mita

Yes! Wish you were with me the day, a huge lost Rottie appeared near our library. Only 4 women volunteered to go help him (4 lane highway next to him). He was wearing a fancy collar with his ID. We called him.... but he wasn't interested. Too busy free & sniffing! Then I crouched down & said, 'Come on, darling!'. You should've seen the changed look on his face.... 'Someone likes me!'. Big smile. He happily trotted over to us. One lady said, 'Can you sit, sweetheart?' Sweetheart sat with a bang, right on my foot. He was adorable.... & knew it. The librarians led him off to their office to phone his owners.... using a piece of string as a lead. :) You have a great Rottie Club there in Victoria. There's a also a Tibetan Spaniel Association of Victoria. The breeders I mentioned used to be Committee Members.

A Victorian couple used to own, show & breed Rotties & Tibetan Spaniels. There's something about the 'centred' nature of a well-bred, well-raised Rottie which is the same as a Tibbie. This couple were committed to both breeds, because of that. I adore Rotties. Seems my own pet Tibbies might, too. When we go to doggie social events, my Tibbie girls are quite self-possessed around all the strange dogs. But they'll usually pick out one... which seems to get their full approval. Once it was a lovely Greyhound ... another time it was a huge, handsome Rottie with a glorious nature, named Robbie. I agreed with them.

That is actually a good point. They didn't do anything & they had the committee. Which goes to show how useless it was & a waste of money. Money that could be put to better use. They don't need a committee to know what is going on & to do something about it. They already know. Really.... the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee was 'useless'? One example, posted here on DOL by Aphra, 23 October: If people are interested, there is a major cross-jurisdicational and national project on managing animals (companion, livestock and other) in disasters. It has been underway for three years now and last month held the third workshop on progress. It is co-ordinated by the Australian Animal Welfare Strategy, which is a national body. Also, I've posted reference to the National Animal Welfare Strategy paper a number of times, in DOL threads. It has excellent positions on matters like the difference between animal welfare & animal rights ... which shows a determination by the Australian Government not to endorse some of the extreme positions in relation to companion animals, rampant in the US. The Committee's job was based on the aims in that Strategy. http://www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/welfare/aaws/australian-animal-welfare-strategy-aaws-and-national-implementation-plan-2010-14#t9 I've got respect for the expertise of most of the members who served on that committee & the nature of advices given. .

Counter-intuitive? "Oh. Isn't she cute." Grrr... "OUCH!" Eight percent of Yorkshire Terriers and seven percent of Dachsunds show stranger aggression (defined as "Snaps, bites, or attempts to bite). Counter-intuitive in the context of this discussion which focuses on aggressive tendencies of a bigger, heavier breed type, bullies. Earlier posts mentioned the 'add on' factor of size & weight to any show of aggression. So little wonder that, in everyday life, it's that whole package which people are cautious of. So it's dogs bigger than the 2 small breeds mentioned as part of the study, which would be in the forefront of people's minds to be wary of. Understandably so, because any show of aggression by them, poses greater potential for injury. ADDING: That fits with your spot on comparison with snakes ... the most dangerous as opposed to the most venomous.

The first mentioned article does show findings about aggressive patterns in breeds.... exactly as the OP is concerned about. This study separates out aggression against other dogs, as I pointed out. And a bully breed is mentioned in that pattern of canine behaviour. Again ... that would answer the OP's question. The second article throws some light on an aspect.... you have mentioned ... the issue of breed behavioral tendency being related to historical use via selective breeding. Again.... people can read the articles themselves.

Good to see a reference to fact there is rigorous peer-reviewed research on canine aggression. With interesting findings in one particular study, concerning breed differences & canine aggression. Looking at tendency to be aggressive with owners, or strangers, or other dogs. So specifically targeting other dogs was covered. Counter-intuitive outcome on the 2 breeds found to exhibit greatest aggressive tendency towards both strangers & other dogs (among other outcomes). People can read it themselves, because it's posted in the DOL forum listing significant studies (p 7). You posted it, SG & a good thing, too. In same DOL forum, is another study that picked up the issue of breed typical behaviours & the relationship with historical use of that breed. Significant finding was the influence of more recent times, of the use for showing when contrasted with those used for original purpose. . Appears that has strongly influenced breed characteristics, because there's difference in what's been selected for. You also posted this research, SG, in the same DOL forum. Beating me to it. People can read it... post 87, p6.

No one, least of all me, is telling you that you have to change his name. It was a suggestion, based on some reasons. You have your own reasons for not doing so.

Leema, any decision about name change rests entirely with you.... so I'm not telling you what to do. Bandi would be an option. Our pet tibbies were retired from registered breeders & came with call names we changed. Ages ranged from 3 years to 8 years. They soon responded to a new name... & nicknames. Chance became Gracie, Sunny became Angel. Our sheltie that came as an adult...was Tiffany & became Shelley. BTW, the breeders didn't mind One breeder was attached to an 8 yr old's call name Zena. But she looked nothing like a Warrior Princess to us.... so we asked the would she mind NinaZena. Thought it was fine. BTW NinaZena gets called NZ often, for short.

Yes to this suggestion... & the reason. Just for the sake of comparison....names like 'Ben' or 'Barry' or 'Bert' give a home-friendly meaning. Or even go for 'distinguished', in the other direction, like 'Bernard' (Bernie, for short). I'm sure there'd be more possibilities.

I'm going cross-eyed trying to figure the direction of tail wagging with our tibbies. They have plumed tails that sit against their backs. When they wag them, it looks more circular ... like someone waving a pom-pom.

One of the Qld breed rescuers that I respect, always speaks highly of Craig Murray. In addition, I've been impressed with the assistance from the behaviorists/trainers at the Animal Training Centre (ATC) at RSPCA Qld. They have a Behaviour Helpline as well as intense, personalised in-home services.

Dogmad, you've got to admit that an unfenced sheer cliff at the back door, is hard to forget! :)

Dogmad, weren't you the person who once posted that a home-check you did... had an unfenced back of the house, giving onto a sheer cliff? Of course, not all would be as extreme... but that one's stuck in my mind. You're right, sometimes it's just small things.... that can be sorted. Might even be fine for the dog they already own, but wouldn't be so for the potential adoptee. Like having a big dog... but not being aware of the tiny 'squeeze thro' spots used by small dog. Or the other way round. Not being used to the jumping abilities of a bigger dog.... when having had smaller dogs. It is awkward.... what seems like a 'stranger' coming in to judge your home. But it'd depend on tact & some good communication skills to help ease the situation. Which is so necessary... to prevent dogs 'bouncing' or suffering nasty fates out on the road.

Yes... & that's a fair enough perspective as well. It's how the world works... people make decisions on how things appear to them. Someone else saying .... they'd lean strongly towards returning, but keep a proviso of case by case details... is not invalidating your position that you would fight for your dog's return no matter what. So would most people, I'd expect. As others have said ... the bottom line is legal possession versus original ownership which predates that. Then there's the overlay of what's just plain fair, rather than the letter of the law. My leaning towards returning the dog, was based on what appears to be a 7 yr incident free original ownership. It'd take some huge missing detail to change my decision on that. It's not about 'fault'.... it's what's been done, by a whole bunch of people to take care of that dog. And that started with a 7 yr long period of care by the owner. Of course, someone in that position would go 'all out' for return.

That's a fair enough perspective. You've just said the devil would be in the details, for you. I actually didn't vote, either. Because I said, just given what appears in the article, I'd be leaning strongly towards returning the dog. But I also acknowledged I didn't have details. And I'd still like to see gratitude, by the original owner for the fact that a bunch of people.... acting in good faith & with no apparent doggie ID .... kept that 7 yr old dog safe from a nasty fate lost on the roads, & got her to safety. Ranger, RSPCA staff & adopting family. Frankly, that would be my very first response.... if I was the owner of the dog. Before we got up to.... return or not. But, then, again, we don't have details. . So I can't judge her. I had tremendous gratitude to the people who saved my tibbie girls when they were let out. Guess who got the biggest box of chocolates.

Things sure can go pear-shaped in the best 'baby-sitting' arrangement. I was driving in our Brisbane suburb & saw a largish, Bully-type dog heading towards the busiest road right on peak hour. Was relieved to see an ID tag on his collar. I stopped ... he was friendly but still determined to go on his travels. Managed to hold him while I dialled the mobile phone no on his ID. Man answered, I told him I had his lost dog. He said he was in Melbourne, attending a meeting & his dog had been left at his mother's home. He phoned his mother.... she'd been visiting a friend nearby, but said she'd hurry home. I walked the dog a block ( he was too big & enthusiastically wriggly to secure in my little car). But he happily came with me.... because he wanted to keep trotting along. There was the mother waiting. She showed me, she found a side gate (the dog was kept behind that) & the front gate ajar. Someone had been in the yard. She'd ask her son to put put a lock on the side gate when he returned. I'm glad the man had put his phone no on his dog. I don't know what I've had done if I'd been stuck there with a dog that I couldn't secure in my car (because he was enjoying his freedom, not because he was mean!). It would have meant a phone call to the pound... & a long wait with a strong dog that wanted to keep on going! And I had responsibilities waiting at home.

My Tibbie girls have collars (which I check often). They have their council registration tag, an ID disc with their name & phone number, & the tag which shows they're microchipped. Twice over the years, a tradesperson we didn't know was in the yard.... managed to leave 3 gates open... & a tibbie girl or two went off for a lone walk. First time, 2 tib girls headed for the sound of children's voices in the home of a Day Care Mum. Marched up & 'knocked' on the front door. Lady read their ID disc & phoned me immediately. Tibbie girls brought home in a little procession of children. Couple weeks ago, another tradesman did the same thing. I got a call from the manager of a real estate office in the next block. She was holding a staff meeting... & they saw a little 'gold dog' looking in the big window & wagging her tail. She said she saw the ID disc on the collar ... so went out, picked her up & phoned me. Speaking only for myself.... I want our dogs to be easily seen as 'carrying' ID which will make it quick & easy for a finder to make contact. Amazing how a simple ID disc can get a lost dog home ... whether the finder knows anything about microchips, or not.

We need to hear lovely stories like this. They inspire rescuers to keep going & they can show some pet buyers what lovely things can happen, if they put time & thought into adopting. Thanks for posting! :)

I wonder if the schnauzer owners across the road also got a note in their letter-box.

A dog like this one.... owned by the original owner for 7 years... can get anzy if the owner is absent. The wandering may have been a result of that.... I don't know. Whoever was dog-sitting was very remiss in not looking at the local pound/shelter, when Mia went missing. The owner's anger would be better directed at that person/persons. There's no doubt that I, as adopter, would legally own the dog. But I'd consider that the original owner has cared for this dog for 7 years & registered her .... which would indicate a level of commitment & responsibility. So I'm inclining towards returning her. I'd expect the original owner to be relieved that her pet was alive.... not run over while roaming ... & that the RSPCA has got her into new home, in good faith. And express some gratitude to those (not the pet sitter!) who've kept the dog alive & safe. Frankly, if the original owner expressed that attitude.... she'd be like the mother in the King Solomon story who proved she was the real mother.

Thanks for that summary. Clear, fully supportable good sense. No wonder pound/shelter work's been found to have appalling mental/emotional health consequences for staff. He paints a tragic picture of distressed rangers having to PTS lovely dogs, based solely on laws about breed label. Not surprised that politicians were conspicuous by their absence. Too much electoral risk in being seen as Friend of the Pitbulls. More votes in whipping up fear & loathing...

Good question, Alison. I don't know if statistics from decades ago would be available. And I don't know if the authorities would think that fatal dog attacks occur often enough today, to warrant setting up an expert Investigation Unit, like for fatal car accidents. There's lots more fatal car accidents. But the deaths & serious injuries from dog attacks involve those at higher risk .... the very young & the very old. That's what breaks people's hearts. Even if a group with expertise in the research on dog behaviour, had the job of setting up a list of factors that police needed to investigate. Like I read research on one aspect.... the dogs that attack/bite their owner already have a different behavioural profile to those that attack another person that's not familiar to them. Knowing what to look for, might help prevent incidents. I wonder if there's something like that already, somewhere in the world? ADDED: Only found one researcher's summary of investigating dog attacks for 20 years. Her findings fit with American Veterinary Association. Don't look at the pics in the Appendix. http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/uploaded_files/tinymce/Delise%20Research%20&%20Investigation%20Methodology.pdf

Fatal dog attacks should be dealt with the same as fatal motor vehicle accidents. A special Accident Investigation Team looks at each fatal car accident ... & investigates to what extent the various factors known to cause accidents were in play. If this were done with fatal dog attacks, a clear picture would emerge about cause (s). And, like with car accidents, could be translated into safety messages. In the 2 yr old's case, it's been reported that the grandfather (& owner of the dog) also suffered bites to his arms as he tried to save the child. I could be very wrong, but this sounds as if there could be some history around the dog... & how it'd been socialised, trained and managed. There's some evidence that dogs involved in serious bites/attacks, have shown troubling behaviour before

Excellent idea about the webcam. Hope all gets sorted, kc. It'd be horrible to think that someone is hurting your dog.

I once saw an ad on PetLink. Someone posted wanting to buy a Prince Charles Spaniel.