----- Original Message -----
From: fbcp2009
To: clelia-kruel@sbcglobal.net
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 1:27 PM
Subject: masterpiece article written originally in 1981 by Américo Cardoso.

Dear Friends,
 
I anticipate the "CAFIB Translation Fund" to be formalized at the CAFIB Conservatória Meeting to be held in this historical city in the  State of Rio de Janeiro at a date to be confirmed, which is being organizing by Mr. Joaquim Barroso from the Boa Sorte Kennel, completing 36 years of continuous Fila breeding, headed by the veteran breeder Mrs. Marilia Pentagna (see: http://www.filabrasileirochicopeltier.com.br/10-Documentos-de-1980-a-1983/10-9.jpg, http://www.filabrasileirochicopeltier.com.br/10-Documentos-de-1980-a-1983/10-10.jpg, http://www.filabrasileirochicopeltier.com.br/10-Documentos-de-1980-a-1983/10-11.jpg and http://www.filabrasileirochicopeltier.com.br/11-Documentos-1984-ate/11-20.jpg,  I forward to you the masterful article written originally in 1981 by Américo Cardoso dos Santos Jr, founder, breeder, judge and leader of CAFIB, entitled "GENETIC IMPROVEMENT AND THE ANALYSIS OF PHENOTYPE AND TEMPERAMENT" which was published in the CAFIB journal "The FILA" no. 30.
 
Through this article which is a true "masterpiece" you can understand how the "main foundation" of the improvement method of CAFIB which is, without doubt, for almost 32 years the basis of our Selection Program and Breeding Philosophy, although CAFIB never have counted on the help and understanding of the FCI.
 
Shortly, this article will be available not only on the CAFIB site (http://www.cafibbrasil.com.br/ ) but on Ligia Morris`s site ( http://fila411-usa.blogspot.com/ ) and on my ( http://www.filabrasileirochicopeltier.com.br/ ) as well.
 
Please note that this article is so important that it has been made available to you immediately attached/below and not through a link.

Tanks a lot Américo to providing us with such gift.
Happy reading!
 
Chico Peltier.

GENETIC IMPROVEMENT AND THE ANALYSIS OF PHENOTYPE AND TEMPERAMENT
Américo Cardoso dos Santos Jr.

(Published in “O Fila” number 30, July, August & September, 1981)

Lately, the build up of the activities of CAFIB has been taking place in stride and has become commonplace. In only one month there have been several Phenotype and Temperament Analyses in different cities and states in the country. This reveals growing awareness on the part of those who are true fans of the Fila. Including of problems that the breed has faced and the desire to fight for its improvement.

Unfortunately, the indiscriminate mix-breeding and the limited material at our disposal to recover the breed, greatly complicates and delays the establishment of the characteristics we seek in order to form a homogeneous and high level group.
The experience gained through these issues makes us believe that certain considerations are in order.

