the differences in dogs?

Everything about Tamaskan Dogs that does not fit within the other topics in this section.
Post Reply
User avatar
Dozer
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:28 pm
Location: weijerswold

the differences in dogs?

Post by Dozer » Sat Nov 26, 2011 10:43 am

ok I just going to be plain out.
I am also on the other forum and asked the question also there.
I read a lot of things and have in maybe a weird way to find what way is best for me.

Can anyone without pointing fingers or rumble on on the human things between the two organisations
tel me what the differences are between a Tamaskan dog or a Aatu Tamaskan?

User avatar
Booma
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1402
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 8:59 am
Location: Perth, Australia
Contact:

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Booma » Sat Nov 26, 2011 10:55 am

The aatu people were originally TDR breeders bit got kicked out.
I think the aatu have different breed standards to the original Tam, but other people who have been here longer than me can answer better.
Image Image

Rahne

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Rahne » Sat Nov 26, 2011 11:06 am

I don't think they were kicked out but left on there own.. They do have different breed standards but as of now all of their breeding dogs are TDR Tamaskan so no difference yet. What the differences will be in the future, who knows?

They started the Aatu with three TDR registered breeders and now after 2 years only one of them is left. There group is very small and they only have a handfull of breeding dogs at the moment.

User avatar
Booma
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1402
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 8:59 am
Location: Perth, Australia
Contact:

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Booma » Sat Nov 26, 2011 11:34 am

Oh yeh I think i remember seeing that they were going to be kicke out but left before it happened.
Image Image

User avatar
Dozer
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:28 pm
Location: weijerswold

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Dozer » Sat Nov 26, 2011 3:46 pm

Like I just said I just want to know without the human stuff.

So thanks for your answer Rahne.
As I understand from you their standard is different?

Rahne

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Rahne » Sat Nov 26, 2011 4:03 pm

Dozer wrote:Like I just said I just want to know without the human stuff.

So thanks for your answer Rahne.
As I understand from you their standard is different?
Yes their breed standard is different, although I don't know the exact differences. They probably have different breeding policies, like the back-to-back matings. But breeding policies can also differ between breeders themselfs (breeding age, health testing, repeated litters etc.) so if you are interested in that you should contact breeders directly.

User avatar
Sylvaen
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 5203
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 3:53 pm
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Contact:

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Sylvaen » Sun Nov 27, 2011 7:13 pm

The dogs are more-or-less the same, the difference is that the bloodlines they are using wouldn't necessarily be used by TDR breeders or 2 particular bloodlines wouldn't be crossed (due to potential health issues). Another example is the situation whereby a piebald puppy was produced from, allegedly, TDR bloodlines; with that result from the first litter, TDR breeders would not have repeated that exact same mating (knowing the likelihood of producing yet more piebald puppies from that combination) since those puppies don't conform to the breed standard. However, that Aatu breeder, who is now breeding independently, repeated that same mating (back-to-back litters) several times... so there are now quite a few piebald 'Aatu's in existence, and those bloodlines (siblings / parents / descendants / etc) also carry those genes so it is likely that the Aatu bloodlines will produce more piebald puppies in the future. It's not to say that there isn't a small chance of it popping up in TDR bloodlines (if indeed that puppy was born to TDR parents) but I think the risk is much smaller because the TDR breeders would be careful not to cross those lines in the first place (opting for a different genetic combination instead if possible)... the same goes for breeding from bloodlines that are known to carry epilepsy or DM. Aside from that, as Rahne said, the dogs are (genetically) more or less the same (from the same original foundation dogs) but the breeding polices are different (back-to-back matings from bloodlines with known health issues, etc). However, in the future, they will be adding in new out-crosses (including the 'Alaskan Noble Companion Dog') so it is likely that the Aatu's will soon start to look quite different.
Image
The future lies before you, like a path of pure white snow...
Be careful how you tread it, for every step will show.

User avatar
Dozer
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:28 pm
Location: weijerswold

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Dozer » Mon Nov 28, 2011 9:07 am

Thanks for your answer Sylvaen.
And about the carriers of DM. Many breeds also wolfdog breeds have that problem. As long as they do not set a carrier on a carrier it would not be smart if you have a small gene-pool to rule them all out. But that is just my opinion.
In case of the epilepsy I do think you have to rule those lines out because you can not test that yet. I know they are full in work with a DNA test but until than I would rule them out. But than I would rule that whole line out.
I know some breeds are in such a place they can not even do that because than that breed will die out if they may not trow their pedigree book open.

Rahne

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Rahne » Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:18 am

Dozer wrote:Thanks for your answer Sylvaen.
And about the carriers of DM. Many breeds also wolfdog breeds have that problem. As long as they do not set a carrier on a carrier it would not be smart if you have a small gene-pool to rule them all out. But that is just my opinion.
Can't speak for the TBA but the TDR doesn't rule out any dogs, instead every breeding dog is encouraged to be tested and every mating must exist out of atleast one clear dog (so no at risk dogs will be born).
In case of the epilepsy I do think you have to rule those lines out because you can not test that yet. I know they are full in work with a DNA test but until than I would rule them out. But than I would rule that whole line out.
I know some breeds are in such a place they can not even do that because than that breed will die out if they may not trow their pedigree book open.
Dogs who have produced atleast one pup that suffers from epilepsy will be ruled out aswell as the dog that suffers from it ofcourse. Other dogs from that line might still be used, but with caution. Some lines, that might both carry epilepsy, will not be crossed. I would personally also opt for dogs that have a risk of developing epilepsy to not breed them before the age of 3/4.

User avatar
martinbernstein
Tamific (Novice)
Tamific (Novice)
Posts: 245
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 4:14 am
Location: Catskill Mountains

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by martinbernstein » Mon Nov 28, 2011 7:26 pm

Rahne wrote:I don't think they were kicked out but left on there own.. They do have different breed standards but as of now all of their breeding dogs are TDR Tamaskan so no difference yet.
Correct. There are different breed standards, but not very different. The two main differences, conformation-wise, are size and fur length. The Aatu will be slightly larger than the average Tamaskan, and the fur will be longer on average. But the goal is the same- to create a very wolfy-looking dog without the behavioral and training issues associated with wolfdog breeds and hybrids.

Bringing in new blood from breeds such as Alaskan Noble Companion Dogs will change the look in ways that are predictable in many ways. Size, bone structure and coat length, pattern and color can be predicted with some measure of accuracy in such outcorsses, particularly in the F2 and subsequesnt generations. But one cannot predict everything of course.
Rahne wrote:They started the Aatu with three TDR registered breeders and now after 2 years only one of them is left. There group is very small and they only have a handfull of breeding dogs at the moment.
Actually this many not be the case anymore. More info to follow.

User avatar
Blustag
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 2971
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 7:53 am
Location: UK

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Blustag » Tue Nov 29, 2011 10:47 am

martinbernstein wrote:Correct. There are different breed standards, but not very different. The two main differences, conformation-wise, are size and fur length. The Aatu will be slightly larger than the average Tamaskan, and the fur will be longer on average.
Can you tell me how they are going to achieve this? What height are you
referring to as being 'larger' ? There are Tamaskan out there and here with
me that are up to 30" to the shoulder and above. How tall do they want them as this is very tall, and much taller than an average German Shepherd for instance? How will they increase coat length? I am wondering because our Tamaskan are tall already and coat length depends a lot on climate. The same
can be said for my Alaskan Malamute. Whist in Finland they had HUGE thick coats but here in UK now they are average.

I think with what they are anticipating putting into the Aatu it will result
in a mixture of colours and masking which will make them look very different to
our Tamaskan and they will lose the wolf looks. This is what happened with
the Utonagan and NI. At least with the Tamaskan the markings are very consistent and will stay that way, so there will be a lot of differences between
the Aatu and the Tamaskan which is another reason why then should DROP the name Tamaskan as that is NOT what they are....

User avatar
martinbernstein
Tamific (Novice)
Tamific (Novice)
Posts: 245
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 4:14 am
Location: Catskill Mountains

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by martinbernstein » Tue Nov 29, 2011 11:22 am

Blustag wrote: Can you tell me how they are going to achieve this? What height are you
referring to as being 'larger' ? There are Tamaskan out there and here with
me that are up to 30" to the shoulder and above. How tall do they want them as this is very tall, and much taller than an average German Shepherd for instance? How will they increase coat length?
I believe the goal is to stabilize the larger end of the size scale and produce a consistently large dog. There is, in both TBA registered and TDR registered dogs, a large range of sizes and weights. All breeds allow for a good amount of size variation, but I think that the Aatu's size range can be moved up a little bit into the higher range, and shrunk. I don't know the details on how this is to be achieved, but I wonder if the good old fashioned formula of mating two large dogs and repeating as necessary won't suffice.

As for coat length, this is partly a matter of simple genetics and of course of environment. I don't think much weight will be placed on coat length, though I admit I have not familiarized myself with the details of the desired coat length standard.
Blustag wrote:I think with what they are anticipating putting into the Aatu it will result in a mixture of colours and masking which will make them look very different to our Tamaskan and they will lose the wolf looks.
Maybe. I'm hoping you're wrong. I don't rule out the possibility that we'll see some pretty wacky-looking dogs. But I think that the prospects are good for continuing and perhaps even further improving the wolf look. What Aatu additions in particular do you expect will change the look so drastically?
Blustag wrote:... the[y] should DROP the name Tamaskan as that is NOT what they are....
I don't completely disagree TBH.

User avatar
TerriHolt
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 3274
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:56 am
Location: UK, East Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by TerriHolt » Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:33 pm

martinbernstein wrote:What Aatu additions in particular do you expect will change the look so drastically?
i'm kinda envisioning the mask less mal x look... and i don't think it would be healthy for the dogs to make them tallker. sam is 11 month old end of nov and he is close to 30". but maybe Aatu's are smaller dogs... idk...
Image

There’s a battle between two wolves inside us all.
One is Evil. It’s anger, jealousy, greed, resentment, inferiority, lies and ego.
The other is Good. It’s joy, peace, love, hope, humility, kindness and truth.

The wolf that wins? The one you feed!

~ Cherokee Proverb

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity... I'm not sure about the former.

~ Albert Einstein

User avatar
Dozer
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:28 pm
Location: weijerswold

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Dozer » Tue Nov 29, 2011 4:29 pm

Blustag wrote: At least with the Tamaskan the markings are very consistent and will stay that way, so there will be a lot of differences between
the Aatu and the Tamaskan which is another reason why then should DROP the name Tamaskan as that is NOT what they are....
I can see your point here but also the point of keeping the name
( i do not choose sides here I just tell how I see it and that I can understand both sides)
Their are many different breeds that carry the same name because of foundation dogs that where used like for inkstands the different Shepherd breeds.
Because they us Tamaskans as foundation dogs I can see the point of calling them Aatu Tamaskan. I also can see the point of the Tamaskan people not liking that because it would be in a while a totally different breed.
But if it was just me I would be honored if someone used the name of a breed I helped starting.
So just calling of on things because of a name i find that a bit foolish, but than again I see that every day and just hope people learned about wheels that are already exist. But I know I am/was naive in that( not really I know this is in every breed the case but I do hope every time again people are getting wiser, but knowing that is false hope)

User avatar
Blustag
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 2971
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 7:53 am
Location: UK

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Blustag » Tue Nov 29, 2011 4:35 pm

How can we be 'honoured' when they use the name purely to sell their puppies.
If they called them a different name that no one knew do you think they would sell then??? I dont like people who ride on other people's coat tails for their
own gain. RPK is another example of someone using our breed's name AND our breeder' names too with false websites. No I am NOT honoured in the least just disgusted.

User avatar
TerriHolt
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 3274
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:56 am
Location: UK, East Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by TerriHolt » Tue Nov 29, 2011 4:40 pm

Dozer wrote:But if it was just me I would be honored if someone used the name of a breed I helped starting.
well, for 1, lynn didn't just help starting and 2. you can't constantly insult, belittle and spread lies about the founder of the breed and the rest of the breeders and still use the name... if they are that interested in the name because it's the right thing for them, why spread lies?

and i'm pretty sure the different variations of the sheps came well after they were established as a breed... maybe not reg but had a strong foot hold.

i would challenge the Aatu, that if they are so sure of the dogs they breed, to give them their own name. not follow in the shadow of someone else because they don't deserve that. just call them Aatu's so there will be Aatu and Tamaskan's.
Image

There’s a battle between two wolves inside us all.
One is Evil. It’s anger, jealousy, greed, resentment, inferiority, lies and ego.
The other is Good. It’s joy, peace, love, hope, humility, kindness and truth.

The wolf that wins? The one you feed!

~ Cherokee Proverb

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity... I'm not sure about the former.

~ Albert Einstein

User avatar
Dozer
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:28 pm
Location: weijerswold

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Dozer » Tue Nov 29, 2011 9:21 pm

Like I said I see both sides
I understand your point of few but I can't help that this is my opinion. ;)
Because sorry to say I do not judge anyone on what I read or hear because I know how it goes so very well but I also learned in the last 30 years that where there is smoke there is fire.......
So yes this means on both sides in my eyes.
But if you love a breed you can see beyond that and that is what I am doing.
I do not care one bit about all those human things I just seeking plain information about the breed that is all.
And yes sometimes share my own meaning on things but that is just my own.

User avatar
Tiantai
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 2558
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 10:16 pm
Location: Canada (North York, Ontario)

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Tiantai » Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:34 am

Alright, I'll explain the differences that I've notice *without the human opinions or the pointing of finger stuff* as you requested.

Standard TDR Tamaskans have a shorter range of appearances. The Tamaskan's coat colour is limited to either wolfish black, lupine grey, or wolf red. The Aatu are known to have at least one pied-bald Tamaskan. I'm not sure if there are others but I've only seen one with that colour so far. There is also a trace of Alaskan Noble Companion Dog traits in them so certain light-coloured coat dogs such as sable-colours do exist in some of the dogs. Also, TDR Tamaskans have their extra dew paws removed should a pup be born with one while I've seen dew paws left intact in some Aatu dogs. That's pretty much all I've seen so far.
Image

User avatar
martinbernstein
Tamific (Novice)
Tamific (Novice)
Posts: 245
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 4:14 am
Location: Catskill Mountains

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by martinbernstein » Mon Dec 19, 2011 3:59 am

fangjingtuanlucas wrote:Alright, I'll explain the differences that I've notice *without the human opinions or the pointing of finger stuff* as you requested.

Standard TDR Tamaskans have a shorter range of appearances. The Tamaskan's coat colour is limited to either wolfish black, lupine grey, or wolf red. The Aatu are known to have at least one pied-bald Tamaskan. I'm not sure if there are others but I've only seen one with that colour so far. There is also a trace of Alaskan Noble Companion Dog traits in them so certain light-coloured coat dogs such as sable-colours do exist in some of the dogs. Also, TDR Tamaskans have their extra dew paws removed should a pup be born with one while I've seen dew paws left intact in some Aatu dogs. That's pretty much all I've seen so far.
Interesting observations Lucas. How many TDR tams have you met? And how many Aatus? And the Aatus with traces of ANCDs. these supposedly "light-colored" and "sable-colored" dogs, where have you seen them? I ask simply because there are no Aatus with ANCD blood in them as of yet. The pied-bald you speak of is not registered with the TBA, and the breeder no longer operates as a TBA member.

And regarding dewclaws; I got my Aatu with her dewclaws removed. Her breeder (TBA) practices dewclaw removal.

Lucas, I'm sure you mean well, and it is clear you really like tamaskans. But some of your "explanations" are not grounded in facts. I've said this in other threads you've written in (though I've gotten no response from you), if you're going to write about things as if you know what you're talking about, either back your claims up with proof or acknowledge that your information may be incorrect. In this case your information is incorrect.

User avatar
Dozer
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:28 pm
Location: weijerswold

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Dozer » Mon Dec 19, 2011 7:10 am

@fangjingtuanlucas
I also know of the pied-bald pup and also know that is also seen as a fold by the TBA. But in every breed sometimes you do have pups that doesn't fit the standard that doesn't make them any less as dogs.
And I understand now from martinbernstein that the breeder of the pup is no longer with the TBA but I think that has nothing to do with just 1 pup.
Also they are thinking of using Alaskan Noble Companion Dog but didn't used them yet so if you see traits of the ANCD in them .........at this moment they only used TDR tamaskans.
And as far as I know the TDR didn't used any ANCD.
And as for the dew-clawing I didn't see any photo of an Aatu that still has them so can you show me?

