The Separation Question
Again and again one hears voices in favor of separating the Shar-Pei into two separate breeds. This has happened to other breeds in the past, so the idea isn't entirely unfounded.
Akita Inu
Another Asian breed, the Akita Inu of Japan, has a history comparable to the Shar Pei and is often cited as an example for an official division.
Just like the Shar Pei, the Akita Inu has a very long history, even if the selective pure breeding of the Akita Inu began several hundred years ago, while selective pure breeding is fairly new to the Shar Pei. Both breeds are considered ancient dog breeds, both breeds are hardly genetically related to other breeds and both breeds still have "newer" genetic parts from Chinese wolves.>
In Japan, the Akita Inu even received the status of a Japanese cultural asset in 1931 and the export of the breed was also prohibited until 1945. During the Second World War, however, the number of dogs was so severely depleted that this breed was also considered to be on the verge of extinction. After the war, American soldiers brought the first Akitas to the USA.
The Akita Inu was bred in the US from 1956 in a direction, that was no longer recognized by Japan as conforming to the standard. As a result, the breed diverged even further on both ends of the world. As a result, the FCI officially divided the breed and since 2000 they have been classified as Akita and American Akita. The main differences between the American Akita and the Akita Inu are the size, the much stronger bone structure and the many different coat colors.
An almost identically different development as the Chinese and Western Shar Pei
So if we are talking about a division of the breed, following the example of the Akita, we would have to recognize the original type from China as the Chinese Shar-Pei and rename the entire western Shar-Pei population.
Country of Origin and Patronage
The FCI would be responsible for creating separate standards and assigning them to the correct groups. Normally, each individual breed of dog belongs to a specific member country of the FCI, the country of origin. The breeding association of this country of origin creates the breed standard. For breeds whose country of origin does not belong to the FCI, either a national breeding association or the FCI itself assumes the patronage and fulfills the corresponding tasks towards the FCI. The Shar Pei has been recognized as a breed by the FCI since 1981. The country of origin is China, but the patronage for the Shar Pei lies with the FCI
Why is that?
The China Kennel Union (CKU) has existed since 2006 and has been a full member of the FCI ever since. So they only became a member after the breed was recognized 25 years earlier. China is considered the country of origin of the breed, but does not have the patronage and currently has no influence on the standard. A point that should change with a division into two separate breeds. China, the country of origin of the Chinese Shar Pei, should receive the patronage for the breed and would thus have the opportunity to have a direct influence on the standard and the grouping. Patronage for the western Shar Pei would remain with the FCI.
From my personal subjective point of view, it all sounds quite reasonable and understandable. So far I have always been against separating the Shar Pei into two breeds, but I have to admit that after writing and revising this articlet I have revised my personal opinion.
In fact, there are only two questions left to answer.
What benefit would the Shar Pei have from a separation?
It is absolutely irrelevant to the individual dog what its breed is called and in which FCI group it is. So the dog doesn't really care as long as his bowl is full at the end of the day! Likewise, the general population of the breed would certainly see it that way too, if asked.
So it must lie with us humans. But even here, at least outside of China, I see no benefit in separating the breed, following the example of the Akita. In China I can see it, as they would have the opportunity to better protect the Chinese Shar Pei and would have active shaping options for the future of their breed.
What would it mean for the breed overall?
It would mean nothing to the Chinese Shar Pei in China. It is an independent breeding population, almost exclusively inside its own national borders, with a solid genetic variance. This means only the Shar-Pei population of the original type, not of the western type, which in the past also found its way from the West to China and is confronted with the breed typical health problems known in western countries.
And for the rest of the FCI world? The original Chinese Shar Pei and the western, modern Shar Pei have almost no points of contact at the moment. The Chinese Shar Pei is found almost exclusively within China.
The only meaning it would have for the Western Shar Pei population is that once officially separated it might be impossible to establish new genes in the breed in the future. With the consequence that the genetic variance of the breed continues to decrease further.
My personal conclusion
If a breed segregation were made based on the example of the Akita, then I support that.
For me, the protection of the breed in China is a matter close to my heart and a separation would be a great opportunity to ensure this protection in the long term. It's not like I don't care about the western, modern Shar Pei, quite the opposite. And a genetic exchange, at least in one direction, would be an important possibility. However, I now see them almost only as a "drop in the ocean" because the majority of the world's western Shar-Pei are "bred" outside of the FCI or its cooperating organizations.
Personally, I think it's more realistic to protect what we still have in China than what we've lost outside of China.
Sources
- Image 1: 掬茶, CC BY-SA 4.0
- Image 2: Jonnydrh, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons
