Who do you consider to be some of the greatest Sires of the last Century?

I'm sure the producer statistics are out there and not too hard to find, but they don't interest me very much because some animals are used so much more than others and it's usually only the positive results (number of champion get) that people use to rate sires.

I see breeding quality and success as being about families: so there's the family that came out of the East that went from Ch. Wonalancet's Baldy of Alyeska through Izok of Gap Mountain, Mulpus Brook's the Roadmaster, Ch. Monadnock's Pando, Ch. Monadnock's Akela, and Ch. Marlytuk's Red Sun of Kiska; and then there's the Mid-Western line that came down through Ch. Kenai Kittee of Beauchien, Ch. Frosty Aire's Beauchien, Ch. Frosty Aire's Beau-Tuk Balto, Ch. Frosty Aire's Banner Boy,CD and on down into the Innisfree family that later included Ch. Innisfree's Sierra Cinnar; and then there are the dogs that evolved out of the West from a mix of Monadnock and Norris dogs like Ch. Dichoda's Yukon Red.

Most of my books go into greater depth and detail about these overlapping strains, but individual statistics don't really mean much to me because they are so much a matter of coincidence. Of course Ch. Monadnock's Pando would have to be the hands-down winner for proportional influence: At his last show, the 1966 Specialty in Philadelphia at age 14 where he got a standing ovation, someone realized that of the 103 entries, 100 were his direct descendents.

I am an International Breeder and I have bought several dogs from the United States. Without mentioning the breeders' names, each breeder I have bought from sent me dogs with big faults or health issues and they will not replace them. How do I prevent that from happening again? I know that the United States has the best dogs but what do I have to do to get one? I am willing to pay money but I do not want another bad dog. The first one said they would charge me if I wanted another one and it had cataracts. The second from another breeder had a bad front and rear. And the third dog had seizures. I couldn't even get them on the phone or return my emails. All were different breeders.

I think what you describe is shameful but probably typical, which is why I've always said "Your survival in dogs depends on your ability to read human character." I personally don't sell dogs through the mail and wouldn't advise people to buy them that way. I prefer to do business like an Indian - eye-to-eye, honor to honor.

What do you think of using the tandem method for breeding?

I had to google "tandem breeding," which is defined as breeding for one characteristic at a time, so actually I don't think anything about it, having never heard of it. Frankly, I don't see how it would be relevant to dog breeding, but maybe I'm not understanding what you mean.

I have a bitch I would like to special. I have been told that she should have a litter prior to campaigning her so she is proven worthy. Is that true? In the past, I have seen many bitches specialed without having a litter prior to their campaign so I guess my question is...is that necessary? And have you found that vitamins have been proven to combating stress on the dog that is being specialed?

It depends on what you want. I believe it's best to breed a bitch before she is three or four if you intend to breed her, but I don't think the purpose of specialing an animal is to sell puppies. I don't know a great deal about nutrition, but I suspect the best way to counteract the stress of being specialled is to not do it every damned weekend. Give them a chance to come home once in a while to run and play and be a dog. And I personally would never campaign a dog for years on end.

Champion Innisfree's Sierra Cinnar was one of the most notable Siberians ever bred. What are some of the others of the past that you feel were of his quality? And what to you think is the most prevalent qualities that are missing in the Siberians of today?

Certainly Cinnar was "notable", though Lorna Demidoff always felt he lacked type. As notable in the same time period was Ch. Marlytuk's Red Sun of Kiska, and the individuals and families I mentioned earlier were the notables of earlier eras. To comment on later animals, I'm afraid, would require too many qualifiers and distinctions to be efficient in this space, but I think Ch. Wildestar's Cat Ballou,
Ch. Demavand's Basra and Ch. Demavand's Cassio's Secondwind could stand next to any, and move with any.

I think the commonest problems among current exhibits are issues of type and proportions - ears, eyes, skull shape, bone lengths etc. Cute faces are not always correct, and flashy movement is not always indicative of correct proportions.

I am a well-known breeder with many Siberians that have had some significant wins. I have been in the breed for over 17 years and I have written to you a couple of times to ask you questions about things that I am embarrassed to say that I did not know. Because the column is anonymous, it gave me the courage to write to find out the answers to my questions. This forum is one of the best ways to become educated and more informed about the breed. I applaud you for the courage it takes to do it, as well as sharing your knowledge and experiences. Thank you.

You are very welcome, and I am truly touched. To survive in dogs one must be fairly thick-skinned, and as someone once said, "Anyone wishing to tell the truth had better have one foot already in the stirrup," but I came to the conclusion many years ago that the key to a healthy breed was an educated fancy; so I have dedicated myself (when possible) to that premise. It is rewarding, therefore, to have my motives occasionally understood and not just be seen as a compulsive "know-it-all."

What is the biggest misnomer in Siberians today?

I'm not sure I understand the question. I think the most common misunderstandings tend to be about movement and proportions. I'd like to see more specimens that are truly "light on [their] feet," with enough balance and leg to be truly "effortless." I'd also like to see more specimens whose expressions are truly "keen, friendly, interested and even mischievous." Neither round eyes nor bulky heads (to mention just two head faults) can really look mischievous.

Recently, I was at a show where the Judge was judging Siberians and an exhibitor has co-owned several Siberians with her. The Siberian she was showing was not co-owned by the Judge. The co-owner took Winners Bitch that day. Do you think this is ethical?

If the co-ownerships are current, I believe it is not only unethical but against the rules.

Can you tell me what changes you have seen in the breed since you began showing Siberians to now? Be specific.

This is really much more difficult to answer than it might seem because there have been scores of changes, some good, some bad, and most all needing tons of explanation and qualification. Generally speaking, however, I would say that the breed I remember 30+ years ago had greater consistency of type and proportions, but the best of today's Siberians probably move more perfectly. I remember few long-backed or soft-backed dogs, for instance, but lots of barrel chested, cobby ones, fewer over-angulated rears but more with stilted rear movement. I remember more loose fronts but fewer bow-legged rears. And, probably because there were fewer kennels but proportionately more breeding experience, there were fewer specimens who seemed put together by committee. In other words, the best then were not quite as good as the best today, at least in movement, but the breed was generally more consistent - a smaller bell curve.

Another way to see this would be in terms of the dominant kennels of the era: When I started the general look came from Monadnock, Alakazan, Marlytuk and related kennels, along with some fringe stuff, while today it's Innisfree, Karnovanda, Kontoki and related kennels along with a lot of fringe stuff. My apologies to those who feel they should have been mentioned in one list or the other, but I'm just speaking in broad generalities.

I currently own a Siberian that does not like to show. She is a dead head. She is an extremely nice Siberian. Is that a trait hereditary? I would like to breed her but I don't want another dead head.

Some large part of the temperament equation is no doubt hereditary, but some part is also environmentally influenced. What you're calling 'dead head,' for instance, might strike me as merely mellow, or it might mean easily bored, or it might mean less energy due to some physical limitation. So these are issues that can't be easily generalized about. Lots of good Siberians prefer their life in the living room to their life in the ring, and then the question is why? If she's your first or one of your firsts, then it may have been how you raised her. So if you're new to the game, I'd have an experienced Siberian person/handler play with her and see where the 'dead' in her 'head' comes from.