User avatar
Tiantai
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 2558
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 10:16 pm
Location: Canada (North York, Ontario)

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Tiantai » Tue Dec 20, 2011 1:27 am

I was talking about this one pup and I did say I've only sen ONE pup with that colour. And dozer I've already brought up that topic in the breed's standard
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Image

User avatar
TerriHolt
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 3274
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:56 am
Location: UK, East Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by TerriHolt » Tue Dec 20, 2011 1:52 am

i think we already knew about this particular pup didn't we and if it's only been the one, do we really need to keep mentioning it? and if the breeder no longer breeds i really don't get the point... how you can see ANCD i have no idea as i'm sure martin would surely know if they been used and he says not... until there is solid proof, no one can state other wise...

and i think proof was wanted for the dew claw 'statement' not the pied-bald pup because, as stated, most already know about that...
Dozer wrote:And as for the dew-clawing I didn't see any photo of an Aatu that still has them so can you show me?
sticking to facts and been able to back up the facts is what this group prides it's self on, lets keep it that way shall we? not take the same route as we all know who and plaster false statements all over... that would make us no better than him in new people's eyes ;)
Image

There’s a battle between two wolves inside us all.
One is Evil. It’s anger, jealousy, greed, resentment, inferiority, lies and ego.
The other is Good. It’s joy, peace, love, hope, humility, kindness and truth.

The wolf that wins? The one you feed!

~ Cherokee Proverb

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity... I'm not sure about the former.

~ Albert Einstein

User avatar
Tiantai
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 2558
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 10:16 pm
Location: Canada (North York, Ontario)

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Tiantai » Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:11 am

I was talking about these ANCD which Takari admit that they are outcrosses

http://www.takari-tamaskans.com/id89.html

As for the dew claw, I was referring to this photo:

http://www.buckhorntamaskan.com/apps/ph ... =138174142

Although I don't know if it's been removed yet since I admit that I haven't been following them.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Image

User avatar
Booma
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1402
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 8:59 am
Location: Perth, Australia
Contact:

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Booma » Tue Dec 20, 2011 3:59 am

Isn't it only rear dew claws that have to be removed?

I can only see that she is planning to cross, not that she(/he) has
Image Image

User avatar
Valravn
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1051
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 4:22 pm
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Valravn » Tue Dec 20, 2011 4:40 am

Kyliedelonge wrote:Isn't it only rear dew claws that have to be removed?
Kyliedelonge wrote:I can only see that she is planning to cross, not that she(/he) has
Correct on both.

User avatar
martinbernstein
Tamific (Novice)
Tamific (Novice)
Posts: 245
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 4:14 am
Location: Catskill Mountains

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by martinbernstein » Tue Dec 20, 2011 6:22 am

First off, the tam pictured there is Juneau and he was purchased from Right Puppy, not from an Aatu breeder. (His owner, Tricia, realized too late all the egregious practices of RPK. She is now a TBA member and I believe Juneau is registered with the TBA.) Another thing about dewclaw removal is that many vets will tell you its not necessary. I personally believe it is in the best interest of the dog to have them removed, but medically speaking it is not an absolute must.
fangjingtuanlucas wrote:I was talking about these ANCD which Takari admit that they are outcrosses
1.Takari is no longer a TBA breeder. Any future litters of hers will not be registered with the TBA and are thus not Aatu, though she has indicated that she will continue to label her pups as such.
2. She has not yet produced any outcrosses with her ANCD pup (to my knowledge)
3. As for the idea of "admitting"; there is nothing to admit. It is a well-known and well-publicized fact that the TBA wishes to bring in new blood, possibly from ANCDs (though not from Takari's).

Facts are important Lucas.

