sandgrubber

Outcrossing and backcrossing was essential to the development of many modern breeds. In the Dalmation case, they went 14 generations before gaining acceptance back into the pedigree. The labradoodle is not an outcross/backcross. It's an attempt to design an new breed with intermediate features. As such, it probably fits in the same category as the Rat Terrier (which is a bit older as a 'breed'). Not to mention the landrace from which the Fila Brasiliero was derived, which came from mixing the mastiff type of the day with the anticedent of the bloodhound. If my memory serves, this happened in the 17th century. Ok, if someone chooses to outcross and backcross to eliminate some breed problem, eg, develop a Lab less prone to obesity, they should face a very high standard to re-enter the pedigree system, and it may take many generations to get there. But if they succeed, I'd say they deserve hearty praise. I don't see why some people find a need to jump on the idea. . . especially given how happy some people are to jump on Lab owners for having fat dogs. It would take a long time and careful breeding, but I think those who select Labs for modern work (eg, guide dogs, sniffer dogs, bomb dogs, therapy dogs) would be happier with a dog who needed less care with respect to diet, and who was less subject to heat stress. Not to mention families who want a dog as a pet and would be happy with a little less shedding. You are correct. The effort might fail. If the genes that make Labs prone to getting fat are directly linked to the temperament traits that make the Lab so successful, it will fail. You're also correct, gene splicing might be a quicker way to achieve the same end . . . someday. I expect the pedigree world will have a good long debate about gene splicing and studbooks . . . in a decade or two. You're being silly re coat and temperature. Australia isn't cold. Say you moved to Newfoundland or colder parts of Siberia. Say you wanted to do some winter sports. You'd either be changing breeds, or thinking it would be nice if Howard had a thicker coat. Reworking livestock to suit new environments is old hat. Why should it not be done for dogs? Swimming in cold water -- an important part of the life of the land race from which Labs is the extreme of metabolic challenge cause water has a huge ability to draw out heat. (Not the place to do the physics on this . . . if you don't believe me, ask a physicist, or time how long it takes a hard boiled egg to cool in air vs immersed in ice water, or remember that 'blubber' is almost synonymous with marine mammals). The features that suit a Lab to this become a problem in other climes. Breeding for a thin-coat lab seems to be happening anyway, without outcrossing. The Lab genome contains a fair amount of hound, and 'poor' coats are pretty common. Guidedogs and the police squad generally prefer Labs with 'poor' coats, and the Lab x kelpie was high on the preference list for tracking dogs for the Australian armed forces in Vietnam. Labs couldn't take the heat. If you don't believe there's hound in Labs, here's a shot of the first recognized yellow Lab, Ben of Hyde, taken in 1899. The genes that produced that head went with single coat . . . and those genes are still pretty abundant in the Lab gene pool. They just aren't popular in the show ring . . . and anyone who deliberately bred for them would be attacked for breeding away from the breed standard.

No one said it's 'that simple'. Desexing of pets and prevention of unwanted litters is a step in the right direction. It won't stop the puppy mills. But it will reduce the oops litters. We have subsidized desexing here. A spay or neuter costs about $40 for low income people. It thelps.

Yes there are many slim Labs. Most of them are under 5 years old. It's crass and inaccurate to say the ones who put on weight are fed like feed lot cattle. Most of them are fed like family members. That's the problem. Why is flab so common in Labs? Genetics. You have to be disciplined to keep a Lab slim as a household pet, especially when there are kids around. Discipline is not a widespread human trait these days. Loads of kids ending out underexercised and overweight . . . as go the kids, so go the dogs. I think it likely that, had fat-Lab families ended out with a poodle, they would have ended out with a slim dog And I'm sorry . . . all gundogs are not alike. A GSP or pointer or Weimerarner is no substitute for a Lab. Very different temperament. There is a reason these breeds aren't used as guide dogs and Labs are. I do not believe dog breeds should be fossilized. All the wonderful breeds we have evolved through selection for different circumstances from different mixes of local dog populations. A lot has changed since the late 19th century. Why should dog breeds not continue to change with time and place? The Lab has only been registered for a hundred years or so. Before registration, lots of bloodlines were mixed . . . the St. John's dog was a great foundation for breeding . . . and a bit of blubber would have suited a dog doing water work in a cold climate. The UK isn't all that warm and the double coat was fine for northern europe. Breeders somehow bred out the white paws and blaze of the St John's dog, and added a bit of this and that to end out with something that worked for the tastes of the landed gentry of the day. Spaniels and setters were abundant in the UK and ran with the Canadian land-race imports. Often the identity of the sire was unclear. Someone who was into competitive retrieving might add a little greyhound to increase speed and ability to jump fences. The result was a great, diverse breed, easily trained, low aggression, soft mouth . . . etc. So why stop the evolution of the breed? Why not permit outcrossing and back crossing to modify it for local conditions?

No one's denying it. But its not uniform across all breeds and the proposal of complusory crossbreeding to solve it is not a proven solution. Witness the Labrador x Poodle. It has TWO sets of inherited health conditions, now - more than either of the parent breeds. Health issues resolved? None that I know of. Indeed, it doubled up the chance of inherited PRA. At the very time where advances in reproductive science have allowed breeders to access breeding dogs anywhere in the world, outcrossing seems to me to be a very blunt instrument to solve the problem where it does exist, let alone where it doesn't No one is denying it? PDEII = "Burn the witch?" I agree that outcrossing is a a blunt instrument and unnecessary except in a few cases. But in cases where it is necessary (Dalmatian) it has been fought pretty hard. I'm with you on the labradoodle. Both Labs and poodles are pretty broad genetically, as classed by the dog genome, although I can't speak to all three sizes of poodles. I have not seen that Lab X Poodle doubles chance of PRA, nor do I understand why it should. It is interesting that both Lab and poodle are better than Labradoodle in OFA stats. Personally, if I wanted to outcross Labs for Australia, I'd work toward something that increases tolerance of hot weather and decreases the propensity to obesity . . . perhaps kelpie, maybe even dingo . . . and it might take many generations of back crossing to get back to true Lab temperament and conformation. But I think outcrossing and back crossing might be faster than selective breeding within the breed. I find it annoying that the pedigree world is SO SO down on outcrossing that working toward an Lab suited to tropical and subtropical climates (or other breed redefinitions) would be treated as blasphemy. Double coat, schmubble coat. There are no icy waters to swim in, the proper coat means lots of shedding, and the poor dogs are miserable in summer. Not to mention high vulnerability to being killed by kindness.

Curb just means restrain. It's most often used in reference to misbehaving children. Has nothing to do with the noun 'curb' (maybe it did at one time).

No. I'm sure they select a region that allows them to identify K9, and to tell small differences between different K9's. A literal dog eat dog situation might pose problems, but in this case there'd be more worries than pooh.

The dog genome project showed that many breeds are highly inbred. In some breeds, there is little question that this is linked to diseases that are widespread in the breed. Where the founding population is small, all dogs are inbred, regardless of what is on the three or five generation pedigree. See, eg, http://genome.cshlp....15/12/1706.full Here's an key extract from the paper. . . .which is neutral on the disease question, other than seeing canine breeds as an opportunity for genetic research on human diseases / syndromes, which in many cases have analogies in the canine population Common to the origin and development of many breeds is a founder event involving only a few dogs and, thereafter, reproductive dominance by popular sires that conform most closely to the breed standard. These restrictive breeding practices reduce effective population size and increase genetic drift, resulting in the loss of genetic diversity within breeds and allele frequency divergence among them. For example, in a genetic study of 85 breeds, Parker et al. (2004) showed that humans and dogs have similar levels of overall nucleotide diversity, 8 × 10-4, which represent the overall number of nucleotide substitutions per base/pair. However, the variation between dog breeds is much greater than the variation between human populations (27.5% versus 5.4%). Conversely, the degree of genetic homogeneity is much greater within individual dog breeds than within distinct human populations (94.6% versus 72.5%). Furthermore, in some breeds, genetic variation has been additionally reduced by bottlenecks associated with catastrophic events such as war and economic depression, making them analogous to human populations of limited genetic variation used for disease-mapping studies such as the Finns, Icelanders, and Bedouins. As a result, the unique pattern of LD in dogs provides an exceptional opportunity to study complex traits that are relevant to human biology using robust approaches that would not be possible in human populations. The popularization of this information is often bad science, and the degree of inbreeding varies hugely between breeds, and within different lines within a breed. But there IS a problem. In most cases it can be addressed without cross breeding. Hopefully, genetics will provide guidance in avoiding hereditary diseases for dogs and people alike . . . and we can work through the problems without sacrificing the breeds we love.

Good on you for taking the girl home. +1 on telling people where you are and inviting help. The first whelping is unnerving, and tiring. And a large litter may take10 or even 20 hours. There are several little problems that you can get by if you have an experienced person on hand, eg, reviving a pup with mucus in lungs, extracting a breach position pup that won't come out, staunching the bleeding if the bitch pulls the cord off wrong. And an experienced person will be a better judge of when to go to the vet if there are problems. If you let people know where you are and ask, I'll bet you get some people volunteering to help.

I never buy wine cause I like the label . . . but I couldn't resist this one. Anyone else got a favorite? (haven't tried the wine yet, but it was only $3.99 so what the heck).

I can't believe a dog training institution would allow this to happen . . . how could they keep a trainer employed after he had killed a couple dogs by heat exposure . . . how could this have happened at a training facility? I'd say the system is broken . . . They say : Mr Craven, 49, one of the country’s most experienced dog trainers, could face prosecution for animal cruelty when an inquiry by the RSPCA is completed. He also faces an internal misconduct investigation. Why didn't this happen the first time he killed dogs by heat exposure?

The link seems to be a 2003 Bill that was not enacted. I'd go to to http://www.austlii.org/au/legis/wa/bill/cb201152/ This is a bill, not an act. It is draconian. $5000 fines for all violations: for failure to register your cat, or if your cat is found without tags, or if you have an unsterilized cat over 6 months of age without a certificate to breed cats . . . cats in violation are likely to be pts. Local governments can refuse breeding permits if they find facilities inadequate for 'safe' and 'ethical' breeding of cats (safe and ethical aren't defined, so local government can do what it wants). I'm surprised it hasn't created a huge uproar. (3) Each cat to be included in a permit under subsection (1)(b) must be desexed at the time of making the application. (4) A local government may issue a permit for a period calculated from the date of first issue or fix a day on which all permits expire and a subsequent day by which an expired permit must be renewed. (5) The maximum period for which a permit may be issued under subsection (4) is 18 months, and not less than 14 days must elapse between the date on which all permits expire and the date by which an expired permit must be renewed. (6) A permit is issued subject to the condition that the owner will surrender a permit during its currency if the cat dies, or there is a substantive change in the circumstances for which the permit was issued.

This must be an Australian thing. Cythioate is still available and being produced . . . no trouble sourcing it in the US. It's an organophosphate, a category of pesticide that is long lasting in the environment and includes carcinogens, so some regulatory agency may be putting the brakes on its use.

In my days in WA I thought it would be a boon to welfare of birds and lizards (not to mention the cleanliness of the sandbox) if suburban cats weren't abundant and free roaming. I can't see how this is going to do any harm, and if the council makes a few quid, good on 'em. I would have loved to have some mechanism for putting out a humane live cat trap in my back yard, catching a neighborhood Tom or two, and handing them in to someone who would make things unpleasant for the owners. Dogs need to be under control. SO DO CATS!

Here's a blog link on this that gives a little more background: http://pedigreedogsexposed.blogspot.com/2011_07_01_archive.html for people who think the pedigree dogs exposed thing is all negative . . . here's the enthusiastic side of JH.

Dogs are still a damn sight cheaper than kids . . . and in many cases, more rewarding. Note also the occasional pole about dog vs. spouse, in which the dog always wins :D. Any opnions? My friend said me after reading this in the paper, you could of bought a nice car. While I said I would rather have a canine companion instead to keep me company.

No problem if the Fila is part of the debate. Just so the bigger problem isn't dropped and all attention goes to a breed that is banned in Oz. Aggressive tendencies can be genetic in dogs. If dogs are to be an accepted part of life in relatively densely settled regions, selection FOR human and/or dog aggressive behaviour needs to be constrained. In my reading, the CAFIB-standard Fila is the extreme for breeding for HA. Not only do I not want a CAFIB-type Fila, I don't want to have one anywhere near where I live, I don't want one in the dog park, and I don't want them ending up in the hands of yabos who like muscle and are stimulated by the sight of blood,. . . .or people who have a meth lab that needs to be guarded. Nor do I want to live under the dog laws that need to be written to deal with the havoc that 'dog as weapon' creates. Overly protective dogs and the problems they create in the hands of any but responsible, experienced dog owners will create problems for dog owners in general. You do not address the basic question. Many breeders (in the broad sense of the word) are careless about temperament, and a few actively breed for aggression. Where aggression is either tolerated (in a relatively aggressive breed) or encouraged, the line, if not the breed, becomes a problem. One reason I have used the Fila as an example is to focus on concepts and avoid coming down on breeds that are in Australia. Having put in my years doing daily rounds in a boarding kennel in Australia,I'd generally praise GSD people for either socializing their dogs or being very clear that they are DA. . . . and for keeping their boys from straying and producing problem x-breed pups. I sure wish breeders of bull breeds would work harder to select against DA . . . would come down on fellow breeders who run particular aggressive lines . . . and would do more to prevent randy boys from knocking up everything in the neighborhood. Please, please, desex those boys and don't cater to the macho guys who want a 'real' dog with real balls. When I lived in the WA suburbs, there were a couple of neighborhood SBT-type (pedigree unknown) males who broke out any time a neighborhood girl came in season. No wonder there are so many young staffy cross dogs in the local pound. Also note, damage done tends to be proportional to the dog's size, and in my books, an aggressive 50+ kg dog is a worry except in an isolated setting with a selected class of owners. I used to have a toy poodle client who I'd swear would pass the tests used by the Fila community for ojeriza. She would bit everyone. Her owner was an old German lady who had had many dogs in her lifetime, and this was the first who had caused problems. I feel sorry for the person who bought her and took good care of her for 10 years.But the problem stopped there: the bitch was spayed, and I'm sure her breeders were ashamed that they bred such a little monster. You're taking things out of context. The first Fila breed standard was written by DR Paulo Santos Cruz in Brazil in 1946. There have been later revisions. For those who have questioned translations, here it is in Portuguese . . . as I read it, this says, in exposition, will not permit touching by the judge . . . no fault if it bites. Dotado de coragem, determinação e valentia notáveis. Não oculta sua ojeriza a estranhos, nem sua tradicional meiguice, obediência e fidelidade aos donos e seus familiares. Conseqüentemente é, nas cidades, inexcedível guarda de propriedades e, no campo, exímio boiadeiro e caçador de animais de grande porte. Como resultado de seu temperamento, nas exposições não permite ser tocado pelo juiz (um estranho) e, se o atacar, não deve tal reação ser considerada falta, mas apenas confirmação de seu temperamento. Nas provas de temperamento, obrigatórias nas exposições, após doze meses de idade, seu ataque deve ser em diagonal ascendente, à frente do apresentador, e sem deste revelar dependência. or the hash that Google translator (not elegant, but also, not biased and ususally intelligable) Temperament Equipped with courage, determination and outstanding courage. Does not hide its aversion to strangers, or its traditional gentleness, obedience and fidelity to its owners and family. Therefore it is in the cities, properties and unsurpassed guard in camp, and cowboy expert hunter of large animals. As a result of his temperament, the exhibition does not allow to be touched by the judge (a stranger), and the attack, such a reaction should not be considered a fault, but only a confirmation of its temperament. At temper tests, mandatory in the exhibition, after twelve months old, his attack must be diagonally upward to the front of the presenter, and without revealing this dependence. In my reading, no question that the breed standard is selling the dog as a protector of family and property in both urban and rural settings, and capable of taking down large animals. It should attack . . . diagonally upwards . . . if confronted. As for temperament and puppy selection, try scanning CAFIB breeder's websites. http://www.molosdrea...=227&id_menu=24 is interesting (from Molos Dream Kennels in Poland, who breed various molasser breeds but feature the Fila as the ultimate guardian) . . . here are a few clips from their article on breed temperament, which they say has been widely circulated and much appreciated in Brazil and elsewhere . . . I don't have time this morning to chase down the breeder's websites that describe the culling (as pets) of pups who don't show ojeriza at 12 weeks . . . but they're out there. Ojeriza is the most characteristic and indispensable trait of this amazing breed's personality. The Fila without ojeriza undoubtedly is not the correct Fila. Brazilians use the term "ojeriza" to define the Fila's specific behavior toward strangers manifested by dislike, distrust, suspiciousness, or even hostility, hatred, severe aversion. Fila Brasileiro's attitude toward strangers is in every respect determined by ojeriza. Why is it considered to be such an exceptional trait? After all, among other breeds one may also find dogs which do not like strangers. That is true, but mere not liking of strangers found in some specimens of different breeds does not have much in common with ojeriza. Ojeriza does not result from the amount of experience gathered by a dog or even from the dog's individual psychological traits, but it is genetically conditioned in this particular breed — the Fila is born with ojeriza. Even the most clever dog will not learn this, what in the Fila is a mental trait. And why does the Fila need this ojeriza? In this crazy world, there is nothing more threatening to a man than another man. ..... Because Fila is born with ojeriza, even few-week-old puppies may object against a familiarity on the part of a person they do not know. When a stranger tries to touch them, they move away, and when grabbed by unfamiliar hands, they do what they can to freed themselves or they simply freeze. The most daring ones among the pups manifest their dissatisfaction by using sound effects such as a childish barking or growling. . . . Some Filas already at the age of few months can bravely attack an aggressor, in other dogs ojeriza becomes visible a little bit later. It is assumed that the one-year-old Fila in a situation of a threat should successfully protect his owner. However, it happens that the Fila at the age of two (or even up to three) years old becomes sufficiently mature and self-confident to bravely and correctly attack the aggressor in defense of the owner . . . What may provoke the Fila to defense? It may be a stranger who gesticulates excessively or expresses emotions with a raised voice. It may be a female friend who flings her arms around our neck when we greet. It may be a cyclist coming fast in our direction, a woman with a baby carriage, a strange child running next to us, a drunk muttering man, and anyone who behaves in a way which is even slightly distinct, i.e. suspicious. The owner always has to have eyes at the back of his or her head and, above all, the owner has to learn to foresee the reactions of his or her dog. In order to be able to do that, one needs to spend a lot of time being with the dog and observing it. and I guess you straight away knew it shouldn't be about anything you do or about the fact that some breeders favour HA or DA temperament . . . bull breeds prominent.

+1 from the Labradors xcept rain's not big deal (don't understand why we aren't welcome in bed when we've been swimming). Wish they didn't close us in at night. We'd love to feel the cool air. . . . holding the pee's no problem . . . ycchh! would some of you dogs REALLY pee in the house! That's disgusting.

Great answer! I think it would be great if all breed standards were clear about aggressive temperament and 'guardian' was clearly defined. If 'primitive guardians' are to be bred to attack anything the dog interprets as a threat, I think that needs to be made clear, and government needs to put limits on the ownership of such dogs. Changing the standard doesn't solve the problem where breed standards are clearly against unprovoked aggression and breeders are either careless or actively breeding for aggression. That's a hard problem to solve . . . but an important one if dogs are to continue being a part of life in urban and suburban areas. I find the question of ankle biters (<5kg breeds) more confusing. Ferocious little buggers that are unlikely to do serious harm (although I know of one JRT sheep-killer) aren't the problem.

The devil is in the details. The WA government seems to be unwilling or unable to release the text of the law . . . at least I can't get any of the links on the wa.gov.au webpages to work. I think most people who live or have lived in WA agree there's a cat problem. But clumsy implementation of a compulsory sterilization law could have some pretty bad ramifications. But of course, that won't happen. State governments are always SOOO careful in drafting their laws.;)

It doesn't call for HA temperament. Sandgrubber and her retriever man just think it does. Sandgrubber's main gripe is this: In her words: The registry that got the breed accepted by the FCI called for dogs with distinctly molosser appearance with bloodhond facial features. They also wanted a nicer temperament in the dogs. However, the other registry, the CAFIB (Club for the Improvement of the Fila Brasileiro), very strongly argues against making the dogs very heavy and coarse. And most controversially, its founders insist on breeding for what they say is a unique trait to the bred. This trait is called ojeriza. Big controversy in a primitive guardian breed. Are you saying that people the dog is not bonded to are not human? I regard a dog who would bite the judge in a dog show as human aggressive. In most any show, a dog who bit the judge would have its registration suspended. The CAFIB standard says that biting the judge is not to be regarded as a fault, but as a manifestation of breed character. A dog that automatically protects its 'family' and reacts with hostility to strangers is a loaded weapon. Not a big problem in a rural setting where everyone knows everyone else and property sizes are measured in hundreds of hectares. Disaster in the suburbs, especially with an owner whose dog handling skills are pretty average and whose yard isn't secure. The dog reads body language and voice tone, and does not understand much English. It's ability to discriminate between a life and death conflict and a barney is poor. Say the dog is standing by and 5 yr old (human) Jack, a family member, gets into a fist fight with 7 yr old John, an 'outsider', and Jack is getting pommeled. Dog thinks his clan is attacked and decides to even the odds. Oh, sorry, John ends out seriously mutilated or dead. A 60 kg dog can do a lot of damage to a child in a hurry. Note a few well publicized dog attacks in this forum have been family quarrels where the dog jumped in. Say two blokes have a bit of a bluey. One has a guardian standing by. Oops! If you are breeding a 'primitive guardian breed', you actively selecting pups to react with hostility to people outside the family, and you are willing to place pups in the suburbs, I personally think someone should make sure your dogs get neutered ASAP. Guardians have legitimate work in situations where ferrals are taking a large fraction of the flock. They have no business in the suburbs. I expect you can breed a 'guardian' that guards flocks but is not especially hostile to human strangers. The sticky part of this all is that governments are often incompetent in recognizing breeds, judging dog temperament, etc. and any law that gets enacted is likely to have unintended and painful consequences. I don't know what the solution is, but sticking up for temperament traits such as not allowing a stranger to touch without biting is the wrong way to go. It would be good if owners of 'guardians' took on the challenge of making their dogs' temperaments more suited to modern dog lifestyles . . . and were extremely careful about how they place dogs with the 'old fashioned' knee jerk reactions to what the dog thinks is confrontation.

To those who have flamed me . .. Yes, as concerns the Fila, this is an academic debate. Australia bans the Fila, and it's unlikely that the ban will be lifted. But the larger question has practical implications, and raises havoc with the ideal of deed not breed. If people are breeding for aggression, regardless of what breed, how should society handle it? Perhaps I should have made up a hypothetical where someone was breeding Labradors to be aggressive . . . I'm sure it could be done. I used the CAFIB Fila because there is a clear breed standard that says, no matter what translation you use, that the dog must show extreme aversion to strangers to be registered (they like to see a growl if approached and attack if touched) and breeders within this standard 'cull' the pups that run to strangers at 12 weeks and keep the ones that growl when approached.' A bit like Belyaev's experiments in reverse . . . but with accepting humans as 'family'. I don't know of other breeds where a breed standard explicitly calls for HA or DA I would like to judge dogs by deed not breed, but I also think that deliberately breeding for aggression makes hash of this ideal. I believe social pressure needs to be put on people who breed for aggression. It is not at all clear how this should be done, given how badly governments fumble on dog questions, and how wimpy the pedigree dog world is about promoting standards other than conformation. If those of you who have flamed me are deliberately selecting the pups with the greater propensity to attack to keep for breeding, I think you are at least as much of a problem as drongo owners. Some people buy the idea of dog as weapon or as property guardian. Ok, I can see having sheep guardians on a large property with a lot of sheep and high losses to ferral dogs. But it becomes complicated where people start bringing a guardian breed in to the inner suburbs and sticking it in the yard to protect property . . . or a criminal enterprise. Fences get compromised. Unsuspecting strangers come into yards. Kids take the dog out for walkies and it pulls free for a bit of someone or someone's dog. Poor dog needs exercise and goes nuts in confined space. Some yabo starts thinking they have just as much right to use the off-lead park as anyone else, with the result that the park becomes dangerous.

Background: I like the idea of blaming the deed, not the breed. But it gets complicated where breeding programs deliberately bring out traits that I would not like to see in the dog next door. This relates to Brazil's national dog, the Fila Braziliero . . . a 'landrace' whose historical uses include tracking and 'gripping' runaway slaves, hunting big game, and guarding large estates in a society with extreme income inequality. I'd guess similar considerations apply to other breeds, or some breeder's lines within breeds. Text is extracted from retrieverman's blog . . . http://retrieverman....ed-for-ojeriza/ . . . see also comparison of the two breed standards at http://www.fila-brasileiro.org/compare_breed_standards.html Is it ethical to breed for ojeriza? February 13, 2009 by retrieverman ... In the 1970′s, the Brazilian dog fancy wanted the studbooks closed . . . The original registry for this breed complied but only after creating a schism in the breed that lasts to this day. This led to two separate, warring registries. The registry that got the breed accepted by the FCI called for dogs with distinctly molosser appearance with bloodhond facial features. They also wanted a nicer temperament in the dogs. However, the other registry, the CAFIB (Club for the Improvement of the Fila Brasileiro), very strongly argues against making the dogs very heavy and coarse. And most controversially, its founders insist on breeding for what they say is a unique trait to the bred. This trait is called ojeriza. roughly translates as xenophobia, a deep dislike of strangers. The standard for ojeriza states that the dog should not "allow the judge (a stranger) to touch it. And if it attacks the judge, such a reaction must not be considered a fault, but only a confirmation of its temperament." (Let that sink in for a second.) Dogs from these lines bond very strongly with their families, and by the time they are 18 months to a year in age, they show very high levels of aggression towards people who are not in their immediate families. The FCI backed club argues that the dogs were never historically bred this aggressive. The dogs allowed visiting farmers to enter the property. It was only when Brazil developed a high crime rate that people began to breed for a much more protective dog. The CAFIB won't even register a dog unless it shows ojeriza as an adult. Puppies are not registered. They counter that the FCI dogs are mixed with Great Danes and other "softer" mastiffs. The see their dogs as very close to the working tracking mastiff of Brazil as it always was.

Let's say that the breed standard for some breed calls for temperament that would lead to unprovoked attack on unfamiliar humans and / or other animals, and some or many breeders are actively and openly selecting for aggressive temperament. What should be done?

Sandgrubber, we have discussed this breed before and the traits of a guardian dog have been explained, yet it seems you still persist with the tabloid cut and pastes. Since the last round, have you spent time with an individual or two from this breed? If you are interested in the extreme temperament standard that differentiates the Fila from other guardian breeds please see: http://retrieverman....ed-for-ojeriza/ I hadn't realised until I read this article that there is a split in the Fila community . . . and the CAFIB registry actively breeds for ojeriza (deeply embedded aversion to strangers) and will not register an adult that isn't HA to strangers, while the FCI deliberately breeds for less extreme temperament. I can't see import regulations saying FCI registry dogs yes, CAFIB registry, no. Here's a breed-enthusiast, who calls himself RealFila, response to the blog (which argues that breeding for ojeriza is not ethical) Owning a Fila is a big responsibility and is not one everyone is qualified to have. I have owned these dogs for 20 years now, I do believe and support the CAFIB standard and Ojeriza. Now with that being said should someone living in a small urban apartment own one HELL NO there is definately a huge potential for trouble in that scenario, however if you are a responsible person with a well secured yard and experience with large aggresive breeds then this breed MAY be for you. owning a fila is like owning a gun u may have the right to own it u ay not have the mindset or ability to handle it. The loyalty to its family is unmatched and they are generally very easy to house break and on the quiet side, but threaten him or his family (actually especially his family) you have entered a battle you are sure to lose. Living in Brazil is relevant because you get to know what it is like to be in a culture where upper middle class people tend to prefer to live in high rise buildings -- because that makes it possible to have a guard on duty, and thus less likely that your children will be kidnapped for ransom. . . not because you get to meet the dogs. I can understand why people might be attracted to HA dogs in Brazil. Kidnap for ransom isn't much of a problem in Oz. I do not see any way of restricting ownership to responsible people with well secured yards and experience with large aggressive breeds . . . The issue here is not the Fila per se, but breed clubs / registries deliberately breeding for HA (or DA) characteristics. Where this is happening, it becomes the breed as much as the breed. I think there is good reason to ban import of dogs bred for ojeriza . . . tough cookies if this results in a ban on FCI dogs and unregistered dogs as well as CAFIB dogs. Better than recreating the mess and heartbreak that occur as the system tries, in its clumsy inefficient way, to sort out the 'good' from the 'bad' in the bull breeds.

In a way, yes. Many (most) Labs are food oriented. Many (most) are skilled at manipulating people (eg, getting kids to feed them under the table). Lab metabolism seems to slow as dogs get older. In the US, vets tend to diagnose hypothyroidism in Labs. Not sure whether that's really the problem.