Someone has to explain this to me. In the US, we have Akitas as one breed. But in the rest of the world, isn't it two breeds?
How can a dog be registered as a Japanese Akita when over 75% of its pedigree is American Akita? That doesn't make sense to me at all. And why would someone do that? What's the motivation in this all?
I see that there are arguments for health issues, but honestly both these breeds have the same issues, and add more to each other as well.
If Akita owners in other countries are looking to explore cross breeding, and that's what it is since these two dogs clearly are not the same, then why not cross breed to a dog that doesn't have these issues?
Who cares about grand championships and showing your dog if your mission is to re- re-create the Akita to cure its health ailments?
Japanese akita and american akita r two different breed. Dont matter if pedigree says JA. If pedigree has american akita, its a mixed dog. Not either JA or AA. No matter what. Its like i want to make jindo bigger and breed jindo and akita because they r simular.
Wow, look at all those AA lines! Sondaisa is a pretty well known AA kennel (you see their dogs everywhere!)
I don't think anyone is trying to suggest adding AA to JA to help with health issues. It would have to be another breed, if that were to be done, and I don't think it is? (someone else might know the answer to that). They do have similar health issues, obviously, as do most of the NKs, so yeah, it wouldn't make sense to breed them together to help the breed (though I think there may be less health issues with AA, or at least spread over a bigger population, and at least slightly more diversity? But I don't know about that for sure either).
I think it's more that in the US, since the breed has not split, there are still tweenies around, and so perhaps it's that those dogs are being called JAs sometimes?
I still don't get WHY someone would want to do it though, ie. call an AA a JA or vice versa. That part doesn't make sense at all, though certainly I know in the US there are some who are trying to pass off tweenies as the more rare JA, and I can guess that simply has to do with wanting to sell dogs. Otherwise, it's pretty mysterious to me, too.
eta: though looking at Baycrest, I guess they use the blends simply to get a color pattern (WFR) according to their website. I mean, I guess that's technically ok, given in the US the breed is not split so they are not cross breeding.....I find it problematic, but....they've got a lot of other very well known AA kennels in their lines, so I guess other people do not find it a problem.
The Finnish Kennel Club is very open for crossbreeding for health and genetic reasons and it is one of the most progressive Kennel Clubs in the world in health issues.
Lisa @shibamistress she is saying that crossing the two breeds will be better for their health. And it looks like, from her argument on her blog/website that she plans on doing just that. So she registered the AA-blend as a JA so she doesn't have to get approval from FCI to do the breedings. It's all legit for that breed club.
Lol @timkim tell us how you really feel. Don't hold back now. ha ha
I saw that....I guess I just wasn't clear that the FKC would actually accept a crossbreeding of AA to JA, because it doesn't make sense to call that a real outcross, you know? So while I didn't phrase it well, what I meant was, does the FKC really accept that as legitimate and good for health of the breed? Or is this one breeder's idea?
(I do know, though, that one of the reasons the AKC doesn't accept the split is because the breed club doesn't want it, because some have argued that they the need the "diversity" of bringing in imports, and some of course just don't want to have their dogs suddenly called crossbreeds. I disagree with that of course, and also know many, many AA breeders who support the split, but...)
Crossing AA to JA is not the best solution for the health problems and that's why we are working also with the Akita crossbreeding project where the crossed breed will most likely be shiba (just because it have the same origin and we have most health data). But this is still ongoing process.
I know you must be all shocked and feeling judgemental but be assured that all is done openly and the thing behind all of this is the health of the dogs. Reason we imported Lemmy is to get some of the lost genes back to Akita genepool. As you might know the genetic diversity is the only help against autoimmune diseases and with Akitas the diversity is really poor. Lemmy have been genome tested by MyDogDNA -test and he shows much higher heterosis than other Akitas. So we are happy about that. I know that there is similar health risks with both Akitas but the key word is genetic diversity and there is a chance that eventually we get the Akita genepool wide enough that we don't get so many sick Akitas.
You can file your complains to FCI and FKC and people in FKC know this. The FKC know Lemmy's background and I get their help when I asked about his registration. You can rage and moan to me all you want also but that doesn't change the facts. And I would leave the breed club out from this. I might be a member of the board but that doesn't mean rest of the club agree on this or take part. I'm not a breeder, that I will point out once again but I do co-work with several breeders. I'm also FKC trained breeding advisor and I study agriculture and animal breeding.
And by country of origin I meant country where the individual dog is born and registered.
