Santo66

I agree what I think temperament is I cant imagine why anyone would think that could be impacted by environment or owners. For me its not behaviour or able to be trained in or out. Can you give me an example of something that purely cant be modified at all? I look at a horse which is a prey animal, and yet I see police horses resisting instincts. I have seen dogs that have been treated so harshly that they don't respond to anything anymore- so they have had their desire to survive taken out of them. I genuinely cant imagine any action by a dog that can not be modified in any way shape or form. Even an aggressive dog can be made 'more' aggressive by their environment. Environment is the trigger of genetic response IMHO whether the response is a good one or bad one, the genetics of the dog is the determining factor. Training will mask or alter the response, but the genetics has to be in the dog in the first place to get the desired response you are looking for?

The default behaviour is the genetics of the dog, the result is the environmental factor (training). I have a DA dog here through training the DA is pretty well masked in an environment of passive dogs, in other words I could in some circumstances present this dog as extremely stable around other dogs but the fact is he's not.....up the pressure of a fiesty dog and the DA is back out there in full force (default behaviour). I have another dog here same breed different lines who's not DA in the slightest and never has been AND the non DA dog was never socialised with other dogs as a puppy either. Working back through the pedigree on these dogs, the sire of the DA dog was DA and the grandsire sire and dam on the stud line were both DA?. I would predict if I bred the DA dog which isn't going to happen, he would likely throw DA progeny.........that's genetic IMHO. Environmental factor is a breeder's friend, there is too much of this used as an excuse for genetic flaw, train the dog out of poor behaviours can be done to a point, but it's much easier to begin with dog that doesn't have the poor behaviour in the first place, like the DA scenario above?

Usually these puppy tests are derived from the behaviour of puppies who turned out to be adult dogs of the type bred for, so the breeders look for puppy behaviour resembling that of their good dogs in puppyhood......sometimes it works, sometimes not. Perhaps when this process doesn't work it may have been obvious there was a difference between the pups with results of test they may not routinely implement. I think puppy tests are better at avoiding unwanted traits than actually determining traits of improvement?

We know that external factors can trigger a behaviour, I totally agree, but what the dog does, how the dog processess the trigger is genetic. Some dogs do become aggressive with pain, some slink off and hide in the corner......the genetics of the dog determines the default behaviour associated with pain IMHO

Well I know one thing: If I wanted a particular type of dog I would trust a breeder who consistantly produces the type over a scientists recommendation who's never bred a dog in their lives :D " I wonder if this would be helpful in selecting the parentage I would like my next pup from

Or maybe it's just under exercised and bored rigid. A dog bred to work needs an outlet. Fail to give it one and problem behavior can be a result. I'd look at the home before writing the problem off as genetic. I agree that under exercise/stimulation is more than likely the cause of the behaviour........the genetics of the dog is the reason it spins and doesn't just yap, dig up the garden or any other behaviour of bordom.

I can see out the window from my desk here, some friends of the people across the road have tail chasing GSD, I have seen the dog several times.......I am watching this dog now continually circling around on the front lawn and wondering if spinners were in the pedigree of this dog from a genetic perspective.......it looks like well structured showline black and tan?

Corvus, some USA police dog programs do exactly that.....send pups out to pet homes to be return for assessment at 12-14 months old. The failure rate is higher, but they claim to get better dogs when training and environment of the police puppy program hasn't influenced the raw genetics of the dog with less likelihood of environment and training masking character flaw. This concept was adopted due to some officers injured/killed on duty when their seemingly well trained and eviromentally sound dogs shut down under pressure in attempt to keep the officers safe?. The same has occurred with some high ranking dogs in bite sports when cross training into civil protection roles.......the dogs trained in prey drive with impressive bites fail in defence drive when pressure is applied to fight off the dog reflective of a real scenario, the dog runs off the field in fear of the opponent. The dogs are lacking in genetic defence/fight drive for a roles greater than sport.

In all honesty, no I haven't shot with a 6D, but we have a 7D and 5D MarkII. The 7D smokes the 5D2 in dog action and from what I understand the 6D is similar to the 5D2 in AF? The 7D takes a bit to get the AF set up though, I got a lot of shots just off focus with the 7D initially and didn't like it much to start with. In all fairness, the 5D2 and 6D were not meant to be action bodies, but with good composure and nice lens they will take some awesome shots. The other thing I find on FF is my lovely 70-200 2.8 is a bit short shooting from the sidelines where the focal range is better on the 7D effectively 320mm on the crop sensor. I don't see much advantage with FF other than better low light. The 7D with a 2.8 lens isn't shabby in lower light by any means I haven't found? I have had a 30 minute shoot with a 1DX.......wow....the thing is insane in AF speed, accuracy and FPS, it's mind blowing, if only I could afford one

Is it a Dogo who scores show points for trying to bite the judge or is that a Fila....one does I recall?

I have never desexed a male either in over 30 years and never once have I experienced a supposed "entire male" negative trait. I have 3 entire males laying on the floor here as I type this :D

Yes. Recovery from ordeal is the genetic strength of the dog allowing it to bounce back. Yes you can absolutely. When the lines are known and particular line or mating pair/dog produces a particular trait, that's genetic and can be identified. Problem is, breeders often lie about known traits especially faulty traits like, "oh never had that before in any of my litters" oh really

Yep.......that's correct :) Environment can trigger it, but genetics carries it. Say a dog scared of the car after braking hard and the dog falling off the seat. The seat fall scared the dog, but nerve weakness in the dog didn't allow the dog to get over the ordeal which is a genetic weakness.

I think the 7D is the best value for money dog camera. The AF on the 6D isn't as fast as the 7D, the buffer depth is shorter with half the FPS, not ideal to catch dogs in action. Only a 1DX in full frame is better than a 7D for dogs IMHO?

I am of very strong belief that breeders be it registered breeders or BYB's need to be scrutinised and held accountable for their reproductions. I am really tired of the fact the breeding of dogs is a complete free for all, breed what you want when you want, personally, I would like to see it as an offence to breed dogs without a licence with the introduction of a BSL....."breeder specific legislation" It is not, and has never been a "free for all" for registered breeders. Registered/show breeders face amazingly few restrictions with relation to temperament. I would have no problem registering a Labrador that is gun shy, hates water, and is dog aggressive. Such a dog could even be titled, provided that the DA can be curbed in the ring. However a cosmetic fault, such as light eye colour (which. btw, gives the dog better night vision) seriously affects results of competition in the ring. Sadly some show breeders are worse offenders at messing up temperament for the sake of the potential ribbon. Funny the amount of Golden Retreivers of late with severe fear of thunder and fireworks........years ago a gun dog was bullet proof to such a noise........not anymore, so who is breeding gun shy gun dogs??

I am of very strong belief that breeders be it registered breeders or BYB's need to be scrutinised and held accountable for their reproductions. I am really tired of the fact the breeding of dogs is a complete free for all, breed what you want when you want, personally, I would like to see it as an offence to breed dogs without a licence with the introduction of a BSL....."breeder specific legislation"

Of course the fault lays with the owner, that's an absolute given, but due the fact that the world is not always a perfect place where all dog owners are responsible people, when dog owners do fault, breed type then comes into the situation what is more or less likely to attack innocent people. Yes, I agree, most are crossbreeds or poorly bred unpapered dogs I am certain of that. Irresponisble owners won't generally pay out for a breed quality dog, that's very true. People who pay out upwards of $1000 for a dog tend to take better care of them and provide the right environment for their dogs needs than the donkeys who buy a cheap mutt from BYB breeders who are as dopy as they are?? Aggression attributed to a lack of socialisation is the fault of the dog's nerve strength to discriminate threat.......a good genetically stable dog doesn't need socialisation to lessen the chance of attack......a good genetically stable dog can determine a threat and non threat instinctively and are unphased by new experiences in a passive environment. Not to say that socialisation isn't a good practice, it's a very good practice to counter the possibilty of aquiring a dog not so strong in nerve strength with breeding of weak nerved dogs appearing to be sadly on the increase. I have heard breeders say that the dog they bred shows aggression because of a lack of socialisation and blames the owner perhaps things would have been different if the breeder wasn't producing spooky pups and bred from decent parentage

I think you are mistaking tenacity and trainability with "aggression"... Because bull breeds are the "penis extension" dog to own nowadays. It used to be Rotties, Dobes, GSDs, and the like - now it's "tough looking" bull breeds... The fact that this problem dog's owners are managing his issues says a lot more about responsible ownership than irresponsible, wouldn't you think? T. You can't train courage and fighting drive into a genetically inadequate dog......may high scoring dogs in bite sports cannot be cross trained into protection roles as they will back down under pressure, they have prey drive to bite but lack defence drive to fight, in other words, a dog may come in for a bite and a good kick will send the dog tail tucked into submission, dogs like this will NOT continue with a mauling when there is an escape path. For a dog to ultimately maul someone, it needs have an instinctive fight over flight character and many Bull breeds have that character, the reason the "penis extension" suppliers use Bull breeds to produce that type of dog. They could achieve the same with Rottweiler's, GSD's, Belgian Malinois etc etc, but those type of traditional protection breeds are a bit more specialised in the bloodlines, harder to source with more breeder control of who gets hold of them and what they do with them as a general rule. It is said that around 1 in 300 average GSD's have the genetic capacity to be protection trained......the yobbos who want hard ass dogs use Bull breeds for a reason is the point I am making. Bull breeds are not weak dogs by any stretch of the imagination, even one's of excellent temperament, put them in a position where they are in need to defend, they are not breeds that will easily back down to pressure......we need to accept this IMHO......denial of breed specific traits is not the answer.

When aggression is required in working dogs, why are particular breeds used and not just any breed. Why don't the police use Labradors and Golden Retreivers in apprehension roles when no breed is more aggressive than others, they all have teeth right......so tell us why they don't use particluar breeds when aggression and fighting drive is paramount in the job? The dog's like this because it has a dickhead owner or is it the genetics of the dog? How come the breeders used a Bull breed to produce a dog like this and not a Standard Poodle or Golden Retriever when you previously said breed doesn't mean a dog will be more aggressive than another?

The 2010/2011 stats from a quick caluculation is 1364 Bull breed attacks, nothing else comes close. Just back track in this section alone and count the reported attacks.......the majority are Bull breed variants of some discription. Is this the denial factor kicking in?

The problem is that Bull variants are the dogs involved in the majority of horrific attacks, killing a child, killing other dogs and severe maulings. Whether or not they are Pitbulls, crossbreeds of whatever, they are Bull variants of some description and whilst dogs of this "type" keep featuring in the most severe attacks, they will keep targeting that "type" of dog.

A Pitbull is an Amstaff without papers, or a Bull breed that isn't a pure Bull Terrier or Staffy isn't it

I think we can all get the idea of what the OP is talking about in terms of "mean"......a loose dog rushes out of a driveway wagging tail and jumps up for a pat and lick of your face......you wouldn't call that dog mean. On the other hand.....a dog comes rushing out of driveway gnashing teeth and tries to take your head off.......that's mean in this context. Some dogs are like that genetically by default.....they hate everyone unknown to them and they will bite you given the opportunity. They are not fundamentally lovely dogs raised badly......they are aggressive by nature and we need to accept this fact. You can mellow some dogs out with intensive training and dedication to improve their behaviour and reactivity, but you can't trust them as the default aggression at the right trigger will re-surface somewhere.....a dog is either a friendly dog with good bite inhibition or it's not?

There is nothing wrong with Bull breeds, what's wrong is the idiots who breed some of them for the wrong reasons. The Pitbull was a dog fighter not a protection dog, but some idiots along the way decided that they should be harmful to people so they bred duds that showed aggression in the wrong areas the way I see it evolve......so man made many Bull breeds into what they were never supposed to be, so what needs to be done IMHO is cull off these crap Bull breeds, get out the breed book and start breeding some proper ones who comply with the breed standards Pitbull's shouldn't be biting people, if they do......something isn't right in the bloodlines.......a friend of mine has 2 Pits both bullet proof with people and other dogs, but I have also seen some shockers too, maulings waiting to happen.

Yes totally agree, until people accept that all dogs are not created equal and the genetics of a dog cannot be modified in the raising, things will sadly never move forward in a positive direction. I am a very strong BSL advocate to mean "breeder specific legislation" 1. Early experience: Dogs that can't recover well from early experience is nerve factor "genetic" 2. Socialisation and training is beneficial for dogs with nerve and temperament issues for better behaviour "genetic" 3. Health can be misfortune, injury or "genetic" The "genetics" of a dog plays the major part in the behavioral outcome IMHO American Bulldogs were someone's concoction to compete with the GSD & Malinois in working roles.......the Johnston line or something to that effect, was supposedly this superdog with masssive aggression and fight drive however what was missing was trainability......the dog ideally was as thick as two short planks, had no clarity in the fight and was virtually uncontrollable in aggression.......bottom line, wasn't close to that of GSD or Malinois in a working role except for a couple of dogs in this line, the rest were rubbish.....suffice to say, professionals don't use American Bulldogs for good reason........but yeah......the were aggressive enough........poor jogger, what hope did he have