User avatar
Sylvaen
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 5203
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 3:53 pm
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Contact:

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Sylvaen » Tue Dec 20, 2011 10:07 am

TerriHolt wrote:i think we already knew about this particular pup didn't we and if it's only been the one, do we really need to keep mentioning it? and if the breeder no longer breeds i really don't get the point...
actually she produced at least 2 piebald puppies (from the same parents, but different litters - 6 months apart).
fangjingtuanlucas wrote:As for the dew claw, I was referring to this photo:

http://www.buckhorntamaskan.com/apps/ph ... =138174142

Although I don't know if it's been removed yet since I admit that I haven't been following them.
WHERE are the REAR dewclaws in this photo??
I can only see the front ones, which are totally normal and should NOT be removed!!
Kyliedelonge wrote:Isn't it only rear dew claws that have to be removed?
YES! The front ones should never be taken off, unless it is absolutely necessary (if they rip off in an accident, etc)... the rear ones are removed when the pups are 3-7 days old (at 3 days old it can be done at home without local anesthetic but I prefer to have it done by a qualified vet, with local anesthetic, at 7 days old as I simply cannot do it myself at home).
martinbernstein wrote:Another thing about dewclaw removal is that many vets will tell you its not necessary. I personally believe it is in the best interest of the dog to have them removed, but medically speaking it is not an absolute must.
I hope you are only referring to the rear dewclaws - the front ones serve a vital purpose (dogs use them to help grip when they are gnawing on bones, etc - much like thumbs) and the front ones should not be removed unless it is absolutely necessary (as a result of an accident or a birth defect, etc). The rear ones don't serve a purpose and only a few pups per litter will inherit these rear ones so for consistency and safety (since the rear ones are more likely to snag and rip off while the dog is running / playing) these rear dewclaws are removed shortly after birth. It's a simple procedure when the pups are very young (either with or without local anesthetic) but if you wait until adulthood then it has to be done under general anesthetic and, as a result, it is a much more risky procedure as all the nerves / blood vessels are fully developed (so surgery can be quite tricky and complicated).
martinbernstein wrote:Facts are important Lucas.
I couldn't agree more. It is VERY important to KNOW what you are talking about because if you start posting "facts" in public and it turns out that those "facts" are either totally false or full of misinformation (especially if you type with authority, as if you know everything) then it reflects badly on us all, and also lowers the tone of the forum - inciting drama and politics. There is no need for a "holier than thou" attitude, we are all here to learn and have fun... not point fingers at others to make ourselves look good. :roll:
Image
The future lies before you, like a path of pure white snow...
Be careful how you tread it, for every step will show.

User avatar
TerriHolt
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 3274
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:56 am
Location: UK, East Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by TerriHolt » Tue Dec 20, 2011 10:54 am

Sylvaen wrote:
TerriHolt wrote:i think we already knew about this particular pup didn't we and if it's only been the one, do we really need to keep mentioning it? and if the breeder no longer breeds i really don't get the point...
actually she produced at least 2 piebald puppies (from the same parents, but different litters - 6 months apart).
wow, and lucas only posted the ONE picture :lol: ... thanks for that, i didn't know it was 2. still no longer a breeder with them tho... right?
Image

There’s a battle between two wolves inside us all.
One is Evil. It’s anger, jealousy, greed, resentment, inferiority, lies and ego.
The other is Good. It’s joy, peace, love, hope, humility, kindness and truth.

The wolf that wins? The one you feed!

~ Cherokee Proverb

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity... I'm not sure about the former.

~ Albert Einstein

User avatar
Katlin
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 2739
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 12:48 am
Location: Calgary, AB
Contact:

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Katlin » Tue Dec 20, 2011 11:16 am

TerriHolt wrote:
Sylvaen wrote:
TerriHolt wrote:i think we already knew about this particular pup didn't we and if it's only been the one, do we really need to keep mentioning it? and if the breeder no longer breeds i really don't get the point...
actually she produced at least 2 piebald puppies (from the same parents, but different litters - 6 months apart).
wow, and lucas only posted the ONE picture :lol: ... thanks for that, i didn't know it was 2. still no longer a breeder with them tho... right?
Yep, so why it was mentioned at all is beyond me ;)
martinbernstein wrote:
Facts are important Lucas.
Not only that but relevant facts are important. I definitely agree with you here Martin.
Polarose Tamaskan
Polardog Outfitters
Owner of Sierra Kaweah RN RI TDI TRN TTDN CRN-MCL @ Polarose

User avatar
Dozer
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:28 pm
Location: weijerswold

