register for free
View our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Sara
Dogsey Veteran
Sara is offline  
Location: Red Deer, AB, Canada
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,817
Female 
 
31-05-2011, 09:37 AM

Are Dogs Born Dog Aggressive?

On another dog forum I'm on, we're discussing whether or not dogs who are DA are born that way. The OP has posted, since she cant rehab her DA dog (she's done amazing things with him so far, but he'll never be normal), that some dogs must be born hardwired for DA, as in there's something wrong with their brains. She believes that Cesar has brainwashed people into believeing that all DA is the fault of owners... which I dont agree with either. But I dont believe that she's right either.

IF she is right that some dogs are born DA, with no symptoms of aggression to anything else, I would think that it's a very, VERY small number of dogs.

I truly believe that DA is triggered. A dog may be born prone to it, but something triggers it (be it something we do, or something another dog does, or a combo). If a dog was born with something wrong with it's brain that causes DA, wouldn't that dog also be aggressive towards people and other animals?

I told her I'd be doing this, and I also told her that I'd do more research, and would be willing to conceed a point if I felt it valid, but so far, she hasn't changed my mind. She is considering it a personality in and of itself, such as a dog being born shy...

I've argued my points, which she replies to only certain points and takes my points out of context and seems to not be getting what I'm saying at all, though others understand my theories, points and observations quite well, so I thought I'd ask you all what you think.... see if I'm right out to lunch.

So what do you all think?
Reply With Quote
Murf
Dogsey Veteran
Murf is offline  
Location: herts uk
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 9,210
Male 
 
31-05-2011, 09:41 AM
Nature nurture ..
Reply With Quote
Krusewalker
Dogsey Veteran
Krusewalker is offline  
Location: dullsville
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,241
Male 
 
31-05-2011, 09:52 AM
dogs could possibly have the equivalent of human brain disorders, like autism or all the others i cant recall the names of at the moment.

that would cause aggression from birth
Reply With Quote
plantman
Dogsey Junior
plantman is offline  
Location: Midlands UK
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 53
Male 
 
31-05-2011, 09:53 AM
No different to any other animal really, some breeds are more aggressive than others, but even from the same litter that can differ. Siblings, whether canine, feline or human can be totally opposed in nature with one being dominant and aggressive whilst another can be submissive. The best that we can do is train aggression out of the individual as far as possible.
Reply With Quote
Sara
Dogsey Veteran
Sara is offline  
Location: Red Deer, AB, Canada
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,817
Female 
 
31-05-2011, 10:00 AM
Originally Posted by Krusewalker View Post
dogs could possibly have the equivalent of human brain disorders, like autism or all the others i cant recall the names of at the moment.

that would cause aggression from birth
Yes, I believe that also, but wouldn't it cause ather types of aggression as well, not just DA? That's my point. She stated that dogs aren't born human aggressive, just DA... which makes no sense to me, and does not help her stance. She says that the reason she believes dogs are born DA and not aggressive to humans is that dogs can always be rehabbed with humans. I think DA is harder to rehab because you cant tell the other dog how to act, and to completely ignore the other dog, to not move fast, and to not look at the dog being rehabbed... she never answered that point, just ignored it and went for something else I said...
Reply With Quote
Tassle
Dogsey Veteran
Tassle is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,065
Female 
 
31-05-2011, 10:17 AM
Didn't they prove genetic aggression (Silver fox experiment).

However, there are so many different 'reasons' for aggression I do not think you can say all aggression is genetic, that being said, possibly there still has to be some genetic predisposition for aggression.

Some dogs will cope with multiple attacks and have no reaction, others will end up reacting in an aggressive way.

I guess it also first helps to define what you class as aggression.

Just musings.
Reply With Quote
Tupacs2legs
Dogsey Veteran
Tupacs2legs is offline  
Location: london.uk
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 8,012
Female 
 
31-05-2011, 10:24 AM
is DA always a problem? i mean isnt it only to the owner?

some dogs are naturally that way but i feel that any dog that has a grumble at another dog is classed as da.
Reply With Quote
inkliveeva
Dogsey Veteran
inkliveeva is offline  
Location: Stirlingshire
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,203
Female 
 
31-05-2011, 10:28 AM
When I got Toro from her breeder at 8 weeks old, the breeder said shes the fighter in the litter, if I'd rather not have her she'd totally understand, I'd never had a bull breed before, and I do admit in the very beginning I had to keep reminding myself she was JUST a dog, afterall she was 8 weeks old, I should be able to teach her rights and wrongs, the good thing was she was being brought up with 2 other big dogs, more than capable of putting her in her place when she needed it and she did on a lot of occasions, she knew exactly where to bite to hurt the boys !
She has never shown agression towards other dogs on walks, but I know the potential is there, I know how to read her, if a dog comes to her face to face, she will stand ridgid tail poker straight head slightly bowed ears pricked straight ,leaving her in this scenario is only spelling trouble it is not play, if the other dog moves first she thinks its a fight.
Its taken 3 1/2 yrs to finally realise why shes like this, Inka pins her if shes not playing with a ball and shes learned if shes not got a ball and another dogs there she thinks its gonna pin her so she gets in first, if anyone has any other opinion on possible causes of her behaviour with the other dogs face to face, please feel free to analyse and comment, I'm always happy to listen and learn.
If I were to push her away, she would go straight in scream growling and basically looking like she was bred to fight, I have to be quiet, lift her by the harness, face her in the other direction and throw a ball, then shes off ball fetching and totally focused on the ball even if the other dog is still there running around with us.
Born dog agressive I think from having Toro possibly yes, but I'm now gonna go ask her breeder how she thought she was a fighter !!
Reply With Quote
smokeybear
Dogsey Veteran
smokeybear is offline  
Location: Wiltshire UK
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 14,404
Female 
 
31-05-2011, 10:40 AM
Originally Posted by Sara'n'Scout View Post
On another dog forum I'm on, we're discussing whether or not dogs who are DA are born that way. The OP has posted, since she cant rehab her DA dog (she's done amazing things with him so far, but he'll never be normal), that some dogs must be born hardwired for DA, as in there's something wrong with their brains. She believes that Cesar has brainwashed people into believeing that all DA is the fault of owners... which I dont agree with either. But I dont believe that she's right either.

IF she is right that some dogs are born DA, with no symptoms of aggression to anything else, I would think that it's a very, VERY small number of dogs.

I truly believe that DA is triggered. A dog may be born prone to it, but something triggers it (be it something we do, or something another dog does, or a combo). If a dog was born with something wrong with it's brain that causes DA, wouldn't that dog also be aggressive towards people and other animals?

I told her I'd be doing this, and I also told her that I'd do more research, and would be willing to conceed a point if I felt it valid, but so far, she hasn't changed my mind. She is considering it a personality in and of itself, such as a dog being born shy...

I've argued my points, which she replies to only certain points and takes my points out of context and seems to not be getting what I'm saying at all, though others understand my theories, points and observations quite well, so I thought I'd ask you all what you think.... see if I'm right out to lunch.

So what do you all think?
Most dogs used to be bred to fulfil a function. They were genetically engineered by us to occupy the roles we wished them to take:

Herder
Flock Guardian
Hunter
Pointer
Retriever
Protection
Ratter
Earth Dogs

Etc etc and, unfortunately fighting dogs.

We selected the “gamest” specimens and bred them in order that we could entertain ourselves with the sport of dog fighting.

Why are some dogs more predisposed to being (insert relevant behaviour) than others, because we have bred some things IN and some things OUT.

Beagles, Foxhounds, Bloodhounds etc are famous for being NOT DA. Why? Because they were bred to live in packs so harmony was and is essential. This is not an accident and soleley a product of nurture, but selection.

Dogs that are bred to fight are a product of both natural and human selection. Dogs that survive pass on their genes (for fighting) to the next generation.

There is a developmental environment factor as well of course which will affect how those genetic factors are expressed and if they are actively encouraged or not.

You can “breed” shy dogs by not socialising them, keeping them in sterile environments etc. The same is true for DA dogs.

Included in the developmental environment factor will be the reactions of both people and dogs to the dog in question as these ALSO “teach” dogs to be people and/or dog aggressive.

We have discussed this on this forum before; ie fearful responses of people to a perceived aggressive breed. This is one reason I underline the importance of getting these breeds (GSD, Dobe, Rott etc) out on the floor ASAP in controlled situations so that they do not learn (and dogs learn 24/7) inappropriate responses through no fault of their own.

As Coppinger says, can you train the dog not to be aggressive once it has learned to be? Probably not satisfactorily.

What is or is not deemed "satisfactory" will depend on the individual and context of course

Coppinger also states that we do not have good ethological definitions of behaviours such as aggression. Is it a unitary behaviour starting in one centre of the brain? We do not know.

Of course some dogs with good genes can overcome poor developmental environments ie the shy dog can blossom, the fighting dog be a good citizen however…………

IMHO you have to remember what the “default” setting is for that dog and, in times of stress, that a dog will revert to the behaviour which was successful in its first expression combined with its genetic response.

So it is not a GIVEN that ANY dog in the right environment will be “fine” neither is the converse true.

The other thing to remember is that the dog may be mentally unstable and just not be “wired up” right, after all we accept this occurs in people, so why should dogs be any different?

We know that dogs that are dog aggressive are not, ipso facto aggressive to people and vice versa. IMHO this is not solely due to particular "triggers"

There are for example certain breeds which are more prone to kill and eat their offspring but they are often fine with people.

It could be argued that birth was the trigger for this, or that the birth itself triggered an abnormal response in the brain which then expressed itself in the cannibalism.

One of the key issues I have with the "there is no such thing as a bad dog" brigade is that puts an intolerable level (IMHO) of guilt on to some dog owners.

I know I have seen dogs (and owned one) that did not have anything that you could put your finger on in terms of genetics or environment that you could say "caused" their behaviour; they were just, for want of a better expression, unpredictably dangerous and no amount of behaviour modification could SATISFACTORILY make that dog safe; some of these were fine with dogs, some with people but in those cases you could not say eg "dog like this because it had bad experience with dog/people" to put it simplistically.
Reply With Quote
Sara
Dogsey Veteran
Sara is offline  
Location: Red Deer, AB, Canada
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,817
Female 
 
31-05-2011, 12:14 PM
Originally Posted by smokeybear View Post
Most dogs used to be bred to fulfil a function. They were genetically engineered by us to occupy the roles we wished them to take:

Herder
Flock Guardian
Hunter
Pointer
Retriever
Protection
Ratter
Earth Dogs

Etc etc and, unfortunately fighting dogs.

We selected the “gamest” specimens and bred them in order that we could entertain ourselves with the sport of dog fighting.

Why are some dogs more predisposed to being (insert relevant behaviour) than others, because we have bred some things IN and some things OUT.

Beagles, Foxhounds, Bloodhounds etc are famous for being NOT DA. Why? Because they were bred to live in packs so harmony was and is essential. This is not an accident and soleley a product of nurture, but selection.

Dogs that are bred to fight are a product of both natural and human selection. Dogs that survive pass on their genes (for fighting) to the next generation.

There is a developmental environment factor as well of course which will affect how those genetic factors are expressed and if they are actively encouraged or not.

You can “breed” shy dogs by not socialising them, keeping them in sterile environments etc. The same is true for DA dogs.

Included in the developmental environment factor will be the reactions of both people and dogs to the dog in question as these ALSO “teach” dogs to be people and/or dog aggressive.

We have discussed this on this forum before; ie fearful responses of people to a perceived aggressive breed. This is one reason I underline the importance of getting these breeds (GSD, Dobe, Rott etc) out on the floor ASAP in controlled situations so that they do not learn (and dogs learn 24/7) inappropriate responses through no fault of their own.

As Coppinger says, can you train the dog not to be aggressive once it has learned to be? Probably not satisfactorily.

What is or is not deemed "satisfactory" will depend on the individual and context of course

Coppinger also states that we do not have good ethological definitions of behaviours such as aggression. Is it a unitary behaviour starting in one centre of the brain? We do not know.

Of course some dogs with good genes can overcome poor developmental environments ie the shy dog can blossom, the fighting dog be a good citizen however…………

IMHO you have to remember what the “default” setting is for that dog and, in times of stress, that a dog will revert to the behaviour which was successful in its first expression combined with its genetic response.

So it is not a GIVEN that ANY dog in the right environment will be “fine” neither is the converse true.

The other thing to remember is that the dog may be mentally unstable and just not be “wired up” right, after all we accept this occurs in people, so why should dogs be any different?

We know that dogs that are dog aggressive are not, ipso facto aggressive to people and vice versa. IMHO this is not solely due to particular "triggers"

There are for example certain breeds which are more prone to kill and eat their offspring but they are often fine with people.

It could be argued that birth was the trigger for this, or that the birth itself triggered an abnormal response in the brain which then expressed itself in the cannibalism.

One of the key issues I have with the "there is no such thing as a bad dog" brigade is that puts an intolerable level (IMHO) of guilt on to some dog owners.

I know I have seen dogs (and owned one) that did not have anything that you could put your finger on in terms of genetics or environment that you could say "caused" their behaviour; they were just, for want of a better expression, unpredictably dangerous and no amount of behaviour modification could SATISFACTORILY make that dog safe; some of these were fine with dogs, some with people but in those cases you could not say eg "dog like this because it had bad experience with dog/people" to put it simplistically.
GREAT POST THANK YOU! I was hoping you'd see this this topic is right up your alley! and you've made some great points!

So in the case of a Border Collie bred and raised in a Puppy Mill until he was 1.5 years old, that was horribly aggressive to people, children, dogs and cats, but has been successfully rehabbed with everything but dogs, would you consider that that dog "hardwired" to be DA, that he was "born that way" and no amount of training will fix him? This is, BTW, the poster on the other forum's basis for her theories, and her own dog.

I do believe that some dogs are born mentally unsound, that sometimes they cannot be helped. I've actually seen a dog like that. But do you believe that there are thousands and thousands of mentally unstable DA dogs, that are only DA and will never be rehabbed?

I honestly dont believe that, and that's what the poster is spouting.

IF there are dogs that are born DA, and only DA, with no other aggresson, and not triggered in any way, they will be a VERY small minority of DA dogs. Wouldn't you think?

And yes, there are certainly breeds and individules born prone to DA, but there needs to be a trigger to make it come out, be it lack of socialization, an attack, fear, an untimely correction... etc. but these dogs are not born DA, imo, they are "made" DA.
Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 > Last »


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 


© Copyright 2016, Dogsey   Contact Us - Dogsey - Top Contact us | Archive | Privacy | Terms of use | Top