SledDogBlog

To Breed or Not to Breed

All kinds of factors influence one's decision about whether or not to breed a litter. When one has a prime female in hand, and access to suitable stud dogs for the job, what could cause one to decide not to have puppies?

Tullibardine's Howlin Yukon Janis is in heat. She is almost three years old, prime Chinook breeding material -- healthy, sound, and sane. Both her ancestry and herself as an individual are a credit to her breed. Why would anyone who likes Chinooks, owning such a bitch, NOT breed her?

Apart from the sheer bother of raising a litter (which is more than amply compensated by the joy of puppies), uncertainty about the future would probably be the main thing to give one pause for thought. A weak economy, high fuel prices, soaring food costs, and limited income opportunities are the "big picture" just now.

Yet there are also uncertainties of another kind. Chiefest of these in my mind would be the dubious future of the Chinook breed itself. A good deal of progress has, of course, been made since the nadir of the early 1980s, but at this point it now looks as though that progress is about to come to a crashing halt. If the present path towards AKC recognition is followed to its logical end, an inbred fraction of the present total Chinook population will become the main gene pool of the breed. At best there will be a permanent, deep split between AKC and UKC breeders and in the Chinook gene pool itself. More probably, the UKC Chinook will slowly die on the vine and, along with it, any faint hope for genetic renewal of the inbred, unhealthy AKC "purebreds," which can only grow yet more inbred, ever more seriously affected with genetic disease, in the hothouse atmosphere of the AKC's closed stud book.

It was recently remarked on one of the Chinook email lists that a few Chinook litters have already been foregone by the owners of breedable bitches, due largely to these very concerns. Add to that the poisonous brew of Chinook dog-politics that seethes just beneath the surface of the email lists, and the hostility of the old guard to new input -- and I'm seriously wondering whether you can't just add me to the list of non-breeders. Janis may have to wait; indeed, she may never be bred at all.

I'm a thoroughly experienced breeder of Seppala Siberian Sleddogs. It's not that I don't feel that my two bitches and I would have nothing to contribute to Chinooks; not at all. But who wants to go to great effort and expense prolonging the death-struggles of a breed that is so obviously moribund as this? Not that it needs to be that way! But from where I sit, it looks like that's the way the powers that be in the Chinook world actually want it.

If Arthur Walden were alive and breeding Chinooks today, I think I know how he would be doing it. He would not be giving himself airs about his "purebreds." He would still be crossbreeding, finding ways to improve the thin coats, the sensitive skins, the hammer-headed behavioural traits and the diffident working attitudes. At the very least, he would want his Chinooks to be healthy, honest working dogs equippped for life in cold country. And I don't think he'd be chasing ribbons and hip scores with the effete bunch that consider themselves the pillars of his breed.

I have a Tarot deck with which I play at irregular intervals. Not often, because (a) I'm not very good with it, and (b) it frightens me too much when I do make use of it. This particular deck has a way of turning up cards from the suit of Swords most of the time, at least in my clumsy hands. (Swords are the most problematic and inauspicious of the four Tarot suits.) So, after leaving the deck to gather dust for most of the winter, this evening I absent-mindedly picked it up, shuffled and cut the deck. When I turned up the top card, what do you think it was?

The Seven of Swords. "Futility."

Off to a Good Start

THE 21ST CENTURY DOG BREEDS forums are off to a good start with fifty forum members enrolled in the first week of operation. Obviously there was a need to be met here. There has been pretty good variety in the first sixty-odd posts; concerns of various sorts have been expressed. New forums have already been added in the "breeds" section -- for Alaskan huskies and for canine hybrids! Time will tell whether these new forums will grow to become a force for change in the dog world. It is, at least, a promising beginning.

New Forum

As a logical next step from all the discussion of AKC, the Chinook takeover, registries, the nature of dog breeds, and so forth -- I've now done what perhaps I should have done years ago. I've established a public online forum to discuss these very matters.

Twenty-First Century Dog Breeds

On the new forum I hope we shall be able to discuss the theory and future of canine registries, the ways in which registries help and harm dogs, the theory and nature of dog breeds, how our notions about purebred status and breed purity may have impacted the health of our dogs, the special situation of minority or "rare breeds," and similar issues. We shall also discuss any "special situations" such as the current kerfluffle over AKC status for Chinooks and the problem of the "Chinook Cross" bloodlines.

21st Century Dog Breeds is unaffiliated with any existing registries or associations and is not limited to any particular dog breeds, although it will start life with individual breed forums for Seppala Siberian Sleddogs and Chinooks. We shall add other individual forums for any breed for which there is enough interest to support a forum to discuss the type of issues described above. It is not, however, intended that these shall be general breed-chat forums of the usual kind and discussions are expected to revolve around the forum themes as described on the front page.

Takeover Accepted?

Surreal is the word for it. Not the only word, but the word. Pusillanimous would be another. I'm talking about the strange goings on among the Chinook breeders, still. It's a little hard to know quite what to make of it, but the bottom line seems clear enough. All the COA/UKC contingent were waiting for was the first sign of weakness from CCA, the first chink in the armour, the least little concession -- so that they could then surrender and get in line to march to the doorstep of the AKC!

The CCA Director made a rather poor showing online (see previous post), no skilled debater, she. Nevertheless, whether deliberately or inadvertently, she made exactly the right noise at one point -- when she said she "would not not consider a breeding to a dog from the cross program" you could feel the earth move. That weak double-negative statement was enough, apparently, to initiate the paradigm-shift that would spell doom for the UKC Chinook. After she left the list, another Board member came on to say that actually, only a small handful of CCA members opposed acceptance of the Chinook Cross Program dogs, and that a committee was "working on a solution." She followed that up with a plea for more members, after first explaining that CCA already had enough members to satisfy AKC, so people who joined would not be giving CCA "any further advantage," and that Cross breeders needed to join in order to have a say and represent their own viewpoint. The message was clear: get on board if you don't want to be left behind, the AKC train is leaving now.

There has been very little dialogue on the AKC topic since then. I think we can presume a rush to buy a ticket. Takeover accepted!

Takeover Update 2

Discussion of the impending entry of the Chinook breed into the AKC Miscellaneous Class has continued, sometimes at a frenetic pace, on at least one Chinook email list. CCA Director Patti Richards, after a period of relative silence punctuated by enigmatic one-line messages (sample: "This post is so full of misinformation that it isn’t worth reading." -- directed at this blog's author) came briefly onlist this afternoon with three brief messages, apparently to clarify her own personal position. In one message she said that she knew she was opening herself to attack, but wanted to state HER feelings, then stated that she would not not consider (her wording) breeding to a Chinook Cross dog; and that she had never said she wouldn't allow her dogs to be bred to a dog that was only UKC registered. In a second message she stated that the stud book would remain "open" for at least five years subsequent to AKC recognition. In the final one she said that the CCA Registrar was working with AKC to correct errors in the registry; that CCA had been given information (whose nature wasn't specified) supposed to be from AKC that turned out to be incorrect, that she was starting at zero and trying to get answers; that when polled more than half the CCA membership either felt that the Cross dogs should not be accepted or that working to fulfil the Miscellaneous Class requirements was more important; and that CCA members want full AKC recognition. She then unsubscribed from the list before she could be questioned for further details!

Leaving everyone quite upset and frustrated since her messages raised more questions than they answered, and contradicted the FAQs on the CCA site rather impressively. Further exchanges with two remaining CCA members revealed the fact that nobody knows much about the "registrar" and that the website doesn't name her; as well as the fact that there is apparently deep division in the CCA membership and Board.

At least it's good to see that they are obviously running scared and either unable or afraid to answer questions or to engage in rational debate on a breeder's list.

"True Purebred AKC Chinooks"

The pot continues to boil and fume as Chinook Club of America (CCA) recklessly attempts to steer the Chinook breed full steam ahead towards a looming iceberg, as convinced of their invulnerability as the masters of the Titanic. Everyone is blithely talking about "true purebred AKC Chinooks," who will have them, who will not. Some folks, to their credit, are saying, "Okay, this makes no sense at all, so I will just keep on breeding my UKC 'mutts', because I have both kinds, eligibles and non-eligibles, and to me there's no difference; dog 'A' is no more Chinook than dog 'C', they are equally Chinooks to me."

But the same folks also acknowledge that there may be trouble on the horizon. One correspondent said, "Many people don't know better and having AKC Chinooks will be a big draw for a person looking for a pet, show dog, or breeding prospect." It is certainly true that few outsiders even begin to understand the complexities and the history of this canine population. I hesitate to call it a "breed" for reasons I'll explain -- apart from the fact that with each passing day, I get a little sicker every time I hear that word.

Let's get something straight here! CCA and AKC are talking about "purebred Chinooks" as though this were something self-evident and true, beyond dispute. As an honest cynologist, I don't buy their line of hype. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A "PUREBRED CHINOOK." Therefore, there is no earthly reason to attempt to discriminate between "purebred Chinooks" and Chinook Crosses. This is a clear case of The Emperor's New Clothes -- something that exists only as a state of mind, a fantasy belief system, impossible to demonstrate in any concrete fashion on the ground.

You cannot take a 1917 crossbred mongrel (sired by a Heinz 57 mongrel on a working expeditionary Eskimo dog), howsoever prepotent and admirable a beast he may have been, and magically transform his progeny (from a variety of bitches of other breeds, principally German Shepherd Dog and Belgian Shepherd) into "purebreds" just by inbreeding them into near-extinction over a 75-year history.

Yes, Chinooks are recognisable insofar as they bear a vague family resemblance to one another. Yes, they have been somewhat consistently bred as a population under somewhat of a pedigree barrier (but with gaps and inconsistencies aplenty). The trouble is, though, you can find "Chinookalikes" on farms and in dog pounds across the continent. The Chinook "type" is a common mongrel phenotype that pops up very easily whenever European shepherd-dog blood is mixed with other breeds. Tan, buff, and tawny dogs with dark masks and semi-erect ears are plentiful and perennial as the grass.

I know some Chinooks, and they are delightful dogs. I own two; my wife owns quite a few. They are a genuine piece of 20th-century Americana, an enjoyable relic of the days of the "gentlemen adventurers" and explorers. But it is absolute nonsense to take a small part of the population descended from the eleven dogs rescued in 1982 from the wreck of the Perry Greene kennels, proclaim them "purebred," and then turn around and say that the rest of the same population, descended from the same source, is "not purebred" because it had additional input AFTER the PG rescue from the source-breeds of the initial mongrel mix. That is not only elitism, it is utter, arrant NONSENSE.

I'm sorry to have to say these things so bluntly. It is not pleasant to be forced to do so. We all have our illusions, and we enjoy grooming them. (Human kind cannot bear very much reality, said a great 20th-century poet.) Dog breeds need their breed myths. We all like to feel that our dogs are somehow special.

But this "purebred Chinook" fantasy nonsense has gone much too far already. A relatively small part of the "breed" fancy is now prepared to make life difficult to impossible for the majority, by cuddling up to a mammoth showdog certificate-mill in order to obtain special status, preference for their own little bunch of mutts. It is unsportsmanlike. It is unfair. It is not in the best interest of the dogs. It is not even in the best interests of the fantasy "breed." It is only a cheap power play by a minority faction, aided and abetted by cynical commercial motives of a mammoth 19th-century organisation that needs to be taken down and dismantled as obsolete.