Moscow Watchdog

After the Second World War the Soviet stock of service dogs had all but disappeared. By order of the USSR Ministry of Defence, rebuilding numbers and covering the needs of the national economy fell to the Central School of Military Dog Breeding, “Red Star”, then just outside Moscow at Veshnyaki near Novogireyevo, now within the city. Towards the end of the 1940s it began crossing the breeds to hand that suited the task.

The choice of “what was available” was a forced one. The breeds brought back from Germany survived in a few individuals apiece; the Saint Bernard and the Newfoundland, the Rottweiler and the Giant Schnauzer counted as exotica. Alongside them worked the German Shepherd and the Caucasian Shepherd Dog, the Borzoi and the Russian Piebald Hound, or Russian Harlequin Hound (russkaya pegaya gonchaya). Out of that patchy, thinly stocked material several breeds had to be built at once.

Who did the work

The programme was directed by the biologist Professor N. A. Ilyin and by the Central School’s commanding officer, Major General G. P. Medvedev; the crossings and the selection of sires fell to the head of the breeding kennel, Nikolai Ivanovich Bortnikov. The school’s cynologist then was Alexander Pavlovich Mazover, an expert of all-Union category, whose descriptions of 1955–1956 survive and show what the first stock looked like.

The method was called complex reproductive crossing — “complex” because more than two breeds took part. The brief was dry and concrete: a large, powerful, roughly built, agile dog with watch and guard qualities, readily trainable and undemanding in its keep. Those traits had to pass reliably to the offspring: the object was not a few good individuals but a breed that reproduced itself.

The first litter and the first show

In 1950 the kennel brought to the 14th Moscow city show of service dogs six littermates born on 12 July 1949 — five males and one bitch: Djoy, Don, Dukat, Despot, Divny and Dido. Their parents are named outright: the Saint Bernard Barry and the Caucasian Shepherd bitch Asha. The founding pair was Saint Bernard × Caucasian Shepherd, and the judging reports still call the puppies crossbreds.

The 1950 descriptions read like an engineering test report. Djoy: a solid body and heavy bone, but a “sharply defined loose lip” and straightened rear angulation; Divny: a tendency to a loose constitution, a light eye, a soft back; Despot: turned-out front feet and almost straight rear angulation on a short second thigh. Faults were recorded rather than glossed over, to be weighed when pairs were chosen — which is why the type levelled out within a few generations.

What the short formula leaves out

The standard in force gives the origin as three breeds: Caucasian Shepherd Dog, Saint Bernard, Russian Piebald Hound. The pedigrees published by the national breed club are more tangled. Crosses of Saint Bernard with Russian Piebald Hound were bred back to East European Shepherds and their descendants to Caucasian Shepherds; the bitch Kara, born 1959, carries such a pedigree. Among the producers is Karabashka, a Caucasian Shepherd × Newfoundland cross, who in 1951 whelped the male Fars by that same Saint Bernard, Barry. The short formula “Saint Bernard + Caucasian + hound” is a summary, not a full inventory.

One detail rarely gets written up. Breeding material was scarce, and “Red Star” ran several breeds at once — the Moscow Watchdog, the Black Russian Terrier, the Moscow Water Dog and the Moscow Great Dane — so the cynologists deliberately inbred closely on particular producers, through descendants of the first and second generations. It was a tool for fixing type and it worked; what it left behind is taken up under health.

The search for a silhouette: a cropping that was dropped

For several years the cynologists could not settle on an image for the new breed reading neither as a Saint Bernard nor as a Caucasian. During that search, tails and ears were cropped. The practice was abandoned: the look settled with drop ears and a long, evenly furnished tail, and every later edition of the standard fixes them so.

Orslan, the founder

In 1960 the male Vepkhia (Caucasian Shepherd) was mated to the bitch Tutti (Saint Bernard). From that pair, on 1 December 1960, came Orslan — breed champion, champion of the 1967 USSR VDNKh exhibition, a dog of “Elite” class, awarded for progeny excellent in conformation and working qualities alike. The standard names him as the founder. His 1968 description, written at the 32nd Moscow city show by the republic-category judge Anetta Yakovlevna Arkhangelskaya when he was nearly eight, records a typical head with an excellent stop, dark eyes, a deep broad chest, correct angulation — and, as candidly, movement “a little restricted; ageing noticeably”.