In the beginning of our activities and within the heterogeneity of the breed, we sometimes found a few very typical dogs. However, they were said to be of mixed-bred origin. At first, this led us to think about the possibility of discarding such animals, not allowing their use in reproduction (despite the quality of their phenotype), because we feared that upon breeding they would disappoint us by producing signs of atypicality in their offspring. So, we heard criticism, suspicion and accusations that marred all kennels, all breeding and all known pedigrees. Of course, after some time had gone by, we learned that those criticisms, suspicions and accusations, in some cases, were made carelessly, without a solid basis and often from people of ill reputation. Sometimes they were faulty interpretations of true facts, resulting in distorted and unfair conclusions. Sometimes they were simply slander motivated by personal grudge and problems, other times they were flippant statements and of course, in reality, many times, they were confirmed as justified, true and from reliable sources.
Furthermore, we also noticed the absurd extent of frauds perpetrated. Those involving sales of separate pedigrees to owners of dogs without registration; granting of Certificates of Origin Registration to puppies that had other parentage than the one mentioned in the document and use of dogs names that had already died,  as studs still in activity, etc. [known as “paper-hanging’]
Thus, we concluded that the name of a proven mixed bred animal appearing in a pedigree and representing and ancestor of a particular liter, would not necessarily mean the puppies were not pure-bred, since such document could have very likely been forged, exchanged, sold or used on a dog belonging from a totally different bloodline than the one in its Certificate of Origin Registration.
Cross-breeders mated their female dogs to English Mastiff, Neapolitan Mastiff and Great Dane males and registered their offspring as descending from a Fila father. Later on, we had confirmation (even by means of photographs) of phenomena more or less the opposite of this fraud. A black dog (registered as  Fila), having unmistakable signs of atypicality (besides the color alone) had become extensively used in reproduction for being a prizewinner and being successful at dog shows generating high demand for its puppies. We heard of a female [Fila] dogs being taken to mate with it, but who turned out to be sired by other males (less valued, but ultimately, pure-bred) because that dog did not have the physical conditions to mate the numerous females it was intended to. For obvious reasons of course, the champion was shown as the sire in the registration of the puppies.
Here’s another case: an old breeder in the south of the state of Minas Gerais who always had purebreds, however, unregistered. Upon becoming aware of the rise in price of registered dogs, he came to São Paulo and bought several products from a kennel known as one of the great traders of the mixed breed and took them back to the country. Once there, he got rid of the dogs he had bought for not considering them fit for breeding, keeping only the "pedigrees", putting them on animals he already had.
So far, we have both cases; pure-bred dogs with mongrel “pedigrees” and traditional cases of mixbreeds with pure-bred registrations.
In face of such chaos, we did not know when, what or whom to believe. As to the legitimacy of an official “pedigree”, what could be done or required from us to consider true the information given to us? Request other documents or certificates? What kind of Oaths, witnesses? How many witnesses?
We came to the sad conclusion that the only solution would be to start over again from scratch, on a clean slate. We have been receiving criticism for this decision, deemed drastic or unfair by some people. We believe that in view of all the above, they will come to understand that we had no choice. The solution adopted was not considered the best one but the only one possible.
In order to register a truly good dog for reproduction, now each animal undergoes a thorough analysis, where all somatic characteristics are recorded in detail, all dogs are photographed, numbered, weighed, and measured. If they are one year or older, they undergo tests of temperament (character) and nervous system. The objective pursued is to get a registration with individual records of each animal having a detailed description of his phenotype, giving considerable importance to positive reaction to gun shot and attack tests but above all, valuing the dog’s type. Upon evaluating the results, we decide for the approval of the animal for reproduction or not.
Upon receiving this verdict, reaction of owners has been varied, especially in case of non-approved specimens. All who take their animals for analysis have hopes of getting an approval and ultimately, they firmly believe that their dog is the best among those who are there. It is interesting to note how people's reactions sometimes vary in view of the theoretical exposition of the problem and the concrete result of the analysis of their dog.
