Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

CONSIDERATIONS COCERNING THE EVOLUTION AND STANDARDS FOR THE ROMANIAN SHEPHERD DOG OF BUCOVINA.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "CONSIDERATIONS COCERNING THE EVOLUTION AND STANDARDS FOR THE ROMANIAN SHEPHERD DOG OF BUCOVINA."— Presentation transcript:

1 CONSIDERATIONS COCERNING THE EVOLUTION AND STANDARDS FOR THE ROMANIAN SHEPHERD DOG OF BUCOVINA

2 1. Acknowledgment The material I hereby present is the point of view concerning the actual standard phase of the RSDB of the followers: Cristian Moroşanu, the president of A.Ch. Suceava, Dorin Ghiuţă, “de Humor” breed owner Macovei Stroe, “de Plai Vrâncean” breed owner Vasile Vasiliu, “de Rădăşeni” breed owner Aurel Giurgea, “de Varancha” breed owner Marius Pop, www.bucovinadogs.ro – site ownerwww.bucovinadogs.ro Rîznic Edward, “de Şapte Coline” breed owner Pr. Vasile Furdui, proprietarul canisei “de Bârnova” Sebastian Raţiu, “of Buffalo” breed owner Cristian Beleca, “de Ariniş” breed owner Gheorghe Hojbotă, Manastirea Humorului Vunvulea Mihail, Focsani city, Vrancea county Busca Catalin, Focsani city, Vrancea county Catalin Chihaia, Gura Humorului.

3 As you will conclude here our comments about the RSDB standards, there are some things to be done in order to take this breed where it’s supposed to get, to the definitive homologation phase. We say “definitive” because we reckon that, as far as population, as number and aspect, is concerned, this breed is ready and satisfies all conditions in order to get the provisional recognition.

4 On 29.03.2002 the last report about Romanian Shepherd Dog of Bucovina standard was elaborated. At that time, this breed knew a indubitable evolution, concretized as followed: Reduction of the elements which do not fit the breed; Adjustment of some typical flaws; A significant homogeneity, including color and character. The genetic enrichment of the existing lines which are recognized by standards were also observed, bringing up at the selection programs some breeds, adequate typical dogs, used for guarding flocks of sheep, herds of cattle, and properties, pursuing therefore from descendants transmission of the features.

5 The breed area spread gradually, and today there are numerous effective and valuable dogs in multiple places in Romania (certified at dog shows): Bucovina– the historic “cradle” f the breed; Vrancea – where, along with with “de Plai Vrâncean” and “de Varancha” breeds, there are many owners and breeders. Bistrita – the place where Mr. Marius Pop develops a hard core of the breed, having very god results; Iaşi – the place where three RSDB breeds are involved: “Iaro”, “Bârnova” and “Şapte Coline” breeds; Bucureşti şi – “Brăduţ” breed; Ploieşti Arad; Braşov; Brăila – “Marianno” breed has got several valuable dogs.

6 Although the breed has count some important successes, numerically and quality speaking, we reckon that there are many things to be done, for that some elements constitute impediments for a genuine evolution of the breed: 1. the lack of a coherent selection program Without an unitary strategy, each breeder has developed an individual selection program, based on personal views upon the standards and factual breed. Some have emphasized the basic accents of the phenotype, which means the anatomic and morphologic features; some others have selected the correct basic temperament as a priority, equilibrated – a vital feature for a big size dog, as far as the urban actual conditions are concerned; the third category of breeders have emphasized the spectacular elements such as impressive size, gown with plumes and developed crest, or impressively massive head. These types of manifestation, similar to this symposium, are excellent to show our interest, breeders and owners, to the evolution of the breed and to justify the necessity of gathering people with experience in RSDB breed communities which appreciate and coordinate dog activity dedicated to this breed. 2. low interest for the breed Because it is a breed without international recognition, the number of people who aim to own or to raise a RSDB as a specific activity, remained still very poor, the main interest of the owners being the guarding abilities of RSDB.