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Dozer » Tue Dec 20, 2011 1:16 pm

So as for the pied-bald pups I said what I tought and still stand by that.
And yes there is talk about using an ANCD but hasn't been used yet. So in my opinion because they are talking about it and when they do all health test necessary in my eye no problem there.....
Also as far as I know Juneau is neutered so he is maybe registrated but they are not going to use him(or there must be a miracle to make this possible :mrgreen: )
And no rear dew claws by the TBA.(sorry but I did find some on photo's from TDR Tamaskans but it can be that they are old ones)

So to come back at the answer of my own question : At this moment there are no differences between the Aatu and the Tamaskan but will be in the future because of the out-crosses the TBA is planning to use.
Am I correct?

User avatar
HiTenshi16
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 4802
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 7:11 pm
Location: Princeton, TX US
Contact:

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by HiTenshi16 » Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:14 pm

Dozer wrote:At this moment there are no differences between the Aatu and the Tamaskan but will be in the future because of the out-crosses the TBA is planning to use.
Am I correct?
This is correct :)
Image

User avatar
Dozer
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:28 pm
Location: weijerswold

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Dozer » Tue Dec 20, 2011 4:11 pm

Thanks HiTenshi16

User avatar
martinbernstein
Tamific (Novice)
Tamific (Novice)
Posts: 245
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 4:14 am
Location: Catskill Mountains

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by martinbernstein » Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:40 pm

TerriHolt wrote:wow, and lucas only posted the ONE picture :lol: ... thanks for that, i didn't know it was 2. still no longer a breeder with them tho... right?
Right. Takari, the one who produced the pied, is no longer a TBA breeder. She wishes to pursue her own breeding program, and her goals (I don't know exactly what they are) are not in line with the TBA's goals.
Dozer wrote:Also as far as I know Juneau is neutered so he is maybe registrated but they are not going to use him(or there must be a miracle to make this possible :mrgreen: )
Juneau is indeed neutered. Tricia discovered that he, like quite a few other RPK dogs, suffers from a form of epilepsy (can't remember which type). Naturally he will not make a suitable breeder.

User avatar
Blustag
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 2971
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 7:53 am
Location: UK

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Blustag » Wed Dec 21, 2011 2:30 pm

Dozer wrote:no rear dew claws by the TBA.(sorry but I did find some on photo's from TDR Tamaskans but it can be that they are old ones)
Are you saying here that you have seen photos of TDR registered Tamaskan
with hind dew claws? As you are talking in the 'plural' sense? I do not know
of any registered Tamaskan with hind dew claws. It is on our Breeder's
contracts that all rear dew claws are removed at 3 days old,

User avatar
Dozer
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:28 pm
Location: weijerswold

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Dozer » Wed Dec 21, 2011 10:35 pm

I indeed see it on photos of TDR registered Tamaskans but like I also said it could be old photo's.
I have seen them here: http://www.tamaskan-dog.com/Galleries/P ... allery.htm
the right row the third and fourth dog and the left row the seventh.There are no names of the dogs here so that is why I give numbers
and here: http://www.tamaskandogshowingclub.com/results2010.html
Under Tamaskan Dog of the Year 2010 number 2: Pocahontas vom Muensterland at Blustag

User avatar
Valravn
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1051
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 4:22 pm
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Valravn » Thu Dec 22, 2011 1:45 am

A few dogs from the first Muensterland litter had hind dew claws that were not removed when they were puppies. They were removed later though.

User avatar
sky
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 11:56 pm
Location: NC USA

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by sky » Thu Dec 22, 2011 2:11 am

Haha... I see pics of my boys. Yes both Rook and Juneau have front dew claws. Never had any rear. And I agree with Debby.... fronts should not be removed unless there had been an injury.

Juneau was neutered after confirming idiopathic epilepsy at 10 mo. old. He has an honorary Aatu registration cause he's such a special boy!

User avatar
Dozer
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:28 pm
Location: weijerswold

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Dozer » Thu Dec 22, 2011 9:20 am

Valravn wrote:A few dogs from the first Muensterland litter had hind dew claws that were not removed when they were puppies. They were removed later though.
ok so they are old photo's.
But why where they removed than because these dogs seems to me a bit older and so it had to be done with surgery and more risky.
I would understand that if for ever what reason it didn't happened by birth that you will say as a organisation that you will allow them than

Rahne

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Rahne » Thu Dec 22, 2011 10:01 am

Dozer wrote:
Valravn wrote:A few dogs from the first Muensterland litter had hind dew claws that were not removed when they were puppies. They were removed later though.
ok so they are old photo's.
But why where they removed than because these dogs seems to me a bit older and so it had to be done with surgery and more risky.
I would understand that if for ever what reason it didn't happened by birth that you will say as a organisation that you will allow them than
Yes all these dogs that you've seen on the photos were from the Muensterland litter, I think the breeders didn't think about removing them at the time and that it is a requirement by the TDR.

I'm not sure but I thought they were removed later when the dogs went in for doing hip x-rays so they were under anesthetic. There is the risk of the dogs rupturing them later (that's why they are removed in the first place) and they would have to go under anesthetic again then (which is always risky) to have them removed.

The owners made this decision for themselfs to have them removed later, not the organisation ;)

User avatar
Blustag
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 2971
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 7:53 am
Location: UK

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Blustag » Thu Dec 22, 2011 1:15 pm

These pups should have had their claws removed at 3 days old but they wernt done. I had my pup done (Pocohontas) when she had her hips done so she
didnt unnessessarily have two anesthetics. Once they were collected as puppies it was too late so we waited for the right opportunity. It ended
up costing me a fortune on top of the xray so I wasnt best pleased.

User avatar
Dozer
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:28 pm
Location: weijerswold

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Dozer » Thu Dec 22, 2011 1:41 pm

Well to be honest I would really understand if there where owners who didn't let them removed.
But I can also understand that if it is a preferment of the breed that they do.
I would not know what I would have done myself.

User avatar
Blustag
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 2971
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 7:53 am
Location: UK

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Blustag » Thu Dec 22, 2011 1:44 pm

Dozer wrote:Well to be honest I would really understand if there where owners who didn't let them removed.
But I can also understand that if it is a preferment of the breed that they do.
I would not know what I would have done myself.
If you had ever seen a dog with torn dewclaws I think you would understand
more why we have them done at 3 days old. A torn dewclaw can rip right up the leg and not only is it extremely painful for the dog but it leaves a very nasty scar too. It would also put the poor dog through having an unnessessary operation/stress to repair the damage.

User avatar
Katlin
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 2739
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 12:48 am
Location: Calgary, AB
Contact:

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Katlin » Fri Dec 23, 2011 5:08 pm

Blustag wrote:
Dozer wrote:Well to be honest I would really understand if there where owners who didn't let them removed.
But I can also understand that if it is a preferment of the breed that they do.
I would not know what I would have done myself.
If you had ever seen a dog with torn dewclaws I think you would understand
more why we have them done at 3 days old. A torn dewclaw can rip right up the leg and not only is it extremely painful for the dog but it leaves a very nasty scar too. It would also put the poor dog through having an unnessessary operation/stress to repair the damage.
This is very true. I've seen it twice and the first time we had to give the dog a blood transfusion because it lost SO much! I will always remove the rear dewclaws. Front ones I don't really mind but dogs are less prone to getting them ripped off.
Polarose Tamaskan
Polardog Outfitters
Owner of Sierra Kaweah RN RI TDI TRN TTDN CRN-MCL @ Polarose

User avatar
Dozer
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Tamthusiastic (Newbie)
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:28 pm
Location: weijerswold

Re: the differences in dogs?

Post by Dozer » Fri Dec 23, 2011 6:59 pm

Blustag wrote:
Dozer wrote:Well to be honest I would really understand if there where owners who didn't let them removed.
But I can also understand that if it is a preferment of the breed that they do.
I would not know what I would have done myself.
If you had ever seen a dog with torn dewclaws I think you would understand
more why we have them done at 3 days old. A torn dewclaw can rip right up the leg and not only is it extremely painful for the dog but it leaves a very nasty scar too. It would also put the poor dog through having an unnessessary operation/stress to repair the damage.
I can understand that if you ever saw it you feel that way. I myself have 35 years dogs and never saw it so that is maybe why I think a bit easier on that.

Post Reply