sandgrubber

+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.

"The Watkins have called for this breed of dog to be banned so no other child will have to endure the agony that Zane did."

Tabloid? My sources are the breed standard in the country of origin and websites of breed advocates. . . plus time spent in Brazil. The Fila is not an ordinary guardian breed.

oops . .. have to read more carefully . . . sorry. Sandgrubber that was a different dog, they are talking about a German Shepherd. They are explaining its deed not breed and that sometimes it can be to do with training/temperament and sometimes medical reasons.

Can someone explain the brain tumor thing? Is it common for a brain tumor to turn a dog vicious? Was this dog on death's door anyway? That wouldn't make the situation any nicer . . . but would cast a different light.

This gets amplified by unstable / antisocial owners are both attracted to and inclined to produce unstable dogs. There's something worse than an unstable dog . . .it's a breed that is stable and bred to be human-aggressive. There is at one banned breed out there whose breed standard calls for a stable and HA (toward strangers) temperament. In breed-specialty shows it is not considered a fault for dogs of this breed to bite the judge. Breed origins / work include capture of escaped slaves and protecting cattle from cattle rustlers and jaguars. You have to have a screw loose to want to import such a dog.

I'd expect the cost of importing a Fila would be close to $10k . . . if you combine airfare and quarantine fees. Are you saying someone imported this dog and is not keeping it in small confines with poor care. What a wanker! Given that almost no one in Australia has ever seen a Fila and they do look like other molosser breeds (but a true-to-breed-standard Fila is much more HA than the average mastiff), seems more likely that your friend purchased some mastiff cross dressed up as a Fila for sex appeal. Dogos have been in Australia since before the ban so there will still be a few of them hanging around.

How many Fila Brasilieros have you seen coming into Australia in the last several years? Or . . .jeez, I've forgotten the spelling . . Doggie Argentineo? I suppport import bans on macho breeds . . and think they can work. Given the high cost of quarantine these days, it's feasible to do a real check on the breed of the dog to be imported, and not practical to have a go at importing something that is likely to get bounced . . . or destroyed once it is imported.

There but for fortune, go you and I, My first Labbie, a rescue, loved kids, but would bite anyone who approached her anal sphincter (aka a##-hole). Vets had to muzzle her to take her temperature. I once heard a growl when a toddler was near. Guess what. He was trying to examine the little hole under her tail. Nothing happened, other than the kid being told 'NO !!!!!!!!!!'. If I'd been distracted by a the kid's mother wanting to pet my puppy, that NO!!!!! might have been delayed and the kid might have gotten a good bite. I don't think there's a breed message here . . . just that kids require supervision, especially around unknown dogs. Most dogs will growl before biting a kid. I'd guess the mum wasn't tuned in. I admit, I hold prejudice against single mums with multiple kids and suspect that the 'plaintiff', in this case, has a lot to hide.

This if facetious. Flame if you like. Maybe we need owner specific legislation. Eg, make people prove they are not a bogan before they can buy/register dogs of a certain class :D.

I saw a 'bouncy castle' the other day in the form of a Dalmatian . . . the local fire dept also has a mailbox in the form of a Dali.

I don't see anything funny about this. Bad reporting, as usual. But I feel for the people who got bitten. How about a law that makes it possible to sue a journo for misidentification of breed. That would reduce the newspaper pitt bull population. That said, in this case it looks like the Parramatta dog (see photos and text posted in the Dogs Attack 4 People thread) was a pit bull and the police are pursuing banned breed charges against the owner of the dogs in the shopping center incident. If they were all pitties it going to end out as a major jump in support for BSL

No. There is no single founding Lab. As best as people can figure out there were one to two hundred lesser St John's dogs imported from Canada to England ~ 1850 to 1900. There were many Labrador lines by 1915, some of them much more important than others. Not all were pure bred from the original St Johns dog stock . . . it's likely that many, or even most, were cross breeds who were back crossed. I guess Bolo would be considered the first peripotent sire, and he would probably show up on the pedigrees of many leading labs more than one time . . . if you took the pedigree back 20 generations or so. He carried chocolate, and some think he is ancestral to all chocolate Labs. So is this dog in all the pedigrees of todays labs?

I came across an interesting bio-pic of Dual CH Banchory Bolo, 1915-1927, one of the most famous Labradors of yore. Found it interesting that a dog so revered in field lines could have such a checkered history . . . and was almost PTS (in those days they said 'destroyed' ) a couple times for behaving badly. http://www.lorkenfarms.com/banchory_bolo.htm clipping a few bits from the article . . . Dual FC-CH Banchory Bolo was the first dog to earn a dual championship by winning both the bench Championship CH as well as becoming a Field Trial Champion in England. Each of his litters produced either a Field Champion or a Show Champion. . . . Bolo came to Lady Howe in 1918, when he was a bit more than two years old. Heartbroken about the loss of her first Labrador, Scandal of Glynn, she had decided to find the only male pup that Scandal had sired. When finally found, he'd been through several trainers and all had given up on him. (Lady Howe said that in human terms "he had a really bad police record.") She was offered the dog for nothing with the proviso that if she did not want him later on, he should be destroyed. . . . mishaps follow . . . Bolo is little used at stud . . . but his progeny take all sorts of honors.

Poor kid. Those wounds look awful. But not great journalism. I don't know my UK news outfits. Isn't The Mail pretty low on the list for responsible journalism . . . Labrador? I wouldn't question Lab X, but the round eyes and large white spot are well off breed standard. Is it even the dog involved in the attack? The account given doesn't sound like anyone would have been taking pictures and the dog in the picture doesn't look stressed. There's something fishy about this story. The mother didn't see what happened, she was standing a few steps away, and the child was thoroughly mauled by the time she turned around. She says the kid was 'lying on the floor' . . . in an outdoor park? Why is the story emerging more than two weeks after it happened? If the woman was so upset, why didn't she go directly to the police. [The story says the police got the report from an ambulance driver]. The dog owner gave her phone number. Why didn't someone get her account of what happened?

I'd agree that 4 Corners is more balanced than PDE. JH has some bad habits, like using one photo to castigate an entire breed; rarely giving credit to breeders who are doing the right thing; and missing some obvious facts: eg, her 'pug' expose misses the absolutely horrid ratings for HD and OCD that the pug gets on OFA stats. Conversely, I'd agree with B_M that attacking Steve Jones as a "rubbish" expert has less credibility than attacking David Attenborough. Jones, in genetics, has a broad support from the science community, both as an expert, and as a communicator. In the case of dog breeding, I'd say the 'few bad apples' have been in the bin for many decades, perhaps a century and the result is a bit whiffy. The 'bad apples' have already, gone a long way to spoiling the bin for some breeds, and it will require careful breeding to return to production of a healthy crop. My mother, born in 1923, was vocal about show-breeding ruining temperament and intelligent when I was a kid (say the 1950's to early 60s). She was mostly on about the evolution of the American Cocker spaniel from little working gundogs that she grew up with, the evolution of the 'Lassie dog' [rough collie] to a narrow headed non-working breed, and the US version of the Irish setter, which, in general has unstable temperament and is unsuited to work as a gun dog. The list of breeds that have been altered in this fashion is long . . . and I'd say all breeds are threatened. Personally, I'd much rather have muck raking journalism than a century of silence. Sometimes it takes some well leveraged, off balance effort to make a dent on a structure that has taken many centuries to build and is governed by people, many of whom are self-righteous and set in their ways. edited for clarity

This belongs in cruely and abuse, not the news. A##-holes like this are out for publicity. Don't give it to them.