PetSitters

I disagree with DA dogs needing a muzzle to protect the dogs of owners who break the law allowing their dogs to roam off leash. I have that said to me on a couple of occassions when one of mine has cranked up on an unleashed dog and asking them why their dog is off leash in relation to the laws, they have a go at me because mine cranked up suggesting I should muzzle him? Why should I muzzle him, we are on leash minding our own business then an off leash dog runs at us owned by people who can't control their dog off leash and breaking the law, and it's my dog's behaviour than needs addressing putting their dog at risk of getting bitten Not that I would allow my dog to bite another dog off leash or not, if they abided by the laws or could control their dog these incidents wouldn't happen.

Yes, I agree on that point, the most aggressive dogs I have seen with viscious intent have been little dogs too, but given they are easily dispersed with a swift kick due to their size, they rarely rate a mention in the dangerous dog category or considered much of a threat. I am wondering if any little dogs have fallen to a Dangerous dog order by council, I would be interested to know that?

I One of my GSD's is both DA and HA and I say that although he has been extensively trained and appears ok, the traits are there and I handle him accordingly. The incidents with Bully breeds in the hands of irresponsible owners I think is wider spread because they are available in such large supply and very cheap especially in the cross BYB breedings. BYB GSD's, Rotty's Dobes etc I think have dwindled massively over the years and the type of irresponsible owner attracted to cheap breedings and BYB's seem to be attracted to Bully type dogs I have noticed, but these same people wouldn't spend the money on a quality pure breed and outlay that much money for "a dog" Even monied people have choked on what I payed for my working line GSD bragging about the Bully X they purchased for $50 from the Trading Post? Personally I think it's a combination of poor breedings, plentiful supply, cheap costs in the hands of the irresponsible that amplifies the Bully incidents more so than other breeds of similar traits and capabilities.

Owners of breeds that fail to acknowledge the heritage of their beloved breed, fail to acknowledge the percentage breakdown of personalities attracted to their breed of choice are more likely to make biased comments. Some people do themselves no favours with head in the sand attitudes of what their breed is capable of without correct training, and using their own insular experience with their own dogs to say that people are unjustified to be wary of breeds which they HAVE had exposure too, even if it is just at the dog park. need that like button again... :D This is all true, any breed in the perfect home can be the perfect dog, but that's not what this thread is about. I don't think anyone here has even tried to say that no matter what the conditions, a particular breed will always be bad. As for myself - one of the people prejudiced against staffies, my argument is merely that whether it's because staffies are a harder breed to raise correctly, or because they attract the wrong sorts of owners in the first place (or indeed a combination), a solid percentage of the staffies/bully cross types are dangerous to other dogs. As the owner of a large male doberman, I am not scared of most dogs, firstly because I know and have seen that my dog has no desire to fight and secondly because he's big and strong enough to mean that should for whatever reason he actually end up in a fight against another dog, there's a pretty good chance he'll win (or at least not be destroyed), unless, it's a staffy/bully type. Additionally, it has also been my experience that when dogs do get into a fight, knowledgeable humans can often intervene and reduce the damage done (as I saw with a blue heeler vs a lab fight). But when it's a staffy involved, they are too compact, too hard to grab and too tenacious to stop, and they have a very strong bite. And of course then there's the fact that my dog has been attacked seriously by a staffy/bully type 3 times now, when he hasn't had serious run ins with any other breed (and as I've said before, he spends a lot of time with new dogs at new dog parks - so plenty of opportunities). So that's why I'm prejudiced, that's why I don't let my dog play with other staffies unless I know them really really well and yeah, when I see one off-lead, I react quite differently to how I do with any other breed. If someone on this thread, the owner of Angel or any of the other staffies requested a play date, I wouldn't hesitate, because I am confident that in the right hands, these dogs can be beautiful (I have after all seen lovely staffies for myself). But if I don't know the dog, I am more scared if it happens to be a staffy/bully type. Just having a quick look on the DOL main page, there are 548 Stafford breeders registered here which I think tops the charts then along with the amount of Bully cross breeds BYB's etc there is a lot of Staffy type dogs around, many of random cross breedings and probably some registered breeders who don't know what they are producing either, so it doesn't surprise me in a breed that can have a predisposition to dog aggression that in the sheer numbers of them pure bred and cross that dog aggression is seen more often in Bully breeds than perhaps others. I know a couple of very nice Staffords from good experienced breeders that are wonderfully stable dogs and not the slightest bit DA, but especially in the cross breed BYB faction, I doubt these breedings have anything in mind in the progeny traits other than making puppies