@Tensai - Since I posted, I've located the thread where you presented Finland's idea of cross-breeding the JA to the Shiba and re-freshed my memory of your arguments for cross-breeding.
I'm a diversity fan, but my opposition still stands because your evaluation of the DLA diversity is based on a subpopulation of a subpopulation that has fallen swayed to the matador-chasing frenzy in Europe. Evaluation of the entire breed or even a good representative sample of outcrosses (abet only known to the 4th generation as outcrosses) has not been done.
My opinion is that you should find out what distinct haploids exist in the breed, even if it's only 2% of the population, and bring those to the forefront. Heterosis in an individual dog doesn't help the population if they are the same genes found in 98% of the population. It helps the individual dog, sure, but that heterosis could have also been achieved by selective breeding. I don't know what haploids Lemmy offers vs. the haploids already in Finland, and out of how many dogs evaluated, so you might want to share that piece of info for those on the fence.
When I did the google search about Lemmy's ancestors and pulled up that akitapedigree page with deliberately missing info and AA photos, I found that highly disingenuous and contrary to your assertion that his pedigree has never been hidden. For those familiar with AA and JA lines, perhaps, but to a newbie puppy buyer? I hope you and the people who helped you acquire Lemmy will correct that.
As for the FKC and the registering of Lemmy as a JA, my main concern is that his descendants might not be marked, so on the 3 generation paper the descendants look JA but going further reveals otherwise. Let people buy in knowledge.
@ayk thank you for that post. I have such a limited knowledge of genetics that it's hard for me to argue back. Your replies are so well thought out where mine are like painting on a cave wall.
I know that this might come as a shock to everyone but I do have a friend that breeds tweenies. Over time, I've come to respect her breeding program even though I am pro-split. It's easy for me to respect this person because 1) she breeds AKC where it allowed and 2) she is upfront and honest.
Anywho, on to my morning coffee-less tangent.... in early 2012 she teased me by telling me that some of her friends were testing a loop-hole in the FCI registry process. Looking at who is listed on your website, I know realize who they were talking about.
And I don't understand why anyone would consider crossbreeding Akitas to Shibas for health, given that Shibas tend to have the SAME health issues as Akitas. Wouldn't it make more sense to breed to a less closely related spitz breed that does not have the same health problems?
and is the JA truly in need of this at this stage? Ayk has put this much more eloquently in discussing needs for larger testing, but this is my concern as well: I'd want to see a true study of this before I'd believe it.
And I do have serious issues with passing off a dog that is NOT a JA (clear with all those well known AA kennels in his line) as a JA.
One can say you're being open in the breeding practices, which is fine, but as long as the dogs are being registered as the incorrect breed, it is a problem. First, it relies on the person reading the pedigree to know anything about the lines to realize the dog is a mixed breed. Second, those outcrosses will vanish from the pedigree after three generations, making it impossible for even educated and informed people to know that the pedigree is a complete sham.
FCI has already established the nation of origin for the Akita Inu as JAPAN.
3.7.5. Open studbooks as well as crosses of breeds and breed varieties
The breeding use of landraces is encouraged by enabling the introduction of unregistered dogs to breeds that have populations of original, unregistered individuals in the breed's birth or development country or in the surrounding region. The procedure detailed in the Dog registry guideline also allows for dogs, which are registered in non-FCI-approved registers, to be introduced into breeds. DNA identification will be recorded for all dogs, which are introduced into a breed.
If a breed's average effective population size over the last 3-4 generations, taking overseas populations into account, has been 50 or less when calculated on the basis of inbreeding rate, or 200 or less when calculated using a formula based on the number of breeding dogs, the genetic variation of the breed should be increased through breed crosses and/or the introduction of native breed dogs.
Crosses of breeds and breed varieties can also be approved if a breed or one of its varieties threatens to accumulate such a large amount of serious defects, diseases or disease genes that it makes the testing of breeding dogs for all these conditions impossible, and the breed does not include a sufficient amount of healthy dogs, with a breed-typical behaviour, to enable breeding. The same procedure can be followed if the breed's original working traits have been lost and there is a desire to reintroduce them to the breed.
The third situation, which permits the making of breed crosses, is an effort to repair the conformation of the breed's dogs. If the conformation of a breed's dogs is not healthy enough to enable normal mating, breeding can be continued by crossing the breed with another one that has a healthier conformation; the method here is to pair a bitch with a healthier conformation with a male from the original breed in the combination.