7 We now present our opinion concerning some RSDB standard elements, structured as following: Our desiderate to keep the unitary character of this breed, as it was selected through time and adapted to dogs by changes brought by the evolution of human society; Our acknowledgments upon the field dogs and the ones presented at dog show;, Observing the actual tendencies which constitute important arguments for the appreciation of the breed dynamics.

8 ROMANIAN SHEPHERD DOG OF BUCOVINA (Chien de berger roumain de Bucovine) (black= standard assignation blue= our assignations ) ORIGIN: Romania This breed is originary from Romania and all people’s efforts implied along time to clear and make standard this breed, attest all factors implied in the international recognition to make all the efforts to make the Romanian Shepherd Dog of Bucovina be recognized as a true value of Romania.

9 ORIGIN: Romania UTILIZATION: shepherd dog for sheep and cattle herds, excellent guard dog. CLASIFICATION F.C.I.: Group II: Pinscher-Schnauzer, Swiss Cattle Dog and other breeds. Section 2.2 – Molossoide, mountain type. BRIEF HISTORICAL SUMMARY: The Shepherd Dog of Bucovina was selected from a natural breed of the Carpathian Mountains, in Bucovina, exactly in the North-East of Romania. This breed has been the subject of a special attention as far as selection and improvement is concerned, which led to the present type. In this region, dogs of this breed are used successfully as dogs to guard sheep flocks, cattle herds, and for properties. This dog is mostly known as "DULAU" or "CAPAU". The first standard was drafted in 1982 and revised in 2001 by the Romanian Cynological Association. The present standard, dated on 29.03.2002, was drafted and revised according to the F.C.I. model established in Jerusalem. GENERAL APPEARANCE: large dog, towering, audacious and proud. Sexual dimorphism well emphasized. IMPORTANT PROPORTIONS: The length between muzzle and head is 1:1. the length of the body is easily longer than height at withers. The scalp-humeral angle is around 100-110°.

10 BEHAVIOUR/TEMPERAMENT Calm, balanced, very faithful and devoted to the owner, loves children. Wary of strangers. Excellent herd dog, very brave and efficiently fighter with possible animal prey (bear, wolf, lynx). He owns a very strong barking. When strangers, man or animal, approache its territory, he strongly barks, of a low tonality, which can be heard over very long distance. At nighttime, he patrols around the property or herds. Concerning the big size, imposing aspect and the goal he was first created for (to guard flocks of sheep, herds of cattle and properties), the temperament of RSDR, as for the rest of shepherd dogs, must be treated with maximum of seriousness. The equilibrated character, loyalty to the owner, guarding instinct are compulsory characteristics. We therefore support, as a future project, the introduction of a TAN in the evaluation of the breed reproducer temperament.

11 HEAD CRANIUM REGION: Massive, position easily uplifted in relation with the back line. SKULL: moderate width. The longitudinal axes of the skull and muzzle are slightly convergent. The skull, seen from the front, is easily ball pointed; in sectional view, the skull is almost flat; the skull width: male 16-18 cm, female: 15-17 cm. The zygomatic arches are slightly defined. The occipital protuberance is little emphasized. Stop: not too pronounced FACIAL REGION: Nose: well developed and wide, black colored. Muzzle: tronconic, same length as the skull; well developed, tapering progressively towards extremity, never pointed Lips: thick, tight, strongly pigmented. Jaws/teeth: powerful jaws; complete healthy dentition, very well imbedded, white colored; scissor bite. Pincers bite allowed. Cheeks: not very prominent Eyes: small as compared to the head; almond and oblique, hazel or dark brown colored or slightly lighter, never yellow. Eyelids well pigmented. Ears: relatively high set, triangular “V” shaped, tip easily rounded, fallen and hanging close to cheeks. Cropping is forbidden.

12 As it is described in the standards, the head of RSDR is an element which precisely individualize the breed. The relations and dimensions are very well defined, all elements have an exact description, and practically, aiming for an exemplary whose head is exactly as described and required by standards, is a compulsory desiderate, in order to homogenize the breed. The comparison of dogs displayed at dog shows and reckoned as typical, points out a certain inequable head shape. Today, there are mainly 2 types of head which got close to standards, but still very different between themselves:

13 HEAD TYPE A Positive aspects related to standards The massive head is clearly expressed - as required by standards The skull width - as defined by standards The convergence of the axis between muzzle and skull is clearly regarded Thick lips The relation between skull and muzzle is correct. Negative aspects related to standard Stop is only marked without being emphasized Thick fallen lips, “well applied” required by standards are not just so. Ears are clamped about to the same axis with eyes or a bit upper; “relatively above” as required by standards are not very clear. To many dogs the ears shape is deflected from the V shape required by standards; it looks more like a wide or rounded ear lobe.

14 HEAD TYPE B Positive aspects related to standards The stop reflects very clear the term “well marked”” The lips are well applied, rarely fallen Ears are clumped relatively up, sometimes really up, and their shape is exactly as required by standards, always a V shape with rounded top. Negative aspects related to standards Skull width is at the boundary or under the values required by standards Skull and nasal axes are insignificantly convergent, sometimes even parallel. The general aspect of the head does not leave the impression of being massive.

15 RSDB. Head types Common features: Both types have a correct pigmentation Both types have eyes correctly shaped and colored Eyes are bond to cheeks Cheeks are not prominent. Head type A Head type B

16 RSDB. Head types Conclusions and considerations: Head type A represents more likely the breed, as required and defined both by standards and the molossoide breeds. We propose that this type to be homogenized and also regarded as an improvement subject of some elements: 1. To avoid promoting some dogs with an emphasized stop. 2. To homogenize the correct V easily rounded ears shape, above the eyes or at least at the same level as eyes. 3. to put out the standard term as “well applied lips” or to complete this term with “can be easily fallen”. Head type A Head type B

17 As we require the head to be promoted, here are some pictures of dogs which get closer to the ideal type of RSDB breed we proposed here.

18 Fallen eyelids or emphasizing the third eyelid, is not desirable, and must be penalized according to gravity.

19 Bite and teething The description of bite is correctly specified into the standards and we support the reproduction of dogs with clipper bite. It was noticed that many exemplary have, in the early years, a compact scissors type of bite, which along the years, when teeth get blunt, becomes a clipper bite. The difference between the inherited clipper bite and the attained clipper bite is hard to recognize today, and it is too risky, considering this phase of breed development, we don’t want valuable dogs to be excluded based just on this criteria. It is more important to observe and control a complete teething, with incisors on the same side of the jaw (both superior and inferior jaw), perfectly aligned and positioned (clipper or scissor) against the opposite side.

20 Today, the body aspect is well regarded at the existing dogs. There are still some elements which are insufficiently regarded, which we hereby underline: Avoid body unwieldiness. We wish the following description to be regarded, without making any extreme steps: 1.Avoid dogs with no substance, too light, with a narrow chest, and greyhound aspect; 2.avoid too massive dogs, which tend to be very heavy, and which could lead to slow movements of dog in the field. Some dogs have the superior line easily directed towards the tail, which denotes a poor propulsion into the posterior line, and leads to disharmonic aspect of the dog. Dogs with uplifted croup must be penalized accordingly.

21 TAIL high set-on. At rest, it is carried hanging, reaching or lower than the hock; when the dog is alert or in action, the tail is carried higher, slightly curved, sometimes above the topline, in reaping hook shape. Docking is forbiedden. The standard regulation concerning docking of the tail must pe regarded closer and must be better applied. In this way, we wish to avoid dogs which do not have a proper tail as required by standards, rolled as a ring tail or carried on the back incorectly.

