The zealous discussion of the more popular criteria for a responsible breeder seems to be an almost everyday occurrence. Finding loving, responsible, and permanent homes for the puppies we breed is a monumental task, and takes much time, expense, and effort, especially for someone who has not built a reputation in the breed. In reality, there are fine pets available from every reputable breeder. Taking ownership of a puppy who will live for 10-14 years is a monumental responsibility. Hand in hand with the joy of being responsible for producing a fine healthy puppy is the serious responsibility of placing each and every puppy in the ownership of a loving, responsible, and permanent home. (N.B., the repetition of the key word “responsible”.)    By those breeders who represent themselves to be “reputable”, there is much pejorative discussion on e-mail lists about “back yard breeders and puppy mills” which sell dogs far and wide to anyone with the resources to afford the extraordinary costs. At the same time, our parent club offers a Breeder Referral List for those members willing to sign a conscientious Code of Ethics: “6. I will refuse to deal with dog wholesalers or to sell puppies or dogs to pet shops, and I will include in all stud contracts an agreement to be signed by the owner of the bitch that no puppies resulting from the mating will be wholesaled or sold to pet shops.” Intrinsic to this responsibility is the understanding that the reputable breeder will control the puppy’s well-being by maintaining personal supervision of the puppy’s new family. On these popular e-mail lists, anyone who even vaguely is perceived as a puppy mill is castigated to the point of almost inviting litigation. So zealous is the effort to control the placement of puppies that when a known exhibitor (a long-standing member of the parent club) inquires about a litter, it has been known that he has been asked for “references”.    We all know to have hips x-rayed for Hip Dysplasia; in fact, because of the diligent efforts of breeders, we, as a fancy, have all but bred HD out of the breed (as represented in the USA). We all know to have eyes professionally evaluated by ACVO veterinarians, and we are encouraged to publish the certified results of healthy eyes in either CERF or SHOR, and in all advertisements proclaiming the health of the dog. We, as a fancy, applaud these efforts to protect the breed from deleterious conditions and anomalies (even though the mode of inheritance for these eye anomalies appears to be yet unknown).    We are beginning to learn the importance of checking our breeding stock for healthy thyroid levels, and that Hypothyroidism precipitates unwanted aggressivity, as well as “exercise intolerance, chronic ear infection, allergic dermatitis, bacterial skin infection, yeast infection, seborrhea, heart arrhythmia, high cholesterol, seizures, instability of the limbs, laryngeal paralysis, prolonged false pregnancies, prolonged estrual bleeding, low or absent sperm count, decreased libido (in both genders), silent seasons, failure to cycle, abortion, small litters, and inappropriate milk production”. (NEWSLETTER, The Official Publication of the Siberian Husky Club of America, Inc., Autumn 2002, pp. 33-35)    Some e-mail posters even go so far as to demand home visits, and Humane Society approval before the owner/breeder is permitted “acceptance” as a reputable and responsible home. I assume that it is the intention of these breeders to want to personally verify that the dogs they sell, or intend to sell, are not wallowing in their own feces, are well fed, groomed, exercised, and otherwise cared for. They probably want to verify the quality of food that the new owners are feeding these dogs. They probably want to see that the dogs are not being inhumanly housed, and that they will not be indiscriminately bred. These “home visits”, by their nature, more than imply this personal, hands-on vigilance.    Yes, there appears to be a great emphasis placed on the popular criterion for the well-being of the breed by those who present themselves as being concerned with protecting the breed. Yet, all the while, the breed is slipping out of the confines of those who would appear to protect it. Some of these same people might wish to advertise that the influence of their Siberians are making a huge mark all over the world. But, is this “mark” a result of the breed’s Original Purpose, the particular dog’s merit, or the individual breeder’s ego?    Few would argue that the Siberian is an Arctic sled dog, yet this Arctic sled dog is being shipped, and expected to flourish all over the world. The Siberian Standard judiciously emphasizes “his Northern heritage”, yet breeders who claim to be guardians of his essence ship him to climates and conditions which are the antithesis of “Arctic”.    Does a breeder truly expect that he will be able to maintain personal contact with a new owner, and maintain vigilance of the dog of his breeding which he has shipped to a new home in Bangkok, Cairo, or Honolulu? Why is an Arctic sled dog placed in a home in which a hot, humid, or tropical climate is certain to exist as the norm? How can a breeder maintain personal vigilance of a dog of his breeding when that dog is sold to reside in New South Wales, Johannesburg, or Buenos Aires? Why is it necessary to place a dog so very far from the point of one’s personal observation? Are the numbers of breedings so great that breeders must go to these extremes to locate homes for the litters they breed?    These breeders would, I am sure, defend that they are breeding responsibly, and placing the puppies which they cause to come into existence in a responsible manner, but, even in the most elementary points of debate, the simplest and most obvious of questions immediately leap into mind: “Over time, how is the breed to maintain its hallmark Arctic coat in a tropical climate?” Surely, one must realize that the coat necessary for survival in the Arctic was perpetuated as a result of the environment in which it was originally bred, and surely it is only common sense to believe that this Arctic coat will, in the time spent in the tropics, or in hot climates, gradually mutate to the coat more suited to these hot, humid environments (such coats as we find in the Chihuahua, and the Whippet). How do we feel, and what thoughts come to mind, when we see Polar Bears in Mexico, or read of Whippets and Chihuahuas being sent to the Alaskan tundra, or to Mongolia? Does this strike the reader as illogical at best, and even bordering on cruelty?    It seems to me that (as one example of misplacement) a Siberian sent to the extreme heat and humidity of Bangkok would have little, if any, means to perform (or test) his Original Purpose in harness - even recreationally - in a manner which would not seriously jeopardize the health of the dog. Does it not greatly disturb those who seriously hold that workability is of vital importance to our breed when they learn of a Siberian being sent to a climate in which working the dog is, at best, impractical, and in its worst case, impossible because of the unsuitable climate? Thailand is very far removed from Alaska, or the Northern tier of the lower forty-eight states which have a suitable climate.    Occasionally, for the welfare of the breed, the conscientious breeder may need to invoke the terms of his Contract. If the breeder is not able to maintain personal, vigilant observation of the Siberian he has sold to a very distant location, how will he know if the terms which he guards in his Contract are being respected? Specifically, the above mentioned Item #6 in the SHCA Code of Ethics comes to mind: “6. I will refuse to deal with dog wholesalers or to sell puppies or dogs to pet shops, and I will include in all stud contracts an agreement to be signed by the owner of the bitch that no puppies resulting from the mating will be wholesaled or sold to pet shops.” Without personal oversight, neither the breeder, nor the parent club, will ever know if this provision in his Contract is being respected. Additionally, without the opportunity of personal vigilance, it seems to me that a Siberian sent to a very distant location, or foreign country, might well invite - unbeknownst to the breeder - gross abuse, neglect, or worse.    CONSIDER THIS: If we truly want to preserve the integrity of our beloved breed, and if we have any hope of appearing prudent and humane, should we not place the Siberian in an environment which at least approximates the Native Arctic environment from which he originated, and for which he is ideally suited?   ### -- The above article is published in The Siberian Quarterly: Hoflin Publishing, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, Spring 2003 Issue, pp. 11, 12.

---

Back to
Artyk Siberians


All Web Pages and Images ©Copyright 1997-2005 Fredric R. Cornell, MIS
All Rights Reserved

Maintained By HarborNet