Plans for breed crossing and opening of studbooks will be drafted in cooperation between the breed association, the Finnish Kennel Club and the breed's country of origin. The Finnish Kennel Club will draft general guidelines for the practical realisation of breed crosses. The Finnish Kennel Club observes the principles of the FCI Breeding Rules (Appendix 6) and other FCI guidelines in its authorisation of breed crosses.
@Tensai - One other thing that bothers me is the lack of respect and understanding that's needed to work with the Japanese.
In my opinion, the tactic that should have been use should have been to partner up with Japanese researchers within Japan to do a DLA or inbreeding calculation status of the breed. Being Japanese researchers, they would evoke less suspicion among some AKIHO members about their intentions. Then with the results published, it can be brought to the attention of the other AKIHO members.
A good example of how this *can* work is going on right now with the Hokkaido and Collie Eye Anomaly. The Hokkaido preservation society is now aware of the research article done by a Japanese researcher and are all for testing their dogs with a Japanese lab. Dogs who are being exported via Shigeru are also being tested. This is how the Japanese and foreigners can unite rather than divide over health issues.
I rarely come onto the forum anymore, and it is unusual when I do to even comment on a thread. But this one has me very concerned about the Finnish Kennel Club and the tactics you are using. So much is going through my head that to organize my thoughts, I'll list out my concerns and responses to your argument.
1. Your dog is not a Japanese Akita. Your dog is mostly an American Akita that has been registered as a JA. In fact, your dog comes from very well known lines here in the US, and we all know your dog's breeder as having mostly AA lines.
2. You misrepresent your dog on the Akita database. I truly feel whomever is in charge of that database should either kick your dog out or penalize you and/or the kennel club for purposely leaving out known generations. This is fraud. Plain and simple. Your dog looks nothing like a JA. I also think that the FCI should pull your dog's registration and either fine you or fine your breed club if they were knowledgable about this pedigree. Seeing as though you are the President of the Board of Directors, you are putting your whole breed club at risk of liability and punishment from FCI. I also now question all your Akitas within your club, seeing as though you so freely put up fraudulent pedigrees. You no longer have any credibility, and in shows like the upcoming WUAC, I think that you will see that your community will now question your ethics.
3. Rather than going to work with the Japanese you chose to work with Americans to re-construct a Japanese breed. Maybe this was less expensive for you. Maybe you felt more comfortable communicating with Americans. Maybe it was the easiest method. Either way, it was the incorrect way of working through these issues. If you have a problem with a Japanese breed then you work with the country of origin, not American dogs.
4. You list the JA as being in dire straits, a breed that can't be saved by breeding JA's to JA's. You failed to realize that many breed clubs have successfully found healthy JA's to breed with that haven't required in-breeding. Maybe you should have come to America and spoken to JA people rather than AA people. You are making a lot of assumptions in your argument as far as crossbreeding and how that will make the JA healthier. I understand that you feel like you are well versed in genetics, however I think it has been pointed out by many that your argument fails to convince those who do have that background. Even someone like me can see that breeding two dogs together that have the same issues does not solve your problem- of which honestly I don't think you have one. I think that you are completely incorrect when you state that you can't find healthy JA breeding stock. Spend the time and the money as a club and you will find a solution using purebred JA's. Others already have. Use AKIHO as a model if you need to.
5. I don't believe that all Akita breeders in Finland feel as you do. In fact, it states on your club's website that you have had others leave. In essence, it seems like you are splitting the Akita community into those who agree with you versus those who don't. And that is never good for any community. Work with your fellow Akita breeders if you wish to save the breed. Be open to other possible solutions.
6. I don't know how you don't get this but you are breeding mutts. If you breed a Husky to a Husky you get a Husky. That dog will fit into the breed standards in every way. If you breed an American Akita to a Japanese Akita you get a dog that doesn't necessarily fit either breed standard. You get a mutt. That's fine if you want to try and breed these dogs, but don't lie and register them as a JA because it fits your needs (and your needs only). You are in a country where there is a split in the breeds. If you want to move to the US and try this, then go ahead. But as an American, I will say that I wouldn't use our system as a model. We should have split the breeds a long time ago!
There is so much more that I could write. But I will say that I truly hope that your dog is taken out of the registry by the FCI or you move to register your dog as an American Akita.
Clearly talking about this is pointless because our point of views are so different and you are not reading all what I'm saying and just taking parts of my texts. I have been talking with several genetics about the situation in the Akita and many of them have seen the problems clearly and are worried about the current state of the breed. It saddens me that you are not seeing the clear problems in the breed. But like one smart Professor once said, you just can't make them all see the problem and some just stay in denial forever.
And yes, I have been with JAs over ten years and many of my friends have been even longer. Ten years ago my thinking was very similar to yours and I was bowing to AKIHO and I almost took import from Japan ten years ago. But all this time with sick JAs kinda changes your mind and you start to think where is the problem and what you can do for it when every new line leaves sick offspring one after another. Most of our health problems in Finnish Akita population have come straight from Japanese imports, like Cataracta, hip dysplasia and naturally the AI-diseases. And I have heard that some Akita Clubs in Europe are going to ban Japanese imports because of the health reasons. Not sure if this is happening anytime soon, but clearly there have been talks about it.
I want to point out that I have nothing to hide and I have never hidden any facts on my dogs. Quite the opposite. Plus this is the FKC where we have the public register what will always show all the information about the dogs including pedigrees, health results, show results etc. You are welcome to take a look to our system and how it works. http://jalostus.kennelliitto.fi/frmEtusivu.aspx?Lang=en&R=255 It would be awesome if every Kennel Club in the world would start to use similar system than we are.
This is also one page what you all should read and learn http://www.akita-unleashed.info/ Here is small part of the diseased Akitas from only a few countries.
And once more, the breed club is not part of this in any way. This is a project of me and some Akita breeders.
Thank you, I wish all the best for your tries. There is also much I could write but I think it is pointless in this stage. You can read and follow my blog because all the steps will be published in time. I will try to write in English from now on because Google translator doesn't work with Finnish very well.
Kathy offered me Keeper after a fire in my life when I lost my AA's and blend. Some breeders just want bigger boned Akitas.There were several in Akita history. I would suggest you start at the beginning of Dr Tatsuo Kimura's translations from Japanese Akita Scholars. He is a kind man and he said that white faced red Akitas were never part of the historical standard. Urajiro in fawn coloring is like the Shiba. Loren Egland spent many years studying the origins of the Akita. www.northlandakitas.com You will find many pieces from Tats there. It does give a clear idea about the evolution of Akitas and despite WW2, and the death of so many dogs in Japan, it is a reconstituted breed, if you will.
I recommend you to make new breed for finland. stop messing up our akita. Once you crossbreed your JA to AA or JA to Shiba. it's your own mix breed. you can't call them JA or AA or SHiba. it's your choice to do this but Make sure to not mention any of Japanese breed with these dogs. they are same as huskita or pomsky maltipoo. you may call them Jamerican Akita or Akiba inu.
@Tensai Just admit it. You registered an AA as a JA. Just say it once. I mean we can all see his pics and know it. Change his registration, and create all the tweenies you want. None of the offspring should be called JA though.
@hotarujishin Hi Britain. I was waiting for you to come stick up for your friend since you assisted her in importing this dog and knew of her plans. I'm not saying that AA don't look more like the original pre-WW akitas. Actually they do. I have no idea what the temperament of those akitas were to tell you if they were the same type of dog. But the AA was bred in the US not Japan over the past 30-40 years. We created that breed, with a breed name, and her AA should be registered under that breed name.
That's Classic - Tatsuo Kimura was at the branch show last year. Seemed quite excited looking at the dogs at the show too.
He was also looking to translate some of the latest Akiho articles. You guys hang on to the visit of Mr. Hirose like it's the second coming.
I just don't get this pre-occupation with what the Japanese are doing with their dogs. Just like the pro JA are in the minority in AKC the pinto, big boned, and fawn crew is in the minority in Japan. Plus they have.... you guessed it two breeds in Japan.
I congratulate Saija on her knowledge of canine genetics and population genetics, That is something necessary to see clearly. I wish that more unhealthy breeds would cross, for a generation or more. In Chinooks in the UKC, they started a cross breeding program as there were 11 founders in the reconstituted breed. From friends that breed JA's and AA's I don't think either are healthy breeds. I think the Akita Breed is the walking dead if people stick to their religious views of their dogs. I am a supporter of the FKC.
I'll insert the missing information on the akitapedigree database later. Methinks it's better to have all the information about a controversial dog rather than deleting that dog's file.
I did a test upload on the akitapedigree database and it looks like anybody can update an existing file once an account is created.
Of course, that also means anybody can delete the information after I add in the missing information...
Just like hotarujishin can delete her signature with her name that links her to this project ... and put it back in after I comment directly on it ...
The more I look at the FKC regs the more I say hmmm to this program. I also noticed that early in the post the FKC is supporting now Tensai is saying they are not. (So I took screenshots of all of this)
What I found interesting was that FKC only gives the ok if the population of dogs. (Including those outside the country ) is 50 or less.
