By bringing them to North America though, you are creating a bottle neck, and the breed will diverge from the originals in some way. The Siberian for example does not look or work exactly like the first imports did if you look at modern racing or show lines. The ones that are most like those are the ones working in a way as close to the original as possible.
Actually, the AKC Siberian Huskies do not share the same origins to Seppala's stock, or the CAN/EUR lines. That is why they look different. They were bred only for conformation from the very beginning, and 90% of the breed in the AKC came from 2 kennels.
I think of the K/Coolie more as an Alaskan. The Alaskan has no physical standard, only a working one. Many Alaskan lines are bred for one avenue of work, and some breeders are no longer outcrossing their dogs. Those lines conformed VERY quickly. You can tell they are related, they are bred for one purpose. Ditto Chinooks.
Which is why I don't "buy" that these C/Koolies are no longer being outcrossed. Even feral populations even out fairly quickly, especially with a smaller gene pool. The consistency emerges after only a few generations. Are there still differences? Of course! If any breeds have showed that, it's the Aussie and BC. Even the Sibes. Major differences DO occur in head type, overall bone, and most other conformation aspects. But almost any dog person can pick out an Aussie, a BC, and a Sibe from a crowd.
I'm not so sure the same could be said of a c/Koolie. Especially with not even a loose standard.
Or maybe Avalon's dogs and Yata Hae's dogs and Coolibar's dogs all came from different origins, like the first AKC Sibes? And that is why they look so incredibly different from other breeders?(not just Linds and Sara's breeder, but others as well)