The origins of the wolfalike dog

Sansorrella wrote:

jake wrote:I certainly don,t agree with dogs being advertised as Wolf lookalike dogs when they in fact have Saarloos x NI in the background

"the main purpose of these matings was to create sound breeding stock for the future"

This is not a look alike

Can you please explain your reasoning on this? Just because a has Saarloos x NI in it, it doesn't stop it being a wolf lookalike - I agree it stops it being an NI.

Not quoting anyone in particular here, but when people say they have a healthy NI, with good hips, elbows etc., unless that /bitch is bred from there is no telling what hidden problems there may be that wouldn't show up until it was bred from - and even then the problems may not manifest themselves for a couple of years or more.

I agree with the people who say that there are a lot of healthy NI - but would amend that to say that there are a lot of 'apparently' healthy NI. Apparently, that is until they are bred from and prove otherwise.

So you think that it is acceptable to say you have a lookalike when in fact they would be wolfdog/hybrids?? You don,t think this is misleading? Are you happy to place a with Saarloos content into a family of small children and state that as a lookalike it will make a great family pet? All of the other lookalikes are stating that. You state "They will NOT be a for the novice owner" and you said (refering to Saarloos crosses) "This is not really what is required of a family pet".

Why have you changed the name to lookalikes when you had already called them wolfdog/hybrids?? Better market perhaps???
All info from here:
http://www.sansorrella.com/wolfdoghybrids.htm

You also state that you are prepared to use "good health tested NI" in your programme!! Does no-one else in the country have these?? Why not just stick with well sourced, health tested NI x NI??

Zoeybeau your quote is not from me!! But with regards to your post, I think that you will find the previous poster was referring to Ute,s not NI ( who have a much larger gene pool). It is a bit of a sweeping statement to assume all GSD have health issues!! With thorough investigation into lines, using health tested stock, from parents of health tested stock, what is the issue?? The Ute has a very limited gene pool due to bad breeding practices in the past and therefore to continue with this breed "new blood" MUST be brought in.

Sorry Jake wrong quote,

As regard all GSD having health issues, im not saying they all have them, they most of them the undersirable sloping back, and hip problems, I understand the need to breed out to substaine a gene pool, sansorella said you dont know what health issues there is till you breed, then imo why do it, ?
Why breed if dont know, why not just test for and then breed, if the results come back good and non existent, hd, vwd etc then breed, and only for health, not to see whom has the most desirable coats, not patchy etc.
Do the breedsers of these dogs, keep and show them, do they do anything with them but breed?
Are the puppy owners aware they are taking on a experimental dog, to see if the desirable traits are coming out, or are the breeders willing to take back these dogs, if EPI OR EPILEPSY shows in the lines that these dogs are bred to, as i have it there is no genetic marker for epilepsy, or epi, both of which poorly bred gsd suffer, my sister has a rescue with both of these traits, Medicated to the hilt, are the experimental breeders going to take these pups back?

Sansorrella wrote:

jake wrote:I certainly don,t agree with dogs being advertised as Wolf lookalike dogs when they in fact have Saarloos x NI in the background

"the main purpose of these matings was to create sound breeding stock for the future"

This is not a look alike

Can you please explain your reasoning on this? Just because a has Saarloos x NI in it, it doesn't stop it being a wolf lookalike - I agree it stops it being an NI.

Not quoting anyone in particular here, but when people say they have a healthy NI, with good hips, elbows etc., unless that /bitch is bred from there is no telling what hidden problems there may be that wouldn't show up until it was bred from - and even then the problems may not manifest themselves for a couple of years or more.

I agree with the people who say that there are a lot of healthy NI - but would amend that to say that there are a lot of 'apparently' healthy NI. Apparently, that is until they are bred from and prove otherwise.

Sansorella I completely agree with the point being made....a WOLFALIKE has been as always should be a dog made up of dog not wolf, not hybrid and not wolfdog!! Hence the name... why do breeders insist on putting wolfdog crosses (and that Is a very stupid idea if you ask me also as the wolfdogs should be left as is) and then naming them lookalikes you know it will confuse the puppy buyers, you know or I assume you do that the insurance companies see the difference they wont cover lookalikes now as they think they all have wolfdog in them!!!

There are a million reasons why the name shouldnt cover the 2 main breeds who are NOT putting any wolfdog in their breed....it is a ridiculous state of affairs and the breeders doing this are well versed in the confusion caused by all the different mixes going on are they not!! So I agree Jake pound signs more than any concern at all whatsoever of the dogs welfare and the future of any of our breeds...

And your comment re breeding what can I say I have never heard so much twaddle from a breeder in my entire life!! If yo are breeding which sadly I know you are...I suggest you go learn a bit more about genetics and health! If you truley think that even if dogs are tested you dont know whats going to be produced then STOP BREEDING! Check the generations behind and use your brain! If a breeder doesnt know whats going to be produced then they really shouldnt be breeding should they...if you cant work out what the health of your pups is going to be then how the hell do you know about their temperament or anything else for that matter.?

I have watched your posts elswhere for 3 years now, 1st NIS, then you where sacked, then TIDa and you where sacked, then Crywolf and you where sacked.....each time you banged on that the respective clubs and breeds where the way to go, each time jumping ship......I can see you have as much consistancy with your breeding plans as you do with what breed you are in!! Personally it is the likes of you that causes all the confusion and gives the rest of us a bad name...

And I for one would seriously appreciate that you differentiate between what has and has not any content no matter how small....a lookalike should have NONE!!!

according to the Tida history of the NI, there is some wolf hybrid content in the NI from dogs used about 20 years ago

http://www.theindependentdogassociation.org.uk/breedhistory.html

how many of this tida group were there when the breed started???????

sally wrote:how many of this tida group were there when the breed started???????

no idea, perhaps someone from the Tida committee can answer that question

arctic wrote:according to the Tida history of the NI, there is some wolf hybrid content in the NI from dogs used about 20 years ago

http://www.theindependentdogassociation.org.uk/breedhistory.html

This of course is speculation as there are no hard facts or evidence to back this up. I personally have not come across any pictures of Eddie's dogs that even look remotely wolflike!! You go onto to any wolfalike/wolfdog/Hybrid website and they all tell a slightly different story!! So who do you believe?? Without documented evidence no-one will ever know for sure. Even if it was the case it was so long ago now it is irrelevant.

The point in question is what is happening NOW, with certain persons adding Saarloos and passing them off as wolfalike dogs!! Anyone involved in this breed knows that wolfalike means NO WOLF CONTENT.

jake wrote:

arctic wrote:according to the Tida history of the NI, there is some wolf hybrid content in the NI from dogs used about 20 years ago

http://www.theindependentdogassociation.org.uk/breedhistory.html

This of course is speculation as there are no hard facts or evidence to back this up. I personally have not come across any pictures of Eddie's dogs that even look remotely wolflike!! You go onto to any wolfalike/wolfdog/Hybrid website and they all tell a slightly different story!! So who do you believe?? Without documented evidence no-one will ever know for sure. Even if it was the case it was so long ago now it is irrelevant.

The point in question is what is happening NOW, with certain persons adding Saarloos and passing them off as wolfalike dogs!! Anyone involved in this breed knows that wolfalike means NO WOLF CONTENT.

I have seen pictures of Eddies dogs that did look wolf like, and they were sold as wolf hybrids after all, but as you say no hard evidence to prove or disprove wolf content. Some wolf hybrids can look a lot more wolf like than others. As far as I know there is still no genetic test available to prove wolf content.

yes that is in the past, and we should look towards the future, but I have shown on one of my dogs pedigrees that has Eddies dog Buck (of unknown ancestry) is on the 4th generation, so only 4 generations ago, not ancient history, and IMO not irrelevant. The wolf input of the Saarloos is a lot further back in history than 4 generations.

