Japanese and american akita
As far as I understand most countries in the world have divided akita into two different breeds but in USA and maybe some more countries they are still counted as one. Is there any plan of divide the breed in the US?
Comments
It's a very touchy issue here.
At one point there was a split in the US, but then they merged the 2. It's a constant battle between the 2 sides.
----
Do you guys know why the breed isn't divided? I've heard that if you goes to japan with an american akita they don't even call it an american akita, they say "great japanese dog". Strange that it's so hard to get along with it. But on the other hand, we are from different parts of the world with different points of view...
Honestly, they are the same breed at their core genetics. It's just two VERY different types, and that is why it's split - but if you trace back to the birth of the Akita they looked much more like AAs than JAs. It was not until Morie Sawataishi that the Akita Inu type really started to emerge.
So, we have a breed that evolved into 2 distinct types (even in Japan), and in most of the world they felt it was right to separate them into 2 breeds with their own set of standards, while in the USA the breed club felt it was more beneficial to the over all health of the breed to merge them and slowly shape the types to be one.
If you look at the Akita in America today, and where it was before, you will see the head types of the Akita are moving toward the Japanese type (look). So, it seems things are actually moving away from the Shepard look of the American Akita and more toward the Japanese look just with a huge variation in color.
Akita in America today very closely resemble the Akita from Japan in the Edo period (and before). Watching this merge is a lot like seeing history repeat, and watching the transformation of the Akita into the Akita Inu in Japan. It's kinda interesting.
Anyway, I am not really for or against the split/merge. I prefer the look and temperament of the import type (the Akita Inu) but you will never see me argue one side or another - I don't want to be caught under any of those cross-hairs.
I just wanted to give some of the background.
----
IMO - a blends or tweener seem to loose the features that make each type so neat. Out of the group I visited, few kept the tight lips, the head was not defined as much. To paint a mental picture I saw one that looked like Kuma but with loose lips, squared torso, but kept the JA smaller shoulders. Another one was a brindle with a mask.
AKC - should split into two breeds but as an outsider I just feel the temptation to blend will prevent it.
But that's just me.
The Japanese were breeding the Akita for fighting as early as 1860s. So most of the photos you see are going to reflect the mixing that was being done during that time. In my JKC book, both Mastiff and Saint Bernard are cited as being used from mixing around 1868. I am willing to bet that most early photos of the Akita were taken around 1900.
On a side note, I have heard(and read) that a small medium type dog from the north was used to help bring the breed back after World War II.
RE the vote: Akitarise - I thought it was an AKC vote but it would not be the first time I have been wrong. I will double check.
Regarding the shepardy look in the AA I think its a result of some breeders interpreting the standard differently or basically not caring. http://www.northlandakitas.com/aguide8.htm
By the way I was very impressed by the AA look in France, I love how they have tighter lips than those I've seen in NA
Speaking of Hokkaido, it appears that some Akita as well as the Matagi dogs, found their way into the Hokkaido region. (Late 1800s) I get the feeling that this is the same stock that was used when they post war Akita restoration was under way.
I have always been amazed at how fast the non-JA colors (Pinto, black mask, etc) jumped out of the JA line after all those years of being mixed.
When I get home tonight -I am going to try and scan some of those photos in as a point of reference.
One minor edit - also it is important to point out that Northland Akitas was (I think they are not breeding anymore) a tweenie breeder. The northlands website is packed full of information but like a lot of things on the interweb...it is far from Gospel. For the record, while I am drawn to the history of the Akita, I do not support the mixing of the two types. Hence my thoughts and feelings are a bit biased and so is theirs.
This kind of thinking also comes from the minds of people who placed the Shiba with the worthless dogs like Shar-peis etal...instead of the workers/hunters like the Husky.
Most dogs in that category have historically had jobs. Not sure why the poodle is in there, or the Schipperke, either, but I know I don't consider them "worthless"..
At any rate, the AKC doesn't separate Japanese Akita from American Akita anyway.. most of the other National kennel club of every other country do, though, including the 90+ countries that are part of the FCI.
Yes, non-sporting competitions.
The JP Akita club in my area all find the American Akita style to be very undesirable and actually feel it is not the same dog whatsoever.
Its like saying the Tosa is a Shikoku to them. Yeah, they have Shikoku in them...but damned if they're anything like them.
I hope never to see a division of American vs Japanese type in Shiba.
http://akitainu-hozonkai.com/award/award_all.html
To be honest I dont consider the japanese akita to be the true akita any more then the american akita.
To me its the same breed just one being refined more then the other. It annoys the hell out of me when i hear people say the AA is a mutt when the Akita breed itself was impure to begin with. i agree with Jack Burton, it is time that the ACA split the akita. Both akita's deserve the chance to be recognized in the US without having to compete against each other in the ring.
However I really don't think that they are the same breed. I often go for walks with a friend of mine who has a stunning, very well bred American Akita who I am very fond of, if you look at my Japanese next to her American, they look completely different, they act completely different, they are no more similar to me than an Akita is from a Shiba, they look the alike, but so do Huskys and Malamutes, Beagles and Hamiltonstovare etc.
We had someone stop us recently and said, "Oh, what a gorgeous Akita!" to my friend, then turned to me and said, "And what is this one, a Husky?". Someone who could recognize an Akita didn't recognize my dogs.
I'm not interested in debating the history of the breed, or which is the true Akita (I think they both are!), I just know what I see, I just look at my Japanese and friends Americans and it's as clear as black and white to me that they are not the same breed. Their temperaments are different, their shape, heads, ears, eyes, size, colours are different, I really find it quite strange that anyone still thinks they are one breed, I see more differences between them than similarities!
The way I see the history argument, if you go back far enough in time all dogs breeds are just one breed! New breeds are being developed all the time, they evolve. If we are not allowing them to be two breeds just because they share some history we may as well say they are all just Wolves because all dogs share some history if you go back far enough.
>> I couldn't agree more with this statement. Look back at the old photos, or even read the "Dog Man" book, the breed didn't look like the Akita Inu of today nor did it look like the AA. The overdone, unhealthy, couch potato that is the "Akita Inu" of today couldn't be further from the original working Akita. The AA is just as far removed as the JA is to the original "rustic" working dogs.
I have seen a lot of Akita Inu, and some have been impressive dogs, but none of them, to me (IMHO), can be compared to the original rustic Akita. The original dogs where tough, strong, working dogs - they hunted bear and fought each other. They were so impressive, so powerful of a fighting opponent, that the people of Kochi created the Tosa Inu just so they could have a dog that could stand up to the Akita Inu! The Tosa Inu! I mean, that is pound-for-pound one of the most powerful dog breeds on the planet, and it's very existence is due to the impressive power and strength that was the Akita.
Look at your Akita Inu or American Akita, and ask yourself if you think that dog lives up to the Akita reputation. Do you? (really I'm asking)
I ask becuse this topic - the split - it comes up a lot, it has come up on this forum a lot. The topic always seems so silly to me because it always goes back to an argument of which breed was most like the original Akita, and the truth is, neither is like the original Akita. They are both refined and far removed from the original Akita.
----
That is something I have actually been thinking about lately. I also have talked to a few breeders recently about how the functionality of the Japanese Akita is getting less and less as they're bred for show which is such a shame, honestly I can't imagine any of my dogs having the strength, courage or power that we have all read about. I don't think the Japanese Akita of today lives up to the Akita's reputation, mine certianly don't! I actually think the American Akita lives up to it a little bit more than the Japanese does, but I completely agree that neither are all that much like the old Akita!