Muriel Freeman is considered to be the "Angel of the Rottweiler", truly the matriarch of the breed. Her book, The Complete Rottweiler, is in every sense of the word, a much truer reflection on that breed than the most well known "handbook" in our breed. 

As an exercise, when reading this interview, substitute "Swissy" for every instance of Rottweiler... the resemblance is positively uncanny!  

1987 Interview with Muriel Freeman - Author of "The Complete Rottweiler"

Question: What is your opinion of the rapid rise in popularity of the Rottweiler?

Answer: Much has been said on the subject of dire effects of a population explosion for any breed. The problems of the cocker spaniel, German Shepard and Doberman have been cited ad nauseum. Unfortunately, talking about it does not make it go away. Action is what is required.

20 years ago I foresaw the danger of trying to popularize the Rottweiler. My words fell on deaf ears. 2 years ago, I wrote an article which was published in the AKC Gazette calling upon breeders who "claim" to care, asking that they restrict their breeding program to two litters per annum. A handful of Rottweiler breeders responded with genuine enthusiasm, but as might be expected, the worst offenders offered every lame excuse imaginable, rationalizing their reasons for noncompliance. Where money is a factor, there are precious few who will put the welfare of the dogs ahead of their pocketbooks. Since you have asked, that's my opinion based on 30 years experience.

Question: Since the breed has leapt forward in popularity and increased in numbers in the last decade, it's obvious that many of the Rottweiler exhibitors and breeders of today are probably newcomers to the dog World. What are some of your opinions and bits of advice you can offer these fledgling Rottweiler fanciers?

Answer: Yes, indeed I do have advice for the novice. Regardless of what his interest may be, it is imperative that he learn to walk before he attempts to run. I am not aware of any endeavor which successfully engenders "instant experts". Most certainly there are none in the dog game. It is a many faceted interest with endless possibilities, but no one becomes an achiever, in the true sense of the word, without a solid foundation. Here today and out in 5 years is the prospect for those who think other wise. They are not missed, but all too often, as a result of their lack of knowledge, they leave in their wake a trail of problems with which they have endowed the breed.

On the positive side, a newcomer should go to obedience school with the dog, attend matches, go to AKC shows, speak with other Rottweiler exhibitors, attend seminars, read available literature specifically on the Rottweiler and general information on training, movement, genetics, temperament, etc. He should study the Rottweiler standard. In time he will be able to evaluate the finer points, but from the outset he will be developing a reasonable understanding of the correct Rottweiler. That's a beginning on a solid footing.

Question: Several of the "older" (more established) Rottweiler breeders have expressed fear for the maintenance of the breed type and soundness with this population explosion. Do you have and advice to the more seasoned Rottweiler breeder of how to continue improving their own breeding and showing stock?

Answer: My point of view on this subject is very steadfast. Yes, the breed will survive. The Rottweiler is a survivor. His stalwart character, his superior intelligence, his great adaptability and the unique bond he is capable of attaining with his chosen person assures him of a placement in society for eternity. However, if he is to remain recognizable as we know him, observance of the following contingencies must be considered:

1. The standard of the breed must be reviewed and all the loopholes, compromises and ambiguities must be eliminated. Less than desirable traits must not be condoned.
2. Most important to survival of our breed is the existence of nucleus of knowledgeable, dedicated breeders. Because they will put the welfare of the Rottweiler ahead of all personal motives, our breed will weather the storm.
3. In addition, and in support of survival, the judges must understand the predicament and realize they do the breed a great disservice when they award undeserving Rottweilers. They must be encouraged and applauded for withholding ribbons if the lack of quality warrants it. Hopefully such forceful statements will not have to be commonplace, but at least they are a means of control.

Question: What advice would you give to these more established breeders to work in a positive manner with the newcomers?

Answer: Not all of us are teachers, but very least and established breeder owes is the willingness to honestly share his knowledge when asked for help. The inherent problem is, of course, the possibility that his words will be misconstrued or misunderstood and misquoted. That is a very real danger and explains the reluctance some people have to sharing information.

Question: What is your opinion of the imported Rottweilers ( in a nutshell and in general overall way)? How do you compare the best domestic breeding programs vs the best German breeding programs?

Answer: Sorry, but I can't give you a "nutshell opinion" of this very important issue. Too much is involved. For starters, our breed is of German origin. Purists, of which I classify myself as one, would advocate adopting the German standard verbatim (of course in translation). In fact, just in case there are those among your readers who are unaware of the following countries, with the exception of Great Britain, its former possessions, satellites or spheres of influence, hold their dog shows under the auspices of the FCI. This organization, seated in Belgium, recognizes the standard of the country of origin of each breed as the only criterion by which the breed may be judged in any country under FCI auspices. That is to say, that whether it be Brazil, Czechoslovakia, Holland or wherever- a Fox Terrier is judged by the English standard and Great Dane, Doberman and Rottweiler by German standards and etc. Thus, a judge approved to adjudicate in a country subscribing to the FCI regulations should be able to correctly evaluate the breed in any country whose dog shows are governed by FCI regulations. Ideally, under such conditions one should anticipate worldwide uniformity and to significant degree, it can be said that what we strive for in the US is the ideal Rottweiler as defined in the German standard. Attributable to the fact that our standard, with a few notable exceptions, is patterned after the German one, this is an achievable goal.

In any event, the fact remains that Germany is the recognized source for the Rottweiler breeding stock. The breeders in neighboring countries are fortunate, as their proximity to the German borders make interbreeding with the best German dogs readily available. Consequently, one finds the occasional Dutch, Austrian, Swiss or Danish dog making a significant win at a prestigious German show, or even playing a role in the German breeding program, but when pedigree is scrutinized, German dogs are to be found in the background. In my book, The Complete Rottweiler, I have given detailed description of the system which governs the German breeding program. It is not possible to do it justice in this frame work. So, for those interested in increasing their knowledge in this area, I refer them to the chapter entitled The Rottweiler in Germany.

To answer your question of how do I compare their breeding program to ours, there is no comparison. Theirs is a program. Ours is not. The flaw in their system becomes apparent when, from time to time, unknowledgeable leadership gains control of the club. Fortunately, thus far, only temporary setbacks have occurred before the pendulum swung back to center.

Now that I have committed myself regarding the superiority of the best German Rottweilers, I must also point out that not all their dogs fit into this category and it is, for the most part, those "also rans" that find their way here. We will now pass on to the first part of this question. You made a fatal error by phrasing the question as you did," What is your opinion of the imported Rottweiler?" Indeed, imported from where? Whereas any dog with proper papers can be brought into the USA, this is certainly not true of all countries. Some impose anywhere from 3 to 9 months quarantines. The importation of every dog to those spots is an event of major proportions, and hopefully a positive one, for its breed, as the cost of keeping a dog quarantine is a prohibitive and therefore, affordable only on rare occasions. Without this infusion of new blood from time to time, the breeding stock in those countries would certainly suffer irreparable damage. We in the USA are not so limited. Knowledgeable individuals have in years past imported some few excellent specimens. They made their proper contribution and, as a result we have some very fine American-bred Rottweilers, descended from those German dogs. But the magic which so many present-day neophytes attach to the word "imported" is totally unwarranted. They know nothing of these dogs' pedigrees, believe the word of unscrupulous dog dealers and lay out many thousands of dollars for nothing but mediocrity. This is, of course, a flagrant abuse in the case of German imports. How much better off they would be to "buy American" from a recognized breeder who subscribes to a code of ethics and leave the importing to a few knowledgeable breeders who know something of the genes they are importing. Most foolish of all are those who purchase stock, without full knowledge of the background, from countries which impose quarantines and then advertise these dogs as "imported," as if that pronouncement where tantamount to stardom. After this detailed dissertation, I can give you "in a nutshell" my opinion that the subject of "imported dogs" (with some notable exceptions) is a saga of fraud and deception which has been successfully perpetrated, attributable to ignorance on the part pf the buyer and rapacity on the part of those instrumental in the sale.

Question: Are you in favor of, or do you have problems with the various" Code of Ethics" several of the Rottweiler clubs have? Can you expand on that?

Answer: Yes, I am in favor of a "Code of Ethics" for every club. The least we can do is attempt to show our members what actions are acceptable. People need guidance. Oft times they are unaware of the problems which are incurred as a result of their actions. In innocence they perform in a manner totally acceptable outside the area of the dog world, yet by our standards, their modus operandi is not acceptable. A code of ethics defines that before one becomes a club member. There is no excuse for infringement. A "Code of Ethics" defines rights on both sides and should be viewed as equal protection for the dog breeder and the dog buyer.

Question: Can you tell us what the greatest Rottweiler you’ve ever seen was? Can you tell us why he/she was the epitome-for you-of the breed?

Answer: No, I cannot mention any one dog as being the greatest. Several come to mind as all-time greats. Harras vom Sofienbusch was perhaps the one most like the written standard, except in character. Having met his German master, I am not at a loss to understand why the character departure. His son, Erno von Wellesweiler was a nobleman and had much more charisma. His presence dominated any ring. Falko von Grunsfeld {although poorly marked) was well proportioned and had the temperament and demeanor of a gentleman. Nero vom Schloss Reitheim fell somewhat in between. He was the most fully-packed of all. In his prime, he was the essence of the male Rottweiler.

My ideal bitch was Adda vom Dahl. She was a picture and even in her elderly years those wonderful proportions made her a site to behold. Though I never saw her fully mature, Flora vom Kursaal was an ideal youth Siegeren. Anka vom Lohauserholz was not my ideal phenotype, but certainly stands out in my mind as the outstanding producing bitch. As a judge, the dogs who appealed to me most in the ring were Falko v Grunsfeld, Quinto vh Brabantpark, Mirko v Steinkopf and Santo v Schwaiger Wappen. Those four males, the first time I judged them, laid their head in my hands and it was mutual trust all the way. Numerous bitches have appealed to me in the same way, but I expect that of them.

Question: While you are in the ring judging dogs, do you wear a breeding hat? In other words, are you trying to put up the best show dog of the day or are you also bearing in mind breed problems that need addressing?

Answer: The answer to that question is yes. It is the only hat I wear. To that end, when I prepare to judge a new breed, I always make certain to question the breeders regarding what they consider to be the most important characteristic of the breed- one they never want to compromise. On the negative end of the pole, I ask what they consider to be the most prevalent fault they want judges to monitor. Then with experience, I find assets on which I put a premium and faults that are so widespread that I feel I cannot overlook them. My selections are always made bearing in mind that the purpose of dog shows is to select breeding stock, which is something quite apart from selecting show dogs. Insofar as one can hope that the phenotype is the precursor of the genotype, this modus operandi serves the stated purpose of dog shows. However I am quick to admit, whereas this mentality gets a judge respect from a few serious dog people, it loses one a lot of brownie points with the crowd.

Question: Would you - or have you - ever put up a dog to Winners or higher that had one serious fault but excelled overall in virtues elsewhere?

Answer: I really don't think I have ever put up a dog with a serious fault to Winners. It's not a subject I wish to conjecture about, so I cannot say if I ever would.

Question: Are you completely happy with the present Rottweiler standard? Briefly, if not, what changes would you like to see incorporated to make it ideal?

Answer: Regarding the AKC standard, I have already stated my case on this subject. I would like to see it translated verbatim from the German standard.

Question: Do you have strong feelings-pro or con-for judges seminars? Do you feel they are helpful to you? Do you feel they're helpful to other judges?

Answer: I have very strong feelings about all seminars. Since 1976, I have given seminars in eastern and western Canada, all over the US, in England, Australia, and South Africa and soon to be in Israel. As previously stated, it is the obligation of those who are able, to share their knowledge and experience. Judges aspiring judges, breeders and novices have attended all my seminars and I have never failed to feel rewarded for my efforts. As for me, I take advantage of every opportunity to further my understanding of anything that pertains to our canine friends. This includes all areas. Unfortunately, when one has a fairly busy judging schedule, attendance as many of these worth while functions is not possible. I think it is now evident to AKC that with the passing of the benched shows the opportunity for the doggy fraternity to compare notes and profit from the experience is today best served in the seminar format- a fact many of us have known for a decade or more.

Question: How do you feel about the AKC judging tests? Do you think it helps AKC to ascertain which judges have and eye for a dog? Do you feel having a natural eye for a dog is even necessary to judge dogs?

Answer: I just cannot fathom the reason for all the “to do” which was raised concerning the AKC testing of judges. It appears to me that there is a segment of the fancy who is automatically opposed to everything AKC attempts to do. If AKC imposes controls, that's no good. If they pursue a hands-off policy, that's no good. Well, my suggestion to all these critics is to inform themselves about kennel clubs and dog shows in other countries. Believe me, all in all, we have the best judging, the best venues, the best Kennel Club and the best run shows!

Americans would never tolerate the conditions imposed upon the exhibitors and spectators at some of those highly-touted European events. How would Americans take to being unable to approach the venue within a mile on a rainy, freezing cold day and when they got there have to wait in line for 3/4 of an hour to get into the building-and, when finally got in, find that there where 4 buildings, some of which were a minimum of 1/4 mile long, that where 50+ rings, and that no one knew which building which ring was to be found. And that the ring numbers did not run consecutively, and that the benching was not always adjacent to the ring, and that the place was mined with dog “doo” for a mile long approach and throughout the buildings. I'm a smoker, but I tell you the blue funk that hangs over their indoor shows is enough to make me a reformer. It's as if the Europeans consider it a cardinal sin to be caught without a cigarette in their face!

My feeling is that I personally have never heard a legitimate criticism of the AKC tests. They are designed to test the applicant's knowledge of the written standard and that they do. The ridiculous excuse that some people have promulgated in defense of those who just can't take the tests, holds absolutely no water. Judging is a test every time we walk into the ring. So by definition, such individuals as are unable to meet the challenge of a test are unfit for the job.

I don't think AKC even attempts to discern which judges have an eye for a dog. AKC is concerned with the judge's procedure and demeanor. The exhibitors, other judges and the spectators pass upon and individual's eye for a dog. Whether or not it is a necessary attribute for judging is hard to say. I know I have an eye for all animals. I picked the Grand Champion bull out of a field of 50 Angus bulls. When I select a horse paintings or sculpture for my home, they must be automatically correct. Otherwise I cannot live with them. Whether or not one can compensate for that eye with intense application to the written word is a question I cannot answer.