22 FORQUARTERS Total view: lateral section view and front view: upright Shoulder: shoulder blades are long, strong and oblique, much attached and very muscular. The scapula-humerus angle is approximately 100-110°. Upper arm: moderate height, well muscled Elbow: close connected to body, very muscular, turning neither in or out Forearm: Strong, muscled, sufficiently long Carpal joint: firm Metacarpus (pastern): short, oblique, seen from the side, Feet: egg-shaped (oval), compact and very strong, black and ash-grey colored nails. HINDQUARTERS Upper thigh: very muscular and strong, high self-confidence Stifle: the femur-tibial angle is around 110°. Lower thigh: sufficiently long, wide and very muscular Hocks: from lateral view, it is wide and equally angulated; seen from behind, it is placed parallel with the median plan of the body. Metatarsus (rear pastern): not too long, hardy and neat, perfectly assured and vertical. The presence of dewclaws shouldn’t be penalized. Feet: egg-shaped, compact and strong, black or ash-grey colored nails LEGS

23 NECK: moderate length, thick, strong, without dewlap. BODY: massive, vigorous. Topline: horizontal. Withers: moderately defined Back: well sustained and muscled Loin: strong, very muscled Croup: muscular and moderately beveled towards the tail base Chest: wide and tall, touches the elbow level; the ribs well arched Underline: slight tuck up BODY

24 Related to legs, we underline the following aspects: At dog shows there are still attended dogs having light skeleton, not exactly according to the purpose for which this breed was initially created. A bigger attention must be paid to this aspect, because a strong frame and skeleton is a defining aspect of the molossoide type of dog. The muscular aspect of the forquarters and hindquarters must be strongly signalized to owners. Substance free legs bring a poor gait and a less vigor in the general aspect of the dog The hock angle mustn’t be neither close, because it leads to a oblique croup, nor open, because it leads to a reduced propulsion of the underline.

25 MOVEMENT: equable and swing, powerful and effortless; seen from the front and back, legs move in straight line. Medium amplitude trot is preferred. Crossed or high moves should be penalized. As total view, the forquarters get close to the median line, when they accelerate the trot. Movement is well described in the standards, the medium trot is easy and breezy, and it’s exactly the required type of movement for the second group section of this breed. We therefore require to referees to pay a big attention to this movement in order to be correctly made when dog applies for a long distance run endurance. In the field, attending herds and flocks on large distance run, requires very hight endurance. If the movement is negatively affected after several tours, must be penalized.

26 COAT SKIN: thick, tight, dark-grey colored HAIR: short on the head and anterior side of the legs. On the body, the hair is abundant, harsh texture, from 6 to 9 cm long. Undercoat is shorter and denser, lighter colored. On the neck, hair is longer and crest shaped; on the posterior side of the legs, hair forms moderate size fringes. Tail is brushy, with a longer and thicker hair, well furnished. The RSDR’s coat, along with the head, makes a spectacular characteristics of the breed. The success at dog shows, competitions with other breeds, and also to the public is largely determined by the coat aspect of the dog, the crest presence, well furnised tail and the volume of the coat. We reckon that a big attention must be paid to the coat, and dogs which do not have a crest, or whose crest is too short, or have not fringes on limbs must be penalized.

27 COLOR Classic colour : Well-defined spots of wolf-grey or black colour appear against a white background colour. On the limbs, spackles in black or other colours should be allowed. Uniform colours (without markings) white or black are allowed, but should not be followed. As far as the colors of the breed are concerned, an important aspect, which must be carefully approached, is given by the overcoat. If we translate the standards literally, overcoat is reckoned as atypical, despite the fact that there are many valuable dogs with this type of coat. In our oppinion, excuding from the genetics of dog population the overcoat is not desirable. The correct solution would be to reckon this coat as a classic one. Because is a combination of the same colors, accepting the overcoat is not againt the homogenity aspect of the breed.. We reckon that rather the tricolored coats (tiger type), or slightly marked coats, more yellow that the wolves coats, be concidered against homogenity.

28 SIZE AND WEIGHT Height: male: 68-78 cm, ideal height 71-75 cm; female: 64-72 cm, ideal height 66-68 cm Weight: in proportion to the size. We admit that the actual standard was approved when the breed, measured and calibrated, was numerically poor, as it was known at that time, so that when the height at withers was established, was not according to all existing data. We remind you that, in that period of time, the standard was elaborated according to the dogs coming from flocks, herds or particular properties, where the nutritive diet was inadequate. Along with the breeding in specialized centers, one can notice a increase in size, a correct diet approach and therefore a genetic potential increase of the breed. Concerning everything above, we reckon that the size specified in the standards are easily undersized. Our arguments are:

29 The purpose for which this breed was initially created was to guard flocks of sheep, herds of cattle, at the outskirts of forests, which implies fighting with natural big size preys. In Romania, the most frequent preys are wolves and bears. A dog fighting with a wolf requires an adequate size and power. Statistically speaking, a wolf has got a medium height at withers of 80 cm and a medium weight of 60 kg. Consequently, RSDB size must be at least close to these medium measures. Individualizing the breed in the balkan context must be emphasized. In both situations which leads to international recognition of RSDB breed: as a distinct variety of a Balkan breed or a proper breed, must have clear and précised distinguishing arguments: imposing stature, set higher as standard, can be surely one of the determined elements for this purpose. RSDB is framed in the second group of FCI – Mountain Dogs section. In the same group there are breeds as: Pirinei Shepherd Dog, Saint Bernard, Caucasian Shepherd Dog, Mastiff of Pirinei, etc, breeds which have a superior stature and robustness towards the actual standard or RSDB. We reckon that, with a similar size and weight, the RSDB can compete successfully to the BOG title with the breeds from its section, making a relevant and important argument to the breed popularity. The utility of dogs as a modern perspective is based on another criteria than extreme aggressively. European civilization (which imposes also in Romania, along with EU adherence of Romania) leads, as a main utility of the breed, to the guarding of properties. The modern concept for security, more and more often in all the activities is discouragement, attack preventing. Or, what could more discourage a potential threat, but a impressively large dog, robust, with massive head, strong barking, daring temperament, fear free, and confident with strangers, totally devoted to his master?!

30 Based on what stated above, we ask for a future amendment of the standards concerning height of this breed in a similar manner to the other Romanian shepherd breeds, through: - Excluding the superior limit of height -Establishing the ideal height at 76-80 cm for males and 71-75 cm for females - Establishing the minimum height at 70 cm for males and 67 cm for females, -Assignation expressly that, in order to evaluate the dog, the harmony of proportions to be considered primary in the general aspect of the dog, which must effuse massiveness and vigor in the same time. Until the date of this new possible amendment of the standards, we require that the arbitration to be made in this spirit.

31 FAULTS: other features than the ones mentioned above are considered flaws and will be penalized according to the gravity of the flaw. - Overweight or weak subject - Insufficiently marked sexual characteristics - Absence of teeth except PM1 - Docked ears - Docked tail - Matted or short hair (shorter than 6 cm) - Too long hair (longer than 9 cm) - The absence of the mane or of fringes on the limbs - Curled, ring-shaped tail - Spreading feet, turned out or in - Outward elbows - Barging movement SERIOUS FAULTS: - Atypical subject - Round, protruding eyes - Erect ears - Sagging or too long topline - Very short hair - Curly coat, or of a texture other than described in the standard - Eyes too light in colour - Cow hocks

32 ELIMINATING FAULTS - Aggressive or overly shy. - Atypical subject - Superior or inferior underhung - Absence of incisives or canines - Albinism - Colours other than described in standards - Absence of or atrophied tail - Height under 65 cm or over 80 cm for males - Height under 62 cm or over 75 cm for females N.B.: Male must have two testicles, normal aspect, completely down into the scotum. This standard was revised by the F.C.I ‘s representative, Mr.Raymond Triquet and Mr. Bernard Denis, at Gura Humorului city in 22nd of august 2004. The F.C.I. standard and science commissions have approved this standard in the frame of common reunion dated 18th and19th of September in 2004 at Sarlat - France. The F.C.I. General Committee has approved this standard in the frame of the reunion dated 10th and11th of November, Kyoto - Japan.

33 Thank you !


Download ppt "CONSIDERATIONS COCERNING THE EVOLUTION AND STANDARDS FOR THE ROMANIAN SHEPHERD DOG OF BUCOVINA."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google