K9Nev

I disagree with the statement that aggressive behaviour is the result of how a dog is raised. It's easy to raise a dog of solid nerve and stable temperament over a dog that is overly sharp and nervy which is dependant upon the traits of the individual dog. Over the years, I have had some wonderful GSD service dogs that were freindly joyous pets and others that you could never trust and were an absolute handful to control albiet, had exactly the same training regimes, not all temperaments and dispositions in one breed are the same IMO. Cheers Nev A dog of any breed if raised correctly, by this I mean plenty of socialization. Going to obedience training at 4 mths meeting people and other dogs and getting plenty of pats and treats made a part of the family is going to turn out much better than a poor dog that's been kept in the yard on a chain. Having done all of this and the dog bites someone, then it could be a problem with the dogs DNA who knows. Of cause I'm talking about family pets and not police dogs. It's the owner who molds the pup into a well adjusted and stable adult, the owner is responsible. My own Rottie is an ex-cruelty case and she was very scared of me and would hit the ground if I raised my hand. It took a long time to gain her trust,today she's a great example of her breed and loves pats and treats. You raise an interesting point Tarope and what you achieved with your Rottweiler was raising a submissive dog into a well adjusted pet which is good work. But had your girl been dominant and defence driven attacking you when raising your hand which also happens in cruelty cases, the rehabilitation of that situation would be entirely different with far more work required to achieve the same result possibly never gaining complete trust. I have a GSD I rescued that had bitten twice and was destined to be PTS that came from a very good home but was not a good stable breeding and the dog is nervy and overly sharp and the original owners couldn't handle him. He is a good dog today, a great pet, but you can't trust him with stangers.........I don't trust him with strangers and would never let anyone pat him and consequently handle him accordingly. Cheers Nev

Actually, I think it reinforces it. Police dogs are not pets. They are not socialised as pups to view all strangers as friends and they certainly aren't expected to tolerate uninvited approaches from strangers. It depends on the training, the handler and the individual dog as to how a police dog reacts. Police dogs that react to a non threatening situation are either overly trained in suspicion and defence or are nervy dogs that probably shouldn't be on the job. I used to enjoy bitework demonstrations in shopping malls where afterwards the kids watching would come over and pat the dogs, get a lick on the face as a public reinforcement that a police dog wasn't dangerous to the public unless commanded to be. We did select the better dogs for these demonstrations with good handlers, but some of the best working dogs with the highest levels of fighting drive, were the sweetest most placid dogs in the home environment Cheers Nev

Well where would you do a study to find an indication? If not with a group of dogs of a similar age, breed, and similar upbringing and known clean history, all having passed a standardised behaviour test, and all being fostered in the care of people that have been trained to use the same training techniques and are documenting the training progress in the same way? Why wouldn't that give us an indication with the main variable being time in care, both before and after castration? I am thinking a foster care situation being tempory housing for a dog of unknown history awaiting a permanent home. Many unwanted behaviours could exist in foster care from a general lack of previous training or the dog being unsettled in it's new surroundings etc etc. I would be more looking at the dog to stabilise and become settled, train the dog and then desex where I would be confident to say that in 99% of the time, desexing the (male) dog would make little difference if at all. IMHO, poor animal behaviour is the result of inadequate training more so than the effects of testosterone Cheers Nev

Nice post Hortfurball..........thanks Cheers nev

I disagree with the statement that aggressive behaviour is the result of how a dog is raised. It's easy to raise a dog of solid nerve and stable temperament over a dog that is overly sharp and nervy which is dependant upon the traits of the individual dog. Over the years, I have had some wonderful GSD service dogs that were freindly joyous pets and others that you could never trust and were an absolute handful to control albiet, had exactly the same training regimes, not all temperaments and dispositions in one breed are the same IMO. Cheers Nev

She had the option to leave the dog alone You can never be sure how a dog may react to a stranger and what may trigger them..........best the owner doesn't encourage stranger interaction and people learn not to approach other people's dogs and these horrific encounters are minimised. Cheers Nev

Yes, but I am talking about normal, healthy, well-behaved dogs, that are just undergoing a domestic rehabilitation. Sexually mature dogs that have never been allowed to mate. Not dogs showing serious problems like anxiety, aggression or fence jumping. Many foster carers reported to me an immediate improvement in their ability to discourage naughty boy behaviour. We are expecting the dog's behaviour to improve anyway during foster care, but getting the castration done earlier does seem to help. It's like the dogs are listening more to their owner and less to their boy bits. I wouldn't agree that foster care would provide the best indication that desexing has improved behaviour and handler focus. More than likely, the dog is more relaxed in it's foster arrangement and some training has taken effect. Desexing is no substitute for training for developing the required behaviour from a dog IMHO Cheers Nev

I agree with you to an extent that some are under the illusion about risks but danger to what is the question you need to ask?Pitbulls in this country are more prone to animal and dog agression than human aggression.The facts are the facts.I am not saying there arent individuals that will be dangerous to humans but that is the same for every breed.On the whole there are as many pitbulls if not more today than there was when bsl was first introduced.Why is there no more attacks?Why is there no fatalities?Understand the dogs and you will know the answer.That arent the monster they are made out to be.It just isnt so.We are lucky in the fact that they were banned from importation so long ago and other lines of 'pitbulls' werent imported here. As far as dogs attacking under defence drive and and retreating after the stress is reduced I will hazard a guess you havent had much to do with defence based guardian breeds.I wont go into my take on defensive drive and fight drive but to me they are one in the same or caused by the same stimulus in varying degrees dependent on the individual.The more defensive mastiff based dogs wont retreat.There mindset is to drive away the threat using as much force as needed nothing to do with the reduction of stress.When you say other bsl listed breeds you need to understand that of the 5 listed only 3 have a fighting background.the other 2 whilst they may have been fought at some stage are not and have never been fighting dogs and were not bred under a game bred environment. I do agree with what you ay about guardian breeds and extracting fight drive and this is why some lines of malinois, dutch shepherd and others have had pitbull added and this is fact.It is because of miltary and other trainers seeing the potential and upping the anti in their own dogs. We could mention many other breeds that are already here that pose the same if not more risk but it serves no purpose and this is a public forum that big brother reads.In essence there is no easy fix for BSL.Emotion always gets involved especially when it involves families loved pet but there are reasons for it and the ireesponsible are too blame.Unfortuantely until the government sees the light and places the onus on the dog onwer regardless of breed it will never change and more dogs will be added to the list. Very informative posts Bulldogz4eva, and is nice of you to share your Pitbull experience I have worked with several Pitbulls in protection although the bulk of my experience is with GSD's training and handling police K9 patrol dogs and some sporting work in Schutzhund. Defence drive and fighting drive as I see it are two different things. Defence drive is the physical reaction triggered from civil aggression which has a nerve component where the dog fights under the stress of self preservation or the need to protect. Fighting drive is an extension of prey drive where the dog enjoys the fight free of duress. Defence driven aggression is the common fighting factor in most guardian breeds. Pure fighting drive as I have seen common to the Pitbull occurs to a lesser extent in the guardian breeds although both drive traits have a similar appearance. Cheers Nev

The point I am making Robbi is that many people don't understand where a breeds potential danger is at when part of a community and not everyone will raise these types of dogs to ensure public saftey. It's an illusion to believe that the Pitbull has no more propensity to aggression than any other breed because they do have a far greater ability than most breeds to become dangerous in the wrong hands as they are wired genetically different in their fighting triggers to cause higher levels of injury and destruction. Dogs attacking under the stress of defence drive fight to eliminate their stress and will retreat once the stress is reduced. Dog's attacking under fighting drive which occurs with the Pitbull and other BSL listed breeds, fight because they enjoy the fighting challenge which is a genetic trait. Guardian breeds like the GSD, Rottweiler, Belgian Shephered, Doberman etc, takes the right dog with intense training to extract half the fighting drive that comes naturally with the BSL breeds is where the issue lays in relation to why some breeds are considered of a more dangerous potential than others. There are more valid reasons for why some breeds feature under BSL listings than a government's desire to ruin the opportunity of owning your preferred breed and killing peoples pets is what I am referring to. Cheers Nev

I sort of agree, but the majority of pitbulls aren't conditioned or trained to that extent, and i'd bet money that any pits that have made headlines certainly aren't the ones that have been trained to fight etc.. They're normally your average mistreated family pet. I don't think too many genuine Pitbulls have ever been proven to feature in the bite statistics, but the "potential" of different breeds fighting characteristics is what the governments latch onto. It's like the Schutzhund trained dogs being considered dangerous..........likewise, we don't know of any Schutzhund titled dogs that have bitten anyone, but the laws again act upon "potential" over fact. Cheers Nev

Aversion certainly can be used strategically to minimise stress. In order to avoid an aversive stimulus the dog learns to do something specific. Knowing how to avoid the punisher leads to a reduction in stress, so long as everything goes to plan and the dog learns to avoid the punisher very quickly. Whether or not this addresses the anxiety felt from being left alone remains in question. Simply seeing compliance is no indication that this anxiety has been alleviated. That's not to say that it won't, but how do you know? Another approach is to use "owner being out of sight" as the aversive stimulus in an escape procedure. In this case the owner returns only when the dog is staying in position. The dog learns that the way to bring the owner back is to stay sitting, then the duration can be built up. In order to do this you use a tether so that if the dog breaks from position he can't go anywhere and the owner can just stay out of sight until the dog is sitting again, at which point you reduce the duration and explain how it works again. This article explains the procedure in detail: http://www.clickertraining.com/node/1556 Haven't you found in that method Aidan if the dog is stressed with separation anxiety and tethered, it usually runs to the end of the leash and carries on like a pork chop the moment you walk away??? The dog will sit nicely until you are a dozen steps away, breaks the sit and barks, cries and jumps around at the end of the leash and won't re-sit as the stress levels send the dog out of control???. Another method I have had some success with is conditioning the dog to sit whilst the handler continues a pronounced walk on the spot along side the dog. Then take a step forward and release the dog and reward........take two steps forward......three steps etc until you can sit the dog and walk away 100 metres before release and reward, then work towards walking out of sight once the insight sit is proofed???. Cheers Nev.

The breeds victim to BSL what I believe is the potential danger that can be caused in the wrong hands, more so than what they have actually done. I would be interested in the views of anyone who has trained Pitbulls in protection work and civil agitation which does provide a clearer understanding why these breeds have been targeted with BSL. Cheers Nev They've been targeted because of the media and politicians, they really suited the label that the media portrayed and joe public just lapped it up. regardless of how they can be trained, even SWF's would love to do protection work but sadly they just aren't big enough!!. They certainly haven't been targeted because they excel at any sort of dog sport, protection etc.. Dog fighting and it's losers helped put BSL in place, now it's up to all the good dog owners to put a stop to it. Unless you have actually experienced the fighting potential of a good Pitbull by training them to such a level to extract their ability, people raising and keeping a Pitbull as a family pet and promoting the breed on those qualities seen really need to see the other side of the breed then perhaps they would understand why the breed is subject to BSL. The Pitbull is an amazing breed and is truly the toughest, hardest of K9 fighting machines with the highest pain threshhold I have ever seen. Raised and trained as a family pet by responsible owners, the breed is as safe and reliable as any other breed, but train them in suspicion and civil agitation and teach them to bite properly, they make GSD's and Rottweilers look like pussy cats in comparison along with the fact that in full fighting drive from a handler perpsective, they are virtually uncontrollable. I agree that the fools who try to use the Pitbull as a personal protection dog are largely responsible for bringing the breed under the spotlight, but having said that, a dog with the genetic potential to be trained in aggression to outstrip the guardian breeds in sheer power, fighting drive and stamina without the clear headedness to be handler controllable, there is little option in regard to community safety other than to seriously look at dog breeds that posess this potential. Cheers Nev.

Sounds as if he was treated in time and has a good prognosis which is great. Our breed (GSD) is prone to bloat not that I have experienced it with my own dogs "touch wood", but it's a condition in our minds that we are wary of. Hope everything goes well from here Good luck and best wishes Cheers Nev

Yes..........totally agree I don't know about raw food, but we have always fed our working Shepherds on a base of cooked rice, mince and vegetables, alternating a topping of chicken, sardines, pasta with a dry food mixed with natural yoghurt for breakfast. Pups were fed basically the same except alternating between dry puppy food and the cooked for each meal which has provided good health and results. Personally I think in most cases it's best to follow the breeders advice if not experienced in proven alternatives. Cheers Nev

Some dogs don't process marrow well due to the pancreas being unable to support the fat content which makes them throw up usually 6 to 12 hours after eating the bone. Marrow bones in some can also trigger a severe attack of pancreasitis which makes them very ill, vomiting and diahrea and restlesness from abdominal pain. I had a dog years ago that couldn't eat marrow bones which begain with an odd vomit and escalated into severe pancreas attack where he ended up on morphine at the vets once the illness was diagnosed. He was 18 months old when he had the attack, stopped the marrow bones and lived healthily to 15 years old Cheers Nev

I was about to say the same thing ............don't blame yourself, you have identified an issue and have sought help which is all you can do and move forward from there :D You have a dog with some drive along with nerve issues which even for experienced and accomplished trainers is a difficult temperament to handle and takes special care which the behaviourist will teach you how to address. It's easy to blame incorrect handling being the cause of poor behaviour, but nerve issues isn't normal dog behaviour for the average owner to address with basic training practices. Once you have learned how to address a difficult temperament, at the end of the day, the situation provides the experience to make you a better trainer. Anyone with basic knowledge can train an easy dog, but the good trainers are the one's who can rehabilitate the more difficult dogs Cheers Nev

The breeds victim to BSL what I believe is the potential danger that can be caused in the wrong hands, more so than what they have actually done. I would be interested in the views of anyone who has trained Pitbulls in protection work and civil agitation which does provide a clearer understanding why these breeds have been targeted with BSL. Cheers Nev

Hi Zug Zug, It was more other respondants that mentioned anxiety/aversive measures that prompted my input. Some have the opinion that a dog showing signs of stress in any way determines that the dog must not be subject to any aversive training measures which I strongly disagree. A dog that will completely shut down to a mild aversive which I am sure would not be the case with yours at all, has IMHO a serious nerve issue that will effect it's training potential across the board. Sometimes an aversive in a nervy dog paints a clearer picture for the dog to understand what it can an cannot do and has the potential to reduce the dog's stress levels overall when it understands what's required of it. The dog in the out of sight stays breaks the stay to reduce it's stress, where adding a little more stress on the break as an E collar stimulation the dog is looking to reduce stress, not add to it, so when breaking the stay results in an aversive, it's less stressful for the dog to stay put and wait for the handlers release command as the reward. We used to back tie the dog on a long leash years ago and try to gauge how much slack to have in the leash to provide an appropriate level of correction should the dog break and take off when training the out of sight stay which if done incorrectly could be a fairly radical correction as we could all imagine. Did it condition the out of sight stay???, oh yes, the dog was too scared to break knowing what came next, but they would sit or lay there quite happily once they understood how it all works. The E Collar was a work of art in comparison having the ability to dial in enough aversive to suit the needs of the individual dog's thresh hold, plus the ability to recall the dog to proof two commands in the one exercise which was truly magnificent and completely humane compared with the old method. Out of sight stay's is a difficult exercise to train especially with only positive reinforcement if the dog has separation issues to add in the mix, but from what you have explained to us, I believe that your situation is the perfect situation where the E Collar works wonderfully well to condition the behaviour that you require. I have been fortunate to witness on a few occassions now, some terrible behaviour in the out of sight stay that has been worked on unreliably for months and competely transformed with the E Collar within a couple of hours like a magic wand was my reference Cheers Nev

To be honest Kavik, the thread turned a little off topic with the mention of a "competition" dog being unable to accept an E Collar correction which is a very fine tool for conditioning the out of sight stay............infact it's one of, if not the best tool I have ever used with the greatest success in that application. The thread really wasn't about employing techniques suitable for dogs in competition lacking in nerve strength where I would have provided a more suitable suggestion. Nervy dogs are hard to train and my immediate thought when talking competition that the dog trialling would be of a good nerve platform. Training and trialling dogs of less than ideal temperament is a great learning curve as a trainer/handler as a foundation for trialling a better dog in the future. There is a massive difference and so much easier working with a dog of solid nerve and training for competition. So much valuable training time is absorbed and lost counter-conditioning spooky traits and behaviours when finally training a solid nerved dog, the difference is chalk and cheese Cheers Nev

From what you have achieved Ness.............do you think your dog should be bred??? Cheers Nev

Ness, I admire what you have achieved as a handler/trainer, you have done a great job, providing the focus remains on your achievements and not that of the dog where there is a major difference in that regard. Dog's of less than desirable genetics are often reproduced from training that masks the dog's natural ability which is not necessarily a good thing IMHO to maintain desirable traits in future breedings. As training concepts improve, we take more and more genetically impaired dogs into competition and achieve the titles that provide a sound breeding foundation to produce more of the same genetic imbalances which results in the future breeding of only average performance dogs is what I am referring to. Cheers Nev

It amazes me how people can put an anxious dog through the stress of trialling where quite clearly it has an insuffient nerve platform to do the job. It's ok to impose trialling stress on the dog week after week, month after month trying to overcome the dog's anxiety, but the stress of an E Collar is considered inhumane, but personally, I think the trialling of a dog with insuffient nerve strength is far worse. Anxious dogs IMHO are better off curled up on the lounge enjoyed as pet, not being exposed to the stress of competition when genetically compromised. Cheers Nev

That could be true too Ness, I am not familiar with those rules as such. There are however, many that do use E Collars in training which esentially would be an extremely difficult case to prove against someone, but having said that, would give reason for why E Collar use is often vigorously denied in many circumstances Cheers Nev edited for spelling That depends on what the individual person is hoping to achieve in competition.........to say that I didn't use an E Collar as a reason for not winning doesn't cut it with all competitors in the real world. Some of the winners who do train with E Collars deny it anyway for the most part............so I guess it boils down to how competitive you want to be and each to their own in that regard As far as an E Collar on low stimulation shutting a dog down to increase anxiety, I would seriously question why a dog of such a nerve structure is being trialled in the first place and would be looking as far as competition goes to trial a dog of a more appropriate temperament to be honest. If the dog is already under that much stress in the trial ring, perhaps trialling that particular dog is too much for it??? Cheers Nev

That could be true too Ness, I am not familiar with those rules as such. There are however, many that do use E Collars in training which esentially would be an extremely difficult case to prove against someone, but having said that, would give reason for why E Collar use is often vigorously denied in many circumstances Cheers Nev

Can't say that I see black market mongrel dogs as a lucrative sales potential in general terms. Banning of pet shop puppies would certainly reduce impulse buying as the availability on hand is no longer there. Anyone wanting a puppy other than from a registered breeder is more difficult to scource and takes effort that the impulse buyer I don't believe will take that initiative. Personally I think it should be illegal to breed and sell puppies period unless you hold a breeders licence/registration. Cheers Nev Replace "black market mongrel dogs" with "non-allergenic designer dogs" and sadly you have wording that has been proven to be very lucrative. Impulse buying would be reduced, but not totally eliminated because people can still make stupid snap decisions when they are around cute fluffy puppies and dont always consider the long term care of that puppy, particularly in school holidays. Kids go back to school, Mum and Dad go back to work, no time for training, and within weeks they can have "a nuisance dog" that they no longer want to keep. Souff Anything "black market" for the average person is difficult to obtain compared to a "free for all" which applies in the puppy trade. With the right contacts, there a drugs, guns, stolen cars etc etc available on the black market, but where do you find this stuff???. I would have absolutely no idea where to begin looking to buy an illegal hand gun or some cocain etc which would take effort to find this stuff. You can't simply shoot up to the local shopping centre and buy it at will as you can to aquire a puppy. Puppies are neither an addiction or tools of desparation where people would loose the notion to obtain a black market puppy much faster than finding drugs or guns I would imagine. The puppy business is basically unregulated, so some laws in place would definitely help improve the situation IMHO Cheers Nev