they use Sophia. I don't understand what they would have to do with a breed split by AKC. I am unaware of the WUAC having any relationship with the AKC. But I haven't thought about that for a while. Are they still fairly active?
ACA controls the standard of the Akita in the United States, even if a dog's pedigree is 100% post 1992 import lines from Japan. AKIHO being the exception of course since that club wants nothing to do with these other all breed clubs.
This is an example of what I am talking about:
http://akita-inu-brasil.com/akitapedigree/details.php?id=63471
Clearly the Akita has American Lines in it. I really do not know what type of lines they are. However, they came from pre-1992 stuff and pre-FCI split. It looks like the FCI grandfathered them in. Since the FCI accepted it then it slips in. We can't run around an police everyone. However in the case for the US we don't need to do that.
In this case:
http://www.akitaheadquarters.com/geneal.pl?op=tree&index=10674&gens=5&db=akitas.dbw
You have an Akita with an AKC pedigree and links to both Akiho and FCI Nation.
Seems pretty simple to me. Something may get through but like somewhat said to me once "You could register a pig in AKC as a dog if you really wanted to"
Like you said above in the US we have Akita. Keep it..it's yours - my understanding is that AKC/ACA don't like to split breeds. New breed(Japanese Akita) with new parent club. That way if you want to blend -go for it. If the kid down the street doesn't like to share the ball, then the best thing to do is buy a new ball.
WUAC seems fairly active to me. They are still hold bianual conferences. Sophia, is listed as a consultant from ACA not AKC. Hence my point of WUAC does not view them as the parent breed club of the JA in the US. As far as Akiho goes... I am a member and a somewhat active one at that. Yes you are correct, I want very little to do with the AKC. I have had the chance to meet some really neat people from the ACA might even be a member someday -and- I like my involvement with JACA.
At the end of this, all we really have is two opinions on a difficult situation. For most Akita buyers, they should be focusing on finding a good breeder regardless of what type they want. Making sure they do health checks and communicate with potential owners. For the most people buy a dog that is way way more important. I love a classic AA as much as I do the JA... and for me splitting the two gives me the best chance to enjoy both breeds.
I've enjoyed this discussion.
Besides AKIHO, the United States has a couple Japanese Akita groups, and 2 or 3 American Akita groups. The American Akita groups insist on 100% American lines with no post 1992 Japanese import lines in the pedigree, much like but just opposite JACA philosophy. Here is where the difficulty in obtaining a split that works come into play. If both the JA and AA groups get their way, that would leave all Akitas that have any combination of lines from both countries without a breed to be grouped in, unless the Akita was split into the AA, JA, and the Akita (three breeds). AKC will not split into 3 breeds nor leave registered AKC Akitas without a breed to be part of.
In light of the above, I agree with you that Pedigree is the right way to split the breed, but the opposing forces for the 100% JA and 100% AA will not compromise, so since both can't have their way, they are at a stand off.
A compromise that will work much like the FCI split is to compromise on the percentage so the breed can be divided into two breeds without harm coming to anybody's breeding program, something James Crowley insisted on. Much like FCI countries, it will all work itself out in the breeding box and show ring in the USA as well.
It is an interesting discussion, but after 19 years and the climate at hand, it looks like we will have to get used to the fact that there will not be two Akita breeds in America.