I'm not sure what you mean by "the other way round". Whatever, it is a fact that the majority of dogs in Japan cannot be mated to Akitas in the UK because they are no longer classified as the same breed. They could, however be mated to Japanese Akita Inus in this country. Which doesn't help the gene pool problem in Akitas.

The Akita Inu's are the original breed, the Akita's as we knew them until recently are what the aamericans did with them, so of couse the gene pool will be limited to those fopunder dogs they used in USA, but that is no different to most breeds, who ahve few founders or have ha periods of few numbers.

Lowchens for example are a fairly healthy breed yet they ahve very few founders.  Selection is the key and watching out for problems, which as you say with indiscriminate breeding as seen in then UK isn't happening accross the board with so many people breeding that have no knowledge of what they are doing, or in certain cases don't care and are actually proud of faults.

I'm well aware of the development of the Akita and, as you say, similar things have happened to many breeds which have left their country of origin. Not many breeds, however, have actually been split into 2 seperate breeds. Going back to ages ago in this thread, what I was saying is that just because registrations are in 4 figs. doesn't mean there is a large gene pool, the country of origin is now closed to most Akita breeders &, from what I can gather, US lines do not offer much chance of useful new blood either.

That is inevitable when you create a reed, one reason why I m not in favour of new breeds being concocted, as the gene base would have to be so large and the wastage (dogs not suitable for breeding) so great that it cannot be supported on ethical grounds.

We as custodians of breeds have to ensure that we do the best we can with the gen pool available and breed wisely.

My own breed if British would be on the endangered list, and even in Scandinavia the registrations are only in four figures as The American type Akita are here, and most breeds have an even smaller genetic base, especially the British numerically small ones.

That is why breeding in any breed should never be done haphazardly as it so often is.

American and English cocker Spaniles, the various coats in Dachshunds and Collies, Norfolk and Norwish Terriers are all examples of breeds being split into seperate breeds.

Further back you hav the case of Retrievers etc.

I have only ever seen one type of dog that I know as the Akita. What is the difference between the Akita Inu, Japanese Akita and American Akita please?

Here are some imgaes of japanese Akita Inu
http://www.jacgb.co.uk/frames%20page.htm

and the American type Akita
http://www.akita-association.org/show_results_march_2006.htm

These article spells out the split
http://www.akita-inu.com/two_akita_breeds.htm
http://www.japanese-akita.info/Pro%20split.htm

The akita-inu look much more like the shiba inu than the american akita then I'd never seen one of those before, I just thought the american akita WAS the akita. You live and learn :) To be clear: Japanese Akita and Japanese Akita-Inu are two different names for the same breed, and the American Akita is now a different breed, considerably larger and different looking, created originally from the Akita-Inu. Is that right?

That is about right the Japanese lobbied the FCI (the umbrella organisation for most of the Kennel Clubs around the World) to not accept the Americanised for of the Japanese Akita a as Japanese Akita's as they had moved too far from the breed standard as set out in Japan, the country of origin.

In the FCI countries they split the breed into Japanese Akita and Great Japanese Dog.

Here in the UK where we mainly had the American type the reed nd KC decided to drop the Japanese and call the reed Akita, and now the Japanese Type are known here as the Japanese Akita Inu.  Not sure if under FCI they add the Inu bit, though rather think they do.  Also not sure if they are still calling the Americanised form the Great Japanese Dog or if they have opted for the Akita as our KC have.

About as clear as mud, but you get the idea.  The Americans developed the breed into something the Japanese disapproved of, hence the split.

Just checked the FCI website

They now have the two breeds as Akita (for the Japanes type) standard no. 255 and American Akita (for the American type) standard No. 344

You can read the standards on this pge:
http://www.fci.be/nomenclatures_detail.asp?lang=en&file=group5

It seems -to confuse things!- the FCI now call them "Akita" and "American Akita". I know in Sweden (FCI country) it always used to be that  Japanese breeds ended with Inu -I believe it means "dog"? Eg. Akita Inu, Shiba Inu. I can't access the Swedish KC's website right now, they seem to have a problem but I know I have read in their  mag that yes it is now the Akita and the Great Japanese Dog. So weird about the FCI....... See for yourself on the FCI site
HERE.

As of January 1, 2006 the name Great Japanese Dog, has been officially changed in the FCI standard to "American Akita".   The US is now the only major country in the world that has not divided the breed into two.

Terry,

Japanese

[url= http://www.akc.org/breeds/akita/index.cfm]American[/url]

(Im with Brainless much prefer the Japanese)