Читать книгу Akita - Barbara J. Andrews - Страница 9

History of the breed in the Western world has to begin with the US and, unfortunately, it has to include the great debate that erupted there. All importation (to be registered) to America was cut off from 1974 until April 1992, when the American Kennel Club (AKC) finally recognized the Japanese Kennel Club (JKC) and its stud book. One reason that the AKC steadfastly refused to honor Japanese export pedigrees was the concern for the authenticity of the paperwork and the purity of breeds. This was considered by many to be a bit hypocritical, as during that time span, the AKC busily accepted several breeds known to have been hybrids of existent types in various countries. Prior to importation of the African jungle Basenji in the 1980s, the AKC approved the Dalmatian-to-Pointer breedings in order to correct a genetic health defect in the spotted breed.

Suddenly, the AKC recognized the JKC stud book. The AKC had slipped up when it accepted the Japanese Kennel Club records on behalf of Japanese Shibas, which were, in fact, all recent Japanese imports. Traditionalists as well as those Akita breeders who were looking for something “new and different” latched on to the opportunity to once again import Akitas from Japan.

Then, more than 25 years after first seeking AKC recognition, in efforts to circumvent having to go through the same lengthy steps of meeting registration requirements, a small faction of enterprising Akita owners in the US cited the small number of “pedigrees” represented by early AKC enrollment figures. They said that by the late 1990s the breed was in need of new genes because of the small number of early pedigrees and, therefore, the imports must be registered as Akitas, all one breed, so as to allow interbreeding. To most Americans, that made as much sense as breeding Shibas to Akitas to increase genetic diversity.

The big debate on “the split” was thus born. Those persons still active in the breed who were knowledgeable of the factual history of the breed in America knew that the beginnings of the breed were quite random. One has only to look at photos of early Akitas in the United States to acknowledge that the breed had the stamp of many breeds. They watched incredulously as new dogs came in from Japan and were bred to American Akitas. Everyone agreed that some of imported dogs were incredibly beautiful, but all agreed that they were totally different than those in America. And so began the quandary and the debate over “one breed or two” that earned the Akita the dubious distinction of becoming “the breed with the most names.”

At a show in Chile, Grandson to The Widow-Maker O’BJ, South American Ch. Seisan’s Ultimate Warrior, known as Spike, won the Group and was ranked fourth in the show.

Just as fanciers in Japan worked diligently to restore the Akita there to what was believed to be its original form, American breeders worked for 30 years to create uniformity and genetic knowledge of the breed. Bitterness prevails between breeders in the US and elsewhere.

Even the co-authors of this book are in disagreement. Mrs. Barbara Andrews is in favor of keeping the two breeds “separate but equal,” as is currently the case in most countries. Mrs. Meg Purnell-Carpenter of the UK, having had early access to a very good Japanese dog and being one of the first to pioneer the crossing of American bloodlines with Japanese lines, believes it can be good for the breed to take advantage of both genetic pools.

The perfect “Blend”: Overhill’s Pacer, bred by author Meg Purnell-Carpenter’s out of her American import, from author BJ Andrews, O’BJ White Hope of Overhill.

Meg explains thusly, “I find it very sad that the Akitas are to be divided into two breeds, especially when, according to the standards, color is the only dividing difference between the two. I sincerely hope this does not happen in the UK; I very much hope we could stay as we are. At present we are able—if we wish— to exhibit both types, also to breed the two together. If we maintain our present system, we could possibly improve the overall quality of the breed. We would also have a much wider gene pool than other countries that could become very restricted if they cannot mix the two types. Both types have a lot to offer; both also have their faults. With careful selective breeding, combining the two together, I feel that we in the UK would have the advantage over the other countries. I have to say I would heartily support keeping our standard open, as it is now.”

Many Americans consider it ironic that Japan’s breeders succeeded so well in re-establishing what they consider to be the native type whereas Americans have dissolved ten generations of dedicated work by their predecessors through engaging in the cross-breeding of the late 1990s. Because the progeny of such matings is neither American nor Japanese, they are commonly called “Tweenies,” meaning betwixt and between. Those Americans who went to considerable trouble and expense to import top-quality and top-winning Japanese dogs are as disappointed to see the many generations of pure Japanese breeding destroyed as are the Japanese breeders themselves. Tweenie breeders have begun a movement to change the term to “Blends,” as it is considered more acceptable, but most Americans are firmly of the opinion that a mongrel is a mongrel, no matter how beautiful both parents were! That conviction led to the formation of the Japanese Akita Club of America, a club recognized by Japan and one that advocates only the breeding of pure Japanese stock with no American Akita influence.

Adding fuel to the growing controversy of the 1990s, in 1999 at a meeting at the World Dog Show, the General Assembly approved the division of the breed, and the new FCI breed standards were accepted. Henceforth, in all FCI countries the Akita breed has been split to become known as the Japanese Akita and the Great Japanese Dog, formerly the American Akita.

To further complicate life for those who consider the Akita as a spitz-type working-guarding dog, the General Assembly assigned the Great Japanese Dog to Group Two in all FCI countries. That group contains breeds such as the Pinschers, Schnauzers, Molossians and the Swiss Mountain and Cattle Dogs. The Japanese Akita remains in Group Five, rightly so, with the Spitz and Primitive Dogs.

Americans were not at all happy with the designation and, in fact, the breed is still known as before as the Japanese Akita and the American Akita. In fact, in an unconscious attempt to maintain sanity, the defining terms “Japanese” and “American” are in even more common usage. To the confusion of all, the Akita is in the unique position of having more than four different “official” breed standards throughout the world!

Physical appearance and behavioral characteristics of the two pure strains remain quite different. The American Akita largely predominates in the Western world and is exemplified by large bone, greater overall size and a spectacular array of colors and markings. The Japanese sought to re-establish the type native to their country and strongly seek a dog with decisively Oriental features and very limited colors. This has resulted in a wide gap between the best of the lighter boned, smaller, lushly coated, exquisitely beautiful Japanese dogs and the substantially larger, stronger, heavier proportioned and shorter coated American Akitas.

The American Akita authority, Mr. Rayne with his wife, presenting the trophy to a winner in the UK.

Having entered the new millennium, the world-wide Akita fancy seems unhappily divided into three factions: those who would keep the American and Japanese types separate, those who feel that each type could benefit from blending certain virtues of the other and those who wish the foreign dogs would all go away! As it was diversity of color, size and idealism that were the basis for attraction to this marvelous breed in America, some devotees merely smile as they realize that nothing has changed.