IMO Saarloos or Czechoslovakian wolfdog crosses should not be sold as Northern Inuits, and I can't understand why anyone would do this. But wolfalike is such a broad term, could really mean anything remotely wolf looking.

hi
slightly o/t
whilst i do not wish the csv to be crossed,and i do believe unless you are 'in the know' it can all be a bit confusing with whats what,i have at least lived with and met csv's saarloos n.i ute's and their crosses .please unless you have met and experienced these dogs do not pass judgment,how can you? on storys?
i dont mean to sound rude.

Tupacs2legs wrote:hi
slightly o/t
whilst i do not wish the csv to be crossed,and i do believe unless you are 'in the know' it can all be a bit confusing with whats what,i have at least lived with and met csv's saarloos n.i ute's and their crosses .please unless you have met and experienced these dogs do not pass judgment,how can you? on storys?
i dont mean to sound rude.

yes i have met them all, and i,m not alone in my experiences with certain crosses and certain breeders.

Tupacs2legs wrote:hi
slightly o/t
whilst i do not wish the csv to be crossed,and i do believe unless you are 'in the know' it can all be a bit confusing with whats what,i have at least lived with and met csv's saarloos n.i ute's and their crosses .please unless you have met and experienced these dogs do not pass judgment,how can you? on storys?
i dont mean to sound rude.

I dont think your being rude ,But i have met the and more than 1.

Sansorrella wrote:

jake wrote:I certainly don,t agree with dogs being advertised as Wolf lookalike dogs when they in fact have Saarloos x NI in the background

"the main purpose of these matings was to create sound breeding stock for the future"

This is not a look alike

Can you please explain your reasoning on this? Just because a has Saarloos x NI in it, it doesn't stop it being a wolf lookalike - I agree it stops it being an NI.

Not quoting anyone in particular here, but when people say they have a healthy NI, with good hips, elbows etc., unless that /bitch is bred from there is no telling what hidden problems there may be that wouldn't show up until it was bred from - and even then the problems may not manifest themselves for a couple of years or more.

I agree with the people who say that there are a lot of healthy NI - but would amend that to say that there are a lot of 'apparently' healthy NI. Apparently, that is until they are bred from and prove otherwise.

This was your response to a question from arctic on a different forum regarding name definitions (same question was posted here on another thread) I think that it is relevant to this thread.

"2. wolfdog

As above, the official definitions are the same. To me, however, a wolfdog is something with wolf in its genes a long way back - such as the Saarloos or Czechoslovakian wolfdog or their crosses.

3. wolf look a like

4. wolfalike

Both of the above, regardless of spelling/grammar, are dogs that look like wolves but have no recent wolf blood, if any."

Why are you now saying you have lookalikes when (even you state) they are clearly wolfdogs???

What??

You are not making much sense Jake, sandra has always classed her NI's as wolf-look-a-likes! you will also find you can no longer get on our forum to copy and paste our info and posts!!

keetoowah wrote:What??

You are not making much sense Jake, sandra has always classed her NI's as wolf-look-a-likes!

this forum is the 'Wolf like dogs' forum

'discussion centre for all wolf like dog breeds'

so are the Saarloos, Checkoslovakian, Tamaskan and British Inuit wolf like dog breeds?

I copied this bit from the Tamaskan thread, the points made could apply to any of the wolf-a-like breeds not just Tamaskans, not saying I agree with the post, would like to see it discussed with all of the breeds.

I bought my NI in good faith and would be horrified that I could be sued because I can't find out what the G.G. Sire is.

Quote

I think its unethical to sell puppies if you are not 100% sure what the background of those puppies are, but what do I know? I'm just a person who would be incredibly mad if I found out that my puppy, who was sold to me as a pure bred, was in fact a recent decendant of a wolf or wolfdog...it would be grounds for me to sue and bring down my breeder. How honest are you with your puppy buyers? Do they know that you can't go back very far into your own dogs pedigree because its a "new breed"

arctic wrote:

keetoowah wrote:What??

