Breeds To Be Wary Of

[Alison03]

The three most dangerous dogs I've worked with were a Gordon setter, golden retriever and a curly coated retriever

Interesting RMS, it was a curly coated retriever that attacked my best friends son and put him in hospital.

One of the dogs that attacked me and my Shihtzu cross was a GR cross, I always thought they were quiet and reliable till that day.

[dogmatic]

Understood, mita. Trying to identify breeds that are more likely to cause harm to another dog. Here's some of my stories which may or may not be of assistance.

I have only had GSDs. When one was a puppy, she was attacked - out of the blue - and bitten by a Miniature Schnauzer. Left a nice set of teeth marks on her shoulder. We spent the best part of a year, every day, at the dog-park trying to desensitise her own aggressiveness toward dogs. She was attacked and nipped by a number of border collies and once by a staffy - usually giving chase when I was trying to distract her away from other dogs using her ball. She has also been attacked and nipped by a black curly terrier cross "thing" - again leaving teeth marks. The scariest incident was when a man came through the park with a three-legged dog he described as a "camp dog" from the Kimberleys. He seemed to have it under control, but then it's posture suddenly changed. He panicked, and my hair stood on end. He managed to get it on the leash. It's appearance was that of a multi-coloured dingo cross, I guess. Two Miniature Dachshunds frequented to dog-parks. Of all dogs, they were indeed the most confrontational, in terms of running out from their owners, staring at the other dog, including my GSDs on a number of occasions, and barking their heads off, only to be restrained by their owners picking them up. A particular King Charles Spaniel does the same. Of course this is not seen by anyone in the dog-park as a threat.

Another incident was when my older GSD and a tall handsome brindle dog (a breed of bully? trying to find a photo...) had a slight misunderstanding over the ownership of a stick. The GSD has never used her teeth for anything but eating. Nevertheless, she did indicate that she thought the stick was definitely hers. The brindle latched onto her cheek and would only let go after being rolled down an embankment, together with the GSD, and into a creek where its head was held under the water.

As the owner of a number of GSDs over the years, I would say to be wary of GSDs for the safety of your dog. Many, but certainly not all, have a desire to dominate other dogs and this can be understandably frightening to another dog's owner. When a GSD gets to know a particular dog, the other dog may become part of her protectorate and there will not be any threat from that point. Usually this happens after a first meeting where the GSD determines that the other dog is not a threat. Unfortunately, it is the first meeting that often causes concern. GSDs do get annoyed at unruly behaviour from other dogs, particularly puppies and young dogs jumping around the place, but the expression of their displeasure is not necessarily something to be concerned about. Nevertheless, be wary. Younger GSDs may sometimes bother elderly dogs, but generally, GSDs seem to show some respect and ignore them. Similarly with toy and smaller breeds. I have not known GSDs to be savage, in terms of sinking their teeth into another dog, but even the most placid GSD of mine had a tendency to roll the Cocker Spaniel from next door - owned by a nun who would apologise and smile.

I like the way the GSDs guard me and my yard. While I have tried to reduce their reactivity to other dogs, I wouldn't like to completely break their protectiveness. BTW, the best-behaved GSDs I have owned were never socialised, and I have completely given up on the socialisation theory and dog-parks! I don't know if it did more harm than good, but what a nightmare!

Anecdotally, there is one particular large breed that has been known to kill small breeds around my part of the country, usually when they are unattended and have escaped from the owner's yard. That breed has not yet been mentioned in this thread as far as I can see. Rottweiller. At the same time, I used to walk Rotty with my GSDs. Nice dog, and never a problem.

[WreckitWhippet]

Really? Breeds to be Wary Of!

It's like saying 'all red heads are feisty' or 'blonds are dumb'. Quite offensive me thinks!

It's about the personality of the dog not the breed.

I parent 3 bullies - each is different, each copes differently with stress. It is my responsibility to understand them and make sure they and others are safe.

So by all means be wary of the owners, be wary of individual dogs but not the breed.

No it's not, whilst there is some variance within breeds when it comes to temperament, for the most part they come hard wired with breed traits and this includes a predisposition to aggression, prey drive, aloofness etc.

Edited November 9, 2013 by WreckitWhippet

[Tintin Jac]

I also stress the need to keep YOUR dog safe and never, never ever assume anything.

The world is there for all dog owners to share, good and bad, well trained and not well trained, well bred and not well bred, responsible owners and totally irresponsible owners.

If your dog is in danger then you need to protect your dog from that danger ... it is your responsibility as an owner.

Blaming the breed never works, but it is a good idea to learn what the different breeds are best at doing - a dog that is good at chasing and crunching is not always the type that you want around your dog, so it is OK to discriminate.

Take your puppy to dog training, get involved where there is safety, and let them be a confident and happy pup in a safe environment.

Souff, this is DOL statement of the year for me. It is something that everyone of us, not just airlock, should be mindful of at all times!

And, from memory, pretty much the only statement from Souff this year. DOL needs more Souff posts :)

[HazyWal]

Big or small beware of them all is my motto now I have muzzled onlead greyhounds It's unfortunate in my suburb that you have more chance of winning lotto than finding a ranger. I don't go anywhere near offlead parks, I respect the fact that people don't want a pair of lunatics zooming around but the same respect is rarely shown to me. I've taken to putting the dogs in the car and driving around the Coast to just find somewhere that we can walk without being harassed but to no avail. I've found since having Greyhounds that most people don't give a toss.

[hankdog]

I have no problem acknowledging the strengths of different breeds in both people and animals. It's no co incidence darker skinned people live in sunnier climes. It becomes racist when negative inferences are placed on the appearances of an individual, say suggesting darker skinned people not associate with less dark skinned people or bull breeds not associate with your dog.

This is a public forum and making negative generalizations is the kind of thing that gets you to BSL. If we all condone the statement that bull breeds as a whole are to be wary of then the next step is to suggest that bull breeds as a whole should be treated as dangerous and legislation should be enacted to minimize the danger.

Edited November 9, 2013 by hankdog

[WreckitWhippet]

I have no problem acknowledging the strengths of different breeds in both people and animals. It's no co incidence darker skinned people live in sunnier climes. It becomes racist when negative inferences are placed on the appearances of an individual, say suggesting darker skinned people not associate with less dark skinned people or bull breeds not associate with your dog.

This is a public forum and making negative generalizations is the kind of thing that gets you to BSL. If we all condone the statement that bull breeds as a whole are to be wary of then the next step is to suggest that bull breeds as a whole should be treated as dangerous and legislation should be enacted to minimize the danger.

ohhh my dear lord... So we say nothing at all.

How about we accept that fact that owning a bull breed such as the SBT will require from the owner an acknowledgment of it's history and temperament traits and will need to be managed accordingly.

The standard states that he is to be bold, fearless and totally reliable.

He is also to be "a gentleman unless set upon"

Let's get our heads our of our bums and look at what that really means. To put it bluntly, if someone starts it, or is perceived to have started something in the eyes of an SBT, you can bet he's going to finish it.

This is not a slight on the breed but an acknowledgement of his past and many years of selective breeding.

[hankdog]

I'm fine with saying he is bold fearless and a gentleman unless set upon. I'm not fine with drawing and inference that this makes him dog aggressive, I doubt that's a selected for trait and would hope it was actively avoided. What bothers me is publicly advocating a negative action, "to be wary of."

It's a fine distinction but I feel it's a step in the direction of BSL. I speak out in the same way I would attend an anti- BSL protest. Not personal but a deeply held belief.

[WreckitWhippet]

I'm fine with saying he is bold fearless and a gentleman unless set upon. I'm not fine with drawing and inference that this makes him dog aggressive, I doubt that's a selected for trait and would hope it was actively avoided. What bothers me is publicly advocating a negative action, "to be wary of."

It's a fine distinction but I feel it's a step in the direction of BSL. I speak out in the same way I would attend an anti- BSL protest. Not personal but a deeply held belief.

If that doesn't make them prone to react with aggression, then I don't know what does.

I don't doubt that there are some who breed for dog aggression, I doubt there is any self respecting ANKC breed enthusiast doing so. An SBT that didn't react to being set upon would indeed be a rare thing, there are some that are more tolerant than others.

It's not a step in the direction f BSL to acknowledge where a breed has come from and the traits you need to be aware of if you plan on owning one. I can only see a more indepth knowledge and understanding of any breed as a good thing, perhaps if this were the case, we wouldn't see so many incidents and dog on dog aggression involving them.

[Brandiandwe]

Big or small beware of them all is my motto now I have muzzled onlead greyhounds It's unfortunate in my suburb that you have more chance of winning lotto than finding a ranger. I don't go anywhere near offlead parks, I respect the fact that people don't want a pair of lunatics zooming around but the same respect is rarely shown to me. I've taken to putting the dogs in the car and driving around the Coast to just find somewhere that we can walk without being harassed but to no avail. I've found since having Greyhounds that most people don't give a toss.

Yup. Although Paige as a nicely developed prey drive, this has been exacerbated by the tendency of others to allow small fluffies and others off leash and rushing my dogs. I avoid them all. Fortunately (?) after a few encounters when other dogs who rushed up to us barking their fool heads off with dominant/ aggressive posturing only to be rolled or driven off by my hounds, the word has gone out and everyone avoids us now. And the person with the dashunds has finally locked them up rather than allowing them to chase others onto the road.

[hankdog]

Hey, My puppy got a bit roughed up by a pair of bulldog like dogs the other week when we were having a walk, and today i met my first bull terrier, it was not a good encounter if i'm honest and i will not be letting my dog any were near Large bull breeds. Are there any other breeds commonly known for being overly aggressive or just a bit untrustworthy around other dogs?

I just want to be able to know when to get my dog out of the area, ive learned not to trust any unknown dogs but there are clearly some that it pays to be no were near by.

It's not being advocated that certain traits are to be aware of when deciding to own a breed. I agree in choosing your dog knowing what fits with your training goals and living circumstances is sensible. What's being said is bull breeds are known for being "overly aggressive and untrustworthy." Further it "pays to be no where near them".

I feel that saying a stafford will not back down when set upon implies a strong defensive rather than an " overly aggressive" manner to me. Advocating that people go "no where near them" is inappropriate on a public forum.

Further inviting others to express their prejudices. again in a public forum is inappropriate.

There was a thread a while ago asking something along the lines of "what scares you in a dog?" The wording was more appropriate, it was an acknowledgement that the fears and prejudices expressed were just that. I object here because the question is phrased in such a manner that implies a factual basis "there are breeds to be wary of" rather than "breeds I'm afraid of". Furthermore there are some expert dog people on this forum and I think this might lend an air of credibility to answers that condoned the opinion that bull breeds are overly aggressive and untrustworthy.

Again I appreciate the difference is subtle but not one I can ignore.

Edited November 9, 2013 by hankdog

[huski]

I don't think bull breeds are "overly aggressive and untrustworthy" at all. I do think that they generally have a higher incident of dog aggression just as they also have a lower incident of human aggression. Acknowledging aggression in any form can be more present in some breeds more than others is not a bad thing IMO.

Edited November 9, 2013 by huski

[Salukifan]

I have no problem acknowledging the strengths of different breeds in both people and animals. It's no co incidence darker skinned people live in sunnier climes. It becomes racist when negative inferences are placed on the appearances of an individual, say suggesting darker skinned people not associate with less dark skinned people or bull breeds not associate with your dog.

This is a public forum and making negative generalizations is the kind of thing that gets you to BSL. If we all condone the statement that bull breeds as a whole are to be wary of then the next step is to suggest that bull breeds as a whole should be treated as dangerous and legislation should be enacted to minimize the danger.

Why is it fine to acknowledge the strengths of breeds and deny that they have weaknesses - often caused by exactly the same traits??

The biggest threat to the future of dogs of fighting ancestry is those who own them and refuse to acknowledge their gameness with other dogs and to manage them appropriately. EVERY TIME such a dog is involved in a dog aggression incident, it reinforces a stereotype that the dogs are dangerous. Many of the incidents that saw APBTs make the news prior to BSL had dog aggression triggers or utterly clueless owners. Your average member of the public does NOT understand that dog aggression and human aggression are two very different propositions and rarely found in the same animal.

I have absolutely no issue with these breeds. I do have an issue with people who fail to recognise signs of dominance in their dogs and to avoid situations where challenges to that dominance can occur. That's how the trouble starts. A failure to submit, or a reaction to being postured at or barrelled and its on. Offlead encounters with posturing dogs and oblivious owners when you have entire males are no fun and frankly I've had more than a few of them. I've been bailed up with my onlead dogs by two.

And shocked owners when their dogs react with gameness and tenacity just make me want to slap them. Honestly, what do they expect? If you want a dog that's going to act like a Cavalier King Charles Spaniel with every dog it meets then for Gods sake buy one. If you're going to be offended when people cross the road to avoid your dog, then don't own one. Respect the fact that some people are not going to give the dog the benefit of the doubt. Sometimes negative generalisations are based on experiences with dogs that are easy to trigger to aggression and damned hard to deter from finishing what they start. That's what prompted the warning to the OP. Deal with it.

And guess what, the OP has already had a negative experience. Should they simply chalk it up to bad luck and allow it to happen again and again? Most of us can acknowledge the more challenging characteristics of our breeds and deal with them. What's so different about bull breeds in that regard?

And to refer to people as "breeds" IS racist. Natural selection and selective breeding are not one and the same thing for pity's sake.

Edited November 9, 2013 by Haredown Whippets

[Kajtek]

It's about the personality of the dog not the breed.

No it's not, whilst there is some variance within breeds when it comes to temperament, for the most part they come hard wired with breed traits and this includes a predisposition to aggression, prey drive, aloofness etc.

Sorry but we just have to disagree.

It has not been my experience at all. Breed traits and predispositions translate to parenting/responsibility requirements in this context.

Edit:

I am not pretending to be an expert. I am not a trainer or animal behaviorist. Just your garden variety animal owner who has owned and loved animals for most of her life. I've lived with 3 beautiful bull breed dogs for 9 years now and have yet to experience any so called predispositions to....whatever.

I do have pretty strong views about the declared breed traits (different from abilities). This is how the BSL happened!

Edited November 9, 2013 by Kajtek

[Salukifan]

It's about the personality of the dog not the breed.

No it's not, whilst there is some variance within breeds when it comes to temperament, for the most part they come hard wired with breed traits and this includes a predisposition to aggression, prey drive, aloofness etc.

Sorry but we just have to disagree.

It has not been my experience at all. Breed traits and predispositions translate to parenting/responsibility requirements in this context.

Oh please. Are you suggesting that all breeds have the same predisposition to prey drive, territorial aggression, protectiveness, the same levels of reactivity and the same bite inhibition and thresholds?

There is more to a purebred dog than "personality". Anyone who spends enough time around purebred dogs will work that out. Terriers, gundogs, sighthounds, working breeds come hard wired with certain traits that socialisation and training can modify or harness but the traits are still there. That's the whole point of purebred dogs.

Its about increasing the certainty of certain traits within a population - that's what selective breeding IS.

Edited November 9, 2013 by Haredown Whippets

[hankdog]

Agreed, a predisposition is just that, it becomes a weakness or liability if incorrectly managed.

I'm not entirely sure where the difference between natural selection or selective breeding is pertinent. Either way you start with the same genotype but end with an altered phenotype. Whether the selection is made naturally or by man isn't relevant although the timeframe of human selection is much quicker.

Whilst initially a fighting dog today's British Bulldogs are very different to those that were shaped by the fighting ring in both appearance and temperament.

This is a side issue though. My protest is against labeling an entire genre of dogs and advocating a negative response to the genre. I also have a pet peeve against the term "bull breed" a bull mastiff, bulldog and Stafford are very different dogs, unfortunately confused because they have the word "bull" in their name. First the dogs in this post are named as "bulldog type" and then the next reference is to bull breeds. The media does this too when reporting dog attacks.

Edited November 9, 2013 by hankdog

[OSoSwift]

As long as I live I will not understand how it is "offensive" or "racist" to expect a higher incidence of a particular trait in a breed selectively bred for it.

I would hardly be offended if a person suggested I not let my Whippets near their chickens, pet cat, rabbit or rat. They were bred for prey drive, triggered by small running animals and they have it in spades.

Agreed.

I don't let our working BC play with the Whippets. He rounds them up at speed and if they don't yield he hip and shoulders them. He sent Lewis around four feet through the air and off our luckily small retaining wall. But he was winded.

His play style works great with other working breeds but not do with the sight hounds.

I have owned bull breeds and I can tell you an off lead bull reed rings big alarms bells with me, especially with the Whippets.

I love bull breeds but they are what they are.

[Salukifan]

Agreed, a predisposition is just that, it becomes a weakness or liability if incorrectly managed.

I'm not entirely sure where the difference between natural selection or selective breeding is pertinent. Either way you start with the same genotype but end with an altered phenotype. Whether the selection is made naturally or by man isn't relevant although the timeframe of human selection is much quicker.

Whilst initially a fighting dog today's British Bulldogs are very different to those that were shaped by the fighting ring in both appearance and temperament.

Yes, and that was done deliberately and, in the case of temperament, with the idea of improving the dogs' affability. Furthermore, they are NOT Terriers and they do not act like a terrier.

The same cannot be said for the SBT or the APBT. There are plenty of folk who don't want to change the dogs gameness but as breeders, they manage it, not deny it.

So do responsible owners. Its ONLY an issue when not acknowledged or managed appropriately.

Edited November 9, 2013 by Haredown Whippets

[mixeduppup]

This thread is quite interesting.

[Kajtek]

Oh please. Are you suggesting that all breeds have the same predisposition to prey drive, territorial aggression, protectiveness, the same levels of reactivity and the same bite inhibition and thresholds?

OK... Oh please right back at you.

A dog is what we want it to be regardless of what it's been originally bred for.

Consider nature vs nurture and re-visit the original question posed in this thread.

Edited November 9, 2013 by Kajtek