Now that the other usual suspects have been named it's become quite clear that this was nothing more than an attempt to introduce tweenies into FCI.
ayk wrote: "Worst case scenario, I can imagine that things could fall down to folks only trusting dogs that have current AKIHO pedigrees."
If I extrapolate from the Akitas in this area and think of my 25 years in Akitas, doing rescue and health work, I'd say about 90% of Akita owners are pet owners and don't care that much about pedigrees--they just want a healthy dog.
And, "I'm a diversity fan, but my opposition still stands because your evaluation of the DLA diversity is based on a subpopulation of a subpopulation that has fallen swayed to the matador-chasing frenzy in Europe. Evaluation of the entire breed or even a good representative sample of outcrosses (abet only known to the 4th generation as outcrosses) has not been done."
I'd love to see a solid study done on diversity and a population genetics approach considered, but I doubt if it would happen because of the large number of Akitas worldwide. There's not even a coherent, worldwide database, which would be a first step. The amount of immune-system diversity is not going to improve in Akitas.
I support Tensai's efforts to try to improve breed health. Several mentioned Lemmy's incomplete pedigree; it was submitted, but others--not Tensai--removed the pedigree or parts of it.
*Jack Burton,* your comment that this is just an attempt to introduce tweenies into FCI is shameful. How many Akitas with incurable AI or orthopedic problems have you lived with?
*JackBurton* - I think you're mis-reading the FKC note:
If a breed's average effective population size over the last 3-4 generations, taking overseas populations into account, has been 50 or less when calculated on the basis of inbreeding rate, or 200 or less when calculated using a formula based on the number of breeding dogs, the genetic variation of the breed should be increased through breed crosses and/or the introduction of native breed dogs.
It's not number of dogs they're talking about, but average effective population size. ie. Say that there are twin dogs in a room. The population is two, but the effective population size is one.
Comments
The mom and the paternal grandfather are AA.
The paternal grandmother, Baycrest's Life's a Beach aka "Piper", looks like a blend, not JA.
At a quick glance, Piper's dad could be a JA (born in Japan) but digging deeper on the Piper's mom reveals this picture pedigree:
http://baycrestakitas.com/ch-keeper
Someone has to explain this to me. In the US, we have Akitas as one breed. But in the rest of the world, isn't it two breeds?
How can a dog be registered as a Japanese Akita when over 75% of its pedigree is American Akita? That doesn't make sense to me at all. And why would someone do that? What's the motivation in this all?
I see that there are arguments for health issues, but honestly both these breeds have the same issues, and add more to each other as well.
If Akita owners in other countries are looking to explore cross breeding, and that's what it is since these two dogs clearly are not the same, then why not cross breed to a dog that doesn't have these issues?
Who cares about grand championships and showing your dog if your mission is to re- re-create the Akita to cure its health ailments?
I don't think anyone is trying to suggest adding AA to JA to help with health issues. It would have to be another breed, if that were to be done, and I don't think it is? (someone else might know the answer to that). They do have similar health issues, obviously, as do most of the NKs, so yeah, it wouldn't make sense to breed them together to help the breed (though I think there may be less health issues with AA, or at least spread over a bigger population, and at least slightly more diversity? But I don't know about that for sure either).
I think it's more that in the US, since the breed has not split, there are still tweenies around, and so perhaps it's that those dogs are being called JAs sometimes?
I still don't get WHY someone would want to do it though, ie. call an AA a JA or vice versa. That part doesn't make sense at all, though certainly I know in the US there are some who are trying to pass off tweenies as the more rare JA, and I can guess that simply has to do with wanting to sell dogs. Otherwise, it's pretty mysterious to me, too.
eta: though looking at Baycrest, I guess they use the blends simply to get a color pattern (WFR) according to their website. I mean, I guess that's technically ok, given in the US the breed is not split so they are not cross breeding.....I find it problematic, but....they've got a lot of other very well known AA kennels in their lines, so I guess other people do not find it a problem.
Lisa @shibamistress she is saying that crossing the two breeds will be better for their health. And it looks like, from her argument on her blog/website that she plans on doing just that. So she registered the AA-blend as a JA so she doesn't have to get approval from FCI to do the breedings. It's all legit for that breed club.
Lol @timkim tell us how you really feel. Don't hold back now. ha ha
(I do know, though, that one of the reasons the AKC doesn't accept the split is because the breed club doesn't want it, because some have argued that they the need the "diversity" of bringing in imports, and some of course just don't want to have their dogs suddenly called crossbreeds. I disagree with that of course, and also know many, many AA breeders who support the split, but...)
And that's interesting that she's on the BOD.
I know you must be all shocked and feeling judgemental but be assured that all is done openly and the thing behind all of this is the health of the dogs. Reason we imported Lemmy is to get some of the lost genes back to Akita genepool. As you might know the genetic diversity is the only help against autoimmune diseases and with Akitas the diversity is really poor. Lemmy have been genome tested by MyDogDNA -test and he shows much higher heterosis than other Akitas. So we are happy about that. I know that there is similar health risks with both Akitas but the key word is genetic diversity and there is a chance that eventually we get the Akita genepool wide enough that we don't get so many sick Akitas.
You can file your complains to FCI and FKC and people in FKC know this. The FKC know Lemmy's background and I get their help when I asked about his registration. You can rage and moan to me all you want also but that doesn't change the facts. And I would leave the breed club out from this. I might be a member of the board but that doesn't mean rest of the club agree on this or take part. I'm not a breeder, that I will point out once again but I do co-work with several breeders. I'm also FKC trained breeding advisor and I study agriculture and animal breeding.
And by country of origin I meant country where the individual dog is born and registered.
http://www.nihonken.org/forum/index.php?p=/discussion/comment/135569
I'm a diversity fan, but my opposition still stands because your evaluation of the DLA diversity is based on a subpopulation of a subpopulation that has fallen swayed to the matador-chasing frenzy in Europe. Evaluation of the entire breed or even a good representative sample of outcrosses (abet only known to the 4th generation as outcrosses) has not been done.
My opinion is that you should find out what distinct haploids exist in the breed, even if it's only 2% of the population, and bring those to the forefront. Heterosis in an individual dog doesn't help the population if they are the same genes found in 98% of the population. It helps the individual dog, sure, but that heterosis could have also been achieved by selective breeding. I don't know what haploids Lemmy offers vs. the haploids already in Finland, and out of how many dogs evaluated, so you might want to share that piece of info for those on the fence.
When I did the google search about Lemmy's ancestors and pulled up that akitapedigree page with deliberately missing info and AA photos, I found that highly disingenuous and contrary to your assertion that his pedigree has never been hidden. For those familiar with AA and JA lines, perhaps, but to a newbie puppy buyer? I hope you and the people who helped you acquire Lemmy will correct that.
As for the FKC and the registering of Lemmy as a JA, my main concern is that his descendants might not be marked, so on the 3 generation paper the descendants look JA but going further reveals otherwise. Let people buy in knowledge.
I know that this might come as a shock to everyone but I do have a friend that breeds tweenies. Over time, I've come to respect her breeding program even though I am pro-split. It's easy for me to respect this person because 1) she breeds AKC where it allowed and 2) she is upfront and honest.
Anywho, on to my morning coffee-less tangent.... in early 2012 she teased me by telling me that some of her friends were testing a loop-hole in the FCI registry process. Looking at who is listed on your website, I know realize who they were talking about.
and is the JA truly in need of this at this stage? Ayk has put this much more eloquently in discussing needs for larger testing, but this is my concern as well: I'd want to see a true study of this before I'd believe it.
And I do have serious issues with passing off a dog that is NOT a JA (clear with all those well known AA kennels in his line) as a JA.
FCI has already established the nation of origin for the Akita Inu as JAPAN.
3.7.5. Open studbooks as well as crosses of breeds and breed varieties
The breeding use of landraces is encouraged by enabling the introduction of unregistered dogs to
breeds that have populations of original, unregistered individuals in the breed's birth or development
country or in the surrounding region. The procedure detailed in the Dog registry guideline also allows
for dogs, which are registered in non-FCI-approved registers, to be introduced into breeds. DNA
identification will be recorded for all dogs, which are introduced into a breed.
If a breed's average effective population size over the last 3-4 generations, taking overseas
populations into account, has been 50 or less when calculated on the basis of inbreeding rate, or 200
or less when calculated using a formula based on the number of breeding dogs, the genetic variation
of the breed should be increased through breed crosses and/or the introduction of native breed dogs.
Crosses of breeds and breed varieties can also be approved if a breed or one of its varieties
threatens to accumulate such a large amount of serious defects, diseases or disease genes that it
makes the testing of breeding dogs for all these conditions impossible, and the breed does not include
a sufficient amount of healthy dogs, with a breed-typical behaviour, to enable breeding. The same
procedure can be followed if the breed's original working traits have been lost and there is a desire to
reintroduce them to the breed.
The third situation, which permits the making of breed crosses, is an effort to repair the conformation
of the breed's dogs. If the conformation of a breed's dogs is not healthy enough to enable normal
mating, breeding can be continued by crossing the breed with another one that has a healthier
conformation; the method here is to pair a bitch with a healthier conformation with a male from the
original breed in the combination.
Plans for breed crossing and opening of studbooks will be drafted in cooperation between the breed
association, the Finnish Kennel Club and the breed's country of origin. The Finnish Kennel Club will
draft general guidelines for the practical realisation of breed crosses. The Finnish Kennel Club
observes the principles of the FCI Breeding Rules (Appendix 6) and other FCI guidelines in its
authorisation of breed crosses.
In my opinion, the tactic that should have been use should have been to partner up with Japanese researchers within Japan to do a DLA or inbreeding calculation status of the breed. Being Japanese researchers, they would evoke less suspicion among some AKIHO members about their intentions. Then with the results published, it can be brought to the attention of the other AKIHO members.
A good example of how this *can* work is going on right now with the Hokkaido and Collie Eye Anomaly. The Hokkaido preservation society is now aware of the research article done by a Japanese researcher and are all for testing their dogs with a Japanese lab. Dogs who are being exported via Shigeru are also being tested. This is how the Japanese and foreigners can unite rather than divide over health issues.
1. Your dog is not a Japanese Akita. Your dog is mostly an American Akita that has been registered as a JA. In fact, your dog comes from very well known lines here in the US, and we all know your dog's breeder as having mostly AA lines.
2. You misrepresent your dog on the Akita database. I truly feel whomever is in charge of that database should either kick your dog out or penalize you and/or the kennel club for purposely leaving out known generations. This is fraud. Plain and simple. Your dog looks nothing like a JA. I also think that the FCI should pull your dog's registration and either fine you or fine your breed club if they were knowledgable about this pedigree. Seeing as though you are the President of the Board of Directors, you are putting your whole breed club at risk of liability and punishment from FCI. I also now question all your Akitas within your club, seeing as though you so freely put up fraudulent pedigrees. You no longer have any credibility, and in shows like the upcoming WUAC, I think that you will see that your community will now question your ethics.
3. Rather than going to work with the Japanese you chose to work with Americans to re-construct a Japanese breed. Maybe this was less expensive for you. Maybe you felt more comfortable communicating with Americans. Maybe it was the easiest method. Either way, it was the incorrect way of working through these issues. If you have a problem with a Japanese breed then you work with the country of origin, not American dogs.
4. You list the JA as being in dire straits, a breed that can't be saved by breeding JA's to JA's. You failed to realize that many breed clubs have successfully found healthy JA's to breed with that haven't required in-breeding. Maybe you should have come to America and spoken to JA people rather than AA people. You are making a lot of assumptions in your argument as far as crossbreeding and how that will make the JA healthier. I understand that you feel like you are well versed in genetics, however I think it has been pointed out by many that your argument fails to convince those who do have that background. Even someone like me can see that breeding two dogs together that have the same issues does not solve your problem- of which honestly I don't think you have one. I think that you are completely incorrect when you state that you can't find healthy JA breeding stock. Spend the time and the money as a club and you will find a solution using purebred JA's. Others already have. Use AKIHO as a model if you need to.
5. I don't believe that all Akita breeders in Finland feel as you do. In fact, it states on your club's website that you have had others leave. In essence, it seems like you are splitting the Akita community into those who agree with you versus those who don't. And that is never good for any community. Work with your fellow Akita breeders if you wish to save the breed. Be open to other possible solutions.
6. I don't know how you don't get this but you are breeding mutts. If you breed a Husky to a Husky you get a Husky. That dog will fit into the breed standards in every way. If you breed an American Akita to a Japanese Akita you get a dog that doesn't necessarily fit either breed standard. You get a mutt. That's fine if you want to try and breed these dogs, but don't lie and register them as a JA because it fits your needs (and your needs only). You are in a country where there is a split in the breeds. If you want to move to the US and try this, then go ahead. But as an American, I will say that I wouldn't use our system as a model. We should have split the breeds a long time ago!
There is so much more that I could write. But I will say that I truly hope that your dog is taken out of the registry by the FCI or you move to register your dog as an American Akita.
And yes, I have been with JAs over ten years and many of my friends have been even longer. Ten years ago my thinking was very similar to yours and I was bowing to AKIHO and I almost took import from Japan ten years ago. But all this time with sick JAs kinda changes your mind and you start to think where is the problem and what you can do for it when every new line leaves sick offspring one after another. Most of our health problems in Finnish Akita population have come straight from Japanese imports, like Cataracta, hip dysplasia and naturally the AI-diseases. And I have heard that some Akita Clubs in Europe are going to ban Japanese imports because of the health reasons. Not sure if this is happening anytime soon, but clearly there have been talks about it.
I want to point out that I have nothing to hide and I have never hidden any facts on my dogs. Quite the opposite. Plus this is the FKC where we have the public register what will always show all the information about the dogs including pedigrees, health results, show results etc. You are welcome to take a look to our system and how it works. http://jalostus.kennelliitto.fi/frmEtusivu.aspx?Lang=en&R=255 It would be awesome if every Kennel Club in the world would start to use similar system than we are.
This is also one page what you all should read and learn http://www.akita-unleashed.info/ Here is small part of the diseased Akitas from only a few countries.
And once more, the breed club is not part of this in any way. This is a project of me and some Akita breeders.
Thank you, I wish all the best for your tries. There is also much I could write but I think it is pointless in this stage. You can read and follow my blog because all the steps will be published in time. I will try to write in English from now on because Google translator doesn't work with Finnish very well.
www.northlandakitas.com
You will find many pieces from Tats there. It does give a clear idea about the evolution of Akitas and despite WW2, and the death of so many dogs in Japan, it is a reconstituted breed, if you will.
Once you crossbreed your JA to AA or JA to Shiba. it's your own mix breed. you can't call them JA or AA or SHiba. it's your choice to do this but Make sure to not mention any of Japanese breed with these dogs. they are same as huskita or pomsky maltipoo. you may call them Jamerican Akita or Akiba inu.
@hotarujishin Hi Britain. I was waiting for you to come stick up for your friend since you assisted her in importing this dog and knew of her plans. I'm not saying that AA don't look more like the original pre-WW akitas. Actually they do. I have no idea what the temperament of those akitas were to tell you if they were the same type of dog. But the AA was bred in the US not Japan over the past 30-40 years. We created that breed, with a breed name, and her AA should be registered under that breed name.
He was also looking to translate some of the latest Akiho articles. You guys hang on to the visit of Mr. Hirose like it's the second coming.
I just don't get this pre-occupation with what the Japanese are doing with their dogs. Just like the pro JA are in the minority in AKC the pinto, big boned, and fawn crew is in the minority in Japan. Plus they have.... you guessed it two breeds in Japan.
I don't think either are healthy breeds. I think the Akita Breed is the walking dead if people stick to their religious views of their dogs. I am a supporter of the FKC.
I did a test upload on the akitapedigree database and it looks like anybody can update an existing file once an account is created.
Of course, that also means anybody can delete the information after I add in the missing information...
Just like hotarujishin can delete her signature with her name that links her to this project ... and put it back in after I comment directly on it ...
What I found interesting was that FKC only gives the ok if the population of dogs. (Including those outside the country ) is 50 or less.
Now that the other usual suspects have been named it's become quite clear that this was nothing more than an attempt to introduce tweenies into FCI.
How Sad.
"Worst case scenario, I can imagine that things could fall down to folks only trusting dogs that have current AKIHO pedigrees."
If I extrapolate from the Akitas in this area and think of my 25 years in Akitas, doing rescue and health work, I'd say about 90% of Akita owners are pet owners and don't care that much about pedigrees--they just want a healthy dog.
And,
"I'm a diversity fan, but my opposition still stands because your evaluation of the DLA diversity is based on a subpopulation of a subpopulation that has fallen swayed to the matador-chasing frenzy in Europe. Evaluation of the entire breed or even a good representative sample of outcrosses (abet only known to the 4th generation as outcrosses) has not been done."
I'd love to see a solid study done on diversity and a population genetics approach considered, but I doubt if it would happen because of the large number of Akitas worldwide. There's not even a coherent, worldwide database, which would be a first step. The amount of immune-system diversity is not going to improve in Akitas.
I support Tensai's efforts to try to improve breed health. Several mentioned Lemmy's incomplete pedigree; it was submitted, but others--not Tensai--removed the pedigree or parts of it.
*Jack Burton,* your comment that this is just an attempt to introduce tweenies into FCI is shameful. How many Akitas with incurable AI or orthopedic problems have you lived with?
And even religious folks vs. scientists.