You are not making much sense Jake, sandra has always classed her NI's as wolf-look-a-likes!

this forum is the 'Wolf like dogs' forum

'discussion centre for all wolf like breeds'

so are the Saarloos, Checkoslovakian, Tamaskan and British Inuit wolf like breeds?

If you read the front page there are sections for wolfalike dogs and wolfdogs in seperate sections!! Why?? Because they are completely different breeds

And Marie I see you are answering on behalf of Sansorrella as are you arctic, but to clarify, as you are well aware I am not talking about NI, they ARE wolfalike dogs and promoted as such, dogs that look like wolves with no wolf content, great family pets. I am talking about Sansorrella,s new breeding programme, which is advertised on her website, regarding the input of Saarloos and calling them wolfalike dogs. She previously classed them as wolfdogs why the change?? ££££££££ wolfdogs have had some bad press and joe public is more interested in the lookalike as a family pet. No offence to Saarloos owners I really do think they are a lovely breed, but should be kept pure.

Why confused?? As Sandra states quite clearly herself the differences between the two:

2. wolfdog

As above, the official definitions are the same. To me, however, a wolfdog is something with wolf in its genes a long way back - such as the Saarloos or Czechoslovakian wolfdog or their crosses.

3. wolf look a like

4. wolfalike

Both of the above, regardless of spelling/grammar, are dogs that look like wolves but have no recent wolf blood, if any.

jake wrote:

arctic wrote:

keetoowah wrote:What??

You are not making much sense Jake, sandra has always classed her NI's as wolf-look-a-likes!

this forum is the 'Wolf like dogs' forum

'discussion centre for all wolf like breeds'

so are the Saarloos, Checkoslovakian, Tamaskan and British Inuit wolf like breeds?

If you read the front page there are sections for wolfalike dogs and wolfdogs in seperate sections!! Why?? Because they are completely different breeds

And Marie I see you are answering on behalf of Sansorrella as are you arctic, but to clarify, as you are well aware I am not talking about NI, they ARE wolfalike dogs and promoted as such, dogs that look like wolves with no wolf content, great family pets. I am talking about Sansorrella,s new breeding programme, which is advertised on her website, regarding the input of Saarloos and calling them wolfalike dogs. She previously classed them as wolfdogs why the change?? ££££££££ wolfdogs have had some bad press and joe public is more interested in the lookalike as a family pet. No offence to Saarloos owners I really do think they are a lovely breed, but should be kept pure.

Why confused?? As Sandra states quite clearly herself the differences between the two:

2. wolfdog

As above, the official definitions are the same. To me, however, a wolfdog is something with wolf in its genes a long way back - such as the Saarloos or Czechoslovakian wolfdog or their crosses.

3. wolf look a like

4. wolfalike

Both of the above, regardless of spelling/grammar, are dogs that look like wolves but have no recent wolf blood, if any.

Jake I answer for myself, not for Sansorrella

reading your intro

I have been researching these dogs now for quite some time, absolutely fascinating. I have never before come across a breed that courts as much debate, disagreement and passion. I look forward to chatting with other interested parties about the origins and way forward for these magnificent dogs.

I totally agree with you on this, I ask questions because I would like to find out a lot more about the origins of the dogs, if I only wanted to hear one side of the story from the NIS or Sansorrella I would a just ask them. I like to chat to anyone who may be able to give me more information

arctic wrote:

jake wrote:

arctic wrote:

keetoowah wrote:What??

You are not making much sense Jake, sandra has always classed her NI's as wolf-look-a-likes!

this forum is the 'Wolf like dogs' forum

'discussion centre for all wolf like breeds'

so are the Saarloos, Checkoslovakian, Tamaskan and British Inuit wolf like breeds?

If you read the front page there are sections for wolfalike dogs and wolfdogs in seperate sections!! Why?? Because they are completely different breeds

And Marie I see you are answering on behalf of Sansorrella as are you arctic, but to clarify, as you are well aware I am not talking about NI, they ARE wolfalike dogs and promoted as such, dogs that look like wolves with no wolf content, great family pets. I am talking about Sansorrella,s new breeding programme, which is advertised on her website, regarding the input of Saarloos and calling them wolfalike dogs. She previously classed them as wolfdogs why the change?? ££££££££ wolfdogs have had some bad press and joe public is more interested in the lookalike as a family pet. No offence to Saarloos owners I really do think they are a lovely breed, but should be kept pure.

Why confused?? As Sandra states quite clearly herself the differences between the two:

2. wolfdog

As above, the official definitions are the same. To me, however, a wolfdog is something with wolf in its genes a long way back - such as the Saarloos or Czechoslovakian wolfdog or their crosses.

3. wolf look a like

4. wolfalike

Both of the above, regardless of spelling/grammar, are dogs that look like wolves but have no recent wolf blood, if any.

Jake I answer for myself, not for Sansorrella

reading your intro

I have been researching these dogs now for quite some time, absolutely fascinating. I have never before come across a breed that courts as much debate, disagreement and passion. I look forward to chatting with other interested parties about the origins and way forward for these magnificent dogs.

I totally agree with you on this, I ask questions because I would like to find out a lot more about the origins of the dogs, if I only wanted to hear one side of the story from the NIS or Sansorrella I would a just ask them. I like to chat to anyone who may be able to give me more information

Perhaps Sandra will come on and answer for herself!!

arctic wrote:I copied this bit from the Tamaskan thread, the points made could apply to any of the wolf-a-like breeds not just Tamaskans, not saying I agree with the post, would like to see it discussed with all of the breeds.

I bought my NI in good faith and would be horrified that I could be sued because I can't find out what the G.G. Sire is.

Quote

I think its unethical to sell puppies if you are not 100% sure what the background of those puppies are, but what do I know? I'm just a person who would be incredibly mad if I found out that my puppy, who was sold to me as a pure bred, was in fact a recent decendant of a wolf or wolfdog...it would be grounds for me to sue and bring down my breeder. How honest are you with your puppy buyers? Do they know that you can't go back very far into your own dogs pedigree because its a "new breed"

Hey now! Don't go stealing my posts j/k.

The point I was trying to make is, at the price I paid for what I believe to be a pure bred dog, I would be really upset if I found out that she's just a husky x wolf. I believe that I read that Tamaskan dogs run at about $2500 per pup which I find simply outragious. Out here, we could easily find a wolf cross if we wanted to, and probably at a lower price. But thats not what I wanted when I went searching for a breeder, and the whole "no wolf tamaskan" selling point makes me think that the people buying the dogs don't want anything with recent wolf crosses....otherwise, wouldn't they have just found a wolf cross? Does that make sense? I hope I clarified it.

Danielle that makes perfect sense

The point I was trying to make is, at the price I paid for what I believe to be a pure bred dog, I would be really upset if I found out that she's just a husky x wolf. I believe that I read that Tamaskan dogs run at about $2500 per pup which I find simply outragious. Out here, we could easily find a wolf cross if we wanted to, and probably at a lower price. But thats not what I wanted when I went searching for a breeder, and the whole "no wolf tamaskan" selling point makes me think that the people buying the dogs don't want anything with recent wolf crosses....otherwise, wouldn't they have just found a wolf cross? Does that make sense? I hope I clarified it.

that is such a coincidence, I just had some info on Buck (although no proof, so can't post it on here) but the words husky and wolf were mentioned

I completely agree, those of us who have sought wolf look alikes with NO content have done so for a good reason..... we didnt want a content or wolf dog....so if any one who has then is told otherwise then I cn see why they are so angry, and also have good cause to take the breeder that sold them to court under trading standards!!

As for Buck I thought you had a picture of him ?? IMO he has no more wolf than my neighbours toy poodle you could share your pic and get n open opinion??

more scandal and dram if you ask me.... can we not let that old soap lie we have all done it to death for years and there is no proof to say if she did or if she didnt.... the NI was started by JK and she never used buck or any of Eddies dogs she bought pups from Eddie now in my book that puts her in the same position as the other owners in the locked thread, the Ute started after the Ni so none of there founders where from Eddie etc etc, see where I am going...can we not just be happy at the knowledge of our own breeds back to their own founders, we will never know the truth about what Eddie did and no offence meant but it wasnt her who started all the seperate breeds so even if she did keep records which she didnt they wouldnt really be relevant to the history of our breeds other than she sold the founding stock and some of them where questionable background, this was all over 20 years ago the breeds have all moved on and brought in other dogs between now and then instead of going on about things we cant ever know for definate can we not appreciate the dogs and all the hard work done by breeders and breed clubs since then??

Excellent post lanie

My only gripe here is the naming of breeds ie: wolfalike/wolfdog/hybrid I have no problems with outcrossing DOGS with DOGS to create a healthier more wolfy looking DOG. Saarloos and CSV are relatively young in this country and in my opinion should stay pure to allow time to determine temperament etc. They should not be confused with the wolfalike Utonagan/NI/Tamaskan. (yes I included Tamaskan as nothing has been proved either way).

Would be interesting to see your picture of Buck arctic. All of the info regarding the early days is all contrasting thoughts of various people and will, as lanie says, never be proven.

Lainie, yes I totally agree with your point that JK started the NIS, and just used a few dogs from Eddie Harrison.

I am just trying to establish how many generations of pure bred NI we have, as Eddies dog Buck is not that far back on my NI's pedigree (closer than Call of the Wild). All I want to know is when the NI was bred pure NI to NI, and which dogs in her family tree are pure NI. I would love to get the facts once and for all, then I would stop asking what may seem so most people, irrelevant questions, but are relevant to me and my dog as this is not many generations ago. I have changed the information on the website I am building, for the NI I have put 'is now pure bred NI to NI' instead of 'The NI has been pure bred for many generations' as try as might I cannot find any facts to support 'many generations'

Yes I have a picture of Buck, haven't a clue what he was and he didn't look wolfy but according to one website 'Buck was prized for his more wolf like pups' but Buck could have been anything from a wolfdog, Husky cross or an unknown mongrel. He didn't look wolfy at all and I really can't understand why he was chosen as a founder dog. One thing he definitely wasn't a pure bred NI.
Buck


I would love there to be an end to the questions I have about the founder dogs of the NI, but no one seems to be able to answer them for me.

I would like to know when on the family tree of my dog is the cut off point where the dogs stopped being wolf hybrids, and became NI? On the sires side I have Call of the Wild, and he is on the NIS website as a founder dog of the NI, so on the Sires side the dogs from Call of the Wild onwards are NI? I just want to know about the dogs on the Dams side. I have Buck (unknown breed) then Mahlek Nanook, so is Mahlek Nanook the first NI on the Dams side, and is Mahlek Nanook the same dog as Mahlek Nanook of the North, and was Mahlek Nanook bred by Eddie Harrison and bought from her by Jullie ?

I take your point we are never going to find out about the Eddie Harrison dogs one way or the other

I accept that JK founded the NIS, and that the breed has come a long way from the dogs of Eddie Harrison

But I would still like to know which dogs were the founder dogs of the NI, there must have been a definite starting point where the dogs bred were NI's

Completely off topic maybe admin could move to an off topic thread??

The questions you are asking should be addressed to JK as she is the founder of the NI. I am sure she will be only to happy to answer any questions you might have if you are a "genuinely" interested party? Again anyone else,s theories are just that, theories!!

Buck certainly has a lot to answer for, inkmark and curly tails You said he sired some really wolfy pups, but then so did Inca (also an inkmark) from Sulin.