Santo66

My mum a dog person, her mum (nanna) a breeder taught us as kids to respect dogs and strange dogs not to approach them but ignore them as they can bite........we were also taught to read the body language of a dog......we were told the truth about dogs which didn't create fear, in fact as a teenager around 13/14 years of age I used to seek out guard dogs in commercial yards near us and feed them through the fence......had a GSD and Dobe I could end up patting for a treat, not that I would have jumped the fence to really test them

Putting fear into kids about dogs is stupid IMHO but having said that a couple of months ago, I had a kid rush at me to pat my not so friendly dog and intervened quickly to prevent contact.......kid say's "does he bite" where I replied he can do and the kid's mum who was standing there and allows her little daughter to rush at strangers with their dogs starts yelling at me telling her daughter that my dog can bite causing her daughter to fear dogs.......I won't repeat here how I responded to that, but this was the exact opposite of teaching a kid to fear dogs, this mother was teaching her kid there was no consequence of wrong behaviour towards a strange dog....the poor little girl is a bite victim waiting to happen with the wrong dog and owner who lacks control.

Kids need to be raised with the truth about dogs and taught how to interact with them and most of all respect dogs and treat them properly either extremes of fear or confidence are not the way to raise kids in regard to dogs IMHO.

Hold on, I need more explicit information...

Which PART exactly of the nerve results in never spooking at new experiences? Ever. Is there a specific length of axons that promotes novelty seeking behaviour?

All actual scientific evidence that I know of suggests socialisation is extremely important. If this animal with perfect nerve structure exists that does not need socialisation, than hooray for it. The rest of the world, however, will need to socialise their dogs at a young age for really confident, resilient adult dogs. I hope that if anyone is not sure whether their dog has beautiful nerve structure they should assume it has a normal level of inbuilt fear of the unknown seeing as it is highly adaptive and all, and that it follows the same rules of socialisation as the majority of dogs known to science. Scott and Fuller did a fantastic series of experiments on this back in the 1960s that to this day we still use as a guide in socialisation regimes. When someone does something better and more comprehensive incorporating genetic nerve structure I'll let you all know.

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.

In working dog breeding programs where the dog is required to perform a role beyond that of a family pet where nerve structure is paramount.......guide dogs for the blind is one role that requires high strength of nerve, many lines of working dogs are purposely not socialised to evaluate the raw the genetics of the adult dog that socialisation can mask until the dog is subject to pressure where genetics will overpower learned behaviour. That is for example, a guide dog genetically scared of traffic that has been coaxed through acceptance of traffic by exposure (socialisation) until a truck turns the corner with noisy air brakes loading the dog with pressure beyond what it's socialisation regime catered for, the dog will revert back to it's genetic fear and spook with potential devastating results for the blind person holding the harness and the dog. 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?

Genetic nerve strength in puppies unfolds early and is easily seen and for the pet dog people rarely test for it and if they do and pup fails is because the puppy isn't used to the environment with the misunderstanding that exposure in socialisation will fix it where the truth of the matter is that the puppy is genetically spooky and a poor candidate in a pet role..........ultimately the production of a spooky puppy is the result of ancestry genotype which effectively is a breeding problem from breeding on the wrong dogs, a common problem found in show dog breeding's, lets improve conformation using a dog who's scared of gun fire in a gun dog breed results in Golden Retriever's petrified of thunder.......excellent

A strong nerved puppy will investigate the unknown where spooky puppies will fear it......there is a massive difference between the two behaviours. Socialisation and exposure in working puppies more identifies genetic fault than creating better dogs from the process. There are plenty of dogs out there with strong nerve structure, it's not a rare occurrence although weak nerve is sadly becoming more accepted with the emphasis placed on socialisation and training to try and fix it.

Further more to this, my best working GSD who's the most environmentally stable wasn't socialised at all in the critical period due to a compromised immune system from a viral illness at 8 weeks old.......my own fear of Parvo kept him isolated, however his genotype was strong in nerve and his phenotype replicates that of his parents with excellent environmental soundness.........I chose a pup from that litter because of parental stability and environmental hardness, where puppy traits were exactly the same :)My least environmentally stable who were heavily socialised and I have had a couple like that, can still spook and show aggression towards non threats the same as their parental phenotypes.

Am wondering if her problems are due to the new home, and lack of socialisation previously?

Socialisation is beneficial to dogs borderline on environmental stability as in nerve structure, but a good solid nerved dog doesn't need socialisation as they don't care about environmental change and they don't spook at new experiences. Lack of socialisation as a reason for behavioural issues is an excuse for breeding's lacking in genetic nerve strength.

It's interesting that Chessies are high on the list for number of attacks. Not a common breed. Gun dog. Not generally favored by yabos,

Given that a Chessie is not a common breed and most wouldn't know what a Chessie is to nominate that breed does sound a bit strange

And when you manage to reduce dog attacks by regulating dog breeds and breeding, we can continue the discussion on animal management.

Too easy at the stroke of a pen........dog breeding is illegal without a licence, parents of crossbreeds must be temperament tested by a recognised entity. That will eliminate most of the shit breeding's to begin with. Aside from the Bull X breeds, these little fluffy crossbreeds out of the puppy farms, the one's that run on their sides on the retractor leash pent up with massive dog aggression need a tune up too as a lot of the breeding's on those a no good either. Remember Melz, the genetic predisposition must be in the dog in the first place for the environment to trigger it.........it's not the other way around.

It is a very long article so I won't quote it. But there is no restriction to read it.

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/animals/owners-bark-behind-their-dogs-bite-20130809-2rmvs.html

Thanks, korbin. Just the one.

I hope it's not a one-off ... we need this kind of information being repeated, again & again, to the public.

There's some more things that could be added on.... like further spot-on US research & also info from medical sources.

Hope this is the beginning of information with a lot more substance.... than chasing dog breeds or sizes.

Yeah, we all know that responsible management of those types of dogs will reduce attacks, but what they are missing is that you can't make pig hunters out of any dog, you can't make protection dogs out of any dog, a dog must have the genetic capabilities to either be trained to attack and fight or attack and fight instinctively and the point is, the same owners with dogs that don't have the genetic capabilities for unprovoked attacks, these horrific incidents wouldn't happen

You could have saved yourself risking concussion if you'd read both the SMH article (with link provided by korbin) & what I said in telling about it.

The article sets out the interacting factors which shape a dog's behaviour....provided by the AVA. And that includes genes.

To reinforce that point, I wrote about the person who makes the decision about selection for breeding:

They (i.e.the SMH) have an excellent article pointing out owners (& the first owner who does the breeding) largely shape how dogs turn out.

I read Korbin's link that I responded to?

You know, just because you repeat something over and over again doesn't make it true.

Sure Melz, so when you get a Labrador working in front line defence at the police K9 unit, then we will continue the discussion on genetic predisposition :D

QANTAS has dumped its controversial ban on American Staffordshire terriers.

They can't place restrictions upon breeds not subject to BSL under the Customs Act as they have no legitimate grounds to ban specific breeds if challenged. They were probably advised that if someone took the matter to court, they would win such a case.

Ok can just see the big macho tattooed guy turning in his 'nasty' macho dog and coming out with a cute poodle (Joke, so don't can me please)

Load of rubbish

Don't laugh..........we have one of them around our way, a council worker, tats, beared work boots and shorts walks a white Miniature Poodle and it does look a bit weird not the type of dog you would expect a guy of that appearance would own. I caught up with him one day and said "oh, your wife's dog" and he so no the poodle is his dog isn't she cute........his wife has a Doberman.....true story

It is a very long article so I won't quote it. But there is no restriction to read it.

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/animals/owners-bark-behind-their-dogs-bite-20130809-2rmvs.html

Thanks, korbin. Just the one.

I hope it's not a one-off ... we need this kind of information being repeated, again & again, to the public.

There's some more things that could be added on.... like further spot-on US research & also info from medical sources.

Hope this is the beginning of information with a lot more substance.... than chasing dog breeds or sizes.

Yeah, we all know that responsible management of those types of dogs will reduce attacks, but what they are missing is that you can't make pig hunters out of any dog, you can't make protection dogs out of any dog, a dog must have the genetic capabilities to either be trained to attack and fight or attack and fight instinctively and the point is, the same owners with dogs that don't have the genetic capabilities for unprovoked attacks, these horrific incidents wouldn't happen

I would continue but I think your ignorance speaks (or should I say, screams) for itself :)

Yes, they have tried and tested many different breeds in police and protection roles to make comparisons so perhaps finish the story by telling us why they didn't continue with those breeds in the mainstream roles..........in fact, the only breed that has ever replaced the GSD in police/protection roles is the Belgian Malinois.......no formal K9 units have replaced herding breeds with Bull breeds which for the most part is down to versatility trainability and consistency in working aptitude. The Rottweiler is a usable breed however lacks endurance over the herding breeds, the Doberman like the Giant Schnauzer lack in bloodlines producing required traits and character..........the rest are not even close, fact :D

Rottweilers are a herding breed. They were originally bred to herd the Romans' cattle as they invaded countries to ensure their armies were fed. Then they herded cattle to market and carted the meat to town to sell it.

Yes they were too......I thought under the ANKC groups that Rottweilers weren't a recognised herding breed?

Working line doesn't mean bad family pet, its all about teaching your dog where and when to use their drive. Roscoe has extreme drive, but has been taught life skills and manners

A GSD is a working dog period and the world's most versatile from a companion animal to protection or service dog any anything else in between, the second best breed at everything is what a GSD is supposed to be. A working line GSD is simply an ancestry line where working traits have been prioritised and preserved in the breeding where a show line is an ancestry line that has conformation amongst other aspects prioritised above working traits......a working line GSD is generally closer to the breed standards in temperament and character than the majority of show line dog's ultimately though, if a working line GSD is unsuitable for a pet for some people, a GSD is the wrong breed for them as watered down versions of the breed are not true GSD's.

Not all show lines lack working ability either especially the ancestry on the old herding lines which are still tan and black saddle show line appearance, even West German show lines there are breeders who do maintain workable drives although less common than working lines.

What needs to be addressed is the breeding of powerful breeds

It actually doesn't. The areas that have seen wonderful success with reducing dog attacks have never focused on this aspect of animal management. Improvement in breeding practices is often a nice by-product of models such as the Calgary Model, but it's never needed to be focused on.

A lot of these dogs are purposely bred for aggression and are purchased for that reason.........the owners are not interested in effective animal management, they want a dog at the minimum will intimidate or bite people, protect their property etc.

What needs to be addressed is the breeding of powerful breeds and lets face facts that many of these Bully X breeds are purposely bred on aggressive parentage to satisfy the bogan market, or they are result of random breeding's done by people who don't know what they are doing breeding temperament/character mismatches creating fear aggressive or progeny that exhibits high levels of social aggression.........the breeders of these dogs need to be accountable for their produce IMHO.

A few years back now, there were cowboy breeders of GSD's who were putting fear aggressive dogs together as quality dogs of man stopping protection capabilities until the police, military and people tried to train these aggressive lines in bite sports quickly determined that these breeding's were shit, limited in their uses and were poor examples of the breed and given they were pure breed and sought after by professional working dog entities cleaned up these poor breeding's automatically over time as the breeders of GSD's like this had no homes for them if they weren't euthanized in the process from random attacks or biting without provocation, but over time the breed quality dramatically improved to the other end of the spectrum where it's harder to find GSD breeding's with enough fighting spirit to be trained in protection, that's another story.........but the point is, the breeders if they wanted to sell dogs had to tidy it up which they did but unfortunately in the BYB free for all, there is no control over what is bred and who gets them and until some breeding regulations are enforced, this problem will continue as in the BSL situation where any dog of visual likeness to what could be result of a cowboy breeding are condemned without testing which is wrong of course so it needs to come down in by belief to who is breeding this shit in the first place that has consequently affected innocent dogs.

Lets not be naïve to think that these dogs featured in sever attacks, mauling's and deaths are nice dogs gone wrong when they were more than likely purposely bred for the bogan market in the first place from an ancestry of aggressive dog concoctions. Breeding needs to be left to people who know what they are doing and if they breed shit, be accountable for it by legislation.

If my dog ever did that, regardless of what the child did I would euthanise and this is coming form someone who loves working kelpies with a passion.

Why is that........the kid may have done something stupid......years ago I sadly saw a dog bite a kid in the face after the kid blew in the dogs face 3 times amused by the dog growling and turning away.....as the kid's mother was just about to chastise him for teasing the dog, he did it the 4th time and the dog snapped causing quite a sever nose and upper lip injury. There was another one commonly mentioned where the dog was PTS for biting a kid and when the dead dog was rolled over, he had a coloured pencil shoved into his ear canal......obviously supervision is paramount with kids and dogs, but kids can do some stupid stuff with dogs and get bitten as a result......not always a case of a dog needing to nail a child without provocation.

Perhaps the main reason for the seperation is the breeders mentioned by Pepe, these were breeders who did not work within the system - they needed dogs for just one purpose, security, that was where the money was. Hence the introduction of the high prey drive. These are dogs not suited to community living. Instead they are a dog for the specialist owner, those who want the high prey sports or security work, fine as long as these dogs are not sold into family homes, but this is not the case. The GSD regardless of their breeding is sold to whoever has the money.

They were defence driven dogs Neville Williams bred.......high prey drive didn't come into Australia much until the importing of Kuran van Tiekerhook with the desire of some for extremes, prey on top of prey and line bred on prey started to create some hectic dogs with drive imbalances, but prey driven dogs of a balanced character are ok in family homes......I have 2 working line GSD's and a Malinois X Dutch Shepherd snoozing on the floor here :D It's more the speed at which they go into drive and the length of time they sustain drive is the difference I think.

There are big variations in working lines as well, some have high prey drive, some types are sharper and more willing to react and other have lower prey drive, high nerve. You don't need a mass of prey drive to be a good protection dog and some lines don't carry it.

Malinois are different, very different dogs from GSDs. They too don't need to be bred with prey coming out of their ears and most lines also don't need prey development like you would a GSD. In fact it can end badly if you just keep encouraging it. I like the old lines I have now, the IPO lines are too wound up for me.

Yes, the security guards I know that use GSD don't like a lot of prey drive in their dogs.

Many security guards can't train dogs so they use defence driven dogs who are over sharp and will at least light up or perhaps bite anyone in a passive environment triggered by insecurity. A good working GSD with adequate prey drive generally won't protect unless directly provoked without training, so they take the easy route a get a fear biter is the reason why they don't need prey drive.

Earlier in the thread I stated that the security guards I know prefer dogs without a lot of prey drive. This includes Diesel's breeder.

High prey drive is useful for sports though.

High prey drive is essential in training a protection dog to attack on command which they do for drive satisfaction/reward no different than sleeve work in Schutzhund, except the dog is trained to target the man not equipment. Fight drive in the dog is trained from an extension of prey drive where the dog fights for pleasure not fear or insecurity as in defence driven dogs.......they are also safer dogs who generally won't react in a passive environment some are quite stranger friendly unless commanded otherwise.....the problem is finding a prey driven GSD hard enough in nerve to take aversive treatment from an offender not to cause retreat or shutdown........the reason some sport dogs are no good in civil protection.

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

Pfff the GSD club please..........they already have a test it's called Schutzund

I would continue but I think your ignorance speaks (or should I say, screams) for itself :)

Yes, they have tried and tested many different breeds in police and protection roles to make comparisons so perhaps finish the story by telling us why they didn't continue with those breeds in the mainstream roles..........in fact, the only breed that has ever replaced the GSD in police/protection roles is the Belgian Malinois.......no formal K9 units have replaced herding breeds with Bull breeds which for the most part is down to versatility trainability and consistency in working aptitude. The Rottweiler is a usable breed however lacks endurance over the herding breeds, the Doberman like the Giant Schnauzer lack in bloodlines producing required traits and character..........the rest are not even close, fact :D

There are plenty of breeds already in this country that are bred to take on a human intruder (or even a runaway slaves, I'm not kidding) and yes, hurt them or kill them, in their country of origin. Up until the bull breed mania hit Europe, my own breed, the Weimaraner had "Mannschärfe" specifically in their breed standard.

There are occasionally incidents with these breeds (other breeds just seem to be preferred by the media for exposure) and yet nobody is screaming to have those breeds banned. A Weimarner is plenty capable of killing a child or even an adult and in fact, a boy has been killed by the family Weimaraner in the US.

I think concentrating on controlling any breed is pointless because not only is any breed capable of violence and killing, but ignoring some attacks because the dog is a certain breed (i.e. a Lab or Golden) and then reprinting another story over and over, with ever more gory and emotive elaborations because another breed is involved just trains people to be negligent with those supposedly completely non vicious breeds.

ANY dog can harm or kill a child or even a vulnerable adult and precautions need to be taken with all dogs. Owners need to learn about dog body language and behaviour to help read their own dog and be able to recognize when this kind of thing is about to happen (or when their dog is feeling cornered by their toddler and about to lash out or when their cousin's dog is stalking their toddler and about to lug it like a pig).

Dogs are dogs and they will behave as such and if that surprises you then maybe you need to learn more about dogs.

Of course any breed is capable of violence.......so tell us why not any breed is used in working roles where violence from a dog is required.........wouldn't the police K9 squad, the SAS and, military just get any pound mutt and train it front line defence, because all breeds are capable right?

That would be the Fila Brasiliero, originally bred for hunting big game and recapturing run-away slaves. There are two registries. One has tried to tone down the aggressiveness. The other tries to retain it. In the latter registry, dogs are not faulted for biting the judge at specialty shows.

And, yes, there are many people who think this ban should be lifted.

Fila's who bite the judge is caused by irresponsible owners and lack of socialisation and they probably weren't desexed and more than likely were kept on a chain and hit with sticks because any breed is capable of biting the judge when raised by irresponsible owners, didn't you know that :D

Rangers seized the dog, believed to be an American bulldog, after the attack.

American Bulldogs again.........the Jogger now this one

There is no place in the community for these stupid breeds for people wanting a protective type of dog. There is nothing wrong with having a dog that offers some protective quality in fact a dog can be very effective to keep potential thieves and unwanted visitors away and help people sleep at night, but a good GSD or Rotty will achieve that nicely who are genetically safe unless provoked with a high degree of trainability......bloody Bulldogs, Mastiff's and crap like that used as protection dogs are mauling's waiting to happen......when individual dogs in these breeds have a high degree of social aggression, they are extremely hard to train and direct aggression in the right areas for the right reason which is the reason why professional's don't use these breeds in formal protection roles.

There is a place for every breed (or mix) of dog out there in our society Santo66... I'd be willing to lay odds that most people that own bull breeds aren't feral types that the media will have you believe, nor are their dogs. Most bull breeds that I've met have been lovely tempered things who only want to be your friend and get cuddles... and I've met more than a few since being involved in rescue.

What there is no place in our community for is the type of person who thinks that they need a big powerful and inherently dangerous dog as some sort of status symbol.

Not every large bull breed type is automatically going to be likely to attack anyone - just as not every smaller breed of dog is going to be calm and happy to interact with everyone either.

Those of us who are responsible owners of larger dogs can get a bit defensive when blanket statements about them are perpetuated by the media and the blissfully ignorant. The problem is that uninformed or biased reporting often results in kneejerk legislation that can affect ALL dog owners, not just those doing the wrong thing... who will keep doing the wrong thing anyway because the laws and regulations aren't policed in any effective manner.

T.

Excuse me......I said American Bulldog.....do you know what they are, what they are used for and the general character of them and yes, they are attractive to people who think they need a powerful inherently dangerous dog for a status symbol and that's why they buy them, not to have snuggles on the lounge. So we have had 3 AM Bulldogs attack the jogger and now this one which is going well given they are still quite a rare breed. Who needs a dog to jump the fence and bite the kid next door

Santo66 maybe you should dissappear off the dog forums seems your full of s#%t!!!

It's true that professionals don't use American Bulldogs, call up the K9 squad and ask them and also ask them why they don't use breeds like that

It isn't and never has been a BREED issue!

It is about individual dogs and mostly irresponsible owners..

It's a breed issue when certain breeds take a responsibility level above what the average owner can provide to keep their dog out of trouble and the community safe, massive difference in the level of control required between handling a people friendly Golden Retriever and an American Bulldog who wants to take everyone's head off. If you want a dog capable of defensive aggression, you need a breed and type of dog that is trainable in defence with the ability to cap drive.........these Bull breed mixtures are hard to train and control in aggression is the point I am making, likewise they are harder to rehabilitate so the uses of an aggressive dog in these breeds is limited.

Rangers seized the dog, believed to be an American bulldog, after the attack.

American Bulldogs again.........the Jogger now this one

There is no place in the community for these stupid breeds for people wanting a protective type of dog. There is nothing wrong with having a dog that offers some protective quality in fact a dog can be very effective to keep potential thieves and unwanted visitors away and help people sleep at night, but a good GSD or Rotty will achieve that nicely who are genetically safe unless provoked with a high degree of trainability......bloody Bulldogs, Mastiff's and crap like that used as protection dogs are mauling's waiting to happen......when individual dogs in these breeds have a high degree of social aggression, they are extremely hard to train and direct aggression in the right areas for the right reason which is the reason why professional's don't use these breeds in formal protection roles.

We have an old chap in our area with a black Lab......I remember he was a puppy in 2000 and his owner was still working.......the dog would be 13 and the owner 70+....as a young dog he walked him rain hail or shine used to walk him every night in the rain....owner wears a black rain coat.......the other night I saw the old chap and his dog in the rain, black raincoat, dog is quite slow now very greyed muzzle the owner still looks quite fit for his age......this pair have been pounding the pavement every night without fail for 13 years......I wonder what the old chap will do at his friend's departure

And that doesn't mean we'd ignore as pets, mixed breeds, like those that come thro' ethical rescues. But not designed mixed breeds, direct from pet stores, puppy farms & backyard breeders.

We loved our little mixed breed dog that was thrown from a car as a puppy. Our 'star', Grandma as she was eventually called, lived until she was nearly 23 yrs old. Lovely little dog, with exceptional health (she looked like a poodle that looked like a spaniel :) ). Our purebreds we've got from the good registered breeders have had good health, too.

Ethical rescues are still for the most part recycling the same stuff from the pet shops, puppy farms and the like placing product from irresponsible breeding's of unknown ancestry......a mutt through rescue means it may have a had quick vet check and the temperament is tested pet worthy, but the background and nitty gritty on the dog is not even close to what a registered breeder can provide who has years of breeding and bloodline experience of their respective breeds. Good rescues do a great job, I admire their work, but it's not in the same league as a good registered breeder.

It did make me wonder if this is why some people turn to other avenues to get puppies, because they don't want a show dog.

They don't want to pay the money for a papered breed, because they are not going to show or breed and just want a pet, they don't need to spend the money to purchase qualities in a dog they will never use. If the papered dog was the same price as the Gumtree mutt, they would choose the papered dog of breed choice........it's all down to what monetary value they think a pet is worth IMHO

I have had several wealthy people turn their nose up at me spending 2K on a pup.......these people would spend 2K a week on rubbish stuff half their luck, but their dog was sourced from Gumtree for 100 bucks and brag about the good buy they got

There are a lot of people who can't afford a papered breed within their tight budgets.......the intention is to buy papered until they learn what their breed of choice is worth where most are over the $1000 mark now which is a lot of money for some people to save up......so they buy unpapered in their breed of choice half price or buy crossbreeds etc they can afford.

There is "attack" - resulting in injury...

Then there is "menace" - behaviour that can ONLY be construed as possibly leading up to an "attack"...

And then there is the average Stafford type of greeting with completely over the top pushy "pat/love me now" attitude... *grin*

If someone isn't dog savvy, the last scenario may be reported as "menace" in the very least - more than likely due to stupid reporting of stats like those in the OP... grrr!

T.

Please do not use the word "Stafford" and "type" in the same sentence, the word "Stafford" is used by the breed enthusiast when discussing the "Staffordshire Bull Terrier". By all means "Staffy" away, as that's the terms for the generic brindle pound mutt and the "type" without papers.

What's the go with Staffy's anyway........why is every second pound mutt of Staffy origin........Staffy's are ok and make nice pets, but I don't see what they offer exclusively to cause mass popularity........I think Stafford breeders are the most plentiful on the main page breeder listings to GSD's, Labs and some smaller breeds

Another thing comes to mind with kids getting bitten stems from todays parenting skills and general overview that kids getting bitten for doing something stupid is the dog's fault.......kids being allowed to rush over to strange dogs to pat them.........I had a woman lecture me a few weeks ago for telling her child who ran at us to pat my dog that he can bite so you can't pat him.......I shouldn't tell a child that a dog can bite......why not......my mum told me that and told me not to pat strange dogs and how to act if a dog shows aggression......we were exposed to dogs in the era when most neighbourhood dogs were floating around the street......more dogs then were hit by cars as a bit of dog news in the neighbourhood, attacks were virtually unheard of other than a couple bailing up the postman.......but we were all taught behaviour around dogs as standard practice, none of this all doggies are nice crap, we were told the truth and how to handle it and none of us got bitten either.

When "attack" is construed as "any act that causes fear in the recipient" - the statistics presented will be skewed. Stafford types will ALWAYS factor high in those sort of statistics because a high number of them will be way too friendly for their own good and will rush up to anyone and anything wanting to say hello in an over-enthusuastic manner.

The numbers as presented in the OP don't actually state how many of these "attacks" actually resulted in any injury at all - yet the average Joe reading them will correlate "attack" to mean that injury occured, and come to the (most likely) wrong assumption that Stafford types are dangerous, evil, bitey dogs...

... and THAT is the reason that I don't trust any statistics regarding this particular topic. They are presenting a "fact" that the people who designed the data gathering want to "prove"... and the assumption they are trying to prove with thos stats is just wrong from the get go.

T.

Recorded attacks IMHO should be incidents that result in bites........it's probably the same skewed collection of data that has rated Labradors and Golden Retrievers high in attacks like the over friendly Staffy.......only two days ago I was attacked in the driveway by a neighbours Staffy when getting out of my car......I was lunged at and severely licked when bending down to pat her........but that is stupid stuff to record as an attack........then again who in their right mind would report an incident like that to council anyway

I suspect that the most important long term trend is in people's preferences for guard dog breeds (shown by the huge declines in dogs like the GSD, Rotti, and Doberman)

The GSD on a whole has been massively watered down in protective traits through selective breeding from where they were 30 years ago when by breed alone in both the GSD and Dobe, many could be sourced from the pound and used in yards for guard dogs untrained once the dog established their domain, territorial aggression would keep out uninvited intruders.......now days you have to source specific bloodlines in the GSD where breeding has preserved the territorial traits suitable for protection of property beyond watch dog qualities.