Why is animal aggression such a bad thing?

It is a bad thing when it is YOUR cat or dog that is getting mauled by a pit bull. Another problem with pit bulls is that they will often stop at nothing to attack their target. They will jump over, dig under or rip apart fences to attack the animal on the other side. When they are in attack or "kill" mode they do not listen or respond to anyone. i have heard of pit bulls that were stabbed and beaten with hammers and still they continued to attack, seemingly impervious to pain.

Some animal aggressive breeds such as Jack Russells are still used for hunting squirrels. If a breed is still performing the task it was bred for it must continue to be bred for that trait. Since dog fighting is illegal in most of the country, it seems it their dog fighting traits should be eliminated as well.

edit: It is sad when a squirrel or rabbit is killed but it is worse when that cat or dog belonged to someone and was part of someone's family. Pit bulls do seem to be more likely to kill a beloved pet.

Chihuahuas and Dachshunds scored higher than average for aggression directed to both humans and dogs, putting them towards the top of the list.

Akitas and Pit Bull Terriers, which have “bad boy” reputations, mostly scored high for dog-directed aggression. When they did injure humans, however, the injuries tended to be more severe than those inflicted by the scrappy, smaller dogs.

“Small size very likely plays a large role in the development of fear-based aggression among some breeds,” Duffy explained. “Smaller dogs may feel more threatened by other dogs and people — a perception that may be well founded.”

Other breeds with a greater tendency to bite humans included Jack Russell Terriers, Australian Cattle Dogs, American Cocker Spaniels and Beagles.

On the “least aggressive” end of the spectrum were Basset Hounds, Golden Retrievers, Labrador Retrievers, Siberian Huskies, Bernese Mountain Dogs, Brittany Spaniels, Greyhounds and Whippets. Interestingly enough, several of these dogs also rated low for “watchdog behavior” and “territorial defense” behaviors, suggesting that they tend to be lovable family pets, but are less vigilant watchdogs than Chihuahuas and Dachshunds. (Discovery Channel)

Below is a list showing how dogs from the online sample fared. The percentages in the middle four columns refer to the “snaps, bites or attempts to bite” responses. The last 2 columns are the averages, average of all and average of aggression against people. I ranked this chart based on the human aggression percentages but you can easily see the ranking based on the overall averages.

Breed # of Dogs Human – Stranger Owners Other Dogs Dog Rivalry Ave All Ave People

Dachshund 68 21% 6% 18% 7% 10% 14%

Chihuahua 56 16% 5% 18% 4% 9% 11%

Beagle 63 8% 8% 10% 6% 6% 8%

Jack Russell Terrier 78 8% 4% 22% 9% 9% 6%

Australian Cattle Dog 136 10% 1% 21% 4% 7% 6%

Cocker Spaniel 107 5% 6% 7% 4% 4% 6%

Border Collie 163 8% 2% 13% 4% 5% 5%

Pit Bull 132 7% 2% 22% 8% 8% 5%

Great Dane 53 6% 2% 25% 6% 8% 4%

English Springer Spaniel 57 4% 4% 18% 7% 7% 4%

Shetland Sheepdog 57 4% 4% 4% 4% 3% 4%

Airedale Terrier 66 5% 2% 9% 3% 4% 4%

Bichon Frise 65 5% 2% 5% 3% 3% 4%

Doberman Pinscher 144 6% 1% 11% 3% 4% 4%

Rottweiler 210 5% 1% 8% 1% 3% 3%

Boxer 70 6% 0% 16% 4% 5% 3%

German Shepherd 292 4% 2% 16% 4% 5% 3%

Soft Coated Wheaten Terrier 216 4% 2% 16% 4% 5% 3%

Akita 99 3% 3% 1% 5% 2% 3%

Collie 132 2% 2% 7% 2% 3% 2%

Bernese Mntn Dog 67 1% 3% 4% 1% 2% 2%

Mastiff (English) 126 2% 1% 6% 4% 3% 2%

Portuguese Water Dog 75 3% 0% 7% 3% 3% 2%

Havanese 73 3% 0% 4% 1% 2% 2%

Golden Retriever 181 1% 1% 7% 2% 2% 1%

Siberian Husky 54 0% 2% 6% 2% 2% 1%

Brittany Spaniel 66 0% 2% 5% 2% 2% 1%

Whippet 59 0% 2% 3% 2% 1% 1%

Greyhound 62 2% 0% 2% 0% 1% 1%

Poodle 169 1% 0% 8% 1% 2% 1%

Rhodesian Ridgeback 69 1% 0% 6% 1% 2% 1%

Labrador Retriever 349 1% 0% 2% 1% 1% 1%

One thing you will notice is that many of the breeds have a higher percentage of dog-dog aggression. For dogs, being territorial, this is not a great surprise. I would have to say the most important percentages are those that show aggression toward people; Humans/Stranger and Owners.

