Santo66

Yes but how do we track those down without outlawing backyard breeding, A lot of these people who buy the dogs 5 mths later can't remember where from but if they do the persons were renting and probably moved (probably due to complaints). Which is why my idea stared with the outlawing or random breeding, imposing large fines on those breeding illegally and those who buy the dog, giving the option of a smaller fine if they give up the breeder , de sex and socialize the dog.

I was in the thought it shouldn't add any more fees to the current breeder, just require the action of current rules that the registering body already has to be an approved body. Breeders don't need any more fees they just need to be required to comply with current rules (those who do it right already do) of their registering body.

I don't believe it's the God given right for just anyone to breed dogs without a sound understanding of what they are doing and needs to be regulated with a breeders licence. Licencing dogs with council I think is the wrong approach and the owner of the dog needs the licence with the dogs they own recorded against that licence.......dogs only need to be micro chipped IMHO not licenced as they are now and a person is licenced to own dogs. I believe if you want to breed, then you apply to council for a breeders permit for that litter only unless you are an ANKC registered breeder with a prefix. The breeders permit nominates the sire and dam if cross breeds the prospective breeder needs to give reason why the cross breeding is necessary and the purpose of it........ultimately it needs to be made hard, too much messing around to get a permit for people acting on a whim to breed dogs as a deterrent, not a free for all as it is now.

Alpinebase is another who have had coats and generally produce even temperaments in working lines with nothing too extreme in the trait spectrum.

Don't let Karl see you said that :laugh:

Oops :) How about a Fax son over a super hard Regalhaus bitch line bred on Mink litter I just spotted....now if I wasn't already over subscribed

And cross breeding won't be stopped.

It isn't aimed at stopping cross breeding but the breeding of potentially dangerous and unstable dogs does need to be addressed. The only way to do that would be to stop breeding by any individual who thinks it's a cool idea and leave it to those who actually understand bit more about the animals in question.

No it won't stop those who are determined just like marijuana growers, but deter the majority.

I believe they need to follow up the breedings on these crossbreeds involved in serious attacks for example, if the breeder of the dog involved has the bitch there who's off her head in aggression then what's the dopey breeder expecting in the pups which needs to be accountable if you are breeding on unstable or excessively aggressive dogs and one of your pups bites someone, they need to answer why they breeding on dogs like that for suburban living........we know why they are to cater for the bogan market and they need to be stopped. It's not the answer to scoop up Bull cross breeds who are nice dogs, they need to target the people breeding aggression purposely and if their dogs don't pass a temperament test give them the green dream.

Isn't it about time personal responsibility was brought back in to fashion.

Yes, can't see how random cross breeding in the back yard accounts for personal responsibility of the person engaged in such a breeding practice.....no health checks, no ancestry history etc etc........the most irresponsible breeding practices of all time and people are supporting the BYB crossbreed to tell us how good it is......I don't get it

Genetics are only one part of the puzzle that makes a dog prone to acts of violence or not...

T.

Very Very true but take 90% to 100% of genetics out by good judgement in breeding and traceable parentage and siblings and your left with an uninformed or idiot owner or a very sick dog.

Sickness is easy enough to test for in majority of cases.

besides current ideas are getting nowhere so why no start at the begining. Where are these dogs coming from?

I totally agree Angeluca......I believe your thoughts on the situation are correct

Genetics are only one part of the puzzle that makes a dog prone to acts of violence or not...

T.

The genetics need to be there for training and environment to bring it out.......do you know how many GSD's fail attack training prerequisites in police and military programs?........about 30% of the breed are trainable and the other 70% lack the genetic structure for the job.......you can't make a courageous, attack dog out of a chicken shit like you can't make any dog chase old ladies and nail them no matter how much you chain them up and poke them with sticks, if they don't have the genetic defence drive or elevated aggression to challenge, they won't be chasing people down the street to maul them regardless of the training and environmental factors.

