Dog and Man: Quo vadis? Knowledge and perspectives FCI Centennial Symposium Brussels, November 11, 2011 Beauty, temperament and health as fundamental criteria for a correct selection Prof. Dr. Giovanni Morsiani - Italy Teacher of Kynognostic at the University of Bologna President of the Italian Saint Bernard Club President of the Italian Lagotto Romagnolo Club President of the Technical Academy of the International Saint Bernard FORUM President of the Welt Union of the Lagotto Romagnolo Club (UMLAG) Founding Member of the Welt Union of the Saint Bernard Club (WUSB) International ENCI-FCI beauty and working judge St. Bernard breeder Del Soccorso (established in 1939 by Dr. Antonio Morsiani)
The Differents Concepts of Beauty Artistic Beauty: Aesthetics and Symbolism in Renaissance
Artistic Beauty: Aesthetics and Symbolism in Neo-Classicism
Artistic Beauty: Religion and Spirituality
Artistic Beauty: The Essence of Aesthetics and Classic Beauty
Artistic Beauty: The Drama
Artistic Beauty: Power and Knowledge
Artistic Beauty: Feminin Beauty and Nobility
Artistic Beauty: Spirituality and Virtuousness
Artistic Beauty: Spirituality and Mildness
Beauty in Nature: Anthropomorphism and Intelligence
Beauty in Nature: Power and Noblity
Beauty in Nature: Power and Nobility
Beauty in Nature: Elegance and Dynamism
Beauty in Nature: Functionality and Elegance
The Concept of Beauty by the Dogs
Beauty, Temperament and Health as fundamental Criteria for a correct Selection By Prof. Dr. Giovanni Morsiani- Italy Most breeds are more than 100 years old since the beginning of laying down standards and, thus, the official definition. In reality, however, they are very much older, though not subjected to pure breeding. Today, we are struggling to preserve them on account of the population sizes having become very small. A rise in the inbreeding coefficients is unavoidable, with genetic defects concealed so far occurring to an ever-increasing extent. What criteria we set for the assessment of dogs is therefore an important question for all of us as judges and breeders so as to help and support the breeds on our part. Should these criteria emerge from the orientation towards present ideals of beauty or from the dogs currently to be seen at the shoes or should they be shaped on the basis of more general aspects? Professor Heim, a well-known kynology expert, who lived in Switzerland in the first half of the last century and after whom the foundation at the Berne Museum was named, set down the following fundamental principle, which is still valid today: From performance to type. At that time, this meant appearance being shaped by work. Today, we will have to fall back on the capacity to work, restored to us by the past. My father, Dr. Antonio Morsiani, one of the best known kynology experts in the world, set down the priorities of these concepts very clearly 40 years ago in his famous COMMENTS ON THE SAINT BERNARD STANDARD and also in various articles on how, for example, The Saint Bernard - from a working dog to a show dog. His concepts in relation to dogs were beauty, but only with functionality, good health and a controlled nature. He also utilised this when he drafted the two standards for the Lagotto Romagnolo and Cane Corso breeds. The basis is always the standard. We, as judges, breeders and researchers are committed to this standard, though we are also dependent upon the standard taking a great deal into consideration.
Almost every breed originated on the principle that dogs had to perform particular tasks for human society. Man tried to strengthen certain characteristics and suppress disorders through targeted breeding. A well written standard will take account of this, stating what form the breed of dog should take in order to meet these requirements in anatomical terms. Zootechnical knowledge should be incorporated into both the drawing up of standards and assessment of the dog. The functionality of a dog is a concept that results from the original requirements. It goes without saying that this has to be different from one breed to another. Functionality for a German Dachshund is not the same as that for a Lagotto romagnolo, a greyhound or a Saint Bernard. The term is breedrelated and should not be confused with health. The concept of health is often expressed in such general terms that an unclear picture can easily emerge. In this regard, we, as judges, can only assess health that is displayed externally. Although we cannot recognise concealed diseases, we should on no account encourage known health defects in a number of breeds through our demands. It would be absurd to repeatedly demand even smaller animals for small breeds of dog although it is known how the skulls are altered in this regard. For us, it can only be a case of the interpretation of standards not allowing dogs to suffer on account of their anatomy or other visible things, such as severe wrinkling or weak ligaments. I cannot be accepted if the interpretation of a standard means that the dog s ability to breath or move is impaired. A standard must be written in such a way that there cannot be any doubt what is desirable. The judges should have the self-assurance to decide themselves, even if the exhibitors or thoroughbred dog breeding associations regard severe wrinkling or an excessively short snout as beautiful. Looking at a number of breeds today which used to be bred for fighting bulls, for example, there could now be major doubts as to whether the dog would die from simply trying to run after a bull. It is exactly the same for dogs with severe wrinkling; they often suffer from wrinkle eczema and most people with normal sensitivities would feel they belong more in a curiosity cabinet than in a beauty competition.
