|
EARLIEST NOTION OF
DOGS IN THE CANARY ISLANDS
"Plinio and Estacio Seboso thus named the islands (Canaria),
making derive their name from the large dogs they found there at the
time of Juba's famous expedition of which two were to the King of
Mauritania". This etymology, which was originally accepted by all later
authors who commented on this famous voyage, has been refuted.
Undoubtedly, in the Canaries there were no dogs of
any extraordinary corpulence. When describing the island, Bethencourt's
chaplains and historians expressly state, "There are pigs, goats, sheep
and wild dogs, similar to wolves but smaller". (Historia General de las
Islas Canarias, de Agustín Millares Torres, t. I, libro IV, I.ª ediction,
1975, pág. 176) In Book II, page 134 of the same work we read, "The true
similarity between the names given to the islands by Juba's men and the
names they are known by today has been widely disputed. Though curious,
this dissertation does not portray that great historic importance which
some of our writers have since wished to give to it. Undoubtedly, the
two main islands were named "Canaria" and "Nivaria", a fact which allows
for no speculations as to the exactitude of Plinio's narration. It is
certain, however, that information collected by Juba and transmitted to
us by Estacio Seboso and Plinio is incomplete and incorrectly
corroborated or connected, either due to inaccurate copyists or
ignorance on the part of commentators". And on page 135, where
the author mentions old historians or geographers, we read, "We have
seen that Juba, philosopher and naturalist in the universal sense of the
word at that time, was the first to obtain the most exact information
about the archipelago. And it is evident that since his famous
expedition the islands took on the name of "Canarias", either because of
the dogs "ingentis magnitudinis" of which Plinio spoke or for different
reasons, the later which others believe is a more sound hypothesis". "Considering
this and other logical observations, other new etymologies have appeared
which we will now briefly mention". Plinio assures us that on the
western slopes of the Atlas Mountains some villages existed known as the
Canaries and perhaps for this reason Ptolemy named Cape Bojador (Morocco)
"Caunaria Extrema". But did these names come from that name which had
first been given to the island "Canaria," or did it occur the other way
around and was it those villages and the African headland which gave the
name to the island? Whatever the case, this curious similarity of their
names should not be forgotten. Others suppose that the Latin birch,
euphorbia canariense, which Juba knew of, wrote about and named after
his doctor Euforbio, was what gave Gran Canaria its denomination,
derived from the Latin "canna." Thomas Nichols agreed with this
hypothesis in 1525 and added, "I have heard the primitive inhabitants
say that it was named "Canaria" because of a certain variety of cane
which grew abundantly in the countryside, from which a dangerous,
poisonous, milky substance was extracted". (book IV, t. I., Pág. 176, of
the same author). And on page 177 he adds, "The island of Canaria was
named "Tamarán" or "Tamerán" by its primitive inhabitants, which appears
to mean in their language, "country of braves".
THE DOGS OF
THE CANARY ISLANDS' ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS
Juba II lived from the middle of 1BC to 23 or 24 AD
and the first conquerors reached Lanzarote in July of 1402. That mean
that 1379 years passed from the time of Juba's death to the arrival of
Juan de Bethencourt and Gadifer de La Salle with their troops (mostly
spaniards) on the coast of the Canary Islands. In all this time, what
has happened in the Canarian archipelago? Has its fauna altered? Have
new contributions been made by the navigators mallorquin, geoneses,
viking, etc? Juan de Bethencourt's chaplains stated that the dogs were,
"wild, similar to wolves, only smaller". Friar Alonso de Espinosa in his
book Historia de Nuestra Señora de Candelaria, page 114, referred to the
dogs which ate the aboriginal Guanches' bodies after the Spanish
slaughter of Acentejo (in the north of Tenerife). He wrote, "These were
small yapping dogs called 'canchas' which the Guanches bred". Well, were
these dogs of the same breed on both islands? Did they have the same
origins? Or on which island did they arrive first and when? For to take
for granted that dogs existed on the islands from the times of Juba II
is a bit risky, to say the least. But what does remain indisputable is
their size; they were small dogs.
To the inhabitants of Canaria and La Palma, "the
devil often appeared by night and day as large, hairy dogs and as other
figures which they named 'Tibisenas' and 'Irnene', (Fray Juan de Abreu
Galindo). On this occasion we are told of an imaginary demon god in La
Palma, where it seems there were no real dogs, I mean of meat and bone,
before the conquest. Nor were there any in Lanzarote, Fuerteventura, La
Gomera or El Hierro. Luis Diego Cuscoy says in his book Los Guanches,
page 108, "In Tenerife although we do not know of the evidence of the
dog related to myth, it is an animal which is present in the worship of
the deceased. There is no chronicler or other ancient source which
refers to the role played by the dog in Guanche funeral rites.
Archaeological excavations have revealed the presence of dogs alongside
the deceased, probably their owners. That would represent the animal's
part in guiding the spirit of the dead to the land of the deceased. It
is possible, almost certain in fact, that the animal would be sacrificed
at the time of its master's death. We have verified the finding of a dog
beside its master in various sepulchral caves in Tenerife. But it was at
the Llano de Maja necropolis where, beside the shepherd's body (together
with a complete collection of funeral offerings: bead necklaces, burins,
pieces of obsidian, ceramics, teak firebrands) that a skull was found
corresponding to the mummified remains of a small-sized dog which had
short, dark, cream-colored fur. . . It formed part of the natives'
source of alimentation, but on a small scale". This is all we know about
the Canary Island dogs prior to the conquest. Therefore, anything else
which is not supported by new archaeological findings is meaningless,
purely speculative and pure invention.
PRESA DOGS OF
ANCIENT TIMES
Since this article is about the Presa Canario dog, we
will concentrate on this and ignore the other canine breeds mentioned
over and over in the the
Agreements and decrees of the Cabildo of Betancuria (Fuerteventura)
and
of Tenerife. The "perro de ganado" (or cattle dog) from
Fuerteventura and the podenco Canario have been disclosed in depth in
articles published earlier in this magazine. On September 3, 1515, it
was recorded that "it was agreed that since the ordinances regarding
dogs are rather severe (being understood that in previous years, right
after the conquest of the island), nobody could have a dog unless it was
kept indoors or within the confines of one's property and tied up all
day and pig herders could have one dog in each hut as long as it was not
a dog of Presa..." (San Cristobal de La Laguna, Tenerife). In another
agreement dated 1516 it was authorized that "butchers, whose job it was
to chop and weigh meat, could each have two dogs at their service, tying
them up by night and day and only letting them loose to seize or
immobilize the cattle." It is inferred that these two dogs were Presa
dogs, since they were the type of dog always used for this job. And so
the ordinance goes on to say, "Furthermore, because there are two dogs
on this island who kill wild dogs (it is understood here, 'untamed dogs')
and because they were kept for this purpose, these two were allowed to
stay. For example, in Adexe and Abona (in the south of the island) where
Pedro de Lugo was alderman, the dogs were trained and kept as long as
they did not come into the village." These two dogs were probably Presa
dogs too, fast on their legs in order to give chase and strong enough to
kill the wild ones. The 5 of January of 1526 in the Cabildo of Santa
Cruz de Tenerife is agreed that "to excuse the great damages that the
great dogs of presa do in the big and smaller cattles, than always there
have been many complaints and it cannot have better remedy to kill them
all, and for it, be choose a person who kills all and take the people
that will be necessary, except the gentlemen with bovine cattle have
dogs, because they cannot govern nor subjugate their cattles without
them, provided they are not harmful and they have them tied in their
houses and in the town and when there are necessity for this cattle that
takes them responsible person so that they do not do damage, and this is
not understood against the dogs of Pedro de Lugo that are taught to kill
the wild dogs and those of the butchers, according to what is ordered.
And also some gentlemen of gañanías can with license of the Cabildo have
dogs in their houses, provided they have them tied; that if damage will
do they pay it. That to all they kill them if they will not be gozques (small
dogs) of one span". And the 10 of December of 1526, within the house the
Advanced "Was speak on the decrees that arrange that there be not dogs,
that those be fulfill. Because it is damage that the breeders of cattle
have dogs. It is ordered that the cattle man do not have dog of presa
nor of another kind, but for taking and subjugating the cattle are four
great dogs of presa, that are in hands of four of the gentlemen, each
one his dog, tied, under control; and when there are to use them to take
some cattle, takes it under control and in the one of the dogs that
Pedro de Lugo, already late, had, in Abona, to kill them, that succeed
the licensed Valcárcel, stay according to the decree to kill the wild
dogs and the dogs of Juan Alonso and of Francisco de Berlanga, guanches,
whom also wild dogs kill, provided they have them under control and tied
them, and in all the others the decrees are valid. And that all those
that they have small and great dogs males and females come to register
them within ten days in front the justice of this city and its regions
and the other parts of all the island, after it is announced ten days".
In an Agreement of date 25 of August of 1617 (Villa de Betancuria -
Fuerteventura) we read: "They agreed that all neighbor who will have dog
of presa loose and without chain, it can kill any person without being
punished". In another one with date 19 of February of 1618 (Villa de
Betancuria - Fuerteventura), we read: "They sent that those that will
have presa dogs not bring them loose, but they have them under control,
in such a way that they do not damage the cattles. Their owners will not
give them to slaves, young soldiers nor boys so that they take them to
grasped "- to pursue to the goat cattle that walked loose by the field
semi wild- In the Agreement of Betancuria (Fuerteventura) dated October
21, 1624, we read, "Dogs cause a great deal of damage to goats and sheep,
whereby it is agreed that within eight days all but one dog per
household will be killed, one dog being left for guarding the home. And
this means hunting and Presa dogs." On August 16, 1630, it is agreed (Betancuria)
that "in order to have a Presa dog one must make it known to the local
authorities." And in January of 1645 a document written by the General
Representative, Sebastian de Betancor (Betancuria) requested that the
dogs on the island be killed because of the great damage they cause. It
is agreed on Sunday 22 in a public announcement that "all neighbors,
inhabitants and residents kill all their dogs, except one, which they
are allowed to keep to guard their homes, but if it is a Presa dog or a
cattle dog it must be tied up." Adrian El Luchador, a Canary Island
wrestler, born in Fuerteventura, commented to me on one of my visits
there to study the indigenous Perro de Ganado (recognized in 1996 by the
Spanish Royal Central Canine Society as the Perro Majorero) that with
the help of a number of friends, he was very successful in using a
strong Perro de Ganado Majorero of his own to give hunt to various wild
dogs who fed themselves basically off goat and sheep in an area known as
Pozo Negro, an open area where volcanic lava predominated. According to
Adrian, that dog was a pure breed, and it behaved as its ancestors had.
But such dogs are no more, or are very few, and in any case, he did not
know where any could be found. After several years of study and going
over the matter again and again, I have reached the following conclusion.
Presa dogs and Perros Majoreros on that island, as on the other islands,
coexisted and bred amongst themselves throughout various centuries, from
the beginning of the fifteenth century to the end of the nineteenth
century. And sometime afterwards, we do not even know the approximate
date (I personally think maybe at the end of the last century, beginning
of this one), the Presa disappears, only traces of it remaining, no
doubt in decline, basically due to negligence on the part of the
herdsmen. Crossbreeding did the rest. The Perro de Ganado Majorero in
Fuerteventura, or its sort, disappeared from the other islands just like
the Presa did. I wish to say that if the old Presa Canario of Iberian
stock disappeared as a breed, it has continued in the purest of the
Perro de Ganado Majoreros to the present day. It is true that very few
of these dogs are of significant pure breed, but they do exist. In fact,
right now we are trying to recuperate the breed with part of this
genetic material.
ORIGIN
Much speculation has been made about the origin of
the Presa dogs mentioned in the official documents which we have cited
above. Some wrote and spoke about their descendence from the aboriginal
dogs which the conquistadors found on the islands. Nobody thought there
was any connection between the Canary Island dogs (Presa dogs, Perros
Majoreros, perdigueros, podencos, etc.) and the Spanish ones, which were
undoubtedly brought to the islands already in the first dates of the
conquest. The great animosity that the "nationalists" of the times
(1970's) felt towards the Spanish conquistadors and colonizers lead them
to not only ignore but also to silence such a possible reality. What is
certain is that immediately after the conquest of the throne of Castilla,
a wide variety of fauna was introduced into the Canaries. Spanish dogs,
in all their diversity, were an important part of this fauna. These dogs
(in the hands of their owners) established themselves day by day on the
islands conquered by their owners, and continued with the same functions
they had on the continent. As we have seen, Presa dogs were used by
butchers to immobilize the cattle at slaughter time and they were also
used to guard homes and properties. Nobody knows whether they were used
to hunt the wild animals (goats, sheep and pigs already extinguish) of
the aborigines. Nothing is known of those dogs' phenotype, nor of how
they evolved in their crossbreeding, or how they adapted to the
surroundings, climate, etc. Nor do we know anything about their size or
their color. This is the truth of the matter. In the past two decades,
much has been said and written about the influence of English dogs in
the Presas Canarios. I was the first to put forth that idea (1982).
Later, having more knowledge about the history of the Canaries, I
defended the Spanish origin of the various breeds introduced into the
Canaries from the very beginning and through conquest and colonization.
Anyway, the dog continued along this path until the end of the
nineteenth century, with no more genetic influence than that derived
from the periodic imports from the Spanish Peninsula. José de Viera y
Clavijo (1731-1813) wrote in his Historia Natural de las Islas Canarias
(page 348), "In 1764 there was an outbreak of rabies brought on by dogs
from Spain and it affected some dogs in Tenerife but no new outbreak has
been reported since." In a separate paragraph he wrote, "The most common
dogs in our Canary Islands are mastiffs, sheepdogs, podencos,
perdigueros, pachones, dogos, waterdogs, bloodhounds, etc." In other
words, as I say in my work the Perro de Ganado Majorero published in
this same magazine, typically Spanish dogs. Limiting ourselves to the
period from the beginning of the 1400's until the 1800's the relations
between Spain and England were continuously hostile, due to religious
motives and expansionist policies. For these reasons the Canaries were
constant victims of acts of English piracy. Although commercial
relations from the 1700's on were very important, the number of English
residents in the islands was insignificant. Throughout the XVI, the
canarian society was perfectly consolidated, and already was basically
Iberian and Spanish-speaking. And the dogs, the bovine cattle, the pigs,
goats, sheep, part of the equines, etc., of the time are of Spanish
origin. When referring to English dogs in 1982 I affirmed nothing in
particular. And as I have already mentioned, I was totally ignorant of a
great part of the history of the Canaries and knew nothing at all about
the historical documents of the town councils in Tenerife or
Fuerteventura. Soon others have followed year after good year giving by
good the aforesaid (hypothetical) origin exposed by me, ignoring
deliberately my later works which was much better documented.
Considering all that has been stated above, I believe it pertinent to
state that the English bulldog, the bullmastiff, the mastiff, the
bullterrier, etc., as breeds, do not go back much further than the end
of the last century. This means they have been created since then by
crossbreeding dogs brought in from mainland Spain. Setters, cockers,
pointers, etc., have no other origin. Clearly, anybody could counter
with the fact of the famous pugnaces britanii which were taken to Rome
from England in the times of Caesar and put to fight Epiro's molosus.
True. But do those English dogs of more than 2000 years ago really bear
any relation to the English mastiffs, bulldogs, bullterriers,
bullmastiffs of our day and age? That is the question. Given the
knowledge we now have about the origin of these breeds, I am inclined to
believe that there is no relationship whatsoever between the present day
dogs and those of 2000 years ago. So, as we have been saying, this
hypothesis which assumes the influence of English "presa" dogs on the
old Presa Canario dogs does not seem valid. The possibility exists, sure.
Though we don't have any details or references on English dogs to
support such an approach, it is possible that some British dogs (note:
British, not English) were brought in by their owners who lived in the
Canaries. Moreover, it is quite likely that Stafford-type dogs were
brought over. This is the oldest English presa-type dog, but we hardly
know anything about its roots either. If this were so, in what way could
those dogs have influenced the Canarian presas, the waterdogs, the
perros de ganado, the podencos, the pachones, the perdigueros, etc.? In
fact a question comes to me which has not been posed before. The English
could have taken the presa dogs from the Canaries back to Britain, the
same as they took other dogs from the Spanish Peninsula (I shall leave
out the remaining Canary canine breeds as they have nothing to do with
my objective here). And who knows how many times these presas went on to
increase the canine population of that nation, and what influence they
had on their presa-type dogs.
THE PRESA CANARIO IN THE XX CENTURY
Viera y Clavijo wrote, "the most common dogs on our
islands are mastiffs, shepherds, podencos, perdigueros, pachones, dogos,
water dogs, hounds, etc." How many of these canine breeds existed in the
Canaries at the beginning of the XX in Canarias? Today, at the end of
the century, we still know practically nothing about this. We don't know
exactly when, but water dogs, beagles, mastiffs, hounds and perdigueros
became extinct here. On the other hand, there are many podencos to be
found on our islands nowadays. And surely this is partly--and only
partly--due to crossbreeding basically with Ibizan podencos which were
brought generation after generation to refresh the castes of "indigenous"
podencos which actually were derived from those podencos of the
eighteenth century. With reference to sheepdogs, it is reasonable to
deduce that from them descend the Perro de Ganado Majorero (Fuerteventura
Island), the so-called perro de ganado ("cattle dog") which is cited in
the official ordinances and agreements of the Cabildo of Tenerife and
Fuerteventura. On the rest of the islands the Perro de Ganado disappears
as well. And with respect to the dogos that Viera mentions, well, this
could be a reference to the presas that are repeatedly named in those
same official documents I just mentioned. But in the first three decades
of this century, if not sooner, the few remaining specimens of this
breed disappeared as well. So? The aficionado who is concerned with
retaining the indigenous fauna of the Canaries could rightly be rather
upset and worried that it seems to be happening before everybody's eyes
and nobody has done or is doing anything about it. That's right. As we
shall see, that is precisely the case. In the early 1970's there was
absolute ignorance of the concept of the modern breed. But generally one
spoke of presa dogs (in the Canaries), perros de la tierra (in Gran
Canaria), perros de ganado (in Fuerteventura), perros bastos (in the
north of Tenerife), bordones (a derivative of bulldog), bardinos (berdinos,
degenerated from bardino, in the north of Tenerife), verdugos (in
Fuerteventura) and the word "lagarteado" was used to refer to any dog of
bardina (brindle) coat, and occasionally the word "mastiff" took the
floor, that someone related (in the 1980's and early 1990's in the north
of Tenerife) with the dogs of presa. The truth is that when one went
around asking about these dogs and the racial differences that might
exist amongst them, the aficionado of the times would respond in a less
than convincing manner. Dogs of presa were or could be those specimens
that in earlier days were used for pechadas (fights). The perro de la
tierra was similar to the Perro de Ganado Majorero and was similarly
used for conduct the cattle or for guarding (in Gran Canaria). The perro
basto (coarse dog) (north of Tenerife) referred to all dogs of a certain
size (compared to the smaller hunting dogs, principally podencos) that
were good for guarding. Bordón referred to all those presa crossbreeds
in which the English bulldog blood was predominant. And depending on the
island and on the canine knowledge of whom you spoke to, bardino could
refer to all specimens from Fuerteventura with a bardino (brindle) coat,
or all presa dogs, whatever their descendence be (in Tenerife it was
spelled berdino). And verdugo, (Fuerteventura), was a dog with a bardino
(brindle) coat or similar. In Extremadura, among cattlemen, this term
still remains, and in some hispano-american countries, as well--which
means that it has its original roots in Spain.
In the late 1980's, given the poor results up till
then of my research on Canarian presa and cattle dogs, I had the idea of
coming up with a questionnaire of 16 questions for three old dog
fighters from Gran Canaria. These men were Francisco Saavedra Bolaños,
Salvador Hernández Rodriguez, and Demetrio Trujillo Rodriguez.
The first question was: Do you recall the first dog
fight that you ever attended in your life?
Francisco Saavedra Bolaños replied:
"Yes, I do. It was a fight with "El Muchacho," a dog
with a bardino (brindle) coat, against a black dog named "Negro". I was
fourteen years old. The black dog was a real dog."
The second question: In what year was this?
"In 1928."
The third question: What were those dogs like?
"They weren't old Presa Canario dogs."
The tenth question: Do you remember the last typical
Presa Canario dog? Please describe it for me.
"The Presa of the land was big, large-lipped, with a lot
of head and chest. Its lips were so large that it was said they had to
be cut in order to be able to fight. I was four or five years old when I
saw two. They said that they were real Presas "de la tierra" (literally
"of the land"). They were male and female; they were brother and sister.
Their owners were Marcos Mendoza and Antonio Enríquez."
Salvador Hernández Rodriguez replied to the first
question;
"Yes, in the Casino de Armas. The fight was between "El
Asesino" and "El Tigre", two crosses of English bulldog. The owners were
Ramón el de Bañaderos and Juan Barriguilla, and the referee was Juan
Martín."
To the second question he answered:
"I must have been about 26 years old. I'm sixty-seven
now. So that was in 1949."
To the third he answered: "'El Tigre" was very wide and
had an enormous head. 'El Asesino' weighed 45 kilos (99 pounds) and he
was the best dog I've ever seen in my life."
To the tenth question he replied:
"Yes. It was 'El Molone', the son of a bitch owned by the
Count of Vega Grande. It was dark brindle. It must have weighed 45 kilos
(99 pounds). With that dog I won three cups in exhibitions organized by
the Cabildo (island council). There were exhibitions of goats, dogs and
cows. That dog had a lot of head and a lot of chest."
Demetrio Trujillo Rodriguez answered thus to the first
question:
"I was eight years old."
To the second: " In 1936."
To the third: "They were short, wide and big-headed
dogs."
To the tenth: "I don't recall the Presa Canario dog. At
those times all dogs were crossbreeds."
From oral tradition we know that sure enough the
Presas Canarios were rather short, wide and big-headed dogs. Francisco
Saavedra says they were large-lipped. One very important piece of
information is the weight--45 kilos (99 pounds). This means that it was
a large dog, but not excessively so. Most likely it was just large for
the times. But is it certain that those dogs were Presas descending from
the Presas of centuries ago? Since we can't answer that question for
lack of information, it must be left in the air. Probably it will never
be answered.
To the eighth question (What crosses with foreign
breeds were done in those years?) all three men replied the same: "With
bulldogs, bullterriers and Great Danes."
Now, since when were these three breeds (two English
and one German) crossed to obtain Presa dogs for fighting? And another
really important question: When did dog fighting begin in the Canaries?
It is very probable that Great Danes arrived in the
Canaries once the Second World War was over (not before) at the hand of
fugitive German nazis who came to the islands in search of refuge. There
is nothing, no historical references or oral traditions, which could
lead us to believe that in past centuries there were dog fights in the
Canaries. So one may think that this practice which did enjoy certain
popularity among the lowest classes in the 1920's until its prohibition
in the 1940's in Gran Canaria and Tenerife (in the rest of the islands,
hardly at all) was indeed imported from England.
Of course, nothing can actually be ascertained, since
nothing is known about it. But we do know that in the Canaries there
were never any organized dog fights and dog fights were much less
frequent than it may seem. "There were no dog fighters in those years,"
Francisco Saavedra told us on our interview. "There were people that had
a dog and would put it to fight with the dog of another man.and, money
was not bet. We just went to see which dog was better. That was all."
And to the question, "What did the dog fighters live off of?" he said, "From
their labor in the fields." "From the fields," answered Salvador
Hernández. "We were people of very little money, poor people. Important
people almost never got involved in these things. They had other
pastimes." And Demetrio Trujillo said, "We were field workers." In those
years ram fights were also held. Like these, the dog fights just arose
naturally amongst the indigenous countryside population. They didn't
necessarily have to be imported. Canarian dog fights had nothing to do
with the English dog fights.
CROSSBREEDS
Once the indigenous Presas Canarios of spanish origin
had practically disappeared, and given the increase of the popularity of
dog fights (or pechadas as they were called in the Canaries), the dog
fighters resort to the English bulldog, the bullterrier and the Great
Dane the Perro de Ganado Majorero, the Spanish Mastiff, and they cross
them in order to obtain adequate products for their dog fights. In
reality, the Perro de Ganado Majorero of the times was the base of many
of those crosses due to its rusticity, its endurance and bravery. And
this is why many specimens had dark brindle coats. It is clear that in
those times not all the perros majoreros were brindles. There were black
ones, sandy ones, ones with white patches, etc. There were also ones
crossed with perros de la tierra (literally, "dogs of the land" of Gran
Canaria), which "were similar to the Perro de Ganado Majorero, but maybe
a little larger," Salvador Saavedra Bolaños tells us in the interview.
We know very little of the different coats that the old Presas Canarios
had. It seems that the brindle coat was the most common. We do know
something about the coats of those Presas that were crossbred in the
1920's and we know even more about those crossed from the 1930's onwards.
The Perros Majoreros and the perros de la tierra transmitted a very high
percentage of the brindle coats, then the black coats and the sandy coat
sometimes with white patches. The white coat could have come from the
bullterriers and the bulldogs, the fawn and black colors, from the Great
Danes. In those years and up to the 1960's, the majority of brindle,
black, sandy and fawn dogs were acollarados (had white areas around
their necks), calzados (on their feet), corbatos (on their chests), and
berrendos (on their lower bellies). White dogs with spots were also
frequent. In the early 1970's there hardly remained any Presas produced
from this crossbreeding in Tenerife and Gran Canaria. In the remaining
islands they have completely disappeared. Like the Presa dogs, support
for them is also a thing of the past. Some elderly men, old fighters,
remember out loud longingly to anyone who will listen to them of their
Presas' heroic deeds. I my book The Presa Canario Dog: It's True Origin
the most important moments are mentioned as well as some of the most
talked about Presas.
THE MODERN PRESAS CANARIOS
After the 1970's, support increased for the Presa
Canario dog and as a consequence dog fights came back as well. Some of
the old fighters participated with their dogs (which, as we have said
before, had nothing to do with the old Presas). To obtain Presa dogs,
the enthusiast would crossbreed different foreign breeds such as the
English bulldog, the bull terrier, the English mastiff, the Neapolitan
Mastiff (Mastino Napolitano), the Staffordshire bull terrier, the
American Pit Bull Terrier, the Dobermann, the Bullmastiff, the Great
Dane, the Dogue de Bordeaux, the Fila Brasileiro, the Spanish Mastiff,
the American Bulldog, and the Rhodesian Ridgeback. In Gran Canaria the
Perro de Ganado Majorero was frequently used, though not so in Tenerife.
The breeds used most often in Gran Canaria were (since the beginning and
in order of importance): the Neapolitan mastiff, the Great Dane, the
English Mastiff, and the Perro de Ganado Majorero. After the 1980's the
American Staffordshire Terrier and the American Pit Bull Terrier were
also used. In Tenerife the most used were the bulldog, the bullmastiff,
the Great Dane and sometimes the Dogo de Burdeaux and the Staffordshire
Bull Terrier. In the 1990's the American Staffordshire Terrier have
occasionally been used. The Rhodesian Ridgebacks and the Fila Brasileiro
haven't been used very much and only in Gran Canaria, as far as we know.
The consequence of this crossbreeding is the morpho-phenotypical
diversity of the modern Presa Canario. And so it isn't easy at all to
raise and select for a prototype as described in the standard. In order
to attain the approximate phenotype that we have set as a goal (not the
ideal, of course, which is impossible to attain in any breed), there
must be some genetic constant in a good part of the existing Presa
population with which to work from. And this is impossible given the
circumstances I've described above. So someone who attend to a Monograph
or a Specialty, although little he or she may know about canine matters,
quickly realizes the lack of homogeneity that there is among the dogs.
The solution to this serious problem (which has been the case in many of
the breeds we know of today that are perfectly established, genetically
speaking) will slowly be solved over time as long as only the most
robust, similar, healthy (in the broadest sense of the word), functional,
etc. specimens are used. To use those Presas with character flaws,
psychic imbalance, poor structure, undershot bite, missing premolars,
dysplastic, atypical, is a terrible mistake which is committed all too
often.
Published in Magazine "Todo perros"
Nº 40 y 41 - Febrary - March, 1998.
Manuel Curtó Gracia
With the kind permision of Irema Curtó Kennels
www.iremacurto.com
Perro de Presa Canario sprzed lat |