Yeah well just because some people think cross breeds don't deserve to exist doesn't mean it will ever happen. Who gets to decide one dog is better than another? No one I think you'll find.

I really don't think the breeding is what needs to be focused on.

What's the point of the crossbreed anyway when they are modelled off a pure breed but how do you reproduce a great crossbreed dog......it's hard enough for dedicated pure breed breeders to do that with an ancestry of previous dogs on tap.......most crossbreeds are the results of whoops litters and idiots doing random BYB's where the produce fills the rescues and pounds anyway......there needs to be control in dog breeding IMHO, what we have now is a free for all for people skilled in the knowledge that male + Female = puppies.

I guess speaking with a friend last night who's just imported semen from the USA at great cost and messing around in hope to improve a trait doesn't leave me overly excited at thinking a BYB cross breeder is the league to be breeding dogs sorry!!

I would use an Ecollar in the situation you describe which acts like an extended leash or remote trainer is what they are also called.......it's not about frying the dog on the collar, it's about enough stimulation to break the drive of running away and for the dog to learn breach of command isn't the most pleasant choice...

Well, arguably to 'break the drive' you are attempting to offer a stimulus that is salient enough to become more pressing than chasing something or whatever the dog is currently doing. For some dogs, you will probably have to use something pretty strong. It doesn't matter whether you use it as R- or P+, it needs to compete with highly arousing stimuli for strength.

Many trainers now are relying on conditioned responses instead. The dog in question stopped after the recall, looked back, then opted to go the other way. The aim with programs like Leslie Nelson's Really Reliable Recall and variations thereof (which have been very popular for decades), is that the dog doesn't think about it. They hear the recall and they respond automatically. As long as they hear it chances are good they will turn almost on the spot and race back towards you. The really nice thing about it is you tend to get very fast recalls without trying very hard. Fast recalls are successful recalls. Less chance of a dog stalling or getting distracted halfway. My dogs usually bolt back at a gallop. It is very simple and people usually have great results with it. This method is best learned through the dvd. It works on all dogs, because the principles are very straight forward. There is a section on the dvd for independent and headstrong dogs. You don't need to assess the dog's suitability because there's nothing potentially harmful about it.

Lots of people make dvds about dog training that are popular because the methods are broadly applicable. Take Control Unleashed and BAT. These protocols have helped thousands of dogs all over the world with a large variety of temperament differences and specific problems. Works as well for a frightened or anxious dog as it does for an overly excited dog. Also works great with high drive working dogs. CU was originally designed for sport dogs. If we approach training with a good understanding of learning theory, arousal, and emotional states, the rest is just adapting it to suit the details. That's WHY things like CU are so effective. Because that's exactly what they do. It's not like every dog out there has its own unique set of rules.

It still amounts to a dog recalling because it values the return to handler more than disobeying for reason A:The dog anticipates a reward through learned behaviour or B:The dog fears an aversive through learned behaviour of non compliance. Some dogs high in drive or satisfaction for live prey for example is their thing, their primary motivator and with dogs like that, it's extremely difficult to provide a valuable enough reward to over-ride their satisfaction to chase and perhaps capture live prey especially if it's a problematic behaviour that the dog has got accustom to doing for self reward/satisfaction over a period of time.

Officers made patrols of surrounding streets and located two large dogs believed to be American Pitbulls

Here is another one, the old Bully BYB again........the deed is getting done by the same type of dog from what I have seen a lot of is these Bully/Mastiff/Pitbull/Bulldog BYB morons are breeding for aggression in the first place to supply moron owners who want tough dogs. These type of dogs should never be bred IMHO.........no one needs a breed concoction of unstable temperaments which is exactly what these fools are breeding that reach the hands of foolish owners who can't handle and contain them properly for the level of aggression these breeding's have. They need to regulate the breeding of random concoctions and make the breeders of these dogs accountable along with the owners of them.

I'm interested to know how everyone would tackle this problem... My youngest dog... About 15months give or take has almost perfect recall... believing she was 1 year old when I first fostered her (now adopted) I expected a lot and initially, for about the first 2 weeks, took her to fenced dog park to check on recall and as she showed herself to be very smart and perfect recall we headed back to the unfenced park. Whoever had her and gave her up did a great job with basics and lots of other cool stuff too... Spit being one that comes in handy as she tends to eat anything in the garden... Turns out she was not a one year old as she has grown so much and the vet and I now figure she was about 6 months... and is now about 15 months or so...

My usual off leash area is huge with a creek running along side separating it from the on leash side... So, all goes great for months then about a month ago she ran down the creek and up the other side and stopped and looked... I called her back and she looked at me and then ran... the other way. You see she noticed that our friends we visit regularly live about 100 metres on the other side of the creek... She ran over to the house.. up and down the fence and then around to the front gate knocking on it... Yes I can see from the other side of the creek... She came back a few minutes later... That was the first time... Since then she has done it a further 6 times. Each time going just a bit further past their house and over the street to visit their dog. This street is a dead end and with walking tracks all around so there's no danger of getting hit by a car but every chance of me getting an off leash fine.

I have repeatedly tried to stop this and will have success for days and then off she goes again. The friends GSD's alert their owners and they come out and help get her back... I've tried treat rewards but doesn't work everytime. The only thing I can think of is to have someone on the other give her a damn good scare. My other 2 are missing out on being at the great park as I have had to go back to the leashed park. I am hoping for this to be resolved before summer so they can enjoy swimming in the creek. Otherwise it's going to be permanently on the leash for her if I want to take the other dogs to the creek.

I hope that's enough information and would love some more thoughts and ideas as to how to resolve this little issue...

I would use an Ecollar in the situation you describe which acts like an extended leash or remote trainer is what they are also called.......it's not about frying the dog on the collar, it's about enough stimulation to break the drive of running away and for the dog to learn breach of command isn't the most pleasant choice......it's a shame we have half whits condemning and banning Ecollars as this type of scenario is where Ecollar training works awesomely well when used properly........people will never become proficient with the Ecollar which is such a great training tool when there is such a skirt flip over them, yet a novice can collapse a dog's windpipe with a choke chain purchased at the local pet shop

I wish Steve would make videos of his training..

The problem with video's is using video technique on the wrong dog.......like using a drive training video on a dog with no drive......I could understand Steve not producing general videos creating a headache for himself and the dog owners without first assessing the dog's character and behaviour.

I wouldn't risk trying to give her a scare, for two reasons - 1. you don't know what repercussions the scare might have outside that situation. She may find it very traumatic and become fearful in general, she may associate the scare with all sorts of things that aren't the thing you wanted her to associate with (roads, houses, people, a particular person, trees, clouds... who knows, it will depend what her brain makes of it at the time and how much she generalises her reaction). Or 2. her reaction may not be fear anyway, at best could be nothing, but could be aggression, could be loss of trust in you, who knows.

I wouldn't risk trying to give her a scare, for two reasons - 1. you don't know what repercussions the scare might have outside that situation. She may find it very traumatic and become fearful in general, she may associate the scare with all sorts of things that aren't the thing you wanted her to associate with (roads, houses, people, a particular person, trees, clouds... who knows, it will depend what her brain makes of it at the time and how much she generalises her reaction). Or 2. her reaction may not be fear anyway, at best could be nothing, but could be aggression, could be loss of trust in you, who knows.

That's why a dog needs to be assessed for the correct training approach to be employed......we can't just make these assumptions on the basis of extremes in nerve strength deficiency like shutting down to fear or aggression from aversion which are extreme cases although it can happen is not the norm at all. You can pretty well tell in a dog's general character if they have a tendency to fearful shut down or elevated aggression from aversion.........too many trainers modelling themselves on the purely positive scaring everyone with reactions that can happen in extreme cases and we start to believe every dog will fall apart or become aggressive using any form of punitive method which for the average dog becoming negatively affected is all bullshit.

It's pretty easy to write it off as such and for people to make excuses as to why their dog can't or won't be taught to recall. If I believed all the bullcrap about Sighthounds and how untrainable they are, I'd never have bothered to teach mine.

Some individual dogs in the same breed have better handler focus than others, that is they are easier to establish value for handler reward and dogs like that are easier to train a super recall than dogs who find more instinctive value in chasing things they shouldn't.

She is trained in prey drive and has more value for the game I provide than anything else, she has also been taught from day one that toys and playing with me give her drive satisfaction, not chasing after wild animals etc.

Good foundation training makes a big difference preparing a dog for super recall........I have a working line GSD trained from day 1 in handler induced drive satisfaction, recall and off leash obedience followed on from early training to the point that he doesn't get distracted at all having learned that the best reward comes from me, as Huski said previously, they don't want to miss out on what may be on offer from the handler, but the dog needs enough genetic drive for this to work to it's optimum. I have a lower drive GSD also who's not bad but nothing like action man who's a nut case in drive

According to this, I should have a hard dog to train then. Oddly enough, my greatest huntress is also the one with the reliable recall. She can bring down rabbit and Hare and a hare is not an easy accomplishment.

You may be lucky there but I wouldn't hang my hat on training a good recall easily on dogs with instinctive trait for live prey unless you are using aversion to stop the chase.........if the dog has either less value for handler reward than the value it has for chasing prey or doesn't fear correction for breach of command or the prey isn't used in drive training to gain obedience, they have no reason to recall as a general rule, hence the typical pet untrained.

Alpinebase is another who have had coats and generally produce even temperaments in working lines with nothing too extreme in the trait spectrum.

A police spokeswoman said she understood the dogs were a Staffordshire Terrier/Bull Mastiff cross, and were unregistered

What's new.........the old BYB Bully again.........the poor old lady was a threat, she spooked the dogs, what's the excuse this time for these dogs taking down an innocent person

Hi,

Are there any good working line German shepherd breeders that breed long coated sables?

Thinking of getting another after losing Solo.

You won't find any "good" working line breeders breeding for coat type and colour. Macklin and Monsimbee used to have some long coat working lines I recall, they are pretty rare though, plenty of show lines in long coat.

It's pretty easy to write it off as such and for people to make excuses as to why their dog can't or won't be taught to recall. If I believed all the bullcrap about Sighthounds and how untrainable they are, I'd never have bothered to teach mine.

Some individual dogs in the same breed have better handler focus than others, that is they are easier to establish value for handler reward and dogs like that are easier to train a super recall than dogs who find more instinctive value in chasing things they shouldn't.

She is trained in prey drive and has more value for the game I provide than anything else, she has also been taught from day one that toys and playing with me give her drive satisfaction, not chasing after wild animals etc.

Good foundation training makes a big difference preparing a dog for super recall........I have a working line GSD trained from day 1 in handler induced drive satisfaction, recall and off leash obedience followed on from early training to the point that he doesn't get distracted at all having learned that the best reward comes from me, as Huski said previously, they don't want to miss out on what may be on offer from the handler, but the dog needs enough genetic drive for this to work to it's optimum. I have a lower drive GSD also who's not bad but nothing like action man who's a nut case in drive

Yesterday, I took my young dog for a walk, and stopped to speak to my neighbour who has 2 preschool children. They came up to her, and as she has never seen preschool children before, she was frightened of them, so she growled a little.

That is menacing.

My friend took her rottweiler to the off lead park. The rottweiler spied some children on swings in the next park, and loving children, ran over to them (ignoring the owner's calls. Screaming, they ran away, with the dog, thinking it was a game, running after them.

That is menacing.

I would think a dog which growls, barks, or runs at a person is menacing.

Under the current definition of an attack a dog that does all of those things in NSW can already and often is declared Dangerous by the Council - with all that that entails (including building a child proof enclosure with a concrete floor and a roof). I'm hopeful that the introduction of a menacing category will allow for a more realistic and able to be complied-with restrictions being placed on the dog rather than the whole dangerous dog requirements.

Will depend on how it's written.

In a case where the dog didn't bite anyone, that is there is no physical evidence of attack, what happens if the dog owners says it's bulldust that their dog growled or whatever the compliant is about.....the council officer investigation didn't see the incident so what then?

Thanks huski. What about if the dog supposedly does normally have effective control and responds to the first command, every time, but just this once the temptation to go sniff/chase was just too strong so it ignored the command - would you see that as acceptable? I've often heard the argument that you can't expect every dog to be perfect all the time and that there is no such thing as a 100% reliable recall. (and then attacks happen..."my dog has never done this before!!")

IMO if you get training recall right you proof in high levels of distraction and the dog is taught buying into a distraction doesn't pay for them.

I have never seen a dog with more prey drive than my Malinois but she will recall mid chase off live prey, training a reliable recall is IMO something that is possible with ANY dog of ANY breed.

Yeahhhh, but your Mal is a performance bred dog too Huski, dog's like that are not hard to use their drive for training a super recall or maintain handler focus through high level distraction :)

My OHs parents use the local vets home feeding system. They have 3 big GSPs who all have their quirks, they feel more comfortable leaving them at home and having one of the vet nurses come in morning and night to feed and check on them. They go overseas once or twice a year for three weeks. We were going over once or twice a week to let them out of their enclosure to have a good run around the property but that's about it, they seemed to cope really well.

Thought I should add that the person doesn't have access to the house, just the garage with all internal doors locked.

Can I just say, I'm SO not a fan of this.

Twice a day visits don't tell you how often or for how long the dogs are barking, won't give you early notice of a missing dog, and certainly would be too far apart for successful intervention in the event of a veterinary emergency like bloat.

Whereever you leave your dogs, leave them somewhere with better attention and monitoring than twice a day visits to an unattended home. If you live in the burbs, spare a thought for your neighbours and don't leave dogs home alone for long periods, especially overnight.

What's the difference when the owners go to work all day and an evening out........plenty of dogs are left alone during the day and at night and cope well. For dogs used to living like this and there are plenty, a home feeding service is far better than the dog adjusting to a strange environment in a kennel

So here is my problem. The maltese seems to bark at the sound of leaves blowing. This sets off his staffie and in turn sets of my staffie... My other two just go and look... My staffie and their two are already fence fighting. My staffie ... this morning... has now started pulling at the fence pailings and has superficial injuries to her mouth... She is bleeding but at this time isn't vet worthy...

Although I understand your predicament, but essentially the problem is that you can't call your dog off the fence to ignore something going on next door that is really not of your dog's concern. Personally I would use this opportunity as a training exercise to gain better control of your own dogs as fence barking and fighting only attracts council complaints long term and is better IMHO that your own dogs don't get into the habit of it. If the dogs next door become a problem with nuisance barking, you can always report them for their owners to address their contribution to the problem.

What is DDR Line please?

DDR lines were East German working dogs used in border patrol. They were large heavy boned dogs with defensive aggression that worked best as guard/sentry dogs. DDR lines were mixed with Czech lines to add prey drive and better trainability producing some extremely good dogs of breed improvement over the DDR and Czech lines.

Back when I used to show there used to be quite a few breeders who would support it and there was enquiries made. I cant remember exactly what happened but I believe it was politicians that made it quite clear what would happen to those dogs that were trained. Not the gsd people. Thats in my town anyway.

Who is behind the banning of Sch in Victoria is the GSDCA. They were put under notice from the German SV for non compliance and had to seek an exemption on the basis that Sch was illegal in Australia in order to retain their SV membership. They actually put their foot in it as the Victorian Ban declared Sch titled imported dogs as dangerous dogs so through the back door at the ANKC all the Sch titles fell off the paperwork of imported dogs and their ancestory for a period of time a few years ago until the GSDCA pulled a deal in the legislation to allow Sch titled imported dogs to be shown without a muzzle and striped collar. Technically a Sch titled dog in Victoria is a dangerous dog supposedly to be declared as such.

The GSD clubs, at least the one in Vic anyway, are working towards designing a better test of working ability/temperament - plenty of things go on behind the scenes. There are people passionate about the breed who want and strive for the best of both worlds. There is a new working line male soon to hit Aus that is beautifully constructed and I imagine will be well used amongst the show and working breeders alike.

What is wrong with the ORIGINAL test?

Oh I forgot, the ANKC don't support it..

There's nothing wrong with it and I'd love for it to be a prerequisite here as it is in Germany - but I don't make the rules. Obviously I meant a better test than what is currently being done

It's a shame more members don't have your view Ish to have the numbers to make change. The BH is as good a test as any which is the companion animal test that will certainly weed out unstable dogs and isn't too hard to train for and is the official breed entrance test to qualify for the full regime.

It's basically the same as rewarding with food for a specific behaviour except that instead of giving a treat you give a toy reward. Because a toy isn't a consumable like food, there is some foundation training required with toys to use them effectively, most important is the dog must release or out a toy on command otherwise they will take off with it as a rule and you will spend more time chasing them to get it back for another routine :laugh: Training with toys need to be "your" toys, that is you don't leave your training toy laying around for the dog to become possessive over or too familiar with where the dog looses drive for it. Balls or tug toys are good with driven dogs or a combination of both. :)

What these dog owners source aggressive dogs because they are generally involved in criminal activity and use dogs for added protection. There are actually circles of grubs who purposely breed aggressive dogs which are mostly Bull breed based who supply these type of people..........I have had many approach me over the years looking for GSD's who will take someone down without training, some live in fear of their lives especially in drug deals gone wrong........also women living in fear of scumbag X's often want an aggressive dog in their yard to keep the X away, some are quite sad conditions these people live under but as irresponsible people with aggressive dogs is the cocktail that leads to problems unfortunately.

The GSD clubs, at least the one in Vic anyway, are working towards designing a better test of working ability/temperament - plenty of things go on behind the scenes. There are people passionate about the breed who want and strive for the best of both worlds. There is a new working line male soon to hit Aus that is beautifully constructed and I imagine will be well used amongst the show and working breeders alike.

What is wrong with the ORIGINAL test?

Oh I forgot, the ANKC don't support it..

The GSDCA don't support the original test probably because the dogs they breed won't pass it aside from they are too lazy to train a dog to that level would account for most of it. They claim that the original test is perceived as attack training promoting the breed as potentially dangerous dogs.......now they need to tell the ANKC that the original test weeds out the dangerous dogs, show them the SV book and comply with it. I can just imagine all the "Australian Champion" show dogs dropping from hero to zero when they are deregistered when failing the breed temperament and character test

At the minimum, there is nothing stopping them passing the BH, tracking and obedience phase which would be better the nothing test they have now

�� Santo why don't you step out of this thread quietly before you make a fool of yourself even more.... You have clearly no idea...

It's a discussion, no need to take on board my view of the situation.........if you have a better debate angle don't be shy let's hear it

My point was that there is no scientific data to support the idea that socialisation even CAN cover up "poor breeding".

I think the fact that socialisation can effectively reduce the incidence of fear aggression proves that well enough.......socialisation I am regarding as exposure to environmental challenges not a free for all at puppy classes.

Let's say we take two groups, picked at random, half are socialised and the other half are sequestered. We find a difference between the groups that is unlikely to be due to chance. Is that speculation or guess work?

I think you would find similar behaviours in both groups at random select. IMHO you would need groups of near similar genotype and phenotype for half a chance at legitimate resolve.

Your scientific evidence was more than likely the result of data collection that included dogs of less than ideal nerve strength

Yes, exactly my point. Because those studies have been done on populations of dogs, which include dogs that do not meet this apparent ideal nerve strength. In fact, most of them do not, it would seem. Thus, please do socialise your dogs, people.

however, once a dog has been through socialisation regimes, the socialisation on that dog can't be undone to confirm if it was the socialisation that produced the confident resilient adult dog or the genetic nerve structure of the dog it's self so there is no "real" scientific measure that isn't based upon speculation or guess work.

Read Scott and Fuller's book before you get too carried away. It's still in print and seriously, it is full of fascinating data and insights. Anyone interested in dog genetics and behaviour should have a look. I don't think their methods are suspect. It's the best you can do without finding genetic clones. There's a reason why it is still considered a primary source of literature. No one has ever topped that study.

In this example I ask you this Corvus:

Do you want I guide dog of genetic nerve weakness with fear of traffic masked by the effects of socialisation or a genetically stronger nerved dog who instinctively doesn't care about traffic and has no fear of it?

As far as I know they socialise their dogs, as do assistance dogs. Extensively. Security sector, not so much. Military and police, to a small degree if I understood the trainers I have spoken to.

What you are describing I assume is in personality research called a behaviour suite or a super-trait. We have to be careful with these things and test whether certain behaviours really do statistically more often occur together, and that in no way says anything about how genetically inheritable they are. Evidence suggests it depends on the behaviours and the breed. I could write a great deal about the subject. And have published papers on it, as it happens. The bottom line, though, is that the concept of 'nerve' is probably dangerously broad and over-simplified in my opinion, and subject to massive confirmation bias. Plus it is annoying as hell to hear non-descriptive and misleading terms like that in use.

Corvus, regardless of your liking to scientific data that can change depending on which way the wind blows........how many scientific examples have been given as a link to cancer on that alone I prefer practical analysis in some instances over theory. The fact is, a socialised dog cannot be un-socialised end of story, that is the effect of socialisation cannot be erased from a dog to start again with the same dog un-socialised to record the difference. Furthermore, I could make up socialisation regime and show my un-socialised dog as an example of the result of that regime as the dog displays extreme environmental stability, yet it's all bullshit, the environmental stability resides in both the genotype and parental phenotype of that breeding, nothing to do with socialisation.

My point is that there is becoming too much emphasis placed on socialisation to cover up poor breeding's as every second behavioural issue is attributed to a lack of or incorrect socialisation regimes, from my experience of most behavioural issues stem from breeding the wrong dogs. Socialisation for me is a fault finding exercise when exposing dogs to the unknown........I didn't say not to socialise dogs, I said genetically stable dogs don't need it and when a fault is found during the socialisation process IME, although socialisation and training can mask the behaviour, if the dog is subject to enough pressure, they will revert back to their instinctive behaviour.

Your scientific evidence was more than likely the result of data collection that included dogs of less than ideal nerve strength however, once a dog has been through socialisation regimes, the socialisation on that dog can't be undone to confirm if it was the socialisation that produced the confident resilient adult dog or the genetic nerve structure of the dog it's self so there is no "real" scientific measure that isn't based upon speculation or guess work.

I think what you are referring to is essentially breeding for temperament and absolutely nothing to do with the dogs nervous system.

There is no correlation between the nervous system (or nerve structure as you put it) and nervousness in dogs. Signs of nervousness all come from the brain and while genetics may take a part in whether a dog has a nervous predisposition the greatest scientists are still trying to work out whether nurture or nature has the strongest impact on the development of our personalities.

If they can't figure it out with people I'm not sure they will have gotten anywhere with dogs, who after all can't talk to you about their childhood :p

Thank you Leah82, I couldn't have said it better myself :)

Perhaps Santo66 you need to find a better word for comaprison because as Leah82 and Corvus have stated, the nervous system is a competely different ball game. By saying a dog/person has 'nerves of steel' it is merely an expression and doesn't actually relate to the nerves at all.

You know what I am talking about when referring to a dog's nerve as do 99.9% of anyone else involved in dogs from breeding/training aspect :laugh: