Tamaskans [ Utonagans, & Northern Inuits ]
Hey guys, hope all are doing well 
As of late, I think I've become a bit obsessed with looking up & studying all the different dog breeds. [ you can see me on the computer til 4am reading & reading & reading. Once you start learning about a breed you like, it's really hard to stop!
]
Anyways, any one that knows me knows I like dogs that look like their wild counterparts. One of the reasons I love Shibas is that they look so much like foxes, & one of the reasons I love Shikokus is because of that really wild / primitive look. [ of course health, temperament & stability of breed should always come first, but I think few of us would own a dog we thought was "ugly" ;p ] Now, the reason I bring this up is because several breeds have recently caught my eye for their heavy wolfish-look [ but supposedly lack any wolf content ].
I was just curious to get all of your opinions on said "breeds;" Tamaskans, Utonagans, & Northern Inuits.
I have to say that even though all these dogs are drop-dead gorgeous I'm a little confused by what's going on with these "breeds." Essentially, all these breeds are the same type of dog [ I believe, the Northern Inuit ] but the society broke up and some of the members just changed the name of their dogs breed [ from NI to Utonagan ] now these two breeds have been around for a decent amount of time, but what concerns me more is the Tamaskan. Apparently, one lady just took her Utes & continued to breed them with huskies to create the "Tamaskan." Also, the "origins" of the Tamaskan seem a little unclear... I've even seen on some sites though they say no wolf was used in breedings, that there was wolf / wolfdog used. [ the fact that in the "breed history" every few sentences describes the dogs as "origins unknown" is a little unnerving. ]
Furthermore, the founder? / founder's daughter? of the breed, "blufawn" can be seen posting here & here.
Now I have no problem with mutts, or people breeding certain dogs together to make a "new breed" [ so long as all breeding stock is carefully screened & the dogs are healthy ] after all, it can be argued that all breeds were at one point, a mix or mutt. [ just look at the Doberman Pinscher, for example. ] I really like the fact that all these different groups are trying to make a dog without wolf content [ there are enough poor wolfdogs out there because people thought it'd be fun to breed a wild animal with a domestic dog ] but do so properly!
Now I am not a cheap person. [ I work at Best Buy, I can't be ;p ] & would gladly pay $3000 for a well bred dog. [ whether it be Shiba, Shikoku, Akita, Husky, GSD, etc. ] but I find it a little outrageous that the Tamaskan breeders are charging about $2000 & up for what is essentially a mutt with parentage whose "origins unknown." [ now tons of dogs have parentage whose "origins unknown" but we're talking hundreds & hundreds of years ago, not in the 1980s ] Especially, because this is a "new breed," shouldn't they be a little cheaper? I mean, what happens if the Tamaskan societies disband in a few years, what are Tamaskan owners left with? [ besides, perhaps, a loving companion, of course ;p ]
I guess that I am just really disappointed. IMHO, It makes Tamaskans look like just another designer dog [ puggle, labradoodle, etc. ] where the breeders are just cash-cowing instead of genuinely trying to come up with a new breed.
Anyway, what's all your opinions? Any one who owns these breeds? I'm really very curious as to what everyone has to say I'm hoping someone out there can put my mind at ease, as I would really love to have a Tamaskan one day but after all my research & readings have made me very nervous & as of right now I have to say I wouldn't own one.~
[ as a side note, please no one think I'm attacking NI's, Utes, or Tamaskans. All said dogs are really lovely, it's just the people breeding them I'm a little appalled with. ]
As of late, I think I've become a bit obsessed with looking up & studying all the different dog breeds. [ you can see me on the computer til 4am reading & reading & reading. Once you start learning about a breed you like, it's really hard to stop!
] Anyways, any one that knows me knows I like dogs that look like their wild counterparts. One of the reasons I love Shibas is that they look so much like foxes, & one of the reasons I love Shikokus is because of that really wild / primitive look. [ of course health, temperament & stability of breed should always come first, but I think few of us would own a dog we thought was "ugly" ;p ] Now, the reason I bring this up is because several breeds have recently caught my eye for their heavy wolfish-look [ but supposedly lack any wolf content ].
I was just curious to get all of your opinions on said "breeds;" Tamaskans, Utonagans, & Northern Inuits.
I have to say that even though all these dogs are drop-dead gorgeous I'm a little confused by what's going on with these "breeds." Essentially, all these breeds are the same type of dog [ I believe, the Northern Inuit ] but the society broke up and some of the members just changed the name of their dogs breed [ from NI to Utonagan ] now these two breeds have been around for a decent amount of time, but what concerns me more is the Tamaskan. Apparently, one lady just took her Utes & continued to breed them with huskies to create the "Tamaskan." Also, the "origins" of the Tamaskan seem a little unclear... I've even seen on some sites though they say no wolf was used in breedings, that there was wolf / wolfdog used. [ the fact that in the "breed history" every few sentences describes the dogs as "origins unknown" is a little unnerving. ]
Furthermore, the founder? / founder's daughter? of the breed, "blufawn" can be seen posting here & here.
Now I have no problem with mutts, or people breeding certain dogs together to make a "new breed" [ so long as all breeding stock is carefully screened & the dogs are healthy ] after all, it can be argued that all breeds were at one point, a mix or mutt. [ just look at the Doberman Pinscher, for example. ] I really like the fact that all these different groups are trying to make a dog without wolf content [ there are enough poor wolfdogs out there because people thought it'd be fun to breed a wild animal with a domestic dog ] but do so properly!
Now I am not a cheap person. [ I work at Best Buy, I can't be ;p ] & would gladly pay $3000 for a well bred dog. [ whether it be Shiba, Shikoku, Akita, Husky, GSD, etc. ] but I find it a little outrageous that the Tamaskan breeders are charging about $2000 & up for what is essentially a mutt with parentage whose "origins unknown." [ now tons of dogs have parentage whose "origins unknown" but we're talking hundreds & hundreds of years ago, not in the 1980s ] Especially, because this is a "new breed," shouldn't they be a little cheaper? I mean, what happens if the Tamaskan societies disband in a few years, what are Tamaskan owners left with? [ besides, perhaps, a loving companion, of course ;p ]
I guess that I am just really disappointed. IMHO, It makes Tamaskans look like just another designer dog [ puggle, labradoodle, etc. ] where the breeders are just cash-cowing instead of genuinely trying to come up with a new breed.
Anyway, what's all your opinions? Any one who owns these breeds? I'm really very curious as to what everyone has to say
I'm hoping someone out there can put my mind at ease, as I would really love to have a Tamaskan one day but after all my research & readings have made me very nervous & as of right now I have to say I wouldn't own one.~[ as a side note, please no one think I'm attacking NI's, Utes, or Tamaskans. All said dogs are really lovely, it's just the people breeding them I'm a little appalled with. ]
Comments
That said, the dogs are very pretty in the pictures. So, for everyone who is happy to spend that kind of money on a pet, great... But I don't think you should fool yourself into thinking these dogs are anything more than any other kind of common "heinz 57" dog just because the parentage can be traced!
I'd love to start (marketing) a breed of dog called No-Minn (Northern Minnesota) ... It would be the combination of black lab, Rott and Husky that our last dog was. He was the nicest animal you'd ever meet, good with children, etc. etc. You'd be surprised how many dogs with similar looks and personality I see around, but I still think it would be fun to create the marketing image to make them worth several hundreds if not thousands of dollars!
It was just created for its look. (more husky like, than wolf like ... no ?)
(Are UK and USA specialists of creating "new" breeds ? I was surprised to see, when I go to Canada, that a lot of breeds we don't recognized in the FCI were so common... )
Now, as for the price, I think you are paying for the rarity right now. Because there are so few Tamaskans in existence, breeding programs can be much more difficult to conduct responsibly.
As for the differences between the Utongan, NI, and Tamaskan, I don't know much. Most of the reading I've done on the subject has been from the perspective of the Tamaskan breeders so its probably a bit slanted. It appears there was some disagreement on breeding and registration practices as well as the direction to take the breed. So they splintered off and became separate breeds.
I don't blame you for being fascinated with the them. After my next dog which will be an Akita, I will probably get a Tamaskan. I really want to own an off leash dog at some point in my life. That will probably only happen after I loose one or two of the three dogs I plan to own in the near future though.
---
Sangmort - I research like mad now too! I met a Tamaskan about a year ago and I just fell in love with its look, but apparently it had a very calm temperment and was a great house and family pet. So maybe they are on to something with the breeds they are mixing to appear like a wolf.. but since finding out about that 'breed' - I have been researching the Utonagan (which are some of the original breeding stock for Tamaskan, right??) and NI dogs, and they are all very similar in breed history, mixing husky, malamute, GSD to get that 'wolf' look as the main intention.
Me personally, since researching, will probably look into either a Sarlooswolfhund or Czech Wolf Dog, because I want it to be part wolf and look like a wolf too.
The point of creating a new dog is to get it to the point where you can breed Tamaskan to Tamaskan (or other dogs) and get a standardized Tamaskan everytime. Most "designer" breeds these days are not going for that. They are going for money at pet stores. All the "poos" and "puggles" and whatnot. You cannot breed a Puggle to a Puggle and get standardized little Puggles. Things have not been developed that way, you just get an even stranger looking little mutt, maybe more beagle look or more pug. I know that in the past at dog auctions, Puggle puppies that didn't make it to the petstores, where they sell for $1,500 or whatever, are sold for $1. They are sold so cheap because they are useless to the millers who cannot breed them. If they don't sell, well, we all know what happens then.
Humans are amazing, aren't they?
They're a breed if they produce similar offspring. Actually, as far as I know, (at least until a few years ago)the FCI wouldn't recognize a breed before there were 500 homogeneous individuals, that bred similar and homogeneous offspring.
Pretty much almost every breed out there started out that way. You have very few breeds that are "pure" and "original" and even the ones that are have had some work done on them, for selection purposes, to eliminate certain traits and make others more apparent. And then there are quite a lot of breeds that had to be "restored". The Akita is one of them, but there's the Leonberger, the St. Bernard and some more. And then there are "new" breeds, like the Sarloos.
All of them started out heterogeneous and were selected to be what they are today. If done by people that know what they are doing, the tamaskan will get there.
I agree that there are good breeders & bad breeders but what makes me really weary is the fact that "origins unknown" & "no records were kept" for the early breedings, which is a little strange since it was only 25-30 years ago. Also the fact that they are claiming no health issues [ how can there not be when the founding stock were all huskies, GSDs, & malamutes who are known to have eye / hip problems ] & are determining things like temperament from only a few specimens. [ however, it does make me happy to see that most of the breeders hip & eye screen their breeding stock ] I just wish the breeders promoting this breed would have kept info about the tamaskans more quiet until they had something like five-generations of pure tamskans.
dlouisroberts - They are at the point where they can breed tamaskan to tamaskan, but this makes me think of something else...how close are the bloodlines? Are they inbreeding?
lol all this creating a new breed stuff is so confusing.~
The rest of my dogs, forever, will come from rescues and shelters. I've thought about the breeder thing, and I just can't justify it to myself.
although, that is why a month (or so?) ago I was entranced by this husky/? or wolfdog mix from the shelter, she was even more beautiful than any other Tamaskan I had ever seen, and a shelter dog! She was just amazing, and what I would have been looking for prior to fostering shibas... maybe I'll meet another one in shelter again someday..
Good news is Koko had since been adopted and I hear the new caretakers just love her
http://www.petfinder.com/petnote/displaypet.cgi?petid=10808716
====
Are all these (above) breeds created just to look like a wolf without having wolf content? Or was there a real purpose to their breeding?
About the new breeds, I don't see a purpose on creating a new breed these days. I think it was just a looks thing.
Lets face some facts here, generally, there are 2 things that need to happen to stop the overwhelming amount of dogs in the rescue system:
1 - Education of people
2 - The removal of puppy mills and BYBs
An educated consumer [potential puppy buyer] would either look to the rescue system or properly select a quality breeder to purchase a puppy from. A responsible breeder would properly screen their potential puppy buyers and not sell their dogs to a person they don't feel fit to properly take care of a dog. Responsible breeders would also work to not saturate a breed, they would do health and temperament tests, and would always take their dogs back if an owner didn't want them anymore - therefore they would organically limit the amount of dogs that can produce because they are always faced with having to take back the puppy they just produced. All of these solutions create a synergy that would actually help reduce the number of BYBs and puppy mills and reduce the amount of dogs being discarded by un-[dog]-educated owners.
Without good, responsible, ethical, breeders you can't solve the problem. It's not a black and white situation, there is a gray area, and in that gray area lies the education of the people - breeders and owners.
I'm not saying that rescuing dogs isn't respectable, and that its not probably the better choice when looking for a new pup - all I'm saying is rescuing dogs is really only treating the result or the symptoms and not treating the source of the problem.
Rescuing dogs saves dogs lives - obviously that's great - it doesnt stop puppy mills and BYBs. I respect and applaud your [or anyone's] aspirations to save the lives of dogs, but please take a second to see the bigger picture too.
----
And a responsible owner is a major part of that equation, too. One who did their research, found the above breeder, and vows to care for a dog for the life of that dog irregardless of any hardship (that includes someone responsibly rehoming too).
But educating the masses is the black hole. Even better educated people get trapped in the cute doggy in the petstore window trap, supporting mills. They also get wrapped up in a great newspaper ad about "oops" puppies and designer breeds. They also give up easily when the baby is born and they don't have time to walk puppy. Until puppy mills do not exist, and people take responsibility for their dogs and spay and neuter, and backyard breeders become better educated themselves and realize how they are only contributing to the problem.. there is a never ending cycle of shelter dogs and mass euthanasia.
I have utmost respect for both a rescue group and a responsible breeder, I have that same respect for someone who adopted a rescue dog as well as the person who did research and adopted a puppy from a responsible breeder. You need both kinds of the above people until there are no more dogs, or cats or bunnies or rats or lizards.., abandoned by the uneducated masses.
I feel that just for me, in my life, until there are no shelter dogs, I can't justify it for myself to look forward to purchasing one responsibly bred puppy when I know that I just left the shelter this afternoon watching six healthy, normal dogs get led into the lethal injections room. Tuesdays are the hardest days to think about breeder puppies in my situation.
----
You make good points - my suggestion may be a "perfect world" outlook, i guess. I just don't like the division that exists in some cases between "rescue people" and breeders - I'm not saying every rescued person villainize breeders, but there are some that do when really its a MUST that rescues and breeders work together.
I think its very easy to suffer short-sightedness when you are "getting your hands dirty" working in the rescue system... there are so many dogs in need and sad stories. Its like the mail, it never stops. Just like its easy to turn a blind eye to all the problems when your obsessed with the show ring competition and suffer kennel blindness.
My only thought / question is if all the people that spend a so much money, effort, and time on rescuing dogs spent all that [money, effort, time] to working on actually fixing the problem... well I wonder if it would be the same outcome, and endless stream of abandoned dogs / cats / birds / etc. really, I am just asking - not making a judgment or posting a rhetorical question. I'd honestly like to know what others [and you, Jen] thinks about this. (???)
I'll reword the question: Does the rescue system perpetuating the source of the problem?
Can it ever really be "fixed", and what would the world be like if it was fixed? Forced spay/neuter laws? A "pet ownership license"? Restrictions against breeders? limiting the number of pets someone can own? A pet tax? What would it really take?
I'm sure none of us have the answer, but it's an interesting discussion.... Not to imply that there is one answer to such a huge multifaceted problem.
----
I think rescue is just as dirty and hard work as a responsible breeder. really! they both take an incredible passion to get the job done correctly!
Is the rescue system perpetuating the source of the problem? its tough to answer that! but in a way, I think yes, inevitably. But there are portions of the rescue realm that are getting PROactive instead of just REactive, fighting for stricter pet mandates is one proactivity, trying to spread knowledge of puppy mills and the landslide of horrid they create, spay and neuter awareness and availability..
An interesting point:
Actually, a friend of mine from Belgium recently pointed out how odd she thought our country handled rescues and animals in general. She said that if all these rescues didn't exist, would people be as inclined to dump their animal?
At the time, I was like "WHOA..wait just a minute there" but afterwards I really had to think.. is shelter/rescue giving irresponsible pet owners too much of an option?
But I digress..
I think in both the rescue system and the breeding world there are a lot of grey areas.. both are trying to work against the odds to solve the issue while both are perpetuating it in their own way. But right now in 2008, I'm glad both exist. They have to!
Personally, I have found that I can see it from all angles now better than I ever could. I think that is why I'm choosing to focus my energies on breed specific rescue. If I can focus on one breed or type, I can help educate the public about the breed while raising awareness of key issues like responsible breeding and ownership and what really happens in the rescue and shelter world, and about the breed in general - to save it, protect it, and preserve it the best possible way that I can.
In the long run, I would like to see mandated spay and neuter laws (i'm an environmental law student and find these laws are a worthwhile legislation if executed correctly) and I would like to see stricter pet ownership license criteria and I would like to see a stricter reinforcement of these laws. If there was a real threat to break the laws, I think less people would own a pet for fear of fines or taxation. Money really changes things! I think breeders need to be closely monitored and frequently evaluated, as well as rescues, until the problems are at least smaller in number if not solved all together.
Rescuing dogs is something hugely admirable in my opinion. Most of the time, you don't know what you're getting, a dog that has health issues, who may have been abused, who has been locked in a kennel doing nothing but producing puppies for four years, etc.... and it truly is amazing for someone to say, "I am going to give you another chance at life, to make your life happy." & take that poor dog at the shelter into their home & give them the best time they've ever had.
However, sometimes, there are people such as myself, who have never EVER owned a dog [ but have wanted one their whole life ] & have a specific breed in their mind [ shiba, shikoku ;p ] & would just once love to go through the whole puppy-raising process...from picking a breeder, waiting for a litter to be born, picking your own puppy out of the litter, bringing them home for the first time, giving them their first bast, teaching them their first command, & just watching them grow from an 8-week old pup to an adult dog.
Now I'm not saying you can't get an almost exact experience from a shelter dog, but how many 8-12 week old shibas & shikoku am I going to find in a shelter in FL ;p Just once I'd like to go through the whole process, & as such right now I don't feel like adopting is for me. Now, when I finally get my pup, & he is old enough, you bet your ass I'll be fostering & adopting out the window haha
Brad & jen - as I continue to look at breeders on the web, the one thing I've noticed is that even the not so great breeders make you sign a spay / neuter contract. You have to spay / neuter the pup by / around 6 months of age or you wont be able to get the dogs papers. Some breeders I've seen even early-neuter/spay their pups before they even go out to any home. [ unless you buy the pup as a "show / breeding" dog ] Hmmm...just something I remembered & thought I'd toss out there
Unfortunately, I don't think the link between rescue and puppy mills is as direct as the link between pet shops and puppy mills. Ultimately I think education and limiting access to impulse purchases is what will help curb overpopulation in shelters. The more difficult it is for people to own a dog the less likely people that aren't willing to go the distance will take them home. At the shelter I volunteer at, all you need to adopt a dog is to be 18, have a driver's license, and have $40. A large percentage of our adoptions end up being turned back in within a day or two or get picked up as strays by the ACOs.
Further, I don't believe that rescue and the existence of shelters is increasing the number of people that get rid of their dogs. My suspicion is that if rescues stopped and shelters closed, we'd end up with significantly more strays and animal cruelty cases because the same people that are willing to turn their dogs into a shelter would be willing to neglect them or turn them loose.
Honestly, I always thought having a dog was simply putting down a food bowl twice a day, & taking the guy out to walk to use the bathroom...then I started reading & reading & reading & I realized having a dog is a lot like having a baby! You have to prepare, set ground rules for the dog, and teach it what the rules of the house are...the dog doesn't know peeing in the house is wrong until you teach him so. I think that is one of the major problems, people just go out, impulse buy on those adorable puppies in the pet shop, take him home, and "tolerate" the puppy messes in the house, the chewing and play-biting, until 1 year later you have a fully grown dog whose bites aren't so cute anymore and his poop not quite as small. People just loose tolerance & either throw the dog outside in the yard where he stays there unsocialized & becomes even worse or they toss him at the shelter where the next person repeats the cycle.
My current favorite show right now that I watch every day in order to prepare myself for when I get a dog, is "It's Me or the Dog" on animal planet. It is an excellent show where a dog trainer goes out to peoples houses who have raised their dogs poorly & now the dogs are misbehaving & sets them right. What's sad is a lot of the stuff the trainer corrects are really simple things that even I could see were wrong! For example, some people have their dog sit on the couch...praise the dog for sitting on the couch, then 1 hour later, scold the dog for sitting on the couch! Then they praised him again, then scolded him, until the dog just ignored them. The owners were in complete shock!
Another lady never ever let her poor Chihuahua leave the house or walked him or anything...then got upset when he urinated & defecated inside the house! Well where do you expect him to go? Other things were as simple as petting a dog when he jumps up on the owner [ praising him ] but getting upset about why the dog was always jumping up...it really is an excellent show though albeit a bit maddening. But my point is these are the type of people that are an inch away from throwing their pets at the shelter for simple behavioral mistakes that were the fault of the owner all along, because the owner wasn't educated. [ & big surprise, none of the owners ever taught their dogs the most basic of obedience commands ] & on top of it, all these behaviors can be easily fixed with time & effort!
Well now...I've been wanting to do something to brush up my web design skills on & I think I've found it! I Will create a web site dedicated on proper doggy-ownership focused on what to expect before you get a puppy / dog, what it means to have one, the commitment it is, supplies you need, must-know obedience commands, socialization...etc. haha I'm really excited now, hope everyone in the forum doesn't mind me picking brains for information. I think I'll sift through the 7 or 8 books on raising a puppy that I have & sort out some notes & key points
All I'm saying is I'm not willing to have a life created just for me when there are already so many that are out there just looking for a home.
There are thousands of people across the country trying to get legislation implemented in their state, or nationwide to put more strict regulations on mills, but the government flat out doesn't give a shit. The Anti-Mill groups don't have enough money to buy the ear of the legislators so nothing gets done.
The rescue system does not perpetuate BYB's and mills. It's shelter and rescue or death. Should we cure pet over population by just killing them all instead?
It's not something that I believe can be fixed. It can't be fixed because humans are greedy and many of them are willing to do anything as long as it puts a dollar in their pocket. The problem is not the dogs, it's humans. If rescues and shelters aren't there to take in and try and save the strays, unwanted, abused, and neglected then they would just wander the streets and starve to death or suffer some other awful death.
1. public education - it starts small, and its a pay-it-forward sort of motion, if someone is looking for a dog, I send them links to breed rescues and local shelters AND info on how to find a responsible breeder.
Get involved with a public initiative, because we erected the area's first dog park, I have the ability to leave 'spay & neuter', 'shelter shelf life', 'breed rescue', 'finding a true responsible breeder' and other pamphlets at the dog park. People do take them, because they are attached to the poop bag station and are in plain view. I can have donation drives there and talk about the issues at hand and why we're asking for simple things like sponges and blankets.
I am going to start a breed rescue.
2. Legislation - I think there should be mandates, especially for dog ownership, pet # limits and spay and neuter, because the responsible breeders wouldn't mind paying the taxes to be exempt for breeding purposes, and the show dog people wouldn't mind paying a tax to be exempt for their purposes either. Whether you can buy the lawmaker's ears or not (which I believe is the sole reason things do not change, not enough $$ where it counts) I really believe that if their email and snail mail boxes get flooded with enough letters and emails about a particular movement or law pending then they have to listen to the people.. or America is just dead to me.
3. Personal responsibility - There is no reason why all my animals should not be spayed or neutered, there is no reason why any companion animal should not be spayed or neutered. They are simple everyday procedures that have major benefits. There is no reason my animals should not be trained, obedience and otherwise. Also, there is never a good enough reason to give up a pet in my eyes. Granted, life happens, but having babies, moving, not having enough time during the day or being unemployed are not good reasons. Lest an act of God happens, I will forever work to keep my animals in the home I promised to them. In these ways, I am at least NOT contributing to the ugly statistics.
All movements start small on the home front, and the only way to make a dent is to be proactive against the systems that are destroying the sanctity of the lives of animals. Until animals are not needlessly killed..
Some quotes that keep me going:
If you think you're too small to have an impact, try going to bed with a mosquito in the room.
-Anita Roddick
If a dog will not come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience. - Woodrow Wilson
If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. - Mark Twain
We give dogs time we can spare, space we can spare and love we can spare. And in return, dogs give us their all.
- M. Facklam
"If you have men who will exclude any of God's creatures
from the shelter of compassion and pity,
you will have men who will deal likewise with their fellow man."
St. Francis of Assisi
and of course:
"There comes a time when one must take
a position that is neither safe, nor political, nor
popular,but he must take it
because his conscience tells him that it is right."
~Martin Luther King~
there are tons more but I have to get some work done today!
Was this thread officially hijacked or was it always heading in this direction??
I think it is a personal choice and no one should question 'why' someone chose one over the other. It comes down to the right dog at the right time. Jack was the oops puppy. He had the best home he could with me - and he had a load of genetic problems. His illnesses broke my heart. Tasha was the rescue - one of the world's greatest dogs in my eyes, but had I ever wanted to perpetrate that it would have been impossible and irresponsible without papers. Had I wanted to compete with her it would have been hard to impossible without those same papers. When I wanted to get another dog, it was very soon after Jack's death. Tasha wasn't getting any younger. What to do? I thought about rescue (hell, I was in Akita rescue for years), but I could NOT take another heartbreak of a dog with loads of health issues so soon after losing the canine love of my life. And yes, while it is still possible to get a very healthy dog from a shelter, you run a much higher risk that if you research a quality breeder and buy from there.
So, there will be certain circumstances which will influence your decision. The only right thing to do is that once you've brought in your new family member, take care of it for the rest of it's life.
The money I paid for Ronan has been worth every cent. He's been exceedingly healthy and that means the world to me. I know that things can still happen, I just paid money to shift the odds in my favor. I don't know where my next dog will come from. I'm not going to worry about that. When it happens, it'll happen.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/H/HELMSLEY_DOGS?SITE=WCNC&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
"So, there will be certain circumstances which will influence your decision. The only right thing to do is that once you've brought in your new family member, take care of it for the rest of it's life."
beautifully said, Michelle M!
Breeder? Sure - if you are positive the breed is for you and that you've done your homework on said breed and the breeder AND asked lots of questions. Hopefully, the breeder will have asked you plenty of questions, too.
Rescue or shelter? What a heart you have! You are no doubt a wonderful person, and let me be the first the thank you immensely. I was involved in rescue for years - I love the people who are willing to take in a full grown animal without knowing a lot about their past life. But do take into consideration that the dog you rescue could have heartworm, hip displaysia, diabetis, seizures, serious allergies, or any number of health issues. When you adopt, please be sure you're prepared financially for anything your new family member may come up with. Know that since you probably don't know the animal's past, you don't know it's genetic makeup or mind-set (extreme phobias). Be sure you are willing to take on the task and give that animal a forever home. I spent $800 on Tasha when I fostered her in order to get her healthy. She's still terrified of cages or pens. She sometimes doesn't know how to handle a lot of affection (she spazzes and spins in circles). I knew that from the start. It's amazing the people who don't. I've since been very fortunate with Tasha's health, but it could have been financially devastating (Jack's health was). Why do I say all this? Because as a former foster mom, I got a few dogs back because people had no idea the animal had allergies or heartworm or HD. They can't handle a dog that doesn't like men/women/cats/thunderstorms/delivery people.
Do refrain from BYB and mills. Of course, a lot of these dogs do wind up in shelters, so you inadvertently may end up with one anyway. Want a cause? Fight to shut down those mills. You'll never stop BYB though. Only reduce them.
Dave and I had an off-line discussion about out-crossing, working breeds, and designer dogs. A question we stumbled across was this:
If these breeds [Tamaskans & etc] where created to perform a certain task [workability] and not just simply for looks would it change your opinions on whether or not they should have been created to begin with?
----
My two cents: I think that breeding a dog to look like a wolf and NOT be a wolf is a good thing. Maybe it'll keep those who insist on having a wolf or hybrid focused on something that is going to behave more like they expect a regular dog to behave. Since I sometimes help out a friend who runs a wolfdog rescue, this is truly a great thing. So, in the case of the Tamaskan, I say thumbs up to both looks, temperment and workability in a breed. If those that are breeding these dogs hold true to their breeding program of breeding dogs who pass on hips, elbows, & eyes, DNA tests to prove that the dog is Tamaskan and helps trace lineage, and NOT inbreeding, then Kudos!
Looks - we're a visually driven species. Do you think your current dog is ugly? When you saw your first Shiba, Shikoku, Akita, Husky, etc., didn't you think to yourself, "Wow! What a beautiful dog! I must have/learn more about them?" Of course you did. Pick an ugly dog breed. Pick an ugly dog. Did that dog make you want to run up to the owner and ask what it was? Maybe, but doubtful. Did you think, "I must have one of those!" I bet you didn't. You looked at the Akita and saw power, beauty, and courage. You saw the Shiba and thought what a little adorable fox it was. You saw the Shikoku and saw something foxy/wolfie/coyote like and loved its looks. I know I'm guilty. You may love your dog's traits, like I do. But you were first drawn by looks.
Remember, all breeds had a start like this, and I'm certain at some point someone said "There are ENOUGH breeds!" Aren't you glad there were people who didn't listen and bred the Shiba, the Akita, the Golden, or the Lab?
I own two breeds that didn't come from one single strain of wolf. I will not judge these people. At least not those trying to be responsible. To me, they're keeping people from seeking out real wolves to own.
That said, nice looking dog, the Tamaskan. As long as they are breeding Tamaskan to Tamaskan and consistently getting a Tamaskan then they are no longer designer, unless you also want to label 99% of all breeds designer. Yes, they're new - and that does warrant watching for health reasons. But in light, we've also got so many breeds that are overbred and have serious problems - like the poor Golden. Shoot, those who have Shikokus are all watching our pups since the breed is relatively new to the U.S.
P.S. I'm not what you'd call a person who believes entirely what the bible touts, but I do like the phrase, "Do not judge, lest you be judged yourself."