| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Tanitsja
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 1174
|
 Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 4:35 pm Post subject: discusion on agression/behaviour in dogs/animals (reposted) |
 |
|
| Amara wrote: | | Omg this is like really annoying, people are voting their fave dogs as German shepherd (most dangerous dog in britan) Labradors (second most dangerous dog in britan ) Cocker spaniels (really ugly and manic) Rotweiler (real-llly aggresive) Wheaton terriers (i got attacked by one and had 27 stitches in my leg) but are voting S. Poodles as least faves, one of the most relaxed breeds in britan |
| Tanitsja wrote: | | actualy some researchers found indication that no breed is more dangerous, and most biting breed tends to follow which breed is most trendy among family people, hence most biting dogs tend to be dogs like golden retrievers, dach etc |
| Chilly Girl wrote: | | Yes, actually, that is true, most family dogs do tend to be more bitey, but on a different level. Such as it is usually only a nip, to put children in their place. But breeds such as the german shepherd who have been trained to bite, and hard, to it on a much higher level, that may require stitches. |
| Tanitsja wrote: | well you said it rigth there...trained 
any dog can be trained to do such, obviously geting pushed by a mouse and an elphant is two different things, both can be trained to chase and push a human, the elephant is more dangerous merely because of its size
but if not trained to do so, its not a more dangerous breed...so its not the dog who is dangerous, its the owner
many people want guard dogs, not realising that there is an extensive selection process and years of training behind something like a police dog
and there is where it all goes wrong...but thats not the dogs fault, its the owners who target sertaint breeds, just as families target others
none of this is the breeds faults, its the bad breeders and bad owners who are to blame, not the dog, not the breed
only some 20-30% of a dogs personality is genetical, and things like agression you would need heavy selection on to get such a high level then that no training would do anything about it, hence 99% of the cases of a dog bite some human somewhere is to blame. Be it the breeder, the owner, the victim or someone else...
the only time no one is to blame is in cases of such things as illness causing it, like braintumor or the like changing the dog...but these are so rare...other then that there is always a human who are partialy or fully at fault at some point in time for the dog biting, because no dog is born mean..have you ever heard of a puppy coming out growling and snaping? no hence its the humans at fault, we set their enviroment and we raise them...we affect their enviroment and experiences..and that is what shapes their personality and harvest out their potential even...and yes we breed them
so we are responsible in almost every case when a dog bite...not the dog |
| Chilly Girl wrote: | Tanitsja, everything you said was true. And I completely agree with it. =]
And I just hate that Labradors, one of my fave breeds, is getting put down as a family dog, just because people DO NOT train them to NOT bite. =] |
| Quote: | oh luckily my fav breed at least where i grown up is not put down as one, 99.999% of the dogs in the breed exsist purely in homes where they are both pets and working dogs
which may be shocking to those who keep the breed elsewhere in the world who in my mind to some extent totaly maluse the dog, for one keep them as mere family dogs, or use them in activeties the dog breed isnt built for and goes against all advices on which limits they shouldnt be pushed to go beyond
i know most hunters using retriver breeds have their own lines these days because the regular dog of the breed has been ruined, not being breed up towards the aims it needs to be to maintain its hunting qualities, so if you want a hunter of such breeds you have to make sure to get it from a hunting line...its sad and US clubs dont help either as they unlike FCI clubs dont follow the wishes of the breeds home countries.
I dislike general missuse of dogbreeds against what they are breed and created for, a working breed dont belong in the midle of a big city, lapdogs been made for a reason, working dogs are happiest in homes and enviroments where they can live at least to some degree in the way they been breed to live. And there are big dogs who been breed for such work that they can be given a suitable city life, so there really is no excuse in size either. So even if you prefer big dogs if you live in a city that just means you should limit yourself to sertaint breeds, it dont mean you can argue that if so then no big dogs should fit me....and in the end also, last i checked no where on the UN list of human rigths is there a point on owning a dog...yet a lot of people act as if it is their god given right to own an animal if they so desire.
|
| Cecelia wrote: | Thanks for your input everybody.At this moment the winners are Golden Retriever and Smooth Collie but there's still plenty of time left.
