Breeding For Aggression

[gwenneth1]

I won't be answering this one - to me it is too loaded and the old saying of "careful what you wish for " springs to mind...

Too many variables which could see the demise of half the dog breeds - not just a small select few.

Ditto...could easily stray into expansion of BSL and when that net is cast who knows what individuals and dogs may end up wearing it

[Crisovar]

I won't be answering this one - to me it is too loaded and the old saying of "careful what you wish for " springs to mind...

Too many variables which could see the demise of half the dog breeds - not just a small select few.

I agree.

BSL is train wreck without brakes.

We are going to end up in a dogless society or a society where breeds are so dumbed down they will be unrecognisable.

[fuzzy82]

The Caucasian Mountain Dog comes to mind...

From wikipedia:

Caucasian Shepherds are typically assertive, brave, alert, strong, hardy and courageous to a fault. They are truly second to none in their bellicosity towards strangers. Unless properly socialised, they may exhibit unmanageable tendencies. They seldom have time for strangers (but will greet family friends warmly) and have extremely powerful guarding instincts. Everything and everyone who belongs to the family, including children, cats, other dogs, etc. will be regarded by this dog as part of its family and as such will fall under its guardianship. Owing to their size and nature these dogs should not be left alone with children. Aggression and dominance toward unknown dogs should be expected unless the animal has been extensively socialised at a young age and even then some unwanted behaviours may occur.

Here's a video (top one) http://www.russiandog.net/dog-video/guard-dogs

[Sandra777]

Sandra777, do you have a lot of experiance with these crosses that scare the hell out of you or is it just what you think they may be like?

Fair amount of experience with them and yes, those with sensible owners are great dogs just the same as any other dog can be with a sensible owner.

The ones with d-head owners are IME very bad news.

I have met enough of both to form the opinion that dogs of this sort of cross and muddle have the potential in the wrong hands to be much worse than any pure bred/purposefully bred protection dog I have met because pure bred/purposefully bred protection dogs have a foundation of being bred by people who had some clue on what they were trying to achieve (which didn't include a dog that would eat their children )

I should have been more precise and said that it is the POTENTIAL of these dogs in the wrong hands that worries me more, than hundreds of specific individuals that I have met and made a scientific study of.

On the whole these dogs are bred by people who want a tough dog or a cool dog, so they are ignoring things that an sensible breeder would not - nervy unstable temperament (mistaking it for "good guard dog") - would be the first thing.

[espinay2]

The Caucasian Mountain Dog comes to mind...

From wikipedia:

Caucasian Shepherds are typically assertive, brave, alert, strong, hardy and courageous to a fault. They are truly second to none in their bellicosity towards strangers. Unless properly socialised, they may exhibit unmanageable tendencies. They seldom have time for strangers (but will greet family friends warmly) and have extremely powerful guarding instincts. Everything and everyone who belongs to the family, including children, cats, other dogs, etc. will be regarded by this dog as part of its family and as such will fall under its guardianship. Owing to their size and nature these dogs should not be left alone with children. Aggression and dominance toward unknown dogs should be expected unless the animal has been extensively socialised at a young age and even then some unwanted behaviours may occur.

Here's a video (top one) http://www.russiando...ideo/guard-dogs

And yet, I know someone in New York City with a CO which was a very effective Service Dog (until its retirement due to age and its own mobility issues). The dog is a certified Mobility and Psychological Support Dog.

[SkySoaringMagpie]

What are you aiming to prevent?

If it's dog attacks, what people, dogs and circumstances give rise to most attacks?

[poodlefan]

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?

Ban, maditory desexing and no importing, of the idiot owners/breeders. We already have too many idiots.

There goes any breed with prey drive.... which is many of them.

[sandgrubber]

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.

[RottnBullies]

I won't be answering this one - to me it is too loaded and the old saying of "careful what you wish for " springs to mind...

Too many variables which could see the demise of half the dog breeds - not just a small select few.

I agree.

BSL is train wreck without brakes.

We are going to end up in a dogless society or a society where breeds are so dumbed down they will be unrecognisable.

Ditto!

No doubt this Is clearly a thread coming from OP dislike of the breed Fila Brasileiro

In which now I see has been admitted

[tarope]

This topic also brings to mind the ban on importation to Australia of GSD's in the 70's etc because it was considered an 'aggressive breed'.

Might be an idea if you checked your facts first before making this Ignorant statement.

[Roxy Lady]

Hmm, well i took the OP to mean a hypotchetical 'imaginary' dog, which is bred excusively to be either HA or DA, with the standard allowing/encouring the behaviour to be bred into these imaginary dogs.

The imagininary dog i picture is a large/medium dog that is muscualar in stature, which if was bred to be HA or DA would certainly do a lot of damage.

I also took the human aggression to be what it is. Aggressive toward humans. Not wary or cautious, or protective just outright aggressive. IOW would definitly bite and attack if allowed.

I see no place for outright HA to be bred into dogs. I understand training for aggression or even a natural wariness or protectiveness. But intended outright 'natural' HA is not on! Who needs a dog like this??

as above can be said for DA. Really who needs it?

Not any of the dogs originally bred for fighting these days 'compete' or are encouraged to do so (unless by idiot owners), fair enough they have a natural tendancy but a responsible owner/breeder should have no reason to breed an overly DA dog, temperament these days should be just as important as looks. IMO ;)

[espinay2]

This topic also brings to mind the ban on importation to Australia of GSD's in the 70's etc because it was considered an 'aggressive breed'.

Might be an idea if you checked your facts first before making this Ignorant statement.

Whats so ignorant about bringing to peoples attention the futile banning of the importation of the GSD based on incorrect fear based assumptions? Ok so the ban actually ENDED in the 70's. And the main fear was that crossed with a Dingo it would create a sheep killing super dog. But it still stands as an example of something I would not like to see in this country again when it comes to jumping to conclusions about dog breeds and agression. Might be an idea if you read the thread again.....

[gwenneth1]

This topic also brings to mind the ban on importation to Australia of GSD's in the 70's etc because it was considered an 'aggressive breed'.

Might be an idea if you checked your facts first before making this Ignorant statement.

Im not 100% on this myself, but I thought WA/( or was it nationwide?), had a ban on GSD's for fear it would mate with Dingoes and breed an aggressive "superkiller" of sheep. I recall the GSD issue being hotly debated and they were being referred to as "babykillers" who couldn't be trusted...seriously... (I've had three GSD's in my lifetime and they were all brilliant, the working lines ironically more energetic but steady in temp). I felt espinay2 was not referring anything derogatory though towards the breed itself but highlighting prejudice towards a breed prior to it laying a paw in Australia.

(edited for typos! and do an addit...)

Edited June 25, 2011 by gwenneth1

[Nekhbet]

its owners who buy the wrong dog and dont treat it with the respect it deserves that cause problems NOT dogs bred for HA/DA. There seems to be an attitude in this country that a dog should just shut up and act like a backyard ornament no matter what breed you buy.

[Crisovar]

This topic also brings to mind the ban on importation to Australia of GSD's in the 70's etc because it was considered an 'aggressive breed'.

Might be an idea if you checked your facts first before making this Ignorant statement.

Whats so ignorant about bringing to peoples attention the futile banning of the importation of the GSD based on incorrect fear based assumptions? Ok so the ban actually ENDED in the 70's. And the main fear was that crossed with a Dingo it would create a sheep killing super dog. But it still stands as an example of something I would not like to see in this country again when it comes to jumping to conclusions about dog breeds and agression. Might be an idea if you read the thread again.....

Yep

Even thought the import ban was lifted there were still many places in Australia where well into the '80s heavy restrictions were in place on ownership, including no entire animals at all in some places.

All based on ignorance and fear.

[miss whippy]

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?

I feel that in Australia, we have no place for breeds that have been bred to attack humans or other dogs, unprovoked, especially if intended to cause heavy injury.

That said, 'that would lead to' is rather unclear. Also, a problem is where to define provocation. Is a breed that has for generations been selected to ward off trespassers to the extent of injury if said trespasser persisted, or selected to catch vermin or hunt deer under the same umbrella? There are guarding breeds that are bred to protect the family and property, but rarely is it part of the intention that these would do so without so much as warning, and without trespass or threat being part of the equation. The hunting/game breeds are carefully selected to focus on their quarry, the mouse, the rabbit, the deer, not to mistake another dog as it's target for unprovoked attack.

There are breeds that have a much higher risk of mis-use, in that with a little questionable breeding and foolish or uneducated handling, can become a danger, but this can be said of many breeds to varying degrees.

This is already a problem to which we may not have a workable answer. I wonder whether we should be required to obtain a license to own a dog, but judging by the number of apparently licensed drivers creating havoc on our roads, I doubt this would solve a lot! Maybe a license to breed dogs would be more possible or effective to enforce.

Mostly our problem is ill-intention and foolhardiness, human traits, we will have trouble breeding out. As well as deciding where to draw the line.

I don't have a lot of answers to give, but a lot to think about.

[Guest bigdogg]

I used to have a cross bred Fila - two of them actually.. No aggression what so ever towards people or other dogs. They did bark at strangers and 'sounded' serious - but thats all.

[Guest bigdogg]

http://apdha.org.au/index.php?page=busting-the-myth

In the second photo the dog in the middle with a baby on his belly - thats a fila cross dog..

Im not defending any dog breed or anything like that.. but just dont believe all of what the media has to say.

[Sandra777]

I feel that in Australia, we have no place for breeds that have been bred to attack humans or other dogs, unprovoked, especially if intended to cause heavy injury.

OK, so we'll take our enormous population of Staffordshire Bull Terriers and destroy the lot then shall we?

[miss whippy]

I feel that in Australia, we have no place for breeds that have been bred to attack humans or other dogs, unprovoked, especially if intended to cause heavy injury.

OK, so we'll take our enormous population of Staffordshire Bull Terriers and destroy the lot then shall we?

My reasoning about this is similar to the reason behind our country's policy to not allow it's citziens to carry firearms.

Are you saying that Staffordshire Bull Terriers are bred with the intention that they will attack other dogs or humans, unprovoked?

If that is the case, yup, or at least neuter them all.

I don't think you are saying that, and neither was I.

I do have a bit of an issue with the fact that there are the sorts of breeds that do have an instinct intentionally and selectively bred into them to ignore another dog's signs of submission or defeat and with no provocation, attack and fight to the death, with no reservation and no consideration of their own preservation. That owners and breeders freely admit that bar bashing them on the head with a brick or shoving something sharp up their arsehole, there is nothing you can do to make them let go. I'm not saying that every example of the breed is going to do this, but there is a much higher potential for problems with a breed that has been developed to have these characteristics. Instinct is a very hard thing to counteract, even with the best of trainers.

Take for example the Fila Braziliero, which seems to be the possible cause of this debate. If the standard set out by the CAFIB was the standard exclusively being followed, I would not want those dogs in our country. What possible use could we as Australians have for an animal with these characteristics? The FCI standard has a different requirement, as was quoted 'nicer temperament', which may be reasonable enough to feel that safety with these dogs is not such an issue(I don't know, I haven't read the standard). Do we know which is which? If not, surely safety is more important than the ability for people to choose to have a particular breed of dog.