It is always on weekends that we travel to different cities to perform the Analyses of Phenotype and Temperament. Usually we arrive on Saturday. At night CAFIB’s master breeder, Dr. Paulo Santos Cruz, lectures about various topics related to the Fila, from its origins, structure and temperament characteristics, genetics, to practical problems arising from mix-breeding the Fila, including the presentation of objectives and work methodology of the CAFIB. The response obtained in these lectures is excellent. Not only for the sound knowledge of the subject matter and teaching capability of the master, but also because they are fully illustrated by means of the projection of slides, films and charts, which make the themes addressed more intelligible. The reaction of listeners is usually filled with enthusiasm and support for our struggle. The following day, on a Sunday, an analysis of the dogs is carried out, wherein some are approved and others not. Frequently, we find that many participants from the lecture given the day before; who had enthusiastically praised CAFIB in a minute go to bitter criticism about the technical knowledge and the good repute of judges who work on the analysis, given the non-approval of their dogs. It is understandable, although absolutely non-justifiable. It is difficult for certain people to tolerate the non-approval of their dog after it had been given awards, titles and trophies by the ‘official’ dog cynophilia. It is typical for human beings to face those who praise and extol with more empathy; even if unfairly, than those who criticize, even if constructively.
The summary done during the analysis is drafted by hand, and later a clean copy is typed in an appropriate form and sent by mail. There have been several cases when the summary is received by the owner of the dog and is not well understood or raises questions.
Quite frequently, dogs presenting clear signs of atypicality, but with outstanding characteristics of structure and even temperament appear in the analyses. These animals are not approves because they have a series of characteristics that expose mix-breeding; for example, high insertion of ears, accentuated "stop", no dewlap, tight and thick skin, unusual color, badly characterized movement without the typical camel pace when walking and no waddle. However, they may have great proportions, muscle mass, bones, angulations, vertical standing position, dentition, bite, temperament and nervous system. In short: there are certain specimens that are great dogs but not pure-bred Filas.
Maybe one would argue that if they are excellent dogs they could contribute positively to reproduction, passing on the qualities they have. It is easy to refute this argument remembering that a sire should be worth much more for its genotype than its phenotype, being that, in order to transmit its characteristics it is necessary to have them genetically determined and be homozygous for a large number of factors. Moreover, in the selection of any purebred, it is necessary to check the homogeneity of specimens by following the description and directions of the standard. All efforts should be directed towards the establishment of a single type that in the case of Fila is nothing else than the original type, selected and established over a hundred years ago by farmer/landowners and cattle ranchers in central Brazil, particularly in the state of Minas Gerais.
As a result of hybrid vigor resulting from heterosis, the first generation of crossbred (called F1) sometimes are beautiful and showy dogs, one cannot deny, but they are useless as sires (in a serious program of genetic improvement). Choosing well, producing the finest specimens in each generation is very difficult when working with purebred animals of known ancestry; mating amongst mix-bred dogs always results in heterogeneous descent, making it absolutely impossible to predict any result in the breeding.
We hope that these explanations clarify the reason for non-approval of certain dogs, whose profile shows a great number of qualities.
A few words on those approved in the Analyses of Phenotype and Temperament are valuable now.
Obviously, the assumption of a mixbreed occasionally not showing atypical signs in its phenotype was considered. It is unlikely that this would happen in the first generation wherein offspring of a mating have fifty percent of the bloodline of another breed and whose appearance often blatantly exposes mix breeding. However, when mix-breeds having a higher degree of Fila bloodline than others, mate between themselves during successive generations, eventually, cases may appear of animals that by a fortuitous combination of genes may not show outward signs of mix breeding. Therefore, those individuals may get approved.
To prevent this risk, CAFIB approval is provisional and depends on confirmation by means of a progeny test. Those who prove they transmit to their descendants the type and quality that got them will then get a Definitive Registration. On the other hand, those who show a lack of breed integrity in reproduction (despite not showing it in their phenotype), by generating offspring who show atypical signs, will have their provisional approval canceled and their descendants will not be registered.
Besides protecting us against the possible approval of a mixbreed "disguised as a pure-bred", this standard also allows us a little more flexibility for approval. Which is an advantage that cannot be neglected because of the undersupply of exemplars that could be considered high level. So we feel a little more comfortable approving dogs of regular appearance only, since we open the possibility that eventually they would turn out to be good sires and the recourse of withdrawing the provisional approval is always an option if good results do not fulfill the chance given.
These explanations should be taken into account by those who do not get their dogs approved and do not come to terms with the result, alleging their dog is the son, the grandchild or the sibling of a given specimen approved in analysis or awarded in exhibitions.
Furthermore, we must consider that not even in a better quality group than the one reflected by the sad situation that Fila breed is in today, being the son of champion parents should necessarily be understood as synonymous of quality. Puppies are not manufactured in series, like identical pieces and in the same litter some stand out more than others. If it were enough to have an excellent father and mother, all offspring would be of high quality.  In short, there would be no medium quality animals and every kennel would only ever produce champions.
Not always is the best dog the best sire and we have already emphasized above the importance of valuing genetic heritage above outward appearance in a breeding program. In many breeds of dogs, cases of animals that, although not having achieved greater prominence in exhibitions, had produced excellent offspring, are not uncommon. As well as occasionally exceptional dogs, winners of trophies, whose offspring sometimes disappoint. A well-known breeding rule advises that it’s preferable to mate a regular dog that descends from an excellent bloodline to an excellent dog coming from a regular bloodline.
We must remember that the process of selecting some and discarding others is the basis of genetic improvement and that in practice, one will never come to point in evolution when all specimens that are born could be considered the cream of the crop, that applies not only to dog breeds but to any species developed by man.
As a result of not considering those aspects, many naïve breeders adopt the simplistic solution of bringing their females to mate with show champions, relegating to a secondary plane or even ignoring a deeper study of the bloodlines present in various pedigrees.
We should always carefully evaluate the positive and negative characteristics of our dogs, especially in reference to the genetic aspect so that we can compensate for eventual imperfections, looking for the opposite qualities in the partner to be chosen for mating. Thus, we infer the best in show is not always the best sire or a more appropriate male for any female.
Still elaborating on non-approved dogs, there is another aspect to be clarified. We have explained above that due to the provisional nature of approval and scarceness of good specimens, we don’t always allow ourselves a high-level strictness in the evaluation criteria, which would be beneficial for the breed and fully justified if the circumstances were different. As the number of approved dog’s increases and consequently the quality of the gene pool available, the accuracy in analyses is intensified as well. Hopefully, over time the improvement in breeding will enable us a much more rigorous standard of quality aiming at the systematic eradication of more serious defects, such as temperament faults and bite problems. We believe that soon we will be able to really deserve the pejorative classification as "elitists”, that has already been given to us. However, we prefer to regard it as a virtue.
The rigor used in the assessment of animals is more intense in the judgment of male dogs, not for considering they have more genetic prepotency than females as commonly believed. What happens is that males are or may be responsible for a much higher number of offspring than female dogs. Even if a bitch is mated every time she comes into heat, she can produce a maximum of two liters a Year, while a male can sire dozens of liters in the same period of time, if heavily used.
Based on this, one can deduce that many of the approved animals, although being of reasonable quality, are quite far from being considered excellent, especially amongst females. Thus, we have registered within our files, dogs we can say that “scraped by” the scrutiny of judges in the analyses, and whose approval should be seen as a chance to eventually produce offspring having a slightly higher level, if well mated. Besides those, there are dogs that could get better qualifications and be considered good, very good and excellent. This distinction is necessary, as well as the explanation for its reasons for those who understand the approval as a certificate of excellence in quality, without taking into account the provisional nature of this certificate, which in some cases can be cancelled.
In order to better distinguish the approved dogs, CAFIB is drafting a Score Regulation like the one performed by other entities who are already at more advanced stages of selection. For example: the Associação Brasileira de Criadores de Cavalos da Raça Mangalarga [Mangalarga Horse Breeders Association of Brazil]. During judgment, each item to be considered will have a maximum value defined. The sum of all points given by the judge for every detail of the dog will be the final score given, it will be the score result. This method will allow valuing each animal appropriately, according to the varying quality of its phenotype and temperament and making more accurate the assessment of the characteristics to be inherited.
It is essential to have an exact and objective idea of the positive and negative characteristics of each animal, facing with scientific impartiality all the undesirable points the dog may have as well.
Whenever we indicate in the summaries the defects of the analyzed animals, we usually receive all sorts of excuses and explanations from their owners, who try to show that those flaws notated are excusable and it would be unjust to penalize them. Which means that dogs having weak constitution and light bones have always been acquired in a deplorable condition, because the breeder had neglected the elementary care such as good food, administration of calcium and vitamins. Difficulties in movement such as hip dysplasia or other abnormalities are never due to genetic problems, but always due to the dog being run over as a pup, a fracture resulting from a fall or a sprain in the car when coming to the show. Missing teeth are always a result of a remarkable ferocity that makes the animal bite the iron bars of the gate furiously, whenever someone rings the doorbell. Fear of gunshots is trauma caused by the sad accident of having bitten a St. John’s Feast firecracker that exploded in its mouth. A shy reaction to an attack with a rod is usually attributed to the cruelty of the former owner who used to beat it mercilessly.
We do not intend to deny that, in fact, many of the problems presented may have been acquired by accidents or unfortunate circumstances. Even so, the judges should only consider what is before their eyes at the time of analysis or exhibition. It is often difficult or even impossible to prove whether the defect is genetic or not. It may not be a sympathetic and understanding posture not to take a dog owner’s word when he blames this or that event for the emergence off failure. Unfortunately, we know that many people act in bad faith and that if it were possible, they would not hesitate in trying to impinge old “stories” that justify everything. Be that as it may, we got tired of hearing them.  Within a single standard of conduct, perhaps some [dogs] are hindered however, it would be advisable not to set precedents. 
If on one hand, there is bad faith that tries to cover commercial purposes or nurture personal vanities, there are also the cases of people who naively want to discover miraculous methods to correct their dog’s defects because they cannot resign themselves to those. How to improve narrow hips, sensitivity to gunshot, longelineal type and faulty bite are common inquiries. Then, thwarted attempts to alleviate the defect take place, as in: massive doses of calcium and jogging next to the bike or car to "improve the rump"; careful training, petting the dog every time blank cartridge shots are triggered at a distance that will shorten gradually; the expectation that the female breeds to see if it becomes corpulent; the hope that by eating large amounts of bones or chewing hard rubber toys the lower jawbone goes to the right place. 
Bearing in mind that there no absolutely perfect dogs exist, the sensible attitude should be to see the animal as it really is, evaluating and weighing pros and cons in due proportion. Failing to recognize and accept existing defects in an attempt to deceive an eventual puppy buyer, a judge or ones own self, shows lack of maturity, which does not benefit the breed. Defects should not be hidden or concealed; we must try to correct them in subsequent generations through the careful choice of the right partners for mating, and scrupulous about the selection of offspring that are born.
It is perfectly understandable that people place high expectations on a dog, which they purchase and in the course of its development they become fond of it. As a result, bonds of affection and emotional ties distort reality, making it difficult to recognize the fact that perhaps that animal does not deserve to be used in reproduction. However, we must remember that often a mating in which both the male and female are excellent, there are disappointments. Often when we think we have the ideal genetic material to produce a formidable litter in hand, reality disappoints us. Good breeding is very difficult, even when we work with great animals. Intending to get satisfactory results from medium quality specimens seems like a childish attempt and lacks scientific spirit.
The lack of critical scrutiny from a few people is such, that again when granting the provisional approval for male or female dogs which would need to be mated with a well-chosen partners, having proven genetic prepotency; to try to produce a good litter, we come across plans that seem quite pretentious for us, including “inbreeding” as master plan for the next breeding program.  
            No doubt inbreeding is an efficient and rapid method to set type and desired characteristics because it is responsible for homozygosis presented by the products resulting thereof. But we cannot forget that consanguinity is a double-edged sword. For whose use it is important to consider many aspects. One must know how and when to use it, and it can be a powerful weapon in the hands of people who understand genetics, who have high quality animals and those who are prepared to eliminate entire litters. Just as it determines qualities, it highlights defects as well. Therefore, its use is justified only when having great dogs, whose type and quality really deserve to be perpetuated. Consequently, it is not a method to be adopted as routine, to be used by all breeders and in all dogs, as some seem to intend. 
For the remarkable qualities that distinguish it, the Fila breed has raised the interest of many dog lovers in other countries, as evidenced by the growing emphasis given by numerous specialized publications, mainly in Europe which focus primarily on the problems originated from mix-breeding. The future of our breeding and the chance of it getting respected, occupying the place it deserves within international Cynophilia depend on the honest and united work of breeders in the search of a common goal. They must be responsible when facing genetic improvement with the effort and seriousness of those who study a science, and with the talent and sensibility of those who are dedicated to an art, above personal vanities and mean rivalries.
END- 1981
This article, which had already been published in Brazil and in Spain, was written in 1994, originally as a letter in response to technical questions asked by the Spanish breeder, Jaime Perez Marhuenda, to the director of CAFIB-Rio, Francisco Peltier de Queiroz who, in turn, has passed them on to the judge and director of CAFIB-Brazil Américo Cardoso dos Santos Jr.
Since then, Jaime has come to Brazil several times and has become a Cafib Judge and a Cafib representative in Spain. Through articles and news stories he has written in the important magazine published by the Spanish Molossos de Arena Club [Club Español de los Molosos de Arena], where he is a director, Jaime has undertaken one of the most important efforts in disseminating information about the Brazilian breed in Europe and which he should be credited for.
NOTE: Translated by Luciana Gomes and with final revision by Ligia Morris.