Tanitsja: Amen!!
and Chilly I love labs too most I know are sweethearts but some are highly territorial.....probably because of their living enviroment and training (or lack of)
Anyways thanks everybody!  |
| Kholran wrote: | | Tanitsja wrote: |
the only time no one is to blame is in cases of such things as illness causing it, like braintumor or the like changing the dog...but these are so rare...other then that there is always a human who are partialy or fully at fault at some point in time for the dog biting, because no dog is born mean..have you ever heard of a puppy coming out growling and snaping? no hence its the humans at fault, we set their enviroment and we raise them...we affect their enviroment and experiences..and that is what shapes their personality and harvest out their potential even...and yes we breed them
|
I agree with most of what you're saying. I agree that in MOST situations, dogs are not innately aggressive. Most dog/human aggression is fear-based or food-based. But not always. There is such a thing as Dominance Aggression, which occurs when you have a very strong-willed dog that feels the need to control everyone and everything around it. This is the kind of dog that will not take correction, will lunge up at you if you stare it down, and will often guard places or items that belong to it. Dominance Aggressive dogs will sometimes block doorways or stairs, or growl/snap if you disturb its sleep. This is THE MOST dangerous kind of aggression because it's completely unpredictable. You do one small thing a Dominance Aggressive dog doesn't like, and it will bite. Really good article here if you want more info on Dominance Aggression.
That said, I have seen aggressive puppies firsthand. I worked at a shelter for a year and a half, and saw all kinds. Abuse, neglect, dangerous dogs, wonderful dogs, etc. There was a Rottweiler mix named Jade that came through with a litter of pups. All but one of the litter went on to new homes. The one that didn't showed SEVERE aggression over food as early as 8 weeks of age. During her behavior assessment, she repeatedly displayed signs of aggression, and was euthanized after all attempts at foster rehabilitation failed. In a separate situation, Humane officers seized two purebred Rotties, one male, one female, and a litter of pure Rott puppies. At about six weeks of age, one of them bit the behavior coordinator in the face when she picked the pup up. Six weeks, and showing that kind of aggression. So yes, some puppies ARE born with aggressive tendencies. Doesn't happen often, but it happens. |
| Tanitsja wrote: | i disagree, bad breeders and ignorant owners is what allow the best dogs to become ruined down the path of dominance agression instead of becoming well adjusted family pets
the same dog who have potential in a well breed well adjusted litter to dominate a family if allowed to walk that path, is the same dog who have the greatest potential to become an awsome work dog, and a utterly stabile family dog if raised corectly
in europe at least where i grown up, where the average dog owners knowledge lays at a higher bar then it seems to do in US, and in the working dog enviroments where they really have to have even more knowledge in especialy...dominance is a desired trait, specialy for experienced dog owners...as long as the puppies all look ok and dont have any major faults to it, then an experienced owner would know to go for the more dominant puppy.
And a good breeder will know to analyse the hirarchy and personality of their litter, and such help the buyers pick the right puppy for them, place the omega's with the newbies, or those who have a less firm personality, and the alpha's with the experienced dog owners or those who have a very firm personality...so that the dog and owner match
so the same dog who can turn out to be a major problem in an inexperienced ignorant dog owners hands, is the dog who can excell and be the best of dog in the experienced knowledgable owners hands
so you give me that puppy who seems to have dominance issues, i want that dog, thats the dogs we breed at home, thats the dogs our owners call back for time and again...thats the dogs we realise has the greatest potential in working dog circles on the other side of the sea...and that makes the most stabile dogs if raised corectly
it is NOT the dogs fault, it IS the breeders and owners fault, for not breeding rigth, for not raising the dog right, not giving it the right training, AND not having enough knowledge to harvest the potential of the BEST dogs
the very same way that an inteligent kid become a problem kid because its bored in a class that average is bellow their level, so they are not challenged, thus they becomes problem students due to their enviroment, when if placed up a grade or in a special class, the same student would excell
So you can be sure i will keep blaming the owner and breeder, it is Their fault that They didnt get the knowledge They should have before breeding or purchasing a dog...Their fault Not the dogs..Their...them the Humans...just the same way its not a cars fault when someone who never had driving training, and never bothered to get a lisence sets themself behind the wheels and ends in car crash, it was their fault for not geting training and gaining the knowledge needed to drive the car...not the cars fault...but the Drivers fault... |
| Kholran wrote: | | Quote: | | Canine dominance aggression typically develops at social maturity, which usually occurs between 18 and 36 months of age. Although most dominantly aggressive dogs are male, this condition can occur in females, often at a young age (8 weeks to 8 months). Dominance aggression is not controlled by hormones, but the presence of androgens, including testosterone, or the lack of estrogen during sexual and social development may exacerbate the aggression. The fact that dominance aggression usually occurs at social maturity suggests that owners don't cause this problem. |
To use your car analogy, sometimes you just get a lemon. You can be the best driver in the world and if the car is faulty, and an accident happens, that's no fault of yours.
Of the litters I spoke of, the pups were raised in the same house with equal methods. Five turn out wonderfully, one is aggressive from the start. That has nothing to do with raising or environment. Dominance Aggression happens sometimes. I've seen it. Dogs raised in perfect households, never mistreated, never abused, and yet they repeatedly snap at or bite the owners. I'm glad the dogs you raise are so well adjusted, that's great. But there are dogs out there that ARE born aggressive, or are genetically predisposed to aggression.
| Kathy Davis, Author/Trainer wrote: |
A puppy’s chances of developing aggressive behavior depend both on genetics and on how people handle their puppies. Much of dog behavior is genetically based and will not be overcome by training. Training has great power to change a dog, though. Every experience teaches a pup what to expect from people and from the world, and how to get needs met. The most teachable months in a puppy’s life pass quickly. How can we make the best use of this short time? |
| Dr. J Michelle Posage and Dr. Amy Marder wrote: |
# Aggression is influenced by several factors, including: genetic predisposition, early experience, maturation, sex, age, size, hormonal status, physiological state and external stimuli. Behaviorists use a classification system based on patterns of behavior and the circumstances in which they occur. This is done to determine the dog's motivation and the cause of the behavior. The classification is as follows:
# Dominance-related aggression is one of the most common types of canine aggression that behaviorists treat. The aggressive acts are directed toward one or several family members or other household pets. Dogs are pack animals, and they relate to humans as members of their own species and pack members.
# Territorial aggression is directed toward approaching animals or people outside of the pack in defense of a dog's area (home, room or yard), owner or fellow pack member.
# Inter-male aggression between adult males usually involves territorial or dominance disputes. Inter-female aggression occurs most frequently between adult females living in the same household.
# Predatory aggression is directed toward anything that the dog considers prey, usually other species, but sometimes any quick-moving stimulus, like a car or bike.
# Pain-induced aggression is caused by a person or animal that causes pain. It often occurs when a person attempts to touch a painful area or when injections are given.
# Fear-induced aggression occurs when people or animals approach a fearful dog. This is common when the dog cannot escape, and is sometimes seen when an owner uses severe punishment. Active, unpredictable children may also stimulate this type of aggression.
# Maternal aggression is directed toward anyone that approaches a bitch with puppies or in false pregnancy.
# Redirected aggression occurs when a dog that is aggressively motivated redirects the aggression from the source to another. For example, a dog that is barking at the door may redirect his aggression onto an owner that is pulling him back. Dominant dogs often redirect onto subordinates.
|
Just a few sources citing genetic predisposition to aggression. You can do you research...there are plenty more out there. |
| Tanitsja wrote: | well you said it right there, the same as the rest
an alpha isnt the same as the rest, its the alpha, and their dominance means more work, the more dominant a dog the more work there is with it to harvest their positive potential
it needed extra attention and work, it wasnt like the rest, and the inability and lack of knowledge in your foster home to realise this was what didnt give the dog a figthing chanse to become the awsome dog it could have become
the alphas are the pick of the litter, but they require more work, if you lay it down though they in all generality becomes even better dogs for it then the rest of their littermates...they have the greatest potential, but you need to lay down the work needed to bring that potential out, if not, if you ignore it and just let them run wild with the rest...then yeah likelyhood is they will think they can dominate even humans and they will turn up resorting to agression to guide you as a pack member, because now the responsibility is on them
because thats what the alpha do, he is the leader and ultimate parent of the rest of the pack, if you allow yourself to become one of the pack instead of being the leader, and allow the dog to be the leader, then yeah you signed over the parenting rolle to the dog and it will do its best to do its job that it dont have the ability to do...
and that is what is dominance agression, which in reality aint really agression at all, but perfectly normal "parenting" from dog perspective...it bites to corect you..not because of agression...and when you dont respond as a leader you confirm that it is the leader, each and every time you respond as a mere pack member you reconfirm that the dog not you are the alpha
it really is that simple, the dog is alpha among the dogs and next up it test itself against you, sometimes it takes but one corection, sometimes a few weeks...but in all reality by consistantly responding corectly as an alpha and confirming your position, the puppy will adjust and fall into place in hirarchy, and the corection biting will stop when it accept you as the alpha, instead it become really attentative, lookint to you for leadership...as long as you provide it there is no problems, the moment you let the facade fall...the dog will try to fill the position again
which means you dont, nor do you allow others to, and as long as all humans behave as self declared alphas the dog will accept that humans is above it in the hirarchy...which means you as the owner make sure everyone behave corectly around your dog.
if you can do that, then the dog will turn out great...and thats what i was talking about...we had plenty of those dogs, some takes all from one too two corections of a couple different persons, half an hour to hour training over a resource, or something similar simple...while others take weeks of consistant working to bring around...but we never had one we didnt bring around
but really its a puppy, a baby, just because a 2 year old toddler test your patience and throw a tantrum you dont doom it as a problem child and give it up, you deal with the issue and raise the kid by constnatly corecting it and not giving into its tantrums
6-8 weeks is a baby, if the dog was 2 years and still agressive and really had been given every chanse, the best of raising and no bad experiences, and still was agressive, ok then maybe you could get me to buy that you run into an odd dog that was truly geneticaly agressive (not to be confused with dominance agression)
but a baby? a itsy bitsy baby animal? who has yet to really start its real training? who had no chanse to learn right from wrong properly yet? sorry but i can not accept that...not when there is a dozen other reasons readily avaliable at hand to explain the why...which dont sound like was explored and ruled out
i can exept a parent giving up on a teenager, i cant accept a parent giving up on a baby or todler...you dont give up before you even started...at least not without admiting that the fault lay at your own lap, and that you are in over your head...and that is the reason you choose to draw out before you slip up and make things worse.
But when you cant handle a 2 year old and give it up, then you do so admiting if there was noting wrong like a pronounced illness, that you was not ready for parenting responsibility, you dont say that you given birth to the baby from hell and nothing can save the kid...i'd like to see the doctor or profesional that would accept that...its too early at 2 to say that, sure some kids you can point on them like being angles...but not all are...not all babies sleep through the night, some todlers have worse tantrums then others...and some puppies are dominant and more stuborn then others...its natural, it dont mean there is anything wrong with them...its how it is...it dont mean they cant be raised to good dogs still...it just means that that puppy...or that baby is a litle more testing for you to raise..it dont mean you can or should give up on it
| Bertani C., Bracchi P. G. 2007 wrote: | Dominance aggressiveness, in particular, generally develops during the dog's social maturity (18-24 months of age). Generally, aggressive dominant dogs never show any signs of aggressiveness or dominance at an earlier stage of thein life, even though they may have had some warning attitudes which foreshadowed the whole behavioural syndrome.
In the first phases of its manifestation - characterized by a specific behaviour like staring at the master, pushing, resistance to stroke or touch on paws and head, growling when disturbed in sleep -, dominance aggressiveness in dogs usually remains concealed even to tests on dog's temperament.
It is then safer to consider these tests just as indicatos of a behaviour which must be corrected: if the puppy manifests any sign of unproper or aggressive behaviour, it should be immediately and decisively corrected. Of couse, in this case the test represents a warning and not a definite condemnation; in the same way, no signs of behavioural troubles in puppies do not guarantee for the future.
|
|
| Cecelia wrote: | Wow this debate has some wonderful arguments on boty sides.
Tanitsja I agree with you in most cases though I agree with Khol in rare cases.Most dogs can be fixed few can not.So both sides of the argument are wonderful.
Speaking of wonderful I recently just took back an awesome book by Sue Sternberg.i think... It was called Shelter Dog Adoption or something like that.If you could read that book Tanitsja it would probably help you understand what Khol is trying to say better.What breeds of dogs did your parents raise anyways? |
| Tanitsja wrote: | spitz's and yeah by all means there are dogs who are so far gone they need to be put down
but i disagree that you can say it about a puppy, which is the case argued here...you cant judge a young puppy who havent yet started much resciving training...a dog aint grown up in the body till its 2 years, in the head not till they are more like 3 years, and only when they are 4-5 years are they fully matured and setled as an adult dog
so saying that a puppy was so agressive it had to be put down when it was only 2-3 months, sorry no one is going to convince me on that one, its so young and affectable, and most of a dogs personality is enviroment even if some tad bit is genetical, that you really cant say either way, you dont even know how the dog will develop in body...you got indicators on looks and personality, but nothing sure
and while i dont argue there may be dogs who are geneticaly so termed for agression that if not placed in the best of circumstances they may turn out hopeless, they are far and long between...most of the dogs who reach such levels of agressions that they cant be rehabilitated, does so not from genetics but enviroment
the fact is even enviroment before birth will affect a puppy, stress and which sibs it lay between will in fact play in as hormonal effects, but these are things that you can counter like most enviromental effects at least to some degree if you try
its in fact such that a well raised and socialised puppy will be more dominant then one not if they are put togheter...basicaly if you raise, socialise and train a dog corectly your automaticaly preserving and tending dominance as a trait in a dog...the agression only apear as a cause of dominance when you dont balance that tending out with a clear leadership rollemodeling..and really is the least problematic of agression problems if you just recognise it for what it is
the other agonistic behaviours in general may be bigger problems, some of them are but a sign of the dog not human being the alpha, but others are serious in dept problems who may take years to rehabilitate a dog of when first aflicted, and even then you may not fully recouperate the dog, only partly.
the fact is though if something look like an orange, taste like an orange, and smell like an orange, there is a 99% chanse it is an orange...and over here at least if there are problems with a dog, the pro's look to the most likely reason first, which is the enviroment, breeder and owner, because in reality the chanses are the explanation can be found there, even when the dog in an odd case aint savable. I aint saying true agressive dogs aint exsisting, or that a dog cant be higher geneticaly termed for it, but in most cases the outcome is made or broken on the raising, socialisation and training....not on the gene's, so its always reasonable and logical to look to that direction first, then medical, and only after thoroughly rulling those out can you start contemplating that its genes alone.
You never blame it on genes first, because thats what its least likely to be, and for a puppy, its too young and unshaped to even contemplate so early on blaming it on genes. By all means if its more agressive then you can handle, and you dont have resources at hand to deal with rehabilitation or training of the dog, then put it down rather then allow it to grow up a danger to society...but dont blame it on gene's ...not on that age, specialy someone as a shelter who should be educating people shouldnt be doing so as they should know how many does exactly that wrongfully...and should be figthing to mend such ignorance in the populace to help make the situation better so people stop blaming the animals for their short coming
i can respect someone who say hey we made a mistace, or hey this is more then we can deal with if they show further that they learn from it and try to avoid similar situation again...what i cant respect is someone blaming their or others shortcomings on an inocent animal who never asked to be messed up by the humans around it, and sadly in most cases where the animal is blamed it was enviroment who was to blame not the dog... |
| Cecelia wrote: | I totally agree about giving them a chance to grow up first.But we do have to not let our emotions ge in the way.Which I am the worst person in the world to ask about that.....the very emotional person I am....
|
| Tanitsja wrote: | i aint the first to let my emotions geting in the way of the rational and best solution and i realise in US a whole lot of dogs, also puppies have to be put down, and the ones being put down are the ones less likely to find a suitable home
what frustrates me is when people put down an animal for the wrong reasons, i think when you do give them the needle it should at least be with open eyes and the right reasons in mind
saying that this is a dominant puppy, it takes resources and follow up that our regular foster home cant suply, and a home that have an experienced or strong owner, the likelyhood of that happening and balancing it out in the big equation economy wise etc, its better to put this one down, that the one over there who are more likely to easily adopt and be a suitable home to a regular non knowledgable family
that there that i can take, ok, yeah sure, rational fair estimation weighing likelyhoods up against resources and the like...ok yeah cold, but thats how the world work, and one need to go, so you have to look at which is most likely to get a good life quality if kept alive, and knowing every dog kept alive is anothers death...then yeah your playing god, and yeah its a nesicary evil
but as long as you at least do so openminded and with all papers on the table, then i can deal with the logic behind it... its when things are done in ignorance shifting responsibility from where it lays through excuses be it intended or through not knowing better, that frustrates me
so tell me an orange is an orange and i can accept it, tell me an orange is a lemon then i have more problems with the accepting part, and in this case by the information given, it sounds more like an orange then a lemon to me |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kholran
Site Admin
Joined: 28 Nov 2006
Posts: 784
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In reading through the arguments you've made, I can only come to the conclusion that you've never witnessed or had to train true dominance aggression first hand. Honestly, I hope it's not something you ever need to deal with, because you seem to have a very idealistic, "rose-tinted" viewpoint on the matter. These are not dogs that can safely be placed into new homes, regardless of owner experience. These are dogs that certified behaviorists and trainers have all come to the same conclusion on.
In the case of the Rottweiler puppy, you have a dog that's going to mature to be over 150 lbs. You have SEVERE aggression at a young age that has NOT responded to training, correction, or redirection. Now you suggest having waited until that puppy has matured, generally around 18 months. So now you've not only got SEVERE aggression, but you have a 150-200 lb dog that will lunge at the owner, control the environment, and bite if pushed. In your "hope for the best" situation, you have endangered a potential new owner with an animal that is unpredictable, aggressive, and can do a heck of a lot of damage.
I'll let you believe what you will, but in the event that one of your dogs is born with true dominance aggression, I truly hope for you, the dog, and the potential new owners, that you make the right decision for everyone involved. Otherwise, you will have an injury lawsuit on your hands. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tanitsja
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 1174
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
thats just it, we seem to disagree with the defination of dominance agression
and what i am saying is that i can agree in the puppy being put down for lack of resource, but not for saying it was beyond saving, because that do not when talking about dominance agression in a young animal add up to any of what i read or learned at all
which i backed with a research of my own on the topic which do state the same that i claimed, that its too early to say for sure what the outcome of a 3 month old puppy will turn out as
and the puppies you talk about, so far there has been nothing in your description of their behaviour to convince me otherwise, so either we are at a point where we disagree, or there are something left out here detail wise that makes a difference
i do agree though that the likelyhood of such a dog on the wrong hand turning bad is higher, on the right hands though if it is talk of strong dominance then the dogs turn out more then fine for their potential
but then i am talking of "agression" that comes from the dog trying to be the alpha over a human
not other types of agression that for various reasons may have gone beyond reasonable treatment.
and sorry but its something i do stand by, not being rosy eyed but realistic based on different knowledge and learning then you, i talked to other people from US, ...one thing you should keep in mind is that the situations and practises is different in europe and US, which is something people in the field in US agree on even if they disagree with other things, there are differences...europe have a lot of different solutions, laws and practises
a great example on that is how in US the show doghwhisperer is a suported show by many, while internationaly recognised behaviouralists has tried to stop the show, and in many european countries Millan would be tried for animal abuse if he replicated some of his methods, because they are illigal in more then one country in europe, and while tv stations buy the show (not illigal to show illigal methods), behaviouralists and educated persons in europe is batteling to get the public to realise the show is not great, and they should not listen to all of it because they may end up breaking the law and harm animals by using such methods.
other major differences is in say neuturing, which is heavily politiced as all good and positive in the states, while not at all normal in europe, where its only done for medical or working reasons, where its seen as likely to cause negative consequenses to the animals health and in some places have been or even is still in fact illigal
now if we had the same amount of problems that the US ok then i'd eat my hat and say we may be just as wrong as you are, but europe in general do not have the same level of problems...hence i do not feel you can argument that we are idealistic when we have systems, methods etc thats proven to work much better then the US ones by resulting in fewer problems all over the scale.
normaly better results indicates that something is done more corect, not more incorect then in the area of poorer results...
another thing you need to realise is that even though vets and behaviouralists are profesionals, just like other highly educated persons their education varies with where they are educated, which teachers they had, and personal belifs etc...so just like if you dont like the answer your doctor give you its advicable to seek another doctors opinion, the same goes for this
not every vet will give 100% same answers as another vet, not every behavioualist will give 100% the same answers as another behaviouralist
so saying just because 1 or 2 behaviouralists at your shelter say one thing, that every behaviouralist in the world would say the same is what is idealistic in my opinion. Because i met enough animal field related pro's including behaviouralists to know that they far from all agree on everything. And from my gained knowledge and experiences i disagree on the point of dominance as a trait being a problem for an experienced dog owner, but then i am basing myself on european definations of terms, not US ones.
And in case of the rottie my opinion is that by the sound of it the dog was what 2 months? 3 months? far to young still to firmly conclude it wont take corections, because with some dogs it takes longer to have them take corections you want to put onto them, seeming that its completely useless and ignored, but over time it still can sink in and cause the wanted reaction. Hence at that age no you aint going to convince me that all corections and methods have been tried to no use, because there simply is not enough time to have fully honestly tried and made sure that no method will work.
Some dogs potty train on 1-2 days, some use months, and this is the same with any methods, as more the one method of corection exsist, and a method should be used at least a month or two before considering ruling it out as ineffective...sorry there just is no way everything could have been tried at a puppy
and if they did, then doing so would probably been parital to making the problem worse, through confusing the dog by the inconsistancy it would have caused by constantly changing method of corection. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LouLou07
Joined: 03 Jun 2007
Posts: 4178
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:46 am Post subject: Re: discusion on agression/behaviour in dogs/animals (repost |
|
|
[quote="Tanitsja"] | Amara wrote: | | Omg this is like really annoying, people are voting their fave dogs as German shepherd (most dangerous dog in britan) |
That is totally incorrect! I did my work experience at Guide Dogs for The Blind and they use german shephards there. If they were dangerous would they really give them to people with limited vision. They are not dangerous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mash
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 2683
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's like what I've always said. You don't get bad dogs, just bad owners.
Meaning that the dog NORMALLY (I'm not saying all the time) has behavioral problems because of something the owner is doing, or more likely, not doing. Unfortunatly where I come from the law stands that if a dog has bitten or shown signs of aggression then the animal would be advised to be destroyed. I personally don't agree with this 100% of the time SOME dogs could be retrained, but others are beyond help. I used to work in a animal shelter, and I was always asked how I would feel if I rehomed a slightly temperemental dog and it bit and possibly killed a child.
My own dog, has dominance issues. We're not sure why (I personally think he's a little "special".) And if he was ever taken to a rescue, he'd be destroyed straight away, however we are able to notice the signs and keep him well away from members of the public, so he is relativly safe. But not every dog is lucky enough to find a dedicated family like mine lol. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cecelia
Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 1487
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
hmmm....... I do believe in dominance agression but I believe that it is rare and that genetics normally has nothing to do with it at a very young age.
A good resource on agression with dogs is the book The Tellington TTouch. Linda Tellington Jones has some wonderful methods to use on the agressive dog and numerous other animals as well. I don't know if any of you are as book crazy as I am but this is a wonderful book that I think mentions dominance agression and how to fix it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tanitsja
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 1174
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
yup which is what i am arguing, i do not have the source on it, but i heard from as long back i can remember that a dogs personality is only 20-30% genetical
and frankly it takes more then F1 then to make a true agressive dog, also you do not call agression like that dominance agression, such agression would be based on having genetical higher production of chemical components..and then not only talking testosteron...
because that also effect in the womb by exchange from a male animal to their neighbour sib, so actualy where a puppy lay in the womb will affect the enviroment even before birth, and such a brood who display 'agression' at young age shouldnt be neutured for instance till after 12 months...and there are actual scientific studies to suport this...the testosteron affection itself ..that knowledge come from studies on mice...the after 12 months that comes from study on dogs, and differences to neuturing age, and after 12 months there is no difference
but for broods likely born with higher testosteron level due to laying between 2 males in the womb, its a difference to when you spay them, if you spay them at young age before they reached maturity and had estrogen input they are more likely to stay agressive
I sugest before even breaking down to read behaviour books to get a base understanding of what the books relate to and read part 7 in Biology the science of life , the chapters on behaviour subject tally about 130 pages and should give a understanding of terms you can and will meet reading behavioural books.
but a genetical agressive dog, which is a much better term to use, is one that through biological set up would be predisposed to more easily react agressivly regardless of reason
dominance agression is not reasonless any more then fear agression, its an agression that you know the reason for, and thus can treat based on such reasons much the same you can fear, because it has a reason its not just chemicaly related
hence the moment you can say a dog is not just agressive overall, but can say it has a type of agression you are moving away from genetical agression and over to psychological agression.
The later is what you let a behaviouralist deal with, if you got genetical agression then you are dealing with not psyche but physical, and then its time to go to the vet, because thats their field. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chilly Girl
Joined: 15 Apr 2007
Posts: 1712
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tanitsja wrote: |
a great example on that is how in US the show doghwhisperer is a suported show by many, while internationaly recognised behaviouralists has tried to stop the show, and in many european countries Millan would be tried for animal abuse if he replicated some of his methods, because they are illigal in more then one country in europe, and while tv stations buy the show (not illigal to show illigal methods), behaviouralists and educated persons in europe is batteling to get the public to realise the show is not great, and they should not listen to all of it because they may end up breaking the law and harm animals by using such methods. |
I live in the US, and I work very closley with dog trainers and behaviorists. And I'm working on qualifying to become one. Not a single one of them, or me, support the Dog Whisperer show. We absolutley hate it.
So, it is mostly the general public who adore the show. I have friends who aren't up to date in the animal world, and they love the show. They just don't understand what I hate about it.
So, why do I hate it? Well, he supports the use of electric collars. He grabs the dog by their head and pushes them to the ground. He claims for this to be natural. Well, the wolves in the wild get on the ground in submission by themselves, NOT by force. His dogs walk with their tails between their legs and their faces show anxiety, NOT calmness.
And besides, I'm sure there are at LEAST a few closed minded people in England who would love the show. Just stop putting down people in other countries. And quit saying yours is so great and all. Not that it isn't. It's just not polite.
Chilly |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cecelia
Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 1487
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have watched the Dog Whisperer many times at first I liked it then I started to really watch what he was doing and realized how cruel most of the methods are.Now I am still trying to figure out training methods in dogs. how to most effectively potty train,how to eliminate barking, no pulling on the leash,jumping etc.... I am also interested in starting agility.
well that's getting off topic
Anyways I wish there was a handbook that could tell everypne about how to deal with all different types of agression. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kholran
Site Admin
Joined: 28 Nov 2006
Posts: 784
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I agree with Chilly...I am in the US, and NO respectable trainer supports what Cesar does. His methods are cruel and outdated, but since the television shows only the "miraculous" result, people who are not versed in appropriate training methods think he's wonderful. He has been denounced by the ASPCA and the Humane Society of the United States, among other animal welfare groups. No trainer or behaviorist I have ever worked with had good things to say about him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chilly Girl
Joined: 15 Apr 2007
Posts: 1712
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 9:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Thanks, Kholran and Cecelia, I'm glad some one agrees with me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 08 Aug 2008
Posts: 70
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 11:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
I totally agree with everyone on here who says that dogs never start out bad or aggresive but become that way because of...  HUMANS!!!!
If you train a dog to bite, it will bite. If you beat a dog it will protect itself and bite. And in the case of an abused dog it will think all humans are that way and it will usually stay aggresive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kholran
Site Admin
Joined: 28 Nov 2006
Posts: 784
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 11:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Knight wrote: | I totally agree with everyone on here who says that dogs never start out bad or aggresive but become that way because of... HUMANS!!!!
If you train a dog to bite, it will bite. If you beat a dog it will protect itself and bite. And in the case of an abused dog it will think all humans are that way and it will usually stay aggresive. |
That's not true at all. I worked in a shelter for a good long while. I saw all kinds of things. Dogs that were beaten, starved, abused by people, neglected. Everything. Yes, we had some that responded with aggression. But most of them? Were wonderful. Dogs that had been severely abused still greeted new people with wagging tails. Dogs that had been starved had no trouble with people taking away their food. And then you'd get dogs that were never mistreated that would just snap.
As I have repeatedly pointed out, certain types of aggression are responses to what has been done to them (ie Fear aggression and occasionally Resource aggression). Others rely more on genetic factors (ie Dominance aggression and Small-animal aggression).
I think what's not being translated here is that a Dominant dog is NOT the same thing as a Dominance Aggressive dog. A true dominance aggressive dog should not and cannot be safely placed in a home and in many cases, the only solution with this type of aggression is euthanasia. Now don't misinterpret my words. I'm not saying EVERY alpha-type dog needs to be destroyed. You can have an alpha dog without it having Dominance aggression. These are the dogs that just need an experienced owner, that will walk all over a handler that lets them get away with things. I'm talking TRUE dominance aggression. The dog lunges at you if you make eye contact. The dog tries to bite when you reach over him. The dog will whip around and snap if you handle him incorrectly. He will lunge and bite seemingly out of nowhere, without any forewarning or distancing signals (growling, lip curl, freeze). THAT is true dominance aggression, and it is unsafe in the home, experienced owner or no.
I have seen dogs that are innately aggressive, just as I have seen dogs that are innately unaggressive. You can say all you want, but there ARE genetic factors that influence aggression. Sometimes you can manage these factors. Sometimes you can't. When a rottweiler puppy is disengaging from food/toys/play to aggressively attack a handler AFTER attempts at behavioral modification, that is unsafe. You can't hope it gets better, because the longer you wait, the bigger and stronger that dog becomes, and if you have a 150-200 lb dog disengaging to attack you, you're in some serious trouble. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tanitsja
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 1174
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
you are talking about an agressive dog point stop
fear agression = agression caused by fear
dominance agression = agression caused by dominance
agression plain down no additive beforehand is what you are talking about
and that is something different if that agression also is ruled out being caused by some type of illness
dominance agression is what you get when you allow a dominant dog to be the alpha of your household, and is not agression point blank so to speak of
and now we are talking more on the same terms
however i still doubt that you can at 2-3 months determind wheter agressive behaviour is caused by agression, or termed agression, its too early unless you have some of chemical testing to prove that the behaviour aint caused for a reason, and frankly for that to be commonly avaliable.. well sorry that far we have not come yet
hence you generaly have to rule out disease and termed behavioural agression, which takes a combination of vet and behaviouralist...and yes it will take more then 2-3 months, because the animal is too young to say anything conclusivly at such an age..because the tests needed to be sure about it behavioural wise would take longer then the animal have lived so far.
However because of the resources this take, and the fact that there just is not a home at the end of the road for every animal, i can see why shelters wont cary the risk of using such resources, also because even if it turns out its not genetical predisposure for agression, likelyhood is that such a dog need an advanced home with experienced owners at least till its been trained, and those homes just do not grow on tree's, at least not among the most common adopters
its the same as, you got two animals, one is perfectly healthy, the other need a leg amputation and can live then with some adaptions...you have to put down one, which do you put down...resource and life quality wise, risks and costs of operation etc, you put the one needing an operation down because the other is more likely to find a good home, and be a suitable pet
so you got a normal behaving dog, you got one that for some reason or another has become agressive and need rehabilitation...or who are in general dominant and need a firmer handler...have to put down one? you put down the later, because its more likely to find a successfull home for the firmer with the animal geting a good life and not becoming a danger to society due to lacking owner abilities
its that simple, cruel, cold...yes in one way, the other way not so much because of risks resources etc...its the right descision to make.
shelters cant rehome every animal, so they need to seek to find the animals most likely to make successfull stories and give those a chanse, and the rest get a mercyfull end to their life where nothing ill can befall them
luckily where i grew up we dont have the overpopulation that they have in US, there is a very few private organisations (mostly for cats) but mostly its all run by the officials, like i checked one county...they had 3 dogs curently up for rehoming and some 20 odd cats, checked one situated in a major city and it was cats, cats, a couple rodents, more cats and actualy a bird, no dogs.
In majority rehomed dogs as such is privatly rehomed through their owners advertising them on the same places that dog sales in general is advertised. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KaylaBlue
Joined: 13 Mar 2007
Posts: 949
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 11:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
To Knight and anyone else who believed otherwise -
For the longest time, my mom was a shelter director here in the US. There were so many abuse cases that reflected how cruel some people can be. Just in the dog category, there was the time when a man came by with two purebred Golden Retrievers and said that they were perfectly healthy, but with further examination, it was found that they had severe hip dysplasia. The man obviously knew this because when we tried to contact him, we found that he had given us a fake phone number. The dogs ended up going to wonderful forever homes (including one of my families neighbors). Another case was when somebody left a dog outside of our doorstep that had several cigarette burns on his sides. This dog was sweet and loving and found a great home as well.
My point is that not all of the dogs that come from bad situations turn out badly, even though some do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Search Forum & Players
Memberlist
My Farm
Log in to check PM