Personally, I have found male GSD's who have been desexed early by 4 or 5 years old have an odd shape about them, like a fullness behind the rib area with no tummy tuck compared with an entire male or one desexed around 18 months. It's hard to explain the "look" I have noticed, but I can generally tell which males have been desexed early once they are fully matured there is a definite strange shape about them

I have no breed prejudice as such and have seen good and not so good examples in most over the years, but there are breeds I am cautious of when walking dogs that I encounter roaming or off leash that have more potential for an aggressive reaction than others. Golden Retriver's, Labrador's, Beagle's, Setter's, Vizsla's, Spaniels to name a few from experience don't raise too much of an alarm encountering them, but I am cautious of Bull breeds, GSD's, Cattle Dogs to name a few I have had nasty experiences with being rushed at aggressively when encountering these breeds roaming off leash or in the company of owners who can't control them. One of my GSD's is dog aggressive in a big way, my other one who is actually a working line GSD an entire male is not DA in the slightest. So, yes, there are breeds I am personally cautious of in an unleashed roaming situation that I have less trust in them not acting aggressively towards the dog I am walking than other breeds and one of those breeds is my own, a breed I am highly passionate about

I too owned Golden Retrievers for many years prior to my first GSD and still Have a Golden and two GSD's. GSD's are NOT a pack aggressive animal, they are great with kids and friends within their pack, they have a high tolorance for rough play and they don't spook easily having a high threshold against reactivity being ideally a hard nerved dog. GSD's are the last breed to snap at a kid for accidentially treading on their tail for example, personally I would trust a GSD with child play and interaction more than other breeds of less stable character. Some GSD's can be aloof and intolorant of strangers where the guarding aspect surfaces unlike Golden's who are traditionally outgoingly friendly with everyone and love meeting new people, GSD's can be aloof and reserved intitially with people outside of their family and friend pack and wary until they trust them, but befriending a GSD, they don't forget you easily. Your kids raised on a weekly visting basis will be fine with a GSD and the dog will more than likely be anticipating their arrival for some play time with the kids. They are a big dog and play hard, jumping, chasing and mouthing and need like any dog, adult supervision and training to mould behavioral standards into the dog with child play, but as a guardian breed, their instinct is to guard their own, not turn against them. A GSD would be the last breed I would anticipate turning on a kid or person they have befriended in aggression, their loyality and trustworthiness is generally impeccable in a well bred GSD

First and foremost I agree with Aidan to separate them and then professional help to determine what is happening between them. Sometimes in play which switches into fighting is caused by one of the dog's feeling insecure or loosing control of the game, the other dog's drive to play exceeds the other's comfort threshold and they become defensive and snap or fight. Redirected aggression ramped up with over excitement can happen but although this behaviour can be controlled and improved, it takes a bit of work and dedicated supervision. I personally wouldn't leave them together on their own where a lot of damage can be done if a fight erupts with no one home to address the outcome or stop the fight.

I understand the concept - the part that doesn't sit well with me is that we as humans are doing the natural selection thing, we decide what is the best conformation not nature - who's to say we haven't ballsed up and the standard really isn't the best the dog could be. I hear all the time of standard changes and of breeds no longer representing what they should. anything a human has a hand in producing is just as likely to backfire if you ask me. My honest opinion is that some of the labs i've seen on the net that are meant to be show winners seem rather heavy boned/large set - I'm not sure how this would help a retrieving dog who needs to be fairly active. Again I'm a noob at it so could be completely wrong. Btw I have no interest in becoming a breeder I just find it a little sad we as humans decide which dogs are deemed 'worthy' of reproducing (exceptions for deformities and illnesses and the like - common sense). I agree with you. Dogs are being put on mains register & bred from, just because they have good confirmation etc in the show ring, but maybe those dogs have problems with giving birth naturally for example....a very important fact for natural survival. Also with my breed, Border Collies, certain colours are not accepted on the mains register anymore, or pricked ears, means you have no chance in the show ring, so what do these "faults" have to do with whether a dog is structurally sound & should or should not not be allowed on mains register???? Look what our years of selective breeding has done to the poor old King Charles Spaniel, or breeds with flat faces or GSD's that can't walk a straight line without wobbling on their back legs. I am not a breeder, just an observer from the sidelines. Some of the GSD breedings are shocking examples of the breed as a working dog and really need to be outcrossed on some good working line dogs to pep them up a bit, but show breeders would cut their wrists before outcrossing on working line dogs primarily because the progeny won't win shows which in my opinion is the wrong breeding concept for maintaining the breeds integrity

I have a BF Falcon wagon which I really like for the dogs. Plenty of room for my two GSD's in the back and transporting dogs the wagon is low enough for heavy dogs to jump into without lifting them up. The Falcon is a bit bigger in the back than the Commodore which influenced my choice with the larger wagons and I have been pleased with the Falcon it's great

I know a couple of adult GSD's people rehomed for free and were good dogs, one was papered, it's just that they were not attracting a paying customer at around 3 or 4 years old and the owners didn't want to PTS or surrender to a pound or rescue. I am a bit cautious of free GSD pups though?

As I said previously still waiting on clarification re what Joek said. I specifically said titles aren't worthless, just no absolutes there and further evaluation may be necessary. If someone wanted a working pup go to a breeder that has active success in producing dogs for performance roles. Titles are the breeds testing criteria on a global status Kateshep where at least dogs who cannot pass the criteria are weeded out of the gene pools and without that, anything can be bred and active success in performance roles comes down to breeder interpretation or what they particularly like in a dog which is not always what a GSD is supposed to be. Most of the SA police dogs are showlines donated to the force, security dogs can be pets if you like so active success on that basis doesn't inspire any absolutes in greater proportion than titles from my perspective? You mention that dogs can be trialled in prey drive only which is correct in saying the dog has not been subject to pressure for determination of courage I agree, but having said that, dogs that react in defense aggression from nerve weakness often mistaken for courage are too low in reative thresholds to pass a companion animal test (BH) is not an ideal GSD temperament either, in fact it's actually faulty but there are plenty of working line GSD's like this being reproduced and shouldn't be if the testing regime was mandatory for registered breedings. In my opinion choosing a pup from parents and ancesctors that are titled provides the best opportunity to obtain a dog free of the character traits that otherwise slip through the net creating weak nerves,fear biters and low drives etc in the progeny of dogs bred in a non tested regime.

I am not sure what lines the Macklin dogs are or what they aspire to be following? There's an odd working line dog in some of the pedigrees unless they derive primarily from English lines perhaps? Most black dogs are working line and high energy dogs and would suggest determining what type of GSD you prefer prior to selecting colours.

No. Look where the stringent testing and evaluation in germany has gotten the german showline. It's no secret the major emphasis has been on pursuing conformation traits. Which is why as a result of neglection of working ability there is a WL/SL split even though back in the 60's, 70's there was no such thing they were mostly the same dog, same pedigree. And why the original poster of this thread is looking for a gsd with a straight back, because thanks to judges and breeders awarding and breeding to dogs with more exaggerated traits- (the ones who have gotten the highly esteemed KKL1 and high conformation ratings), which is evidence even the general public are becoming more aware of it. I think you are missing the point Kateshep as your post was in response about a breeder advertising a showline litter from two VA Kkl1 SchH3 imported dogs and what JoeK said was the progeny from this calibre breeding is likely to have a better working ability than an "average" Australian bred working line dog? The litter was advertised as suitable for "anything" including SAR, protection etc and from what I can make of your posts, you are doubting this could be possible because they are showline dogs with the assumption that any run of the mill GSD could attain a SchH3 and receive a Kkl1 rating as the testing process to achieve this has little relevence with working ability or quality control in relation to the breed standards compliance, am I correct? The answer "no" to my question you are saying that someone new to the breed who reads the breed standards of what a good GSD is supposed possess, are better off selecting a pup from ancestory that haven't been work tested whatsoever in the last 5 generations as the rated dogs in this example doesn't really reflect anything substantial in terms of working ability or the general character of the dog?

Kateshep, Wouldn't you consider with any knowledge of GSD breedings to explain to someone beginning to learn that dogs who have passed a German breed survey and received a Kkl rating have undergone the highest breed suitabilty testing process than the one's who haven't and is more likey that progeny from stringently tested dogs will possess the authentic character balance required of the GSD?.

Although there have been targeted home invasions in Adelaide often with fire arms used, these stalker type invasions for the most part have been random attacks on vulnerable people by opportunists where the police are saying that dogs provide a good deterrent in these types of attacks. The police priority is human safety above animal welfare in the sense of perhaps encouraging the possibility of dogs suffering less than ideal treatment if purchased for a deterrent factor from their suggestion is outside a police agenda.

Yes, I was just about to suggest to teach the out on a tug first I had to teach my young one not to drop the ball without an "out" command it would end up in the toilet, in the washing machine on top of poo you were picking up at the time, in your cup of tea etc etc

Out of interest, does anyone know when and why the idea of limited reg and selling on contracts became popular? From my experience, it seemed to have hit suddenly and nearly every breeder I spoke with was on a similar basis and wondered what triggered and kicked it in? My first pure breed I bought when living in WA in 1982 and I am sure there was no limited reg then and had the choice of either buying papered or not and breeders would advertise papered or unpapered with a price difference. I bought papered not that I bred or showed and I think it was like $200 unpapered or $250 with papers but I remember the breeder asking me which I wanted. My next in 1990 was automatically sold with papers (main reg), the same again in 1995 and 2002 there was no discussion about it. It was in 2006 I came across limited reg and restrictions and thought WTF is all this about suddenly

Excellent questions, PetSitters. When we're working with a single animal this is what is known as a "single-subject design", which has a number of problems (and some advantages) which you can Google, there should be some accessible info on SSDs out there. In a nutshell, it would be very difficult for a dog trainer to correctly attribute an effect to a cause using a single dog. It would be very difficult for a research scientist or applied behaviour analyst, for that matter. When you start talking about groups of dogs we have ways to address the problems inherent with SSDs. Nevertheless, statistical analyses makes several assumptions which we have to be confident that we can make about the dogs we have in front of us. This makes it difficult to work with very small groups of dogs, or dogs of different breeds with widely varying traits unless we're using tightly controlled conditions. Luckily,the most basic laws of learning have been found to be highly generalisable. We can do things in tightly controlled environments, or with highly uniform samples (a sample is a group of subjects), or even with completely different species, then make observations and see if they apply in the real world, or with the species we are more interested in. This can enable us to confidently make some assumptions about, say, dog behaviour that are based on experimental data which can reveal causal relationships. Causal relationships are links between cause and effect, which are often very difficult to see, much less prove. Humans are notoriously bad at getting them right, we learn all sorts of things that influence our decisions and even our observations (not the YouTube vid with the balls). We often confidently make false attributions, e.g my child became hyper after drinking red cordial, completely missing the facts that my child did not become hyperactive after drinking red cordial yesterday, and that my child was at a party playing with lots of very excited kids when she drank red cordial this time. Right from the earliest days of behaviourism, punishment was observed to have all sorts of unintended consequences that could be very difficult to predict. Sensation, perception, prior learning, biology and cognition influence the way that animals respond to aversion. Skinner studied punishment deeply and eventually decided that we should avoid it. Things have changed a bit since then, we know a bit more about punishment, but Skinner's observations are still relevant. All the things that I have mentioned in earlier posts are things that have been observed in the lab (and outside the lab), and it is prudent to consider them when working with dogs. We need to keep an open mind and accept the possibility that our actions, no matter how skillful, may have unintended consequences that we might not see or causally link to an effect. How much we err on the side of caution is probably a personal choice, and will probably change for each person over time. Thanks for your explanation Aidan appreciated

That can happen, but it can also introduce someone to the pleasure of owning a dog where the dog does get a good life. A freind of our rescued a Rotty X from the pound for that purpose initially and they adore this dog so I guess it can go both ways. The one's I dislike are yard dogs I remember a GSD years ago in a car yard I ended up being able to feed and pat him through the fence, his life was pretty aweful

Not too many people up to no good will take on a GSD or Rotty in a hurry and think twice, it's totally true that walking my GSD's increases my feeling of safety tenfold :D

No it's not actually bad advice because none of those Adelaide attacks and home invasions have occurred on properties with large dogs. There was one the other night here where a small 7 or 8 kilo dog bit an intruder who decamped leaving a blood trail over the side fence. I actually follow these attacks on the news and think about the situations that occurred applied to my place with my big fellow (GSD) cruising around the house at night, there is no way an intruder would get past him easily or at the least wake us up with the commotion he would make in alert of a problem. My Golden Retriever has a nice bark not that I think he would protect if challenged, but he's big enough and sounds the part.

Not always, and it's not always a problem when it does. Do you know much about the cause and effect fallacy or confirmation bias? Bitches certainly can have a negative influence on their pups, just like human mothers. I tend to think that bitches have the advantage over us in terms of non-verbal communication, though. Are you saying you would actually do what I suggested so long as the dog wasn't the "ramping up the aggression" type? Not around my dog you wouldn't! Aidan, how is fallout determined scientifically when a dog for example that has been compulsively trained dispays symptoms when the same dog cannot be wiped of it's former training experiences to re examined after training in a different method from a clean sheet of paper so to speak? I ask on the basis that different dogs have different responses and some I would imagine to suffer varying levels of fallout where I don't see enough uniformity to make firm conclusions. Even litter mates can respond differently so perhaps the measurement of complusion applied to an extremely hard dog over an extremely soft dog would alter lab results dramatically?

Isn't there science determining that desexing at 8 weeks or younger is detrimental to the pup's growth and development?

Morally yes, the dog walker shouldn't have bolted, but if the child did do a sudden dash towards the dog as they do sometimes with everything unfolding quickly, I wouldn't want my dog euthanased for that which is likely to happen after committing what is often regarded as the ultimate sin, dog injures child? I can imagine at the moment of panic and stress where the dog walker could have thought, this is not my fault and I am out of here to protect my dog's future perhaps?