Orslan’s best-known son was Dick; alongside him stood Murat, Jack-Dzhenal, Malysh and Ikar. The national breed club states that it has restored and preserved the lines of Dick, Murat, Malysh and Ikar, whose descendants still carry Russia’s genealogical groups. On so narrow a base this matters: the more living lines survive, the fewer matings between close relatives are forced on breeders.

The Moscow Watchdog is a rare case: the editions of its standard can be laid side by side to show where the breed was heading. The first published description appeared in 1958, in the catalogue of the 22nd Moscow city show of service dogs (24–26 May 1958), still covering a breed group rather than a breed. Then: 1985, the breed group granted the status of a breed, with a new standard; 17 April 1992, the standard then current approved by the Russian Federation of Service Dog Breeding; 1997, a lightly amended edition approved by the RKF and adopted by the Department of Animal Husbandry and Breeding of the Russian Ministry of Agriculture; the edition in force is dated 23 April 2008.

The breed physically grew

The 1958 standard asked of males not less than 66 cm at the withers, of bitches not less than 63 cm. The current standard lifts that floor to 68 and 66 cm, wants 77–78 cm in males and 72–73 cm in bitches, and imposes no upper limit at all. Real producers of the mid-1950s show the starting point: the male Khim at 73 cm and 54.7 kg, the male Kheder at 68 cm and 44 kg, the bitch Khurma at 68 cm and 50.5 kg, the male Arik at 72 cm and 50.6 kg. In half a century the breed gained some five centimetres of desired height, and much mass.

The formula of origin changed as well

The 1958 standard puts the origin simply: the breed group came from crossing Saint Bernards with Caucasian Shepherds and mating the crossbreds “among themselves”, with careful selection for type and productivity. The Russian Piebald Hound is absent there and enters only in later editions — no contradiction, just the ordinary life of a document: in 1958 what was thought essential was set down, and the formula was refined afterwards.

Dewclaws: a fifty-year serial

In the 1958 text, in the paragraph on feet, stands a note that the phrase “dewclaws are permitted” was struck out by A. P. Mazover. The 1992 standard already requires their removal outright, and the current edition goes further: dewclaws are a disqualifying fault. One line crossed out in the 1950s became, in half a century, grounds for leaving a dog in the ring without a grade.

The standard in force describes the Moscow Watchdog as a dog of harmonious build, rough robust type, large, broad-bodied, with a slightly elongated frame and well-developed voluminous musculature — active and agile. Sexual type is strongly marked: males are more massive and masculine than bitches. And the standard does not stop at adjectives; it puts the proportions into figures.

The proportions a judge has to check

Body length to height at the withers is 104–105 % in males and 106–108 % in bitches (bitches are a little longer-cast, as they should be). Depth of chest is 50–52 % of the height at the withers; length of muzzle, 34–37 % of the head; height at the elbow, 50–52 % of the withers height. The last figure deserves attention: the dog should be neither on stilts nor low to the ground, since roughly half its height is leg to the elbow.

Head and Muzzle

The head is massive, broad and deep in the cranial region, the forehead wide and slightly domed, the longitudinal furrow shallow. The stop is short, well marked and reasonably deep. The muzzle is somewhat shorter than the skull, broad, blunt, deep, well filled beneath the eyes; forehead and muzzle lines run parallel. The lips are thick, fleshy and black, and here the standard draws a line: with the mouth closed they cover the lower jaw completely, yet form no flews or pendulous folds — a direct barrier against Saint Bernard looseness, since a lip forming a “pocket” caps the grade at “good”.

The dentition is complete — 42 teeth, scissor bite, incisors set in one line at the base. A concession typical of a working breed follows: broken or knocked-out incisors and canines do not affect the grade, so long as the bite can still be assessed. Incomplete dentition, though, even one missing tooth, disqualifies.

Eyes and eyelids: the point watched most closely

The eyes are small, dark and round, set deep, wide apart and straight, the expression calm and confident. The eyelids are black, tight and moderately dry — not a cosmetic phrase. The faults include “loose eyelids” and “strongly developed third eyelids”; brown eyelids disqualify. The 1992 standard carried the same requirement (“eyelids black, dry”) and the same fault; the 1958 text was briefer still: “Eyelids taut.” One structural weakness has been in the sights throughout the breed’s history — the section on health shows why.