Has functionality not been ignored in such cases through an erroneous concept of beauty, thus accepting harm to the dog? Have skull deformations not occurred in many, especially smaller, breeds on account of excesses having been permitted? Why have many breeds developed in a way that deviates so strongly from the original form? We should not simply say that the breeders are responsible. No, the resposibility lies will all those involved in kynology including the judges as well as normal thoroughbred dog lovers and exhibitors. They stipulate to the breeders and exhibitors which animals are functional and which are beautiful. They are not there to make a few exhibitors feel happy; they are, rather, responsible primarily for the dogs. Our society expects, especially in the case of thoroughbred dogs, that they should be healthy in addition to simply being beautiful. Only by accomplishing this can we be successful in the long term. One problem that has attracted a great deal of attention in the press over the last few years is the nature of individual dogs whose behaviour has been conspicuous. This has caused a large number of countries to adopt restrictive laws accordingly. Although we can say repeatedly that it is almost always the owners that do not guide their dogs in the right way rather than the dogs themselves, this is of no use to us. We have to make it clear that the dogs shown by us are socially acceptable. To be honest, we even have to say that a dog that is well-balanced has a quite different charisma to one that is anxious or even aggressive. Beauty, functionally and health are not contradictory. They form a unified whole. The principle of beauty can only be justified by way of the concept of beauty, which is based on general aesthetic fundamentals, being related to the standard and harmony of the animal corresponding to the same. Functionality is just as much part of this as the health aspects. An animal that has problems moving or difficulties in breathing, for example, can hardly be designated as beautiful. This criticism voiced by the public is therefore sometimes justified. I, myself, not only as a judge but also as a breeder of dogs (my Saint Bernard kennel Del Soccorso was established in 1939 by my father, Dr. Antonio Morsiani), look to the future with some concern.
My breed is the Saint Bernard, which also belongs to the breeds whose population size is declining constantly worldwide partly through the numbers of pups and also on account of too many different typologies being bred that do not meet the FCI standard and which can therefore hardly be used. As judges, we should ensure that this does not happen. We are harming the breed and the breeding. I assume that this is also the case for other breeds. My breed has been bred in a purebred manner for around 130 years now. It was lucky to be crossed with other breeds in the 19 th Century prior to becoming a recognised breed and, for this reason, has been able to remain preserved for a long time. However, we know that it will be necessary to work together beyond national borders in order to increase numbers. For this purpose, breeders and associations from all over the world have founded an organisation, the International Saint Bernard Forum, so as to be able to combat the emerging problems together. Nor can out-crossing be ruled out and, for this, we need support, of course, as well as the appropriate funding. The time has not yet come, but we should still be prepared. My other breed, the Lagotto romagnolo, is somewhat less problematic. It is still a young breed in relation to FCI recognition (but very old, of course, as the original Italian Water Dog and, for 200 years, as the Truffle Dog, who population size is growing). I Italy, we also benefit from the dogs also having to pass a working text if they are to be used for breeding. I must honestly say that the dogs first display their true beauty when working in the mountains. It is then that you notice why they are built the way they are. In other parts of the world where these dogs do not have to work, their limbs are getting shorter, with the dogs themselves becoming more compact and similar to a poodle. Will this breed also go the way of many other breeds or will we be successful in countering this? Finally a dog is not a purebred dog only because it has a pedigree but, rather, only because it is controlled. Prof. Giovanni Morsiani - Italy