mita

In the pic Gallery, there were also Japanese Chins & what looked like Bostons (or French Bulldogs.... I can never tell the difference). So there may also be a sprinkling of the less common breeds among them. I'm trying to find out if there's any Tibbies.

And people should start by reading this recent research published in the American Veterinary Medical Association Journal. Researchers compared later development of pet store & breeders' puppies. They found, by a big margin, that pet store puppies tend to have more problems, like being less psychologically sound overall. Researchers rarely put commands to not do something at the end of their published work. But this time, they bluntly said that, given this problem, puppies shouldn't be bought from pet stores. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/canine-corner/201305/behavior-differences-in-dogs-pet-stores-versus-breeders

I saw a brief news segment on The Project to-night. It referred to these dogs rescued from the puppy farm. Bless the commentary .... because they said the 'business' was to supply puppies to pet-shops. 'Say it again ... & again!' I thought. Poor little mites. The dogs & puppies in that tiny glimpse looked like little spaniels. The commentary also said the RSPCA SA had been flooded with offers to take them. Gallery of pics here: http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/gallery-e6frea83-1226661433778?page=1

All the way from Q'ld, I admire the Dogs Vic Pet Therapy program. I first heard of them when the co-ordinator was being interviewed on Radio National. I believe that her Rottie was part of it. When the interviewer expressed surprise at that .... the co-ordinator gave a brief account of how her 'show' Rotties were bred & raised so that they are lovely dogs with people. She said her pet therapy Rottie was still being shown.... & the residents of the nursing home were delighted when he came in with any ribbons he'd just won. That lady was a fantastic public voice for purebred dogs & for pet therapy. Hope you find just what you need, Erny. Great to see a request for pet therapy.

That's a great idea. I had to keep a record like that when my Annie had a mystery gastric complaint that all tests couldn't get a handle on. Date, time of day, about specific food eaten .... then any show of symptoms. Along with any behaviours like being 'flat', more lively. Bowel movements etc. It proved fantastic information for the vet. And really showed up one factor .... any processed food (no matter how high quality).... seemed to set it off. Then changed diet & kept on with the record. Symptoms faded. Hope your diary (& maybe video) will be as helpful.

Click on Belly Bands at this Australian site to see what they look like. http://www.lovemyfurbabies.com.au/index.htm

I was wondering, too, how they tested aggressivity! One not surprising thing was that the dogs who snapped at children were high on reactivity, but not high on aggressivity. ADDED: Found the abstract. It used a survey method (vets & dog care professionals). Not specific testing: http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/138/19/465.abstract By sheer chance, I found a later paper (2005) from researcher in Sweden. Far more specific testing & conclusions about any breed-type behaviours among breeds & specially amongst groups. Many points jump out. One that struck me was the particular traits found among show dogs... of whatever breed. Based on test results, breed scores were calculated for 4 behavioural traits: playfulness, curiosity/fearlessness, sociability and aggressiveness. It's so good, I'm passing it on to the breeders I know: http://homepage.psy.utexas.edu/homepage/group/AnimPersInst/Animal%20Personality%20PDFs/S/Sa-Sc/Svartburg%202006.pdf

And specially look at what they said about first going strong on diluting with warm water.... even an old urine mark. Before applying any product. That was news to me ..... and sounds so sensible. I'm glad you asked the question.... I've learned something! :)

You could equally believe that ANY human can bite, growl or cower in response to a particular environmental stimulation. They're all behaviours. 'Temperament' is not confined to a highly specific situation .... it's a hard-wired pattern of responding, that remains true across time & numbers of situations. Humans can be highly motivated to at least modify some of their temperamental traits because they interfere with their life goals in some way. That would be 'training[. But they're unlikely to turn into the reverse. I find it harder to get a grip on the same question with dogs. Especially as I'm not entirely sure about the boundaries between breed traits & temperament traits. I saw a break-down somewhere of the distribution of temperament traits across a number of breeds. Some breeds showed a definitely pattern. As would be expected because they'd been bred for generations. It keeps coming down to breeders making their calls on what they want, based on their experience IMO. That's why I go to certain registered breeders & I've got the greatest respect for what they do. ADDED: Found the comparisons (was in the paper I posted): Bradshaw et al. (1996) performed a similar study in which veterinarians and dog-care professionals rated various breeds of dogs on a 13 point scale. Factor analysis revealed three traits: aggressivity, reactivity, and immaturity. Examples are: high aggressivity, average reactivity, low immaturity (Rottweiler); high aggressivity, average reactivity, high immaturity (Jack Russell); average aggressivity, low reactivity, low immaturity (British bulldog); average aggressivity, high reactivity and low immaturity (toy poodle); low aggressivity, average reactivity, high immaturity (English setter); low aggressivity, low reactivity, low immaturity Greyhound); low aggressivity, high reactivity, low immaturity (King Charles spaniel); average aggressivity, average reactivity, average immaturity (Samoyed).

Very, very interesting study on tail chasing in dogs .... to everyone's surprise, I'd think.... found the factors associated with it, were non-genetic. Nor was it boredom. The associated cluster of environmental factors that tail chasing dogs have in common are fascinating to read about. Summary report in Psychology Today: http://www.psycholog...ase-their-tails Thats not quite right . They found SOME factors associated with it were non genetic and they still expect to find a genetic link. Which .... if you read my then edited post..... is exactly what I said. Oh Good = we agree then It sounds reasonable in these circumstances to have an expectations that a genetic link will be found. Even the fact that some environmental factors turned up in the mix around tail chasers would fit in with that. Genes don't necessarily automatically get expressed.... they can need certain environmental triggers to 'switch them on'. There's a saying that genes produce the gun... & the environment fires the bullet. A really blunt paper that looks at the on-going hunt for a genetic link for aggression in dogs is interesting. The authors very much go after aggression from that angle. Tho' a link's not yet found, they strongly argue that certain dogs carry a genetic pre-disposition. And they're just as blunt about breeding decisions being made about such dogs.... as in not! So they acknowledge those who breed dogs have to make a call. http://actavet.vfu.cz/pdf/200776030431.pdf

Very, very interesting study on tail chasing in dogs .... to everyone's surprise, I'd think.... found the factors associated with it, were non-genetic. Nor was it boredom. The associated cluster of environmental factors that tail chasing dogs have in common are fascinating to read about. Summary report in Psychology Today: http://www.psycholog...ase-their-tails Thats not quite right . They found SOME factors associated with it were non genetic and they still expect to find a genetic link. Which .... if you read my then edited post..... is exactly what I said.

Very, very interesting study on tail chasing in dog found some factors associated with it, were non-genetic (like age at which they were taken away from their mothers). They couldn't find a specific genetic link. But they seem to think one will be found. Boredom didn't get a gong. The associated cluster of factors that tail chasing dogs have in common are fascinating to read about. Summary report in Psychology Today: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/dogs-best-friend/201208/why-do-some-dogs-chase-their-tails

Neat summary, Aidan. All spot on. And being demonstrated in human studies.

Well, my wish has come true. I recently posted that I couldn't understand why the Victorian authorities weren't using a brilliant paper from the Australian Veterinary Association as a reference & guide. It's called Dangerous Dogs: A sensible solution, policy & model legislative framework. And bless, RSPCA Vic.... they've recommended that it be read in conjunction with their own position paper. http://www.ava.com.au/sites/default/files/AVA_website/pdfs/Dangerous%20dogs%20-%20a%20sensible%20solution%20FINAL.pdf

Good to see you posting on the topic, corvus. There's an interesting paper that draws together published research from a wide range of discipline interests. A review & evaluation. Conclusions section right at the end makes good reading: http://homepage.psy.utexas.edu/homepage/faculty/gosling/reprints/aabs05dogpersonalityreview.pdf

Good suggestion about the tarp mita, I'll give it a good clean with vinegar tonight then cover it once it's dry. Thank you! Don't know if it'd work, tho'! :) Dogs' noses are so supersensitive. Only other suggestion is to put drops of Nil-Odor, both on the site....& even on top of the tarp. It's highly concentrated... & even a couple of drops knocks any other scent out, by competition. It's available from supermarkets.... comes in very small bottle because it's so concentrated. Here's the How To Remove Pet Urine & Odours Video & Instructions from the Nil-Odor website. They show how to remove new urine stains as well as old ones. Interestingly, they stress the use of warm water dilution at the start.... before any product is used: http://www.nilodor.com/pet-urine-removal.aspx

I loved it, too! Roscoe looked so happy as well as being brilliant. You've done such a good job. My tibbie girl can only do one of those. 'Back'. When she gets a treat offered, she walks backward, into the next room if necessary... because she wants to 'Sit' on a floor cushion & not the cold floor. :)

Yes, he's peeing on top of the other dog's pee scent.... to show it's his place now. So.... now to remove both scents which will be leading him back to do it again & again. I don't know if it'd work, but while you're figuring out a way to do that..... would laying down some thickly folded tarp (the kind you get in KMart), just temporarily hide them from his nose?

I love your call for positive training methods! :) Tim sounds like he's the long lost twin of that equally fine RSPCA CEO in Canberra. Seriously, it makes so much sense to foster a 'whole of rescue-community' approach.

I've pointed out, in my posts, that the first 'owner' is the person who breeds/raises the dogs. An 'owner' being the person whose actions influence how dogs & puppies behave. In the breeder/owner's case, that covers what they're breeding for & how the puppies and parent dogs are socialised. There is solid research showing that both are linked with degree of risk for a dog developing to be aggressive towards humans (or other dogs). And, definitely, the UQ research showed that it was unregistered breeders....'backyard breeders' .... who tended to produce puppies at higher risk for later problems such as aggression against humans. That was in comparison with registered breeders. It makes sense that registered breeders would be more likely to breed for good temperament & also to socialise their puppies & dogs well. After all, their dogs have to be handled by strangers ... judges .... at dog shows. Apart from likely having a longer list of reasons why they do so. A new owner, adopting a dog from a breeder/owner, can only start from the base already established. Even with a puppy provided with a 'good' base, there needs to be ongoing socialisation, training & management by the new owner. A sound temperament base facilitates that learning .... but owner effort is needed to provide a social map as the puppy grows into adulthood. Which explains why many registered breeders are very careful when selecting new owners for their puppies/dogs. But what about the problems faced by a new owner who starts with a pup already at high risk from how it's been bred & raised? Link that with a new owner's lack of knowledge and/or will, to socialise, train & generally manage the pup into adulthood.... then there's an accident waiting to happen. There's a difference between saying that breed label alone does not predict if a dog is of high risk of aggression towards humans..... and saying that poor breeding & socialisation practices tend to produce dogs of higher risk. Yes, those dogs exist while those practices exist. I agree with you.... that's where the challenge lies. But an additional rider.... is that even with at least reasonable practices, there can be factors outside human control. Like specific neurological states.

Yes, what Clover said. The vet told me that, in her experience, most dogs 'recovered' from the loss of their dog 'friend' by 3 weeks. But.... who knows, when it comes down to an individual dog's response? We had an elderly dog that never recovered from the loss of her much younger 'sister' (who was her leader). I know it isn't much help, but I guess you take your cues from how the individual dog behaves.

That is such a sad story but also a beautiful example of a faithful dog. It was so good that both little dogs were later reunited & are being cared for.

A big 'yes' to this.

I chose my language carefully.... I said the study showed when breed label alone was considered with owner behaviour .... then the influence was squarely towards owner behaviour. The word 'towards' shows weighting.... a trend. Which is compatible with the conclusion that breed label alone does not predict that an individual dog would develop into a propensity for aggression against humans. But that owner behaviour has greater significance than breed label alone. The researcher mentioned other variables can be present .... like neurological state.. BUT their study looked at breed label alone and owner behaviours in relation to the development of aggressive behaviours against humans. Using a large enough cohort of dogs.... so that the statistical trends could be measured. And they were.... towards the stronger influence of owner behaviours than a breed label. They did not look at individual dogs.... of whatever breed.... & factors like heritable temperament or neurological conditions. All of which explains why both the Australian & American Veterinary Assocations do not accept breed label.... alone....as a predictor for the development of aggressive behaviours in dogs. But point to a mix of interacting factors. End of story. Evidence posted to support OP's (& others) case that significant owner influence needs to be factored in. Which includes the owners who breed/raise puppies & those who acquire them.

Read what's written. Owner variables have 'greater influence'. Not 'no influence'. I originally put that editorial comment at the bottom. 'Note they said 'greater influence', not 'no influence'. But decided that was insulting readers' intelligence. Seems I was wrong. I've posted elsewhere the factors linked with aggressive behaviour.... according to AVA. And genetics & breed were mentioned. The above study tested weightings of the variables. Which had 'greater influence'.....when owners and breed were considered