abed

I think you might find that an aussie could be harder to get as a show pup than a BC - most of the breeders seem very intent on keeping breeding stock under their own control and generally sell on limited. This just seems to be a problem with may breeders these days - like they are scared of letting others in....... which is such a shame as it is harder for new people to get involved for the future. Only the buyers can fix this limited register nonesense and the way to fix it is not to accept limited register pups, don't buy them and the breeders have no option but change their ways. If the breeders can get away with these stunts, they will continue to pull them and it's up to buyers to sort it out instead nodding their head allowing breeders to restrict their rights of owning a pedigree dog. I disagree ab. The kind of breeders who don't give a damn where their main register puppies end up are really not the kind of breeders I want to be buying a show quality puppy from at all, or any puppy for that matter. If breeders are putting potential puppy buyers through hoops and taking damned good care not to place top notch potential breeding stock with unknown strangers, then I feel those breeders are much more likely to take care with health testing and thoughtful breeding/rearing for quality etc. And that is the kind of breeder I would want to buy from. That's a reason breeders use to justify limited reg if the potential buyers are silly enough to buy it. If the breeders want that level of control which they are entitled to have by all means, don't sell them in that case is the way I look at it

Geez, I never thought of that point of view. The Malinois generally leans towards high level working dogs more so than pet quality where GSD's are plentiful. Ultimately, good research in both breeds is essential finding the right breeder and the most suitable dog.

Nekhbet, you know as well as I do that the Malinois lines vary somewhat and you get a male out of Zico or Kasper with an inexperienced owner for example you are in Dutch Shepherd country, far too much dog for the average dog owner and the Malinois needs to be met with caution somewhat as to where they come from and the lines that produce them. There are many nervy showline Mals with over sharpness that are worse than a weaker GSD in defence reactivity. Across the board, a working line GSD is far more handler compliant with a wider window for error correction than a Mal and quite frankly, if someone hasn't owned a working line GSD or Rottweiler with competent handling skills, a Mal would be last breed I would recommend unless the pup and lines are chosen with experience and diligence to match the owners experience level.

How do you measure prey drive? It depends on the definition of prey drive???. Genetic prey drive is the desire to chase and bite (capture) a moving object. In extension to that to complete the package is the amount of fighting drive in the dog to win the object when challenged under pressure. A prey driven act is the chase and capture and the intensity of both components of the act provides the measure. A field bred Labrador, Siberian Husky or Greyhound etc may have similar drive in the chase compared with a GSD or Belgian Malinois, but the fighting intesity to win the prey when challenged is no comparison.

It depends on the type of dog you want to choose between a GSD and Malinois as they are both capable of the same type of work and applications. As a pet, informal protector and amateur sporting dog, a Maliniois IMHO doesn't rate against a GSD and I personally wouldn't consider one. In laymens terms, the Malinois in comparison is silly, hyperactive, noisy, destructive and a general pain in the butt requiring a higher level of training to obtain the stable behaviours that come easier with the GSD. As a sporting dog, it's much easier to find a Malinois bloodline to out perform a GSD. Although in ultimate performance, there is not much between a "good" GSD and a Malinois, but finding a GSD to match a Malinois from a sporting perspective are difficult to find and in that regard I would choose the Malinois.

I think you might find that an aussie could be harder to get as a show pup than a BC - most of the breeders seem very intent on keeping breeding stock under their own control and generally sell on limited. This just seems to be a problem with may breeders these days - like they are scared of letting others in....... which is such a shame as it is harder for new people to get involved for the future. Only the buyers can fix this limited register nonesense and the way to fix it is not to accept limited register pups, don't buy them and the breeders have no option but change their ways. If the breeders can get away with these stunts, they will continue to pull them and it's up to buyers to sort it out instead nodding their head allowing breeders to restrict their rights of owning a pedigree dog.

I'm not sure what you are getting at here Nev. This isn't a competition about who has the dog with the highest prey drive. I have never implied that my dog has the same level of prey drive as a working line GSD or Mal. What do you class as a dog that has "real prey drive"? Are you saying that dog that has killed multiple small animals doesn't have real prey drive? My point was simply that you can have a dog who has prey drive (and has proven it has prey drive by killing small animals) who can live with small animals without seeing them as prey or having them trigger the dog into prey drive. I am lucky because of the way my dog has been raised he doesn't see cats as prey items What I am getting at is your statement above Huski assuming your dog's upbringing is the reason why it doesn't see cats as prey. It might be because your dog doesn't have enough prey drive and predatory predisposition to chase and kill cats in the first place???. Anyone can raise a dog well that doesn't genetically display particular behaviours and believe it's the good upringing is the reason for their good behaviour, but rehabilitating a dog with poor behaviour and containing genetic unwanted drives provides the true indication of your management abilty. Many people have genetically good dogs that fit into society well and commend themselves on their ability to raise good dogs. My point is, try raising a genetically bad dog by society image in the same fashion as see what happens........the result will be entirely different.

Danielle, There are no laws preventing anyone from owning dogs of predatory and aggressive traits except you are not supposed to allow them to roam and cause harm. The owners are at fault unless the council had damaged the fence and the dogs bolted out as a report suggested, but the dogs are dogs and the owners are the one's who need to pay for what happened IMHO. They need to pay for a replacement pup and trauma to the victim, the need to pay for adequate training for the attacking dogs and a properly secured yard to meet a particular criteria and most of all dog owners need to know that roaming dogs injuring and killing other peoples pets is going to cost them a lot of money. The laws are too soft on this stuff, a $250 fine and a dog euthansed is not harsh enough, they need it cost them 10 or 15K and loose possessions if they can't pay, bankrupt a few if necessary and then they may see the better option is responsible ownership and management.

My reference to Huski's post was the assumption that "due to the raising of her dogs" she doesn't have predatory type behaviour or something to that effect. The point is, it's easy to raise dogs and get a false sense of achievement with a raising or training process applied to dogs that don't have predatory type genetic traits. It's a similar situation to people saying my GSD isn't human aggressive because I have raised him or her not to be that way. The dog in question may not be genetically wired to have social, civil and dominance traits it the first place, but use the same process in raising and training a dog that has, they may get a rude awakening that their raising/training process needs a major revision for a higher drive dog. This is common with former owners of GSD who have had several, raised and trained them exceptionally well until they buy a working line dog from security bloodlines that possess entirely different traits and they call me............this dog wants to chase and bite everyone what do I do ;), my other GSD's never did that and I have raised them all the same

Well then I fail to grasp why you're congratulating Aidan for his responsible ownership of a dog that does't kill things in the back yard while castigating Huski for a dog that does. Where's the handler control for an unattended, unsupervised dog that kills things while secured on your property? I too have dogs that kills rodents and birds in the back yard when unsupervised by me. Does this make me an irresponsible owner? Were are not talking rodents in the backyard, we are talking killing other dogs...............or have I missed the thread topic killing rodents in the back yard is not necessarily a result of prey drive and can be a territorial action. Prey drive alone is not necessarily the cause of attacks on smaller dogs either with often dominance and social aggression being the trigger to chase and kill and the genetics of the dog plays a large part in the overall behaviour.

I say this respectfully Huski, but how about you gain some experience raising a dog with real prey drive like a working line GSD or Belgian Malinois before you become over confident in your drive containment process. My working line GSD has never killed anything. What advice did Huski give? Being a responsible dog owner and trainer Aidan, I would expect nothing less from your dogs, good work Exactly how do you train a dog that's not under handler control NOT to kill prey Abed? You don't have them not under handler control Poodlefan, it's called responsible ownership.........something the owner missed in concept relating to this thread.

I say this respectfully Huski, but how about you gain some experience raising a dog with real prey drive like a working line GSD or Belgian Malinois before you become over confident in your drive containment process. My working line GSD has never killed anything. What advice did Huski give? Being a responsible dog owner and trainer Aidan, I would expect nothing less from your dogs, good work

I say this respectfully Huski, but how about you gain some experience raising a dog with real prey drive like a working line GSD or Belgian Malinois before you become over confident in your drive containment process.

This is not a sensible suggestion at all. This type of thinking creates an us and them mentality between owners of large and small dogs. It's as bad as someone suggesting that eveyone own small dogs as they are unable to cause as much damage. If you are prepared to acknowledge that your little dog can be easily killed in these situations and accept the loss of a pet as a result then my suggestion may not be sensible I agree. However, if you prefer your dog not to be killed and have a fighting chance if faced with a situation like this, a bigger dog makes a lot of sence in risk management, in fact, a bigger dog will often prevent a like situation occurring in the first place as they don't present the prey trigger that a small dog does. The flip side of your argument is that everyone should own little dogs so that the potential to kill another dog is not there. I don't have a little dog, I have two very large dogs (so I'm not taking it as a personal affront), I just think it's a stupid suggestion. If peopole want little dogs they should be able to have them and not feel at risk. The issue at hand is containment, not whether people should or shouldn't have certain types or sizes of dogs. Of course people should be able to own and walk little dogs, but the question is, how do these little dog owners ensure big dogs dangerous theirs are kept contained and controlled effectively and the answer to that is: Good luck when the situation is completely beyond their control so it boils down to two alternatives. Get another small dog that could suffer the same fate, or get a bigger one that has a better chance of survival in the same situation..........can't see what is stupid about that idea???

Wowee...so if by chance my toy poodle is attacked whilst out walking on lead I really shouldve chosen a much larger and tougher dog? Get real. Sorry but even a big rott could be killed in the same situation if two large dogs get hold if it. What a ridiculous and thoughtless comment. In this situation it depends on what you prefer to return home with, your dog or a leash and memories. It's foolish not to acknowledge that small dogs lives are vulnerable to fatality far more so than larger dogs and the problem is, you can't control other peoples dogs or how they manage them and you have the choice to be a sitting duck or have a fighting chance if faced with that predicament. A larger dog reduces the risk of occurrance tenfold is what I am saying which essentially is common sense.

This is not a sensible suggestion at all. This type of thinking creates an us and them mentality between owners of large and small dogs. It's as bad as someone suggesting that eveyone own small dogs as they are unable to cause as much damage. If you are prepared to acknowledge that your little dog can be easily killed in these situations and accept the loss of a pet as a result then my suggestion may not be sensible I agree. However, if you prefer your dog not to be killed and have a fighting chance if faced with a situation like this, a bigger dog makes a lot of sence in risk management, in fact, a bigger dog will often prevent a like situation occurring in the first place as they don't present the prey trigger that a small dog does.

No, I am not saying the owners asked for it and it isn't their fault having absolutely no control of the situation but regardless of that, they have lost their pet from an act which it had no defense and sadly these things happen. In these instances we cannot control or see these incidents of attack eliminated any time soon if ever at all, small dogs have the greatest potential as prey consideration and fatality than a larger dog that has more potential to avoid the risk. What I am saying ultimately is, small dogs are more vulnerable in these situations and reducing the risk of loosing a pet in this way is mananged better with a larger dog being worthy of consideration.

Not so easy looking for a GSD, you don't have any GSD breeders listed Steve???

Not all potential dog owners have a particular breed in mind, a lot just have a "type" of dog they can see themselves with, which is why pet shops do so well because they often have that "type" available.....even though the pup might grow up to be completely different to what the buyers thought they were getting. That does happen a lot, I agree

Given that other dogs roaming and escaping yards etc is beyond a dog walkers control and these nasty incidents will continue to occur from time to time, perhaps it's an idea to choose a breed less vulnerable to a fatal attack. Prey driven dogs triggered by small dogs, don't react like that to dogs of similar size minimising the potential of loosing a pet.

Wouldn't most novice owners after deciding upon breed, then search listing of pups available and choose from the breeders who have them or close to the litter being born???. I would imagine it would be more experienced owners waiting for particular breeders or litters that have some significance to them???.

I thought "assistance dogs" essentially referred to guide dogs for the blind by legislation..........does it actually expand to other areas of assistance???

And that rang no alarm bells?? So you never saw Mum or the littermates, have no idea what conditions the pup was raised in and have no indications of future temperament. Good one. Sounds like the "breeder" couldnt' get rid of it fast enough. Rescue cross breed pups are still the same products of a BYB with rescues providing the BYB with an outlet to dispose of pups that no one really wants. Adult rescues are a different proposition as they can be a properly assessed end product, but if you are not going to buy a pure breed pup from a registered and ethical breeder and punt on a cross breed, you may as well buy a cheapy IMHO if thats the type of pup you want.

Selling APBTs with ANKC papers which say they're Amstaffs is definitely false and definitely does make it false pretenses. Selling any dog with papers that don't actually relate to that dog is false - it's not a matter of are the breeds interchangable, that's a whole different argument :D False pretenses or not Sandra777, if I had to make a choice between handing a perfectly good dog over for euthanasia based on breed or supply a false set of papers to remove the heat from my dog, I would choose the papers, there is no contest

That is so true. But most people need more education on this. We constantly see people on DOL take credit for their dog's good temperament and feel guilty about their dog's faults, or the minor mistakes they make with the dog, without realising that genetics has shaped their dog's personality more than anything else. Given that this forum is about breeding excellent purebreed dogs, it is so important that people understand you only get the dog with the nature you want by very carefully breeding for it. This lab that bit the child's face may not have been well-bred at all. It's interesting to note that on several occassions owners of a particular bloodline of dog with some aggressions cases I have seen are beside themselves with behaviours that have surfaced where they have been blamed or blame themselves for inadequate training and raising not knowing where they supposedly went wrong. Some breeders are not innocent of denying genetic faults in temperament either on the basis that they have never heard or seen the behaviour in their lines before ;) , except for another litter mate that I worked with from a different home and upbringing with the same behaviour Back slapping in a job well done or beating people up over behaviours good and bad are unfair judgments where genetics plays the vital role IMHO.