Sled Dogs: Cultural Legacy and Forgotten History

Sled dogs have been acclaimed for their heroism, athleticism, and their unconditional affection through numerous books, movies, and other media outlets. This legacy has aided the formation of a romanticized perspective on dog sledding. Sled dogs have prompted issues of concern and curiosity targeting an array of groups ranging from animal activists to the U.S Military. Cultural legacy has dominated the popular perspective on sled dogs, illustrating an Alaskan subculture. In contrast, Charles L. Dean explored the latent significance of these canines in his book Soldiers and Sled Dogs. In his publication Dean uncovers the use of sled dogs during World War II. There is a common misfortune in the research regarding dog sledding. The actual use of dog sleds as transportation vehicles is commonly ignored due to the legends and stories surrounding the sport.

Others claim the race was a tribute to the Gold Rush era of 1898 to 1906.[4] Dog sleds were the common mode of transportation. The Iditarod Trail was the conduit for these sleds transferring mail, provisions, and of course, gold.[5] The official Iditarod website acknowledges both accounts as commemorative factors in the notorious race.[6] The race is infamous for it’s hazards in regards to weather and climate conditions, trail conditions, and length. The race itself is over 1,150 miles and is completed within 10 to 17 days.[7] The starting point is Anchorage and the finish line is Nome.[8] The Iditarod defines this subculture and is more famous than any other dog sled racing event in the U.S.

Legends have emerged into Alaskan history due to the Iditarod. The most famous is Susan Butcher, who won the Iditarod race four times.[9] This accomplishment did not come without turbulence. One particular race before her triumphs, a moose killed one of her dogs and injured a significant portion of the pack, thus forcing her to withdraw from the 1985 race.[10] She survived, and was praised for her ability to relate to her dogs as well as her compassion.[11] Susan describes the relationship with her dogs, “They’re everything-my friends, family, and co-workers.”[12] She was the second woman to win the Iditarod and set the most records out of any female.[13] A Saturday in March before the start of the Iditarod, there is a day in Susan’s honor to remember her legacy, which was instated after her death from Leukemia.[14] She is the epitome of an American legend, facing the dangers of the wild and ascending to victory in the face of failure.

This American subculture does not come without criticism. Susan was not the only one to lose a dog’s life during the course of this treacherous race. Animal activists have brought into question the safety and treatment of the dogs involved in racing. In 2009 activists claim there were a minimum of 146 dog fatalities since 1973.[15] The spokesman for the Iditarod claims there is no exact number, but weather conditions can make the numbers spike depending on the year.[16] Like many sports, this one has evolved over the years, incorporating numerous rules for protection of the dogs.

In the 2009 Iditarod Race Rules Manuel there are numerous instances where the dog’s best interest are supported by written rule. Under “Rule 2” it clearly states, “No one convicted of a charge of animal abuse or neglect, as such is defined under Alaskan law, may enter the Iditarod Trail Sled dog Race.” [17] There are lists of mandatory breaks a musher must take, giving specific time intervals. [18] The toboggan itself must be structured to carry any “injured or fatigued” dogs.[19] “Booties” are required for dog’s feet, along with back ups at all times.[20] A Veterinarian notebook must be kept in detail, and presented at check-ins with Veterinarians at designated checkpoints.[21] The rules even go as far as to disqualify or withdraw any aggressive dogs at any time.[22] The same goes for the Mushers, “A Musher whose conduct, constitutes an unreasonable risk of harm to him/her, dogs or other persons may be withdrawn.”[23] Under “Rule 37” there are distinct guidelines to dog care including, “There will be no cruel or inhumane treatment of dogs. Cruel or inhumane treatment involves any action or inaction, which causes preventable pain or suffering to a dog.” Although dog fatalities are a possibility it is clear in the Manuel they will be treated with precedence and investigated.

The dog breeds used for this type of activity have been bred and trained for this type of activity. The Siberian Husky which is a common breed used in the Iditarod is depicted in the American Kennel Club as “…known for its amazing endurance and willingness to work…suitable for anything from sledding to therapy work....”[24] This particular breed also originated in cold climates, thus giving it the dense coat necessary for keeping warm even in the coldest conditions.[25] As said by the late Susan Butcher, “They are athletes and are trained and chosen for competition just like any athlete.”[26]

The excitement and controversy surrounding the race veils the sled dog’s literal use, transportation. As much as these stories and athletes have contributed to this Alaskan subculture, many already know the essence of these stories and their legacy. This is in part due to the readily available research regarding this subculture and what the media outlets produce. What the public is not as exposed to is the operational use of sled dogs in World War II.

Charles L. Dean is one of the few authors to produce an in-depth assessment on the operational use of sled dogs. Until Dean’s research, it is only through passing plot lines that one hears of dogs transporting mail, provisions, or medicine. Dean goes into great detail of these military dogs’ job descriptions and their origins. Dean discovered a military document from the War Department entitled Basic Field Manual, Dog Team Transportation. This discovery was the inspiration for Dean’s research on the utilization of dogs during World War II. Dean is an “Arctic Expert,” who through a variety of sources and research composed an insightful look into the world of Army sled dog teams.

Dean acknowledges in the Preface of his publication, “…there was very little material on the subject, and what there was did not go into detail.”[27] Again this exhibits the pre-conceived notions about what non-racing dogs accomplished due to lack of research. Therefore this small stint in U.S history tends to get lost.