The perfect bulldog must be of medium size and smooth coat; with heavy, thickset, low-swung body, massive short-faced head, wide shoulders and sturdy limbs. The general appearance and attitude should suggest great stability, vigor and strength.
The disposition should be equable and kind, resolute and courageous (not vicious or aggressive), and demeanor should be pacific and dignified. These attributes should be countenanced by the expression and behavior.
1. Why does the standard use the term MUST in certain places, but in other places uses the term SHOULD?
This is a discussion that has been going on for a long time. If you have access to old Bulldoggers you will find an article or two on the whole issue of the "must" vs "should" debate.
From what I have read, it all seems to be an issue of semantics.
I googled "what is the difference between must and should" and got several responses, in other words, we are not the only ones asking this, and I am certain the other queries did not have to do with the BCA Bulldog Standard.
My personal point of view is that every feature discussed in the standard is a "must" in order to have a perfect bulldog.
"Standard" defined;
"Widely recognized or employed as a model of authority or excellence"
Dog standards are "standards of excellence".
As a way to familiarize yourself with the standard (if you are not already) is go and count your "musts" and your "shoulds" your "mays" your "shalls" and your "nevers"...
You find will the entire document almost exclusively uses "should" in describing features.
The "musts" are really few and far between.
The portion here; "The perfect bulldog must be of medium size and smooth coat; with heavy, thickset, low-swung body, massive short-faced head, wide shoulders and sturdy limbs..." as Ward points out, gets a "must" in front of each of those points... "the perfect Bulldog MUST - He MUST be medium sized, MUST have a smooth coat, MUST have a Heavy, Thickset, Low-swung Body, MUST have a Massive Short - Faced Head, he MUST have Wide Shoulders and he MUST have Sturdy Limbs..."
A perfect bulldog cannot be perfect if he does not have those things going for him.
Under tail.. "..must be short, hung low, with decided downward carriage.."
In movement.. "must, however, be unrestrained, free and vigorous...."
As a side note and something to consider when looking at the entire pictue of the breed from it's inception as a show dog with a written standard. The Philo Kuon had no "musts"...neither did the original 1875 standard (I just skimmed it, I don't think I missed any).
The whole "should" issue allows for faults, although a fair amount of dogs do and always have gotten by without having strength in the "musts"...
Makes you wonder if the emphasis placed on the "must" features by the writers of our BCA standard was done for a reason, for example, they realized that those issues were often overlooked?