Coat and Colour

The coat is dense, long and thick, with a well-developed undercoat; the guard hair is straight, shorter on the head and the front of the limbs. Furnishings are heavier in males, forming a “mane” on the neck and feathering behind the fore and hind limbs; the tail is evenly furnished. A slight wave is tolerated over the loin, croup and thighs alone. Curly hair, and a very short coat with no furnishings, are faults.

The colour is red-piebald, spotted: a white ground with patches of red, red-and-black, black-and-red or sable, and a red shade is obligatory, as is white on the chest, the forelegs to the elbow, the hind legs to the hock and the tip of the tail. Ticking on the white, dark “spectacles” and black on the ears are preferred. The ideal is a dark head from a black mask, black spectacles and black ears, against a lighter body whose reddish patches are separated from the white by clear sable margins.

The club’s commentary on colour, drawn up with M. N. Sotskaya, candidate of biological sciences, reads this genetically. Piebald spotting is governed by the recessive genes ss; the pigmented patches by a^ya^y (the sable series, from reddish shades to a bright red with sooting); the ticking by the dominant gene T. White should cover no less than 30 % and no more than 85 % — on R. Robinson’s ten-point scale of piebald expression (1982), 3 to 7 points, but only if head and muzzle are pigmented. “Irish spotting”, small white markings on a pigmented ground, does not conform.

The “spectacles” deserve a word of their own: they are what makes the breed recognisable. Sharp asymmetry, spectacles without a black rim, absent spectacles or a one-sided “monocle”, spectacles that miss the inner corner of the eye — all cap the grade at “good”. The club explains why: sharp asymmetry is a clearly heritable trait. Ticking brightens with age — barely noticeable in a puppy, vivid and distinct by two years old.

A further consequence of the founding breeds: short-coated dogs with undeveloped furnishings still turn up in the ring, carrying the traits of short-coated Saint Bernards and Caucasian Shepherds. Short coat dominates long, so the club insists the shortcoming be recorded in every description — it bears on selection for breeding. The coat is complete only at one to one and a half years, after the second full moult.

The disqualifying faults of the current edition are worth knowing before you buy a puppy: timidity or excessive excitability; any deviation from the scissor bite; incomplete dentition; a wry jaw; brown eyelids and brown nose leather; blue or green eyes and eyes of different colours; dewclaws; unbalanced movement; pacing; males of feminine type; complete or unilateral cryptorchidism. Dogs that are ill, maimed or injured are left without a grade.

This is the part where the breed is most often credited with more than it has. So, point by point.

What exists. The Moscow Watchdog is a recognised national breed within the Russian Kynological Federation. The standard in force, dated 23.04.2008, is published by the RKF among the second-group standards; its adoption by the Department of Animal Husbandry and Breeding of the relevant ministry is recorded in the standard’s own text. The breed has a national breed club, single-breed shows, a system of titles and breeding lines running back to Orslan.

What does not. The breed does not appear in the FCI nomenclature: the list under M contains neither “Moscow Watchdog” nor “Moskovskaya Storozhevaya”, and it is absent from the provisionally recognised list too. The consequence is plain: at FCI shows it cannot compete for the CACIB or international titles as a recognised breed, and RKF pedigrees for it lack the standing of an FCI-recognised breed’s.

The most telling detail. The national breed club publishes separately the “standard submitted to the FCI” — an English version in FCI format, translated by O. Shebarova under the editorship of E. Yerusalimsky. Its header reads “FCI-Standard Nr.: 000” and “DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE OFFICIAL VALID STANDARD: 00.00.0000” — the international template, with the standard number left an empty placeholder. That is the most exact answer on recognition: the document has been filed; the number does not exist.

A separate subtlety trips many readers up. The Russian text of the standard itself carries the line “FCI classification: Group 2, Section 2.2 Molossian, without working trial”. That is the classification the authors proposed in their application, not an entry in the FCI register. Wherever you meet the claim that “the breed belongs to FCI Group 2”, it comes from there — from the submission, not from the nomenclature.

“Without working trial” merits a comment too: no working test is required for show titles — for a guarding breed, a noticeable gap between what the dog is meant for and what the ring checks. A working class does exist at RKF shows, but entry is voluntary and calls for working certificates of the single approved form recognised by the RKF (general obedience plus protection, or guard service).

The standard sets out the breed’s behaviour in remarkable detail — more than many guarding breeds’ standards manage. The dog is obedient, self-assured and level-headed, “intelligent among watchdogs”, with a strongly expressed guarding instinct, independent yet sociable, unreservedly devoted to owner and family, and showing no unmotivated aggression. Every word is loaded: “independent” is a warning rather than a compliment, and “no unmotivated aggression” sets a bar the dog may not fall below.

From the Saint Bernard the breed took steadiness and the absence of aggression without cause; from the Caucasian Shepherd Dog, mistrust of strangers and an instant reaction to danger. In practice the dog does not bark at every passer-by beyond the fence: it weighs the situation up and responds once the line has been crossed.

• Self-confidence. This dog knows its own strength. It does not fuss — which is why its reaction can come unexpectedly fast to anyone who read it as a phlegmatic.
• Territoriality. Guarding ground is in its blood; it needs no tuition to watch the garden. The other side of the coin: it decides where the boundary lies, and your idea of it may not coincide.
• Family orientation. Unlike many service breeds, the Moscow Watchdog is deeply attached to the family. It does not single out one master but takes all “its own” under its wing — standard and club descriptions agree here.

This is a dog of high intelligence, capable of taking its own decisions, and that sets it apart from many other breeds. Set beside companion dogs such as the Chihuahua, which depend on people entirely and react emotionally, the Moscow Watchdog is an analyst: it assesses the degree of the threat.

The contrast with the hunting breeds is worth noting too. The Estonian Hound is geared to pursuing game and may be carried away by a scent, commands notwithstanding. The Moscow Watchdog will never abandon its post for a cat or a hare: its priority is the perimeter and the safety of what it guards.

Who this breed is not for

Let us be blunt: this is not a dog for a first experience. The reason is not “temper” — unmotivated aggression is not provided for by the standard, and timidity or excessive excitability disqualify. The reasons are structural. An adult male weighs upwards of 55 kg and is stronger than a person; he matures slowly, at around two to three years, testing the boundaries throughout. He is independent by the breed’s own definition: in a confrontation he decides faster than his owner can give the command. He guards instinctively, untaught, so an owner’s mistake with visitors turns into consequences that cannot be wound back.

The flat is a subject in its own right, and our sources diverge, so we give both. The standard’s section on use asserts that the breed “settles perfectly well in a flat as in a private house”. The club’s commentary on the coat describes another reality: most of the population does what it was made for, guarding a plot of ground, and many dogs shown at exhibitions are kept outdoors. Our advice is practical: a coat engineered for a year outdoors leaves the dog in constant thermal discomfort in a heated flat, moulting the more heavily for it. Without another option, be ready for long walks — two to three hours a day minimum — and daily brushing.

Training this breed asks patience and firmness, but not harshness. The Moscow Watchdog grows up late: psychologically it is formed by two or three years. Teaching, though, begins on the puppy’s first days in the house — not because it “ought to know commands”, but because this is when the boundaries are laid down, and they cannot be rewritten later.

Basic Principles of Work

The commonest beginner’s mistake is trying to “break” the dog by force. With this breed it will not work: he is stronger than a person, and if he senses injustice he may shut down or answer with aggression. Success rests on partnership in which the human is the unquestioned leader. A piece of history is to the point: the kennel selected on more than conformation — every dog kept on went through training and selection on working qualities, and those not taken into breeding went to the services. Biddability was part of the brief, not a side effect.

A general obedience course is the obligatory minimum: a large, unmanageable dog in town or country alike is a source of heightened danger. Particular attention belongs to the stopping commands — “No”, “Stay”, “Come”. Those, and not protection work, are your instrument: this dog guards without your help, whereas stopping on request is another matter.

Socialisation should be early and systematic. Keep the breed’s own trait in mind: the dog guards its ground instinctively, so every new visitor is not “getting used to it” but a separate scenario to write out and rehearse. If a show career is in view, the judge assesses temperament in the ring description, and timidity or excessive excitability disqualify — an unstable temperament closes the door to breeding as well.

The ideal place is a roomy enclosure with an insulated kennel and free run of the fenced grounds of a private house. This is not a spartan option but the regime the breed was designed for: hardiness against the climate was a point in the brief, and the coat, as the club’s commentary defines it, has to make permanent life outdoors possible in any weather, hard winters included.

Coat Care

The coat needs regular brushing — once or twice a week in ordinary times, daily during the spring and autumn moult. A slicker brush and a long-toothed metal comb are what the job takes. The club adds a practical detail: a correct coat tends to clean itself and needs no cosmetics for a “show” look, and dogs that have been clipped, or treated with products meant to bulk the coat out, are not welcome in the ring.

There is a diagnostic sign worth knowing. If the undercoat is longer than the guard hair, the dog looks “fluffy” — not endearing but a problem: the guard hair no longer keeps the undercoat dry, nor ventilates, nor insulates, so the coat soaks and freezes. A curl over the loin and croup means the same: the guard hair is not stiff enough. For a dog kept outdoors this is not looks but getting through the winter.

Eyes, Ears, Teeth

Examine the eyes regularly — the breed’s weak point by descent, covered in detail in the next section. Persistent watering, screwing up of the eye, or rubbing the muzzle with a paw or against objects calls not for lotion but for a veterinary ophthalmologist: behind such signs there often stands entropion, treated surgically rather than by hygiene. Ears whose front edge lies against the cheekbones ventilate less well than pricked ones, so check them weekly. And since incomplete dentition disqualifies, accustom the puppy to having its mouth examined from its first weeks.

• “Red Star” was developing not one breed but four at once: the Moscow Watchdog, the Black Russian Terrier, the Moscow Water Dog and the Moscow Great Dane. Two have not reached our day: the Moscow Water Dog dissolved into the Newfoundland population without ever gaining certification as a breed group.
• In the first two generations the stock carried Caucasian colours — grey, zoned grey and fawn. Bitches of every colour were used in breeding, but only red-piebald males. That is how the breed colour was fixed within a few generations.
• The obligatory white markings — chest, forelegs to the elbow, hind legs to the hock, tip of the tail — appeared in the 1985 standard as “preferable” and became “obligatory” only from 1997. The club says it outright: fixing this trait took 12 years of selection.
• The breed is still not recognised by the Fédération Cynologique Internationale as a separate breed at world level. The English-language standard prepared for submission to the FCI carries an empty number in its header to this day — “FCI-Standard Nr.: 000”.
• While the young breed was still in search of an image of its own, ears and tails were cropped for a time. The practice was dropped, and the modern standard calls for natural drop ears and a long, well-furnished tail.

Is the Moscow Watchdog safe with children?

The standard describes the breed as devoted to owner and family, with no unmotivated aggression, while timidity and excessive excitability disqualify — an unstable temperament is screened out of breeding. Take the sheer size into account all the same: very small children should not be left alone with the dog, which may knock a child over with body or tail without meaning to. Safety here comes from upbringing and supervision, not from any supposed vocation as a nanny.

Can this dog be kept chained up?

Categorically not. Permanent life on a chain destroys the mind of this intelligent animal: the dog turns embittered or depressed. Temporary tethering is admissible — guests arriving, say, or the gates open for a car — but most of the time the dog must be free to move about the enclosure or the garden. The argument is not merely ethical: unstable behaviour is a disqualifying fault in this breed.

How much does an adult dog eat?

A great deal — this is a dog of 55 kg and up in the males. The regime matters more than the volume: the daily ration goes into at least two meals, the bowl stands on the floor rather than a support, and the dog is left in peace after eating. In winter, a dog kept outdoors needs more energy.

Is it hard to look after the eyes?

The eyes are the breed’s weak point, and it is written into its ancestry: loose, drooping eyelids were described in the founders of the breed group in 1955–1956, and every edition of the standard from 1958 onwards penalises “loose eyelids”. Regular examination is essential. But remember where the line runs: hygiene helps with ordinary dirt, whereas persistent watering, screwing up of the eye and redness are grounds for a veterinary ophthalmologist, because entropion is treated surgically.

What should you ask the breeder before buying?

Four things. First, the parents’ eyelids: were they loose, and have they been operated on? Second, any episodes of gastric torsion in the parents or nearest relatives — a first-degree relative with such a history reliably raises the risk. Third, joint radiographs with an official reading: the RKF admission system does not require them, so this is a matter for separate agreement. Fourth, the inbreeding coefficient of the litter and the ancestors through which it accumulated.