Santo66

It is stupid to release a dog to chase a cat for reward I agree, as it is just as stupid not to correct a dog for inappropriate behaviour and set some boundaries and consequence. Are you disagreeing that high drive dogs don't adapt to reward based training better than dogs of low drive? Are you maintaining that with reward based based training you can extract drive from a dog who doesn't have any drive genetically? Funny that most of the dogs who fail police K9 programs do so through lack of genetic drive......maybe they should read Leslie's book perhaps??

Correct, very well summarised

I guess you could use the cat the that dog finds rewarding, personally I think that would be worse in the balance of good training to release a dog to chase a cat for behaviour reward don't you think? So I would correct a dog who finds chasing a cat rewarding and change their outlook on that one. Once a consequence factor is put into place for an unwanted behaviour, I have found that it increases the dog's potential to become more adapt to traditional reward. If you want an enthusiastic dog who wants to work for you it's best to get a dog from lines that have the right drives for that purpose......not all have the right drives, yet all need training and reliable obedience, so in general pet dog training, you need a broad spectrum of tools and methods to cater for wide variant of drives and temperaments encountered IMHO Then the club will be limited in the type of dog they can train effectively if they use only methods suitable for dogs with drive levels that match their methods and that's the problem. There is a big difference developing drive/motivation in a dog that has drive but hasn't been taught to use their drive over a dog who doesn't have drive in the right place......drive and motivation has to be in the dog genetically in the first place for training to extract it, that is you can't make drive in a dog who doesn't have any for sustainability to base a training program. In other words, a dog that tires of chasing a ball after one throw is never going to be ball crazy no matter the training is it?

True, but it's not like the dog was off leash and ran up lunging at the OP's face........the OP didn't need react with that dog and the situation could of easily been avoided. Can't say that I would stick my face into a strange dog's face like that in all honesty?

And the choice is pretty well toys and food as a motivation/reward basis and depending on the individual dog how much value the dog places on toys and food determines if the dog needs an additional consequence for the wrong behaviour. Not all dogs have the same levels of need for toy and food reward and too much time is often wasted training dogs in reward based methods that don't have a high level response to those rewards. As an example, some dogs find chasing cats rewarding which is a reward drive in the wrong place where no other reward overrides the desire to chase a cat......those type of dogs need a good correction as a consequence of what happens if you chase a cat. Same applies with cronic sniffers, the one's who nearly rip your arm out of it's socket to dart off and sniff something, that is the environment and desire to sniff for that dog is a major distraction with self reward. Sometimes a chronic sniffer can be rehabilitated on a prong collar in 20 minutes where it's been under reward based methods for 6 months with little improvement....wrong method for that dog. One of mine's training kit is a prong collar, another (same breed) is a ball, in fact the ball motivated dog doesn't need a collar and leash at all, correct behaviour can be attained solely by compliance for toy reward, but each dog has entirely different drive levels and the same training methods cannot be used on both dogs, the routine for each is completely different to get the same result. Training method depends on the individual dog and what motivates the dog the most, be it fear of correction or reward or a combination of both methods and a trainer with full box of tools and a head space that accommodates all methods is my interpretation of "good" :D I equally dislike trainers who apply reward based methods to every dog as I do with trainers who dangle every dog on the end of a choke chain....the best training method IMHO depends on the dog and the owner's capabilities which ever that may be.

Unless you know where the guy lives, they won't do anything about a random dog and owner and given that there are no marks on you and no witnesses if the guy was smart, he would deny that the incident occurred so probably not a report that would carry much weight anyway? Having said that, the owner is an idiot allowing people to pat a snappy dog.......what was he thinking

Working Border Collies.......high drive dogs with genetic focus, of course clicker training and reward based methods work awesome with dogs like that which is half the problem when performance dogs are shown as result of a training method where the old mutt with no drive or drive in the wrong place that doesn't assist in training is a completely different story as to what method will work best. I am a firm believer that no single method works best on every dog and a good trainer is someone who knows the difference in a dog's character to apply the method best suited to the particular dog and owner. Any method pushers who either use only reward based methods or punishment based for every dog compromises the full spectrum of training potential attainable with a balanced training approach. In other words, any trainers or clubs that only support one method are half arsed IMHO.

I can so relate to the vet appointments from hell. One of my GSD's is reactive, dog aggression and human aggression......he's controllable if kept under threshold and will allow the vet to examine him if it's all nice and calm from the car into the vets so we have to get him in there without seeing other dogs and I need to stay calm in the process too and if he's going to loose the plot, it's in the vets it will happen.......the worse place I can take him where he's likely to react and the worse place I can be with him where he senses my stress and wants to kill everyone. We do the same thing getting the last appointment, parking around the corner so he doesn't see any other dogs then at the opportune time, shoot him straight in there......but have we had some shocker visits where it's all turned to shit and he's blown over threshold and tried to nail the vet......muzzled of course he can't hurt anyone, but the action is there and I have had to choke him out.......it's just an absolute nightmare and I feel sick in the stomach through the whole process. Anyone with dramas at the vets with reactive dogs, I feel every bit of what you are going through

It's a load of crap......even a dog worked on a sleeve in prey drive, they won't bite your bare arm when the focus is targeting a toy

When my black GSD was a pup, the vet marked him down as a Kelpie X and when correcting her that he was a GSD, the vet didn't know they came in black either :laugh: People ask what breed a black GSD is all the time......never had that with a black and tan!

Nothing would happen, the dog and owner is in the right.

Actually you need to make sure your dog is in compliance with the management requirements of a particular area first and foremost and be in a position where anyone would reasonably believe an incident shouldn't arise in other words, a leashed dog walked on the street is not responsible for the result of attack from a dog at large escaping someone's property regardless of the dog's size as the dog at large has breached the management requirements to begin with, that is had the owner of the escaping dog complied with the management requirements the incident would have been avoided.......the dog on leash is not the menacing dog regardless of the outcome. This has been tested at law a few times where large dogs on leash have injured small dogs off leash in a public place who have mounted attacks on the large dog or it's handler. One case where a small dog was PTS from result of injury inflicted by the large dog was appealed twice and on each occasion the large dog owner escaped prosecution. But in many cases, the larger dog's owner hasn't had the funds to mount such an appeal - and thusly their dog has inevitably been euthanaised fro reacting in kind to an attack by a smaller dog. Being a large dog owner (2 of which are bullbreed crosses) I am distictly aware that if my dogs WERE to retaliate when attacked, they would be the target of some serious action - regardless of any facts showing that my dogs were not the initial aggressor. Therefore, it is MY job to make sure that they AREN'T prone to reacting in kind when set upon by another dog - but look to ME to get them out of that sort of predicament. It's all part of ownership of a larger dog really... having some responsibility for the fact that if they were to bite something, it would have a much greater impact than if a smaller dog bit something, yes? Personally, I don't think ANY dog, regardless of size, should be "allowed" to be nasty in public... but the "rules" seem to be applied more along the lines of how much damage the individual dog can do, as opposed to the fact that they ALL can cause some form of damage with their teeth. I'd rather not be bitten by ANY dog, thank you very much. T. If the attacking dog is off leash, that is it's in breach of leash regulations in a public place and the leashed dog defends itself and injures the attacking dog, provocation is a statutory defence and had the attacking dog been on leash as it should and under effective control, the incident wouldn't have happened. What's been tested in court is the owner of the attacking dog mounting a case for loss against the leashed dog because it nailed the attacking dog.

Actually you need to make sure your dog is in compliance with the management requirements of a particular area first and foremost and be in a position where anyone would reasonably believe an incident shouldn't arise in other words, a leashed dog walked on the street is not responsible for the result of attack from a dog at large escaping someone's property regardless of the dog's size as the dog at large has breached the management requirements to begin with, that is had the owner of the escaping dog complied with the management requirements the incident would have been avoided.......the dog on leash is not the menacing dog regardless of the outcome. This has been tested at law a few times where large dogs on leash have injured small dogs off leash in a public place who have mounted attacks on the large dog or it's handler. One case where a small dog was PTS from result of injury inflicted by the large dog was appealed twice and on each occasion the large dog owner escaped prosecution.

If you want a worker buy from working proven parents, if you can see the parents for their sociability and workability even better. A good worker is not always a good family dog and vice versa. A good working prospect in a GSD that isn't a good pet prospect is a poor breeding. Single tasking GSD's, that is examples lacking the versatility to be taken down any training path suitable for the breed and a companion animal is one of those breed paths is merely a reason to justify a lack of quality. A good working line GSD untrained should neither be aggressive nor prey driven to the point of the inability to relax. The problem where this occurs as Nekhbet points out which in the breed is unfortunately true, is that many lack the training ability to take a good dog down a particular path needing extremes at each end of the spectrum to achieve their goals where they breed in accordance with the type of dog more easily adaptable to their specialities contradictory of what the GSD breed standards requires of them.

My thought exactly after reading the first couple of sentences. Sorry if its been answered later on in the thread, but any actual science to support the notion that cross breeds are unstable? Work back on the science and history of what it takes to produce consistently stable dogs then apply that to a BYB cross breeding. Dedicated pure breeders with years of ancestry on tap struggle enough producing type and the most diligent efforts can backfire. With zero effort to produce type as in a random BYB X, how is this essence of breeding anything greater than a complete lucky dip especially with mixtures of powerful breeds of aggressive tendency?

That depends on what the owner's response is to the enquiry.

Kris is a great salesman, one of the best

Yeah we know all that.......problem is we can't rely on people being responsible so the next step is to remove the type of dogs who kill and maul people when the owners are irresponsible.......the idea is to save lives and prevent the trauma of injury by dogs.....don't you get that

So how do you plan to do that.......stop people breeding for aggression and stop people wanting aggressive dogs, making irresponsible people responsible, good luck with that Rubbish, unprovoked aggression is in the breeding, the genetics of the dog, until people accept this, there is not much hope of improvement really I can take the best bred dog with a great temperament and make it into a fear biter or an aggressive dog simply by managing it poorly and treating it badly. Breeding is not the cause of dog attacks the causes can be lack of awareness of the species and their needs, lack of proper management, a propensity for dog owners to think they are above the law, a lack of common sense etc. I watch every single day dog owners walking the streets with dogs who are unleashed, who do not pick up the crap of their dogs, who leave their dogs untethered outside shops, who let their dogs wander and who really have the attitude that their dog is ok.....but in whose eyes are they ok? I live in Victoria where the "draconian laws" are in place which seem to have made no difference to managing dogs well. Councils need to do what they are aid to do by rate payers and that is to police their area for breaches of their laws and by-laws and to fine people who are not obeying those laws. You can laugh all you like but people must be responsible for their property, their dogs and if they are not they need to suffer the consequences which should be hefty fines. ETA I live in inner city Melbourne known more for hipsters not bogans No you can't make a well bred dog into a fear biter unless the nerve strength is lacking in the dog, hence, not well bred dog. You can make a well bred dog handler aggressive with poor treatment but the dog has conflict with the handler not other people whom it has no connection with. Poor breeding does cause dog attacks as if the same owners had a different dog without traits of active/social aggression, in their irresponsible management it wouldn't matter as an environmentally stable dog won't bite people unprovoked. Plenty of people have dogs running off leash with no control of them whatsoever but they don't all attack people which depends on the dog, not the lack of proper management.

Shelters for the most part are cleaning up the mess left by BYB's, yet shelter people support the BYB in promotion of how good the produce is......it's that good no one wanted them to end up in a shelter in the first place. The shelter scene alone is a testament of too many random breeding's taking place for the wrong reasons. There shouldn't be thousands of dogs without a home which tells me the BYB production needs toning down somewhat?

There are two components kennelling a dog, one is that the dog is living in a strange environment and the other is the owners have disappeared which the dog has to cope with these two components. Pet sitting removes one component where the dog remains in it's own environment and has to cope with the only the owners absence probably something the dog used to anyway as dog owners go to work, go out and leave the dog alone at home IMHO, pet sitting is easier on the dog :D

So how do you plan to do that.......stop people breeding for aggression and stop people wanting aggressive dogs, making irresponsible people responsible, good luck with that Rubbish, unprovoked aggression is in the breeding, the genetics of the dog, until people accept this, there is not much hope of improvement really

Find out the Vet's code for a desexing and send her down the Vets for one of them, they will help her out nicely in the right direction

The council should have the stats on what breed mixtures are causing problems in the community for starters and refusing permits for Bull cross breeds would be a good start.......the Pitbull supporters should hop onto this, instead of defending crap dogs because they have a concoction of Bull breed origin, it's these BYB'er things that are putting the well bred Bull breeds in a bad light........it's not the breed, it's the fools breeding dogs of that breed origin unsuitable for urban existence, in this case the egg comes before the chicken and the breeding of aggressive concoctions needs to be stopped where it begins IMHO. To punish the deed requires an innocent victim, we can't loose sight of that......some poor bugger is nursing injury and emotional scar when a moron with an aggressive dog drops the ball, the aggressive dogs need to be taken away from the morons so when they do drop the ball, the victim gets a serious licking not flesh torn off their bones or worse.

It might make a difference if you bred for lowered reactivity, higher bite thresholds and higher bite inhibiton and you ruthlessly culled any sign of HA. However, "culling" is a dirty word to animal rights types, even if it doesn't mean the death of any dog. It conjurs up images of seal pup hunts and that is part of the problem. In the "old days" a pet dog that displayed any sign of aggression off its property to people in the community got a bullet or worse. Nowadays that also is a dreadful suggestion to a lot of people. They find excuses for the aggression (seen plenty of that here) and line the pockets of behaviourists, most of whom know damn well that raising thresholds to aggression doesn't cure it. Fact is, we've got ignorant dog owners buying dogs from ignorant dog breeders and failing to raise them and contain them as they should. The only cure for ignorance is education. Penalties tend to educate one owner at a time - and we need to do better than that. There are too many people with the opinion that these dogs inflicting serious injury in unprovoked attacks are caused by the owner and the environment which is total bullshit......the owner is at fault for allowing their dog to attack yes, no arguments there, but the dogs themselves are not fit in temperament and character to be part of urban community......these morons do not train these dogs to attack old ladies, joggers or nail kids, the dogs are genetically aggressive and are a handful to manage at best because they instinctively want to bite people or attack other dogs.....aggression and fight has to be born in the dog to begin with for training or environment to bring it out......it's the reason you can't use just any dog in working roles that requires the ability for a dog to attack, defend and protect even in the guardian breeds renowned for those roles around 70% are not genetically capable anymore from result of selective breeding and establishing more suitable candidates for pet environment and community safety. As much as I hate the way the GSD has been watered down in working trait, pet wise and stability in the community the GSD folk do produce some pretty stable environmentally sound examples of the breed.........back in the guard dog era in the early 80's there were some shockers in GSD's and Dobe's bred on fear biters, dogs that would attack anyone they didn't know and were purposely bred for guard dogs, that is you could put them in a yard untrained and they would be frothing at the mouth to kill anyone who approached.....no doubt people here would remember the old guard dog era when every second commercial yard had one and what those dogs were like?