Now keep in mind that this information is to be used only as a reference and there are also contributing and genetic factors.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

If you can't read it, please go to the site. And as far as dog on dog aggression? My oldest Dachshund STARTED every single fight with my APBT.

My oldest Dachshund also killed my African Grey this past weekend. Had her for 25 years. At least he did it true to his nature: Break the neck.

So, whoever is boohooing about wittle squirrels and such? Grow the fck up.

It has become the norm at puppy socialization classes to condition owners to think that if they want a nice tempered and well mannered dog, they must thrust the puppy into social situations with an many strange dog as possible, which is contrary dog a dog’s natural instinct, and seek out the company of others of its species to play with.

In addition to denying genetics which sets the core temperament of a dog, so if you have a horribly tempered animal, no amount of socialisation would change what nature gave it, puppy classes can actually be counterproductive with a shy puppy, as if it is born predisposed to be wary of other dogs, being exposed to rough play may teach that dogs are something to fear and its owner will not protect it and if avoidance did not work, growl to make the scary dog back off.

People who purchase the American Pit Bull Terrier and failed to research the breed so the dominant characteristic, dog aggression, which begins to shape the way the breed at adolescence as the dog matures into an adult, comes as a nasty surprise, and the dog who played nicely with other dogs as a pup when it was comparatively a doddle to manage, suddenly becomes a dog that they cannot or do not want to handle.

In my opinion the answer to irresponsible dog breeding and ownership is not throw the breed standard out of the window and produce dogs that are no more than the breed in name only because it has been gutted like a fish, and its dominant characteristic, in the case of the APBT dog aggression which defines the breed.

Instead I advocate punishing the owner for having a dangerously uncontrolled dog which is not breed specific with a prison sentence, not slap on the wrist, as it needs to be an effective deterrent, using the dog as a weapon and nurturing wary/aggressive behavior and failing to the interaction between children and dogs.

In a nutshell there will always be substandard bred powerful breeds sold cheap to anyone with cash in their wallet [supply and demand], so instead of ruining a breed [breed against function and you lose the breed], legislation should address poor dog ownership and those who are passionate about the APBT should be able to purchase a quality representative of the breed, bred to the original type.

Animal aggression is NOT a bad thing IF the owner understands three things:

1. What animal aggression is,

2. How to deal with it,

3. More importantly, training will only help them control the dog, but NEVER remove over 100 years of SELECTIVE breeding, to breed that trait into the breed. Peroid!

Too many owners are delusional and think their dog is such a sweetheart and wear rose colored glasses when it comes to their dog. Instead, they need to understand what it is exactly and learn how to deal with the trait or find another breed to coddle. Then they are shocked when their cutie pie attacks another dog and say, “But he has never acted this way before.”

One of my APBT’s is very dog aggressive and I never put him in a situation that I know there could be a potential problem; I would be setting him up to fail. That is part of knowing the breed, your dog and being a responsible owner.

I personally have never seen animal aggression as a flaw, just something to work around and consider when choosing a dog. Have animals? Want an animal-aggressive breed? Reconsider.

Have an animal aggressive breed like a husky or pit bull? Keep it on a leash, pal, your dog eats my cats and you and I will be sharing more than words over it.

I don't blame the dog, though. Dogs are dogs. I can't hold an animal with the mental capacity of, at most, a 3 year old accountable for killing a horse because somewhere along the line somebody failed to keep the dog contained.

It's a dog, not some malicious, plotting, scheming, evil person. Dogs are dogs. Animal aggression does not correlate to human aggression.

On the other side of the argument you do have to take into consideration people on the receiving end of an animal-aggressive dog's antics. Pit bulls have killed HORSES for sh*t's sake, that's not exactly "aw shucks, your dog killed my horse, whaddaya say you replace it?" Horses are not only expensive to replace, but trained or working horses can cost a small fortune, not to mention we bond with them as deeply as we bond with our dogs. You have to understand that when a dog kills somebody's pet, an animal they consider part of the family, they are well within their rights to be upset.

Since it's commonplace for dogs of any breed to kill other animals, some breeds obviously have a higher propensity than others, it's understandable that people use animal aggression as ammunition against certain breeds. Pit bulls are animal aggressive, yes, and this is almost always the aggression I hear cited when somebody is talking about their dislike of the breed. However, it's such a commonplace problem and so many people have so abysmally failed at the most basic aspect of dog ownership--KEEP IT FENCED IDIOT--that the concerns people have are very valid. While it's a shame they blame the dog, make it out to be some evil, ruthless, scheming, criminally insane killer, it's understandable that people do get upset. It would be preferable, in my opinion, if the blame were shifted where it ought to be--squarely on the shoulders of irresponsible owners.

In pits animal aggression is such a "flaw" because it's ammunition for simpletons to use against the breed because their small minds cannot comprehend why blanket bans don't work.

It's a bad thing because so many owners of dog-aggressive or potential dog-aggressive dogs can't seem to grasp the whole "keep it away from other dogs, end of discussion!!" part.

It's not a bad thing that my Maine Coons will kill any small prey animal they can get their paws on, but it would have been a bad thing if I let them get their paws on Happy the Hamster we were petsitting while his family went on vacation. It's all a matter of perspective and the situation in question.

And again, it's not a bad thing that my dog is territorial and guards. She was bred for herding and guarding, but it is a bad thing if she shreds the postman, which is why I put a lot of effort into training her that postmen are not to be shredded or even just intimidated.

Basically it's down to people being responsible dog owners.

It depends on the dog. Yes, certain breeds are more prone to aggression than others, but it still depends on each individual dog.

I have had many pit bulls and they have all loved playing with other dogs, even puppies. Obviously a lot of dogs don't like every other dog, but in general, they did well. Pit bulls can be nice to other dogs. I take my pit bulls to the dog park. They love it and have never gotten into any kind of fight

"So why in PITS is it such a flaw?" Because the average person doesn't know how to deal with such animals.

Personally to me its not a flaw. In this breed or hell even my own breed, the Catahoula. My breed is AA because it was bred for task of taking down wild hogs. They can also be DA even around dogs they live with. I know that and it doesn't hinder me from wanting this breed and I'm already prepared to handle whatever may come up.

The real issue isn't the breed. Its people's inability to DEAL WITH the traits of the breed in a proper manner. My uncle bred and raised APBT. ALL of his dogs knew what was and wasn't tolerated. They were trained to ignore dogs outside of the home and knew what wouldn't fly in regards to their kennel mates.

Hell look at some of the questions we get from people wondering why their dog(terrier hound etc) is ok with the other animals they have(often cats) but not strays or wild critters?

Hell my own dogs - Cockers and a Rott. Didn't give two squirts about any small animal that was in our home as a guest. Stray cats that came into the yard, field mice, sand lizards, bird etc?Persona non f'n grata. My one cousin's Sibe? Wasn't a smart stray cat in their neighborhood that would set one paw on their side of the fence.

Did that bother any of us? No because if we caught them in the process all of these dogs could be called off their prey. Now how many AVERAGE pit owners do you think have their dogs trained that well?

At the end of some people don't get why their dog can't be "Friends" with every other dog in the world. Its also the judgement of OTHERS that comes into play. If you don't allow your dog to be "friends" with theirs or if your animal is DA then there is obviously something wrong with you for having such an animal or allowing that to happen.

If someone wants a dog who's gonna love everyone and everything then they need to look at other breeds.

Because we don't live in the dark ages, we are civilized, and people who choose to own killer dogs (dogs that are actually bred and trained for that) pose an unacceptable risk to the rest of us. Do you expect me to live beside you and trust that YOU can manage your dog? Why?

Its no wonder people carry guns. I would too.

How can you possibly compare a dog killing a squirrel to a dog ripping apart another person's dog or cat?

And btw, in provincial and national parks in Canada (and I believe in the US) dogs cannot kill ANY wildlife. So, this idea that nature is expendable and people can get a dog to kill because 100 years ago that is what we did....WHERE DO YOU LIVE? I would like to understand what part of the planet operates with these rules so that I can in future, make note, and if at all possible avoid visiting it.

My Dobermans are and have been very animal aggressive - but from day one they are trained and taught to NEVER bite another dog. They were heavily stabilized in training to work around other males and females in heat or not. And even when fights broke out, the dogs never killed and the wounds were not life-threatening. These dogs simply are not "game bred" to be doggie terminators. They STOP. However, according to what people of PB post here, that is the raison d-etre for owning this breed.

Do you ever wonder what other non-dog owning people think when they read these threads? (link below) Do you think you are doing the dog owning public and PB a service by stating bathtubs are a greater risk to the general public than dangerous dogs?

If you met a family that had a child mauled by a PB, would you tell them to buck up soldier, and stop wasting our taxpayer dollars whining about it. I mean it could have been scrubbing bubbles that got them, thank god it was only a dog - and heck it doesn't happen very often, so get over it.

For what it's worth, I was not a BSL advocate for PB until I joined YA and read the many responses posted from people here on the breed. Congratulations! You've convinced me.

****************************

You know, this is the 3rd post by UHavetoBe that I have read that is BANG ON. and I agree with her 200% Whether we agree why its done, the fact remains, people are now mobile with their dogs and they are told by vets and trainers to take them everywhere.

They didn't do that 100 years ago - or 50 years ago. The world has CHANGED. People must ADAPT. Stop living in the freaking past. This nonsense that a dog's origin must be maintained at all costs is frankly sick and deranged thinking. We used to burn women at the stake because we believed they were witches - do you advocate we do that now too ?

I have to believe you write these things because you are very young, and have no life experience, nor have you suffered horrific loss. I want to believe this rather than consider the alternatives.

Whatever the reason, your posts demonstrate you have no empathy for those that have.

(

Maybe I'm over-thinking it and you are just trolling)

**********************************

Dogs do not have to be friends. But in urban societies - people walk dogs on the street. Because there NO WHERE ELSE TO GO. So, you invariably run into other people walking their dog on the street.

People claim they can control their dogs. They DON'T. And while an owner of a JRT can provoke and annoy - it doesn't kill. Socialization of dogs within your community is what these stupid Temp Tests done by the AKC are for. Its what training is about.

Living on big farms in rural areas where your dog can run for acres and never see a person or another dog may be practical for some of you - but its hardly the norm. What do you think people do living in Townhouses? Have you ever been to Manhatten?

You people all claim to support reputable breeders, and be informed and be responsible dog owners. I keep wondering what train common sense left on when I read some of these posts.

Why is it so bad?

Because the average pet owner is not smart enough or responsible enough to own or manage this kind of dog.

Because the average pet owner thinks if they just love it to death it will change its genetic hardwiring.

Because the average pet owner thinks its ok to take a dog like this out in the public, even to dog parks.

That is why it is so bad.

We do NOT need a breed in todays society whos soul purpose was to attack and kill other dogs.

Unfortunately the common belief with Pit Bulls - "its all how you raise them" propoganda puts other peoples pets at risk.

I have seen it myself with dozens of dogs who have come through our classes where the well meaning folks who have them- and have had them since a puppy- are SHOCKED their dog is dog aggressive. We have one in class right now, the girl was sold the dog by a "rescue" as a Mastiff mix. He is clearly a Pit Bull, which enough people have told her she believes it. Well he is getting close to that magic age of 2 where we really see the behavior kick in, and I am seeing each week him getting more and more interested in the dogs around him- and starting to light up at them as well.

You rambled on about JRT's, well the fact of the matter is vet clinics are not filled up with dead and dying dogs and cats due to JRT''s. The fact of the manner is any large, dog/animal aggressive dog of any breed is a danger in the hands of the average pet owner.

This forum gives you an idea of the skill and knowledge of the average pet owner, and that clearly shows that they should never own a dog like this.

This goes for any large dog aggressive dog of any breed.

After Pit Bulls, the most common dogs we see with dog aggression issues are GSD's and Labradors, and now Goldens-which is no surprise as all these breeds are highly popular and bred

by unscrupulous people who are just out to make a buck.

ADD: Rayvens response made me want to add this-

The common MYTH that dogs have to be "socialized" at all costs and no matter what. Average pet owner thinks that it will a) change the dog and b) that socializing is more important and that dog aggressive Fido has to still go to the dog park.

How in the world did this become such a prevelant thought????

I am thinking of my childhood dogs(that would be in the 60's), we sure as heck did not take them anywhere, not as puppies and not as adults (except to the vet). I would walk them in the neighborhood when I was old enough and guess what,

they were fine with all people and other animals.

It's more serious of a problem in pits because pits have so much more destructive capability.

also, it is flawed thinking to think that the 'wild canine pack' state is ideal or appropriate for todays domestic dogs.

todays domestic dogs are the product of hundreds of generations of having been engineered to be compatiable with the human household. the wolf/wild state is not the ideal for them - totally different animals.