Breeding For Aggression

[espinay2]

lilli - hte OP stated that she meant breeding for HA and DA agression - not weariness, protection etc, but unprovoked aggression.

Again - define the behaviours that YOU consider to be 'unprovoked aggression' - what does this behaviour look like?

I htink we talk about it a lot, but I think for a lot of people what agression actually is is something that, when pushed, they can not define.

So lets define it.

[Greytmate]

I'll have a go at defining the type of aggression we are talking about.

Unprovoked Human Aggression-

The dog with the handler, in an area not regarded by the dog as terrritory. Calm and on lead and a controlled environment where the dog is not exposed to any any usual causes of stress, and no other people or animals can enter environment.

A strange person approaches dog, brisk pace, no eye contact, approaches at 45 degree angle, stops 1.5 metre short of handler.

Is there any of the following behaviour in the dog?

• Lip lifting, or bared teeth?
  
• Growling or barking?
  
• Lunging towards and attempting to bite?
  
• Lunging forwards and biting?
  

The strange person after 20 seconds raises back of hand slowly towards, and under the dogs nose, staying 200mm clear of dog.

Does the dog exhibit any of those behaviours?

If the answer is yes to any of those behaviours, the dog is displaying unprovoked human aggression.

Are people happy to define it like that? Or do they have a better way to describe the type of aggression that we are talking about?

[BJean]

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.

Stick to your labs sandgrubber, with their modern hips and suburban lifespan.

Give Home Renovators something to do cleaning up after their neurotic lab's household destruction.

I feel its fitting to throw around aspersions, its thread content afterall.

Room for two, turtle watching Souff?

Edited June 27, 2011 by lilli

[casowner]

Sandgrubber as a former (and hopefully future) custodian of one of lilli's dogs I know that she offers support throughout the life of the dog. She selects pups for individuals and their lifestyle/circumstances and experience. I hold a very great respect for her due to that, I am very honest about my experience with the CAO breed and I hold it it the upmost regard. There are other CAO breeders that I can approach for a pup and yet I have made the decision to wait for as long as it takes as I know that she will do the best for her chosen breed, the pup and the the owner for the long term

[PetSitters]

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.....

You did say because it was considered an 'aggressive breed' didn't you?

In 1929 an unjust import ban was placed of this wonderful breed because some moron farmers had this crazy idea that GSD's would breed with dingos and produce a super sheep killer. What these morons didn't know was the GSD was a sheep herding breed.

Under this ban came victimization as they were considered vermin and in some states could be shot on sight. GSD owners needed a permit to travel from one town to another, rego was much more and of cause the fear associated with Ignorance which is still alive today.

Bloodlines also suffered and finely in 1972 this ban was lifted

I didn't vote as I don't see the purpose of this thread at all.

Yes, that is correct how the GSD was banned in 1929 and lifted in 1972 by cleaver promotion of the breed's integrity, giving fine examples of the breed to politicians as pets was one method of promotion appartantly?.

[gwenneth1]

I'll have a go at defining the type of aggression we are talking about.

Unprovoked Human Aggression-

The dog with the handler, in an area not regarded by the dog as terrritory. Calm and on lead and a controlled environment where the dog is not exposed to any any usual causes of stress, and no other people or animals can enter environment.

A strange person approaches dog, brisk pace, no eye contact, approaches at 45 degree angle, stops 1.5 metre short of handler.

Is there any of the following behaviour in the dog?

• Lip lifting, or bared teeth?
  
• Growling or barking?
  
• Lunging towards and attempting to bite?
  
• Lunging forwards and biting?
  

The strange person after 20 seconds raises back of hand slowly towards, and under the dogs nose, staying 200mm clear of dog.

Does the dog exhibit any of those behaviours?

If the answer is yes to any of those behaviours, the dog is displaying unprovoked human aggression.

Are people happy to define it like that? Or do they have a better way to describe the type of aggression that we are talking about?

Lets say hypothetically speaking that model is universally agreed upon by various organisations and it becomes compulsory (never mind how this is supposed to be enforced):

Does that apply to:

Dogs who are going to be used for breeding?

Dogs of a specific breed?

Dogs who are being considered for importation?

Dogs who are in rescue and being considered for euthanasia or rehoming?

Dogs who have a DD declaration and it is being contested?

Dogs who have been abused and assessed for rehab-or if they fail the test once, euthanasia automatically applies?

(Dogs who have a known history of abuse by a specific gender/type, same gender/type does test for instance?)

A proposal that all dogs council or kennel registered now have to be assessed ?

Who does the test: authorised, qualified (and what qualifications, authorisations are recognised and by what authorities/organisations?) and fees involved?

Does the same sort model apply for dogs facing a DD order due to DA or Animal Aggression?

Does a small fluffy dog or cat does a walk by(or a more realistic test would be to expose said dog to a jumpy bouncy, quick moving animal as so frequently happens in real life) by a dog and if they do any of the above they then are considered to have potential for a dangerous dog order therefore not suitable for rehoming and automatically euthanised? (and that is regardless of breed, so if you have a sighthound or working dog for example, there are no consdieratons made for what that dog was historically bred for?

(Actually, this happened to people I know who wanted to adopt the unwanted next door neighbours dog. Friend went to RSPCA to adopt, dog apparently failed cat test because in ran at (lunged) at a cat through the fence even though it is highly likely it was first time he saw a cat, but was considered unsuitable for rehoming and was euthanised).

How stringent does the proposed model be, do dogs have to pass a cat, poultry, dog, guinea pig test? After all, if a dog attacks/maims/kills any of those as there has been instances where this has appeared enough to have a Dangerous Dog declared.

Even now the problem not so much lies with regulations/rules, but interpretation of those already in place; subjective nature of those rules and those who are apparently qualifed enough to be the chosen ones who apply those regulations/rules.

Anway, I guess I've once again strayed off topic because the poll is:

AnywayIf the breed standard for some breed calls for HA or DA temperament, what should be done?

Ban importation of the breed

Require special licensing for owners of the breed

Nothing.

Other (please clarify)

and again my answer is it is so simple to merely alter the wording of the standard and this becomes null and void.

[Kazhak]

edited cause my post completely off track..

as far as breed standard goes, its a tough call, it depends on whats defined as aggression. but it all comes down to the Human Factor..

Edited June 28, 2011 by Kazhak

[PetSitters]

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 don't think there are any breed standards that call for this temperament in breeds that are not restricted already, more to the point I think this topic has credibility directed towards breeders selecting aggressive temperaments in breeds that are supposed to be stable and calm in a passive environment is the greater problem we face that needs to be addressed?.

It's like the GSD, because a good example of the breed can be "trained" to attack and protect on command or guard particluar surroundings, a GSD that displays this behaviour without training is too often mistakenly accredited as a good example of the breed which IMHO creates the reasoning for breeding unstable dogs, and this mentality with the GSD is a downward slope to ruining the breed.

I have the fortune of owning two GSD's, one DA & HA unstable dog who will attack and bite strangers and go after strange dogs given the opportunity with the training of this dog centred around not reacting in a passive environment, but the problem is, my dog "will" attack and protect against intruders etc without training and is easily misconstrude as having the ideal "protective" instinct which for a GSD he hasn't and is essentially a fear biter.

My other GSD, a working line dog from a long history of police dog and high level sporting dog ancestory is cool and confident, not the slightest bit reactive in a passive environment and is neither DA or HA, but in bitework training for sport, he has serious aggression under pressure, fight the dog and the aggression surfaces and escalates which is how a good temperament working GSD should be. Unless a GSD is "trained" in suspicion and fight, they should be calm and stable unprovoked and sadly with the GSD as I see things, too many are bred with aggressive tendencies as a short cut to protection training or bred by people who don't understand the correct traits.

I hate with a passion, people excusing fearful and unstable behaviour in the GSD breed as protection quality or claiming such a temperament makes an ideal police dog, DA, HA, fearful, unstable and reactive GSD's IMHO should be desexed and removed from the gene pools. After owning and training an unstable and a stable GSD the two temperaments are worlds apart and no comparison between the two?

[Greytmate]

I'll have a go at defining the type of aggression we are talking about.

Unprovoked Human Aggression-

The dog with the handler, in an area not regarded by the dog as terrritory. Calm and on lead and a controlled environment where the dog is not exposed to any any usual causes of stress, and no other people or animals can enter environment.

A strange person approaches dog, brisk pace, no eye contact, approaches at 45 degree angle, stops 1.5 metre short of handler.

Is there any of the following behaviour in the dog?

• Lip lifting, or bared teeth?
  
• Growling or barking?
  
• Lunging towards and attempting to bite?
  
• Lunging forwards and biting?
  

The strange person after 20 seconds raises back of hand slowly towards, and under the dogs nose, staying 200mm clear of dog.

Does the dog exhibit any of those behaviours?

If the answer is yes to any of those behaviours, the dog is displaying unprovoked human aggression.

Are people happy to define it like that? Or do they have a better way to describe the type of aggression that we are talking about?

Lets say hypothetically speaking that model is universally agreed upon by various organisations and it becomes compulsory (never mind how this is supposed to be enforced):

Does that apply to:

Dogs who are going to be used for breeding?

Dogs of a specific breed?

Dogs who are being considered for importation?

Dogs who are in rescue and being considered for euthanasia or rehoming?

Dogs who have a DD declaration and it is being contested?

Dogs who have been abused and assessed for rehab-or if they fail the test once, euthanasia automatically applies?

(Dogs who have a known history of abuse by a specific gender/type, same gender/type does test for instance?)

A proposal that all dogs council or kennel registered now have to be assessed ?

Who does the test: authorised, qualified (and what qualifications, authorisations are recognised and by what authorities/organisations?) and fees involved?

Does the same sort model apply for dogs facing a DD order due to DA or Animal Aggression?

Does a small fluffy dog or cat does a walk by(or a more realistic test would be to expose said dog to a jumpy bouncy, quick moving animal as so frequently happens in real life) by a dog and if they do any of the above they then are considered to have potential for a dangerous dog order therefore not suitable for rehoming and automatically euthanised? (and that is regardless of breed, so if you have a sighthound or working dog for example, there are no consdieratons made for what that dog was historically bred for?

(Actually, this happened to people I know who wanted to adopt the unwanted next door neighbours dog. Friend went to RSPCA to adopt, dog apparently failed cat test because in ran at (lunged) at a cat through the fence even though it is highly likely it was first time he saw a cat, but was considered unsuitable for rehoming and was euthanised).

How stringent does the proposed model be, do dogs have to pass a cat, poultry, dog, guinea pig test? After all, if a dog attacks/maims/kills any of those as there has been instances where this has appeared enough to have a Dangerous Dog declared.

Even now the problem not so much lies with regulations/rules, but interpretation of those already in place; subjective nature of those rules and those who are apparently qualifed enough to be the chosen ones who apply those regulations/rules.

Anway, I guess I've once again strayed off topic because the poll is:

AnywayIf the breed standard for some breed calls for HA or DA temperament, what should be done?

Ban importation of the breed

Require special licensing for owners of the breed

Nothing.

Other (please clarify)

and again my answer is it is so simple to merely alter the wording of the standard and this becomes null and void.

Hmm, you have gone a bit off-topic. (Although your questions are other good topics too)For the purposes of this thread, I am just trying to define "human aggression" in dogs.

Let's imagine that there was a strong genetic trait caused by a certain combination of genes that led to the dogs that possessed that combination being very likely to fail that "human aggression" test. I didn't list them, but there is a much larger list of other behaviours a dog could show as an alternative to the ones that would fail the test.

Question for discussion - Is that level and type of aggression acceptable in dogs being produced in this country? Should the production and sale of those dogs be unlimited?

The Fila is banned, but are there other breeds in this country where that level of aggression is seen as desirable?

[PetSitters]

I'll have a go at defining the type of aggression we are talking about.

Unprovoked Human Aggression-

The dog with the handler, in an area not regarded by the dog as terrritory. Calm and on lead and a controlled environment where the dog is not exposed to any any usual causes of stress, and no other people or animals can enter environment.

A strange person approaches dog, brisk pace, no eye contact, approaches at 45 degree angle, stops 1.5 metre short of handler.

Is there any of the following behaviour in the dog?

• Lip lifting, or bared teeth?
  
• Growling or barking?
  
• Lunging towards and attempting to bite?
  
• Lunging forwards and biting?
  

The strange person after 20 seconds raises back of hand slowly towards, and under the dogs nose, staying 200mm clear of dog.

Does the dog exhibit any of those behaviours?

If the answer is yes to any of those behaviours, the dog is displaying unprovoked human aggression.

Are people happy to define it like that? Or do they have a better way to describe the type of aggression that we are talking about?

Lets say hypothetically speaking that model is universally agreed upon by various organisations and it becomes compulsory (never mind how this is supposed to be enforced):

Does that apply to:

Dogs who are going to be used for breeding?

Dogs of a specific breed?

Dogs who are being considered for importation?

Dogs who are in rescue and being considered for euthanasia or rehoming?

Dogs who have a DD declaration and it is being contested?

Dogs who have been abused and assessed for rehab-or if they fail the test once, euthanasia automatically applies?

(Dogs who have a known history of abuse by a specific gender/type, same gender/type does test for instance?)

A proposal that all dogs council or kennel registered now have to be assessed ?

Who does the test: authorised, qualified (and what qualifications, authorisations are recognised and by what authorities/organisations?) and fees involved?

Does the same sort model apply for dogs facing a DD order due to DA or Animal Aggression?

Does a small fluffy dog or cat does a walk by(or a more realistic test would be to expose said dog to a jumpy bouncy, quick moving animal as so frequently happens in real life) by a dog and if they do any of the above they then are considered to have potential for a dangerous dog order therefore not suitable for rehoming and automatically euthanised? (and that is regardless of breed, so if you have a sighthound or working dog for example, there are no consdieratons made for what that dog was historically bred for?

(Actually, this happened to people I know who wanted to adopt the unwanted next door neighbours dog. Friend went to RSPCA to adopt, dog apparently failed cat test because in ran at (lunged) at a cat through the fence even though it is highly likely it was first time he saw a cat, but was considered unsuitable for rehoming and was euthanised).

How stringent does the proposed model be, do dogs have to pass a cat, poultry, dog, guinea pig test? After all, if a dog attacks/maims/kills any of those as there has been instances where this has appeared enough to have a Dangerous Dog declared.

Even now the problem not so much lies with regulations/rules, but interpretation of those already in place; subjective nature of those rules and those who are apparently qualifed enough to be the chosen ones who apply those regulations/rules.

Anway, I guess I've once again strayed off topic because the poll is:

AnywayIf the breed standard for some breed calls for HA or DA temperament, what should be done?

Ban importation of the breed

Require special licensing for owners of the breed

Nothing.

Other (please clarify)

and again my answer is it is so simple to merely alter the wording of the standard and this becomes null and void.

Hmm, you have gone a bit off-topic. (Although your questions are other good topics too)For the purposes of this thread, I am just trying to define "human aggression" in dogs.

Let's imagine that there was a strong genetic trait caused by a certain combination of genes that led to the dogs that possessed that combination being very likely to fail that "human aggression" test. I didn't list them, but there is a much larger list of other behaviours a dog could show as an alternative to the ones that would fail the test.

Question for discussion - Is that level and type of aggression acceptable in dogs being produced in this country? Should the production and sale of those dogs be unlimited?

The Fila is banned, but are there other breeds in this country where that level of aggression is seen as desirable?

Greytmate, the "human aggression" test that you put forward, a good attack trained dog would pass, a good police dog etc, the only desire in traits that would fail the test I can see is a junk yard guard dog that would do a job without training, otherwise the traits IMHO have no place in the community and to own a dog possessing traits to fail the test are a liability which takes extreme levels of training, management and supervision to maintain safety.

[Kazhak]

see I think thats the difference, theres doing your job on command, or doing your job because you are aggressive, my partners family had a Rottie, who was a highly trained guard dog, he was also used as the walk by dog for training other dogs because he would not react even if they were going nuts, he was highly responsive to his families cues, he would remain silent when asked or bark loudly & seemingly ferociously if asked, but he was the biggest pooch you'd ever meet, was great with the kids, was good with other animals & dogs. but he was trained & ived with a kind & loving family. again it comes down to the human factor..

[Titanium]

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 have not voted as I feel the poll does not have enough information available for me. Although a Breed Standard may be worded a particular way - the actual accepted and hence described temperament of a breed may be worded completely differently.

For example I am going to quote easily found descriptions of temperament for a popular Breed. Keep in mind these quotes of temperament were literally the first two found online and not a search for negative traits. Furthermore I have nothing against this particular breed. This is example only.

"The official AKC standard for the breed describes the xxxxxxx as “A graceful, alert, swift-moving dog with saucy expression, compact, and with terrier-like qualities of temperament.” However, some xxxxxxx carry “saucy” and “terrier-like” to extremes and are grumpy, haughty, or downright nasty when provoked – and provocation may come easy.

The tendency to be temperamental, a reputation for being suspicious of everyone but his owner, and a clannish dislike of any breed but his own makes the xxxxxxxx an unsuitable pet for households with small or boisterous children."

and

"The breed tends to be fiercely loyal to one particular owner and in some cases may become over protective of the person, especially around other people or animals.[12] They do not always get along with other breeds,[11] and tend to have a "clannish" nature.

This breed is under 5 kg.

Ultimately I feel that the onus is on good breeders and owners alike for the disposition of their dogs and hence politics has no place in reference to bans on breeds.

"Deed not Breed" and "Be Careful What You Wish For" springs easily to mind.

[sandgrubber]

Even now the problem not so much lies with regulations/rules, but interpretation of those already in place; subjective nature of those rules and those who are apparently qualifed enough to be the chosen ones who apply those regulations/rules.

Anway, I guess I've once again strayed off topic because the poll is:

AnywayIf the breed standard for some breed calls for HA or DA temperament, what should be done?

Ban importation of the breed

Require special licensing for owners of the breed

Nothing.

Other (please clarify)

and again my answer is it is so simple to merely alter the wording of the standard and this becomes null and void.

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.

[WreckitWhippet]

Even now the problem not so much lies with regulations/rules, but interpretation of those already in place; subjective nature of those rules and those who are apparently qualifed enough to be the chosen ones who apply those regulations/rules.

Anway, I guess I've once again strayed off topic because the poll is:

AnywayIf the breed standard for some breed calls for HA or DA temperament, what should be done?

Ban importation of the breed

Require special licensing for owners of the breed

Nothing.

Other (please clarify)

and again my answer is it is so simple to merely alter the wording of the standard and this becomes null and void.

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.

Cleary "primitive guardians " aren't an issue either

[Titanium]

Even now the problem not so much lies with regulations/rules, but interpretation of those already in place; subjective nature of those rules and those who are apparently qualifed enough to be the chosen ones who apply those regulations/rules.

Anway, I guess I've once again strayed off topic because the poll is:

AnywayIf the breed standard for some breed calls for HA or DA temperament, what should be done?

Ban importation of the breed

Require special licensing for owners of the breed

Nothing.

Other (please clarify)

and again my answer is it is so simple to merely alter the wording of the standard and this becomes null and void.

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.

Cleary "primitive guardians " aren't an issue either

So the actual Poll then infact should be about WEIGHT and not aggression??? ;)

[poodlefan]

see I think thats the difference, theres doing your job on command, or doing your job because you are aggressive, my partners family had a Rottie, who was a highly trained guard dog, he was also used as the walk by dog for training other dogs because he would not react even if they were going nuts, he was highly responsive to his families cues, he would remain silent when asked or bark loudly & seemingly ferociously if asked, but he was the biggest pooch you'd ever meet, was great with the kids, was good with other animals & dogs. but he was trained & ived with a kind & loving family. again it comes down to the human factor..

How does a guard dog guard if no humans are around to 'command' it?? The answer is simple - by instinct. That will involve a genetic predisposition to be DA or HA in most cases.

I don't have an issue with dogs that are prepared to be DA or HA as part of their 'jobs' if the job is lawful.

What I do have an issue with is people who get such dogs and fail to ensure that they don't become a danger to the community through poor management.

Lets not blame such dogs for the fact that their owners are irresponsible, ignorant or criminal.

Let me tell you, if I lived in some of the world's most dangerous places, I'd own a Fila in a heartbeat. South Africa would be a case in point. If I lived in Johannesburg I'd probably have several. I'd want people to think twice about the dogs before entering my home and I'd be happy for the dog to step up to protect house or family.

Such dogs are only an issue when they're placed in the wrong home.

Edited June 29, 2011 by poodlefan

[RottnBullies]

How does a guard dog guard if no humans are around to 'command' it?? The answer is simple - by instinct. That will involve a genetic predisposition to be DA or HA in most cases.

I don't have an issue with dogs that are prepared to be DA or HA as part of their 'jobs' if the job is lawful.

What I do have an issue with is people who get such dogs and fail to ensure that they don't become a danger to the community through poor management.

Lets not blame such dogs for the fact that their owners are irresponsible, ignorant or criminal.

Let me tell you, if I lived in some of the world's most dangerous places, I'd own a Fila in a heartbeat. South Africa would be a case in point. If I lived in Johannesburg I'd probably have several. I'd want people to think twice about the dogs before entering my home and I'd be happy for the dog to step up to protect house or family.

Such dogs are only an issue when they're placed in the wrong home.

I couldn't agree more with all of what you've said here. All dogs have a purpose, which shouldn't be forgotten In the bigger scheme of things!

And not all types of dogs are for everyone, lets not keep punishing certain breeds because they don't fit our ideal of what a dog should be

[Crisovar]

How does a guard dog guard if no humans are around to 'command' it?? The answer is simple - by instinct. That will involve a genetic predisposition to be DA or HA in most cases.

I don't have an issue with dogs that are prepared to be DA or HA as part of their 'jobs' if the job is lawful.

What I do have an issue with is people who get such dogs and fail to ensure that they don't become a danger to the community through poor management.

Lets not blame such dogs for the fact that their owners are irresponsible, ignorant or criminal.

Let me tell you, if I lived in some of the world's most dangerous places, I'd own a Fila in a heartbeat. South Africa would be a case in point. If I lived in Johannesburg I'd probably have several. I'd want people to think twice about the dogs before entering my home and I'd be happy for the dog to step up to protect house or family.

Such dogs are only an issue when they're placed in the wrong home.

I couldn't agree more with all of what you've said here. All dogs have a purpose, which shouldn't be forgotten In the bigger scheme of things!

And not all types of dogs are for everyone, lets not keep punishing certain breeds because they don't fit our ideal of what a dog should be

Yes

It comes down to responsible choices and responsible ownership.

[poodlefan]

How does a guard dog guard if no humans are around to 'command' it?? The answer is simple - by instinct. That will involve a genetic predisposition to be DA or HA in most cases.

I don't have an issue with dogs that are prepared to be DA or HA as part of their 'jobs' if the job is lawful.

What I do have an issue with is people who get such dogs and fail to ensure that they don't become a danger to the community through poor management.

Lets not blame such dogs for the fact that their owners are irresponsible, ignorant or criminal.

Let me tell you, if I lived in some of the world's most dangerous places, I'd own a Fila in a heartbeat. South Africa would be a case in point. If I lived in Johannesburg I'd probably have several. I'd want people to think twice about the dogs before entering my home and I'd be happy for the dog to step up to protect house or family.

Such dogs are only an issue when they're placed in the wrong home.

I couldn't agree more with all of what you've said here. All dogs have a purpose, which shouldn't be forgotten In the bigger scheme of things!

And not all types of dogs are for everyone, lets not keep punishing certain breeds because they don't fit our ideal of what a dog should be

I can also say with certainly that if I were to find myself living alone on a small rural acreage, I'd be talking to Lilli about one of her dogs. Clearly the dog would need to be managed sensibly but I would take great comfort from having a such a protector around.

[Greytmate]

How does a guard dog guard if no humans are around to 'command' it?? The answer is simple - by instinct. That will involve a genetic predisposition to be DA or HA in most cases.

But what is a guard dog guarding when it is clearly off its own property?

I think the instinct to guard territory is strong in some breeds. It's instinct and it results in DA or HA. It could be argued that this aggression is 'provoked', and is desirable in some situations. Especially if the dog first tries to warn the intruder to back off in an effort to avoid escalating the aggression.

I posted up a 'hypothetical test' to test for aggression that goes beyond any normal territorial guarding. They are the dogs I am really scared of. Those dogs have different rules in their head about why they have to be aggressive.