Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: Better Breeding Practice

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Devonport, Tasmania
    Posts
    6,675

    Default

    Very interesting thread.

    I think i know what you're saying Occy, and if I'm correct then yes, any dog portraying aggression should probably not be bred from.

    When the dog who's just been named Champion tries to take your arm off as you walk past, I don't think I'd give a rat's bum whether it was genetic aggression or aggression caused by other issues in it's upbringing etc.

    Look, if i went to look at puppies, and the sire or dam could not be seen because either of them 'suffered from aggression (whatever sort) because of some bad upbringing or circumstance happening, would I buy one of their puppies? Hell no, because how can anyone guanrantee me the aggression isn't hereditary???

    I can understand where others are coming from, though. i think with me it's because of the breed I love. To have aggression in any of those is very dangerous indeed, no matter the whens, whys or hows.

    Rambling here, hope that made sense?

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Lala Land!!!
    Posts
    1,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Occy View Post
    Why would you EVER breed a dog without having a full history?
    I never said I would.
    I was jsut saying that without a full history you cannot judge if it is genetic or not.

    Breeding, Showing, Training and general crazy making!!!
    If you seek understanding listen to the music, not the song.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Devonport, Tasmania
    Posts
    6,675

    Default

    Let's take Zed, for instance.

    In hindsight, I tend to believe that his aggression (and there were many different types he portrayed in hindsight) was brought about by social factors: lack of training other than the show-ring; lack of socialisation of many different forms; lack of dealing with and fixing issues when they started long ago...the list goes on.

    So one could assume his aggression was caused by upbringing, albeit it unintentionally.
    But what if other dogs from his litter were also showing traits of aggression? Sure, it could very well be that those owners have also failed to do things correctly. But hey, what if it is genetic??? I wouldn't want to take that risk, myself.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Wodonga
    Posts
    2,672

    Default

    If in doubt, dont breed!

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Devonport, Tasmania
    Posts
    6,675

    Default

    I would agree with that comment entirely. Any doubt, whatsoever.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Wodonga
    Posts
    2,672

    Default

    The pup I'll be getting will have a dad who is considered excellent in temperement and a mum who I will view. So many ppl go in blindly and it just takes away from the breeds

  7. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Occy View Post
    Why would you EVER breed a dog without having a full history?
    A full history is easy to obtain. But a full and honest history? We are talking about dealing with people here... Common sense and honesty are unfortunately in short supply generally.

    I knew two pups from an accidental mating, from very well temperamented parents. But the bitch suffered a mild infection during pregnancy and a difficult labour. The two surviving pups both developed temperament issues. One had some mild dominance stuff, but had an owner who was quick to spot it and not allow an inch. But it was constant work to keep on top of.

    The other had a lovely owner, gentle and kind - maybe too much so? Maybe not. Who knows?
    His early dominance issues escalated into bite first ask questions later behaviour whenever he was mildly confronted, even when he was still a puppy. It didn't matter whether it was another dog or a human. Despite all efforts to retrain he had to be PTS before his first birthday.

    The vet then looked into it and this sort of infection can commonly cause behavoural change - it affects the developing brain. So the aggression was not the fault of the bloodlines at all, and shouldn't preclude either dog or bitch from being bred again.

    OT a bit sorry... Neither pups would've been bred from anyway. But if you think about it, if that dog was a vital part of a breeding program, would it be breedable? I wouldn't, but I'm not a genetisist or vet...

    But aggression can come from so many sources, and if a dog is a valuable breeding animal I would think that every possibly investigation would be made before desexing. You would want to be completely sure, there's no turning back!

    That would also depend on the breed's status as well. If it was a high population breed then it wouldn't matter, desex. But in a minority breed complete investigation into possible causes could be better.

    People do go into things blind Occy. They are also very prone to good sales pitches. Which is a bit depressing. Information is so readily available thes days, I don't know how anyone can claim the levels of ignorance they do.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Queensland
    Posts
    423

    Default

    Thoughtful post Occy, and it probably would be a good start for owners and breeders of large breeds at least, but as the others state, you need to have enough experience to know from whence aggression comes.

    If it is called for, as in protecting home and owner against a real threat it is what some breeds are supposed to do and they should show that they are prepared to be aggressive if it is indeed called for.

    If it is fear based it is not acceptable in any breed but often only the very best of trainers can tell exactly where a dog is coming from, it is not always as easy to know as you might think.

    It is a pity we do not need to pass temperament tests to breed and show or work dogs, in particular those big enough to do a great deal of harm, without them passing tests. Other countries do at least have some controls of this like but here it is too easy.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    12,581

    Default

    I think it is beneficial to select friendly dogs for breeding.

    There was something like this done with foxes - they used the friendliest ones for breeding and within a few generations had very friendly foxes. Wonder if there is a web link...

    This reports a vet study in the USA that links training techniques to dog bites. Dr Yin is anti alpha rolling dogs as made popular by Cesar Milan, but I don't agree with everything she writes (can't remember the specific post subject, I just remember it seemed a bit silly)
    New Study Finds Popular ?Alpha Dog? Training Techniques Can Cause More Harm Than Good : AskDrYin.com

    Anyway the info is very interesting.
    The highest frequency of aggression occurred in response to aversive (or punishing) interventions, even when the intervention was indirect:

    • Hitting or kicking the dog (41% of owners reported aggression)
    • Growling at the dog (41%)
    • Forcing the dog to release an item from its mouth (38%)
    • “Alpha roll” (forcing the dog onto its back and holding it down) (31%)
    • “Dominance down” (forcing the dog onto its side) (29%)
    • Grabbing the jowls or scruff (26%)
    • Staring the dog down (staring at the dog until it looks away) (30%)
    • Spraying the dog with water pistol or spray bottle (20%)
    • Yelling “no” (15%)
    • Forced exposure (forcibly exposing the dog to a stimulus – such as tile floors, noise or people – that frightens the dog) (12%)

    In contrast, non-aversive methods resulted in much lower frequency of aggressive responses:
    • Training the dog to sit for everything it wants (only 2% of owners reported aggression)
    • Rewarding the dog for eye contact (2%)
    • Food exchange for an item in its mouth instead of forcing the item out (6%)
    • Rewarding the dog for “watch me” (0%)
    Not sure I entirely agree with her equating "adversive" with "punishment". But that's semantics, ie arguing about word definitions misses the point.

    I use quite a few of the methods in the first list without problems (forcing dog to give up what it has in mouth, spray bottle, "No" (not very effective but I try sometimes), and the "forced exposure" (Frosty hates walking on footpaths or near busy roads). I notice Dr Yin or the study hasn't included "witholding attention" or "turning back on a dog" or "ignoring dog" in the "adversives". I use all of the methods in the second list too. Not sure how you'd train a dog to obey recalls or notto do something like run away, using exclusively those methods though.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Queensland
    Posts
    423

    Default

    Cesar dooes NOT do the classic alpha roll and advises against it, he does make some dogs relax by keeping them down but not the way most folk do when practising the Alpha roll
    Some of the other things on that list will only work at all when timing and method are spot on, that is all too far often not the case.

    Many, no , most cases of aggression are nuture based, not nature based if the aggression is directed at owner or family

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •