UKC or AKC>>> Which Siberian Husky?

[Ice and Cripton]

lool Thanks..ours look like dals more:)

Soz i dont have any pics of cow hooked....will have a look now for you

[Ice and Cripton]

http://www.jindos.com/jindo/appearance/angelcowhocked_s.jpg

[raindog]

i think it comes down to which type the people setting the standard likes

we have 2 huskies,

micha is the uk standard, leaner more wolfish

saskia is the american standard more sturdy looking

want to know what standard your is

fold its ear down and look at it

the uk standard looks sort of like a dalmation

the us standard looks more like a golden retriever/labrador

imo anyway lol

I'm never quite sure where the idea that the US and UK standards are different comes from. In fact, the differences between to two standards are so minor as to be insignificant. Yes on average UK and US sibes are somewhat different, but this is to do with the interpretation of the standard by judges, not the standard itself.

Our oldest (18 months old) husky's hind legs point outwards, recently a vet (not my own vet) commented that we should get a scan as he may have hip dysplasia. I've since read this is uncommon in sibes & would be characterised by a reluctance to use back legs & stiffness after exercise- def not the case!!

He's a much loved family pet so I'm not concerned about showing or breeding- just if he had an underlying health problem.

Any comments or better still pics of dogs cow hocked huskys would be appreciated

Although hip dysplasia is not common in UK sibes (largely thanks to responsible breeders hip testing their dogs) cow hocks are very common (although they are a fault in terms of the breed standard). This diagram explains what cow hocks are:

Fig.1 are correctly built parallel hocks; Fig 2. are parallel but too close; Fig 3 are cow hocks - the elbows angling in together; and Fig 4. is equally faulty but the opposite - what we would call bandy legs in humans.

Mick

[Ice and Cripton]

im confused lol......im not sure which one Alaska is now..Mick when your online i'll upload a pic from behind and maybe you could tell me?

[valkyries]

oppps cant say i've ever took any notice but i'll look at them both now

[Ice and Cripton]

put a pic up if you can..cos Alaska's frame is very femmine she leans 2wards number 2 but just not soo extreame..plus shes not done growing at only 1...hmmmmm lol will put my pic up 2day!!

[ninooks mum]

nooks tail curls round and sits on her back

[Ice and Cripton]

Our 2 dont but sometimes when their really excited i always crain my neck to see if they do lol .....but they never do!! They are set in a high sickle shape when excited but usually they either hang down...or inbetween.

[raindog]

Tails (according to the breed standard):

Well furred or round fox brush shape set on just below level of topline and usually carried over back in a graceful sickle curve when dog at attention. When carried up, tail should not curl too tightly, nor should it curl to either side of body, or snap flat against the back. The hair on the tail should be of medium length and approximately same length all round. A trailing tail is normal for dog when working or in repose.

For more info on the "correct" aspects of the Siberian, this is a briliant site:

http://www.kossok.com/kossok/Introduction.html

Mick

[Ice and Cripton]

I find the show siberians tail is like the first 3 pics, it manages to hold itself high and straight with a slight curve..my two are more like the last 2. Will upload pic now......

[Ice and Cripton]

Also excellent site Mick >> added to rep...been having a look and its verys uselful >> i always thought Alaska had too shorter coat and looked rather wolfish with her straighter muzzel than the us types >> BUT (lol) she is just one of the extreams, as long as she has a double coat, water-proof and corse top coat that sheds in hotter climates thats fine. Im not too sure about her stop though..perhaps you could help..will upload with other pics:)

[Ice and Cripton]

Okay, i checked on the site and tried to be objective but im still a little baffed lol...so here are some pics with the link underneith of which part im talking about....perhaps anyone can offer an objective eye?

Okay her tail is fine i think..usually it just curves on walks and then when she gets a stick or something it flys all over the place:

[ATTACH]2496.IPB[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2497.IPB[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2498.IPB[/ATTACH]

http://www.kossok.com/kossok/Tail.html

Heres her general frame..but the part im unsure about the is the back legs....dont really know what cat she would be in?

[ATTACH]2499.IPB[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2500.IPB[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2501.IPB[/ATTACH]

http://www.kossok.com/kossok/Hindquarters.html

Her muzzel/stop..again..baffed lol:

[ATTACH]2502.IPB[/ATTACH]

http://www.kossok.com/kossok/Head.html

And again with her eyes..ive alwasy thought them to be almond shaped but when shes alert or looking at me when i have food they get pretty big:rolleyes:

[ATTACH]2504.IPB[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2503.IPB[/ATTACH]

http://www.kossok.com/kossok/Head.html

And her back feet:

[ATTACH]2505.IPB[/ATTACH]

[raindog]

It's really difficult to assess a dog without getting your hands on it and seeing it in the flesh. Still - here goes......

Tail - looks fine. Doesn't have a tight curl and from the photos the tailset seems OK.

Hindquarters - OK

Stop/Muzzle - stop looks OK, not to exaggerated or too straight.

Eyes - Blue eyes always look rounder than dark ones, even when they aren't. Hers look fine.

Back End - doesn't look at all cow-hocked from these photos.

Mick

[Ice and Cripton]

Thanks Mick:) Im happy with her no matter how she looks but i always get interested when i see those kind of sites...but i agree most accurate would be to examine the dog in the flesh.....still all interesting stuff!!!

[valkyries]

Alaska looks fine shes a sweety xx

[Ice and Cripton]

Yeah shes the bestest loool Love Alaski:)

[Lana]

Pack Leader: So i just had to add my opinion about AKC. I did not get to read everyone post so please forgive me if i am off subject and/or what i am about to give my opinion on has already been said. AKC is a big joke! Yes that's right i said AKC is a big joke! Why? Well in my opinion AKC is people who falsely believes that by getting your dog register with AKC means something.

The AKC has general requirements for each breed but no investigation to ensure your dog is and what you say your dog is. People just pay a fee, say there dog is this, you get a number, and boom your dog is AKC register It is a honest but i hope system. They ask that you be honest about the information given while people who really pay attention hope that their what someone claims is right. There is no DNA test requirement to establish that your dog is a purebred, no picture required, vet examination to ensure anything.

Ok so you still dont agree with me? Lets do a test. Call AKC and say you would like to registers a purebred puppy/dog (any dog). In reality you really dont have one. I bet a months pay check that you can register a dog that does not exists. Go to the AKC registering a Dog: http://www.akc.org/reg/registeradog.cfm

I have Lana DNA tested by two different companies to ensure i get the same results and i am not being hoodwinked. When some one ask me "is lana AKC registered" i will say "No, but i have her DNA certified that she is in fact a true purebred". I suppose there are many ways to cheat the system even with DNA tests. You could swap the wrong dog and say its another. Lana did a swap by me but i paid $125.00 for a blood DNA test which is done by the Vet. There the vet will draw blood, take a picture, and confirm that his is the dog you say it is by records. The company the Vet uses requires a micro-chip which will be checked before accepting DNA testing.

What if you never been seen by this vet? Well the vet here on base will not do a blood DNA test until you have been seen, micro chip by the vet. I didnt get Lana's results for 8 weeks. So AKC...sure if you want a paper that says your dogs name with other names, a number, and something that says your register...sure give them your money. If you want something more authentic then i suggest getting your dog DNA tested by your veterinary.

Please if i a wrong, i will admit and retract my statement. Please share your experiences with me.

[Bec]

Ok so you still dont agree with me? Lets do a test. Call AKC and say you would like to registers a purebred puppy/dog (any dog). In reality you really dont have one. I bet a months pay check that you can register a dog that does not exists. Go to the AKC registering a Dog: http://www.akc.org/reg/registeradog.cfm

Sorry, Lana, you've lost me.

As per the link you've given above:

A purebred dog is eligible for AKC registration if its litter has been registered.

How can you register a dog that doesn't exist, when it's litter would not have been registered?

The same website also says that:

The buyer of an AKC-registrable dog should obtain the dog's AKC papers from the seller at the same time the dog is purchased.

Because I don't live in the US, and therefore aren't familiar with the ins and outs of the AKC like I am with the ANKC, is 'registering a dog with the AKC' different to the breeder giving you the dog's pedigree papers?

Personally I wouldn't call the AKC a big joke. Without it, we would have no governing body to keep track of and record each breed and pedigree which is integral to maintaining the great dogs we have today. That a minority of people may abuse the system or use it inappropriately doesn't detract (IMO) from its good points.

[Lana]

Pack Leader: Well sorry but it is a joke here. I couldn't believe how easy it was to register a dog in the AKC. Example i can sign any papers saying these are the parents of Lana but what if they weren't. The AKC wouldn't know that some one basically lied.Here is another example for you: Lets say i have Lana register and i get a puppy from someone else(we will call this puppy that Lana didnt give birth to "charlie"). Lana didn't have any puppies but if i want to abuse the system i can now say this is Charlie is Lana's puppy (which it is not) and get the charlieregister with the AKC. Now when i breed Charlie i can now say that all of the Charlie's puppy's litter can be AKC register, so forth and so forth. All i need to do is have Lana owners sign a paper saying that Charlie is Lana's puppy and i am in. There are no background investigation to prove or disprove that the information i am giving is true.

So if you where to buy a puppy from me that Charlie spawned i can now say hey " Yes and Lana is AKC registered" (along with the father of course) and now you think you have paper that say your puppy is a purebred when it could not be.

Only way to ensure purebred is by having the DNA tested. At least is some type of system to check.

[Bec]

Pack Leader: Well sorry but it is a joke here. I couldn't believe how easy it was to register a dog in the AKC. Example i can sign any papers saying these are the parents of Lana but what if they weren't. The AKC wouldn't know that some one basically lied.Here is another example for you: Lets say i have Lana register and i get a puppy from someone else(we will call this puppy that Lana didnt give birth to "charlie"). Lana didn't have any puppies but if i want to abuse the system i can now say this is Charlie is Lana's puppy (which it is not) and get the charlieregister with the AKC. Now when i breed Charlie i can now say that all of the Charlie's puppy's litter can be AKC register, so forth and so forth. All i need to do is have Lana owners sign a paper saying that Charlie is Lana's puppy and i am in. There are no background investigation to prove or disprove that the information i am giving is true.

So if you where to buy a puppy from me that Charlie spawned i can now say hey " Yes and Lana is AKC registered" (along with the father of course) and now you think you have paper that say your puppy is a purebred when it could not be.

Only way to ensure purebred is by having the DNA tested. At least is some type of system to check.

DNA tests are still in their infancy when it comes to "proving" if a dog is purebred, the only guaranteed DNA test you can do with a dog is testing the parent dogs to prove parentage.

Anyone can swap papers, but the fact that dodgy breeders exist does not mean the AKC is a joke. I have a feeling you seem to think this is a really common occurrence, the fact is that it's not. You also have to consider what a breeder has to gain by doing such a thing - a reputable breeder would have nothing to gain and everything to lose by registering a fake litter. There is no way the AKC could investigate every single litter registered with them in a way that proves the right dogs are being registered, that would involve DNA testing every pup to every parent and that's impossible to do on the scale that it would require.

What do you recommend, scrap the AKC and let any random dogs breed and forget about the many of 1000s of genuine pedigree dogs that are registered with them every year? We wouldn't have the many purebred dogs we have today if it wasn't for the AKC and that alone means they are far from a joke to me.

[davidjk]

i prefer the first,

the second looks fat, i have seen real fluffy sibes that still manage to look sleek

the third looks emaciated

but then like sarah said variation means a good healthy breed, if alll sibes where identical then they would be in serious genetic trouble

[raindog]

Pack Leader: Lets do a test. Call AKC and say you would like to registers a purebred puppy/dog (any dog). In reality you really dont have one. I bet a months pay check that you can register a dog that does not exists. Go to the AKC registering a Dog: http://www.akc.org/reg/registeradog.cfm

I have Lana DNA tested by two different companies to ensure i get the same results and i am not being hoodwinked. When some one ask me "is lana AKC registered" i will say "No, but i have her DNA certified that she is in fact a true purebred". .

You could register a dog which didn't exist, but only if you were a breeder and actually owned both of the dogs which you claim to have bred. What on earth would be the point of paying out good money to register non-existent dogs?????

Lana, by your own argument, DNA testing is as much of a joke as is AKC registration. Where do you think the DNA testers got their DNA template against which they measure other dogs? From AKC registered dogs of course!! So if the AKC registration is a joke, so by implication is the DNA test.

All DNA testing will show you (as long as the DNA testers know what they are doing and that is somewhat doubtful - there was another thread on here where someone's sibe results came back as "greyhound") is (a) whether a particular dog is related to (ie the child of) two other dogs; and ( whether that dog is a purebred dog (as long as the DNA testers are competent (see note above).

The thing about the AKC (and any other national/international Kennel Club registration scheme) is that they do rely on honesty. Because of that, of course there is the possibility of fraud. In my experience in the UK, I would say that that possibility is extremely small. For all good, ethical breeders, and most other breeders, there is nothing to be gained by such fraud. If I breed a litter, for example, I am extremely proud of it and want the world to know who the parents are. Yes some less good breeders might benefit from it, but such fraud is, I believe pretty rare and pretty pointless. The only people who might benefit are really bad puppy farmers/backyard breeders (who have no reputation to lose) who leave their dogs and bitches out together and just put any old names on the papers for convenience - again a pretty rare occurrence.

The benefits of AKC/KC registration is that not only do you have the assurance that your dog is purebred, but you also know its pedigree and can follow the health history of the bloodlines down as many generations as you wish right back to the original Sibes imported in the early years of the 20th Century. DNA testing will give you none of that information.

Complaining that AKC registration is open to fraud and that therefore it is a "joke" is throwing the baby out with the bathwater (as we say in the UK). Personally I would like Kennel Clubs to insist that all dogs be DNA profiled so that the possibilities of fraud no longer exist, and I am sure that this will happen before long. In the meantime, AKC/KC registration may not be perfect, but it is the best we have by a long long way.

Mick

[Guest snowdog]

Complaining that AKC registration is open to fraud and that therefore it is a "joke" is throwing the baby out with the bathwater (as we say in the UK). Personally I would like Kennel Clubs to insist that all dogs be DNA profiled so that the possibilities of fraud no longer exist, and I am sure that this will happen before long. In the meantime, AKC/KC registration may not be perfect, but it is the best we have by a long long way.

Mick

[Lana]

You could register a dog which didn't exist, but only if you were a breeder and actually owned both of the dogs which you claim to have bred. What on earth would be the point of paying out good money to register non-existent dogs?????

Pack Leader:The point for falsely registering a dog is so that the breeder can "claim" it's AKC registered and charge more for the dog. Have you ever notice the price difference between a "AKC rigisterd" and one that is not.

There is also that fact if the breeder/owner doesn't have papers on one dog they can cheat the system do that they don't lose out on the"AKC" title.

Lana, by your own argument, DNA testing is as much of a joke as is AKC registration. Where do you think the DNA testers got their DNA template against which they measure other dogs? From AKC registered dogs of course!! So if the AKC registration is a joke, so by implication is the DNA test.

All DNA testing will show you (as long as the DNA testers know what they are doing and that is somewhat doubtful - there was another thread on here where someone's sibe results came back as "greyhound") is (a) whether a particular dog is related to (ie the child of) two other dogs; and ( whether that dog is a purebred dog (as long as the DNA testers are competent (see note above).

Pack Leader: If you read the post about DNA testing and how i got it done there are more authentic ways to get the right DNA tested done such as how my Vet does it. If I get Lana DNA tested and another males tested the DNA of both parents are recorded. Now when you provide a DNA test for it's puppies you can now tell if that puppy belongs to these parents by DNA not just by paper. I am not talking about those little in the mail box kits (though they are good to see what your dog is) but a blood DNA test. The Base vets give us huge discounts because we are military. This test off base would have cost me close to $300.00

If you do the research on what company, what test (not swaps), what requirements to have the test taken,and what results will come from the test you can find a good DNA test. Now can this test be cheated? Yes if the breeder and Vet are both dishonest.

]The thing about the AKC (and any other national/international Kennel Club registration scheme) is that they do rely on honesty. Because of that, of course there is the possibility of fraud. In my experience in the UK, I would say that that possibility is extremely small. For all good, ethical breeders, and most other breeders, there is nothing to be gained by such fraud. If I breed a litter, for example, I am extremely proud of it and want the world to know who the parents are. Yes some less good breeders might benefit from it, but such fraud is, I believe pretty rare and pretty pointless. The only people who might benefit are really bad puppy farmers/backyard breeders (who have no reputation to lose) who leave their dogs and bitches out together and just put any old names on the papers for convenience - again a pretty rare occurrence.

Pack Leader: I agree with in part. Breeding could be a money making business and when it comes to making money there tend to be a lager number than the "extremely rare" and "small" number you are suggestion...in my opinion.

]The benefits of AKC/KC registration is that not only do you have the assurance that your dog is purebred, but you also know its pedigree and can follow the health history of the bloodlines down as many generations as you wish right back to the original Sibes imported in the early years of the 20th Century. DNA testing will give you none of that information.

I agree there is a justification for the AKC and i will retracted my "joke" statement, however because DNA technologies has come so far are you suggesting that AKC is more accurate and/or Important than a proper DNA test?

[Chewbacca_&_me]

Hi, I am curious about this too...seeing as My parents huskies were abit taller than the ones I see here (hawaii) and their fur looked like pic 1 from the first post. I was a little surprised when one day at the dog park all the huskies seemed quite small compared to what im used to.

Could someone tell me stuff about NKC and UKC?? There was a lady with an ad yesterday saying she had an NKC registered husky, and i know plenty on AKC but not the other two.