I didn't know how widespread bite training IS in the U.S.! - Page 3

"I have watched enough highly trained military, police and personal protection trained dogs fail to out, or attack before given the command to attack, that it is obvious. How many schutzhund titles dogs bite before being commanded too, or fail to out? Plenty. How many get a perfect score on obedience? On the out?" (doright) In a schutzhund trial if a dog were to bite when he wasn't supposed to it would be disqualified. Same thing applies on the "out". If they don't "out" they get disqualified. There are many dogs that score in the 90s and higher routinely in the obedience portion of a schutzhund trial. So, this is something that gets dealt with really quickly in training. "You see, it is not the Schutzhund trained GSD's that I and others are saying are the problem. It is the people who breed only from dogs that have a propensity for "good" biting, and for the "hardass" dogs(word borrowed from GARD). When you keep breeding for a specific trait, then you get that trait eventually, more often and more strong in the breed. It is the "breeding" for this that is the problem, with public perception" (doright) A hard dog is one who can handle corrections, it has nothing to do with anything else. I don't know anyone who breeds only from dogs that have a propensity for "good" biting, maybe you got this idea from your experience with pitbulls, but really, you are way off base here. A "good" dog is one with a clear head and a calm full bite, nothing more. "The pure-bred dogs most often involved are German shepherds and Chow chows." I read that as the NUMBER ONE pure bred dog involved in dog bites is the GSD" (doright) This includes all GSDs, dogs bred for schutzhund are not specified. Think about it, the overwhelming majority of GSDs in this country are not german working or show lines, they are from AKC lines. Schutzhund is really pretty obscure in this country, so there is just no way you can derive dogs bred for sport are the ones doing the biting of any innocents from the statistics. PLUS as has already been pointed out, dogs in law enforcement who bite in the course of their job are also included in this statistic. I would suggest you go out & spend some time with a schutzhund club. Become aquainted with the sport and the dogs on a first hand basis. I think if you were to do this, many of your fears would be put to rest.

yet another reason that akc registration means absolutely nada... statistically speaking there is a difference between mean, median, and average. All statisticians use ALL 3 of these stats to provide actually ACCURATE data. i would put money on the fact that schh trained dogs if added into the statistical evidence would seriously lower the bite ratio for gsd.... but we dont care about that right? precisely why people believe ignorance.

The one thing NONE of these statistics even bother to state, which ticks me off, is...the dogs they say have the highest number of incidents of REPORTED bites are....(drum roll please) the dogs that have the potential to do the most damage. Hospitals HAVE to report dog bites. If I am bitten by a min pin, chances are I am not receiving a lot of damage (could depend on the bite site), however, if I am bitten by a GSD, a chow, or any bully breed, these are the dogs that will most likey cause me to have need to go to the hospital. Additionally, look at the number of GSD bred and in homes...a very very popular dog. If you fill a jar with 1000 green M&Ms and add 50 brown M&Ms, the chances are a lot higher that you will pull out a green M&M when you reach in.

yet another reason that akc registration means absolutely nada... statistically speaking there is a difference between mean, median, and average. All statisticians use ALL 3 of these stats to provide actually ACCURATE data. i would put money on the fact that schh trained dogs if added into the statistical evidence would seriously lower the bite ratio for gsd.... but we dont care about that right? precisely why people believe ignorance.

My kids grew up with German Shepherd Dogs, not a problem, It was the English Springer Spaniel who was demon possessed. {i wonder if she carried one gene for rage as her eyes would glaze over under pressure and she would start a gnashing snapping frenzy) - We were always very careful with her and she was put up when other children came over.

I will give you that I do not believe that the GSD of the quality that us on this forum have, are the problem. But I do believe that the "public perception" of the GSD is one of a highly dangerous and untrustworthy breed, which may "snap" at any given moment, and because of its size and background, can cause serious damage. More than a cocker spaniel. Many people actualy call the GSD the "police dog" from habit. Again, this is a public perception problem. I could go on about how the breeds problems have nothing to do with schutzhund titles, but instead, come from the breeding mentality of the traits associated with schutzhund type training. I guess I am not getting my point across, so I will try one more time. The traits admired in dogs that are bred, raised and purchased for bite sports, is what many a breeder strives for with this breed. This also includes the similar traits for military and police work. I believe that it is wrong, and a detriment to the breed as a whole, for just any old owner of some titled dogs, to be breeding for these qualities. How many people have never actually titled a dog themselves but buy titled dogs, pregnant or otherwise, to stud and breed with? Too many. How many breeders of titled dogs (thereby assuming that it is more qualified to be bred over my Fido solely because of the title), are doing more disservice to the breed than I would be doing if I bred Fido, who has proven himself as a good family companion? A breeder of proven family companion GSD's does more service for the public perception of the breed, than a breeder of bite trained dogs does for the public perception of the breed. IMO. The GSD is the #1 biter of the pure bred dogs according to the web site sited above, for a reason. The statistic that most dog bites are by mixed breeds could probably be delved into further, albeit that it would be a monumental task, to ascertain if that carries over to the percentage of these mixed breed mutts that are mixed with GSD's. At this point, it would only be an educated assumption that since the GSD is the #1 biter of the pure breds, that the mixes containing a preponderance of GSD blood in them, would be the higher percentage biters of the mixed breeds. But, one could not prove that theory, but it does make since when you think about the evidence we do have. Yes, small dog bites will not get reported nearly as often as large dog bites. No doubt about it. But keep in mind from your own personal knowledge, how many times do owners of GSD's (or other large breed and very capable of inflicting serious injury breeds) bite you or family members, and do not get reported. No one wants their beloved dog, or expensive and/or highly trained (which means lots of money and time invested) dog, to go down with the authorities as "dangerous". No one wants to have to pay higher insurance rates or go on record as having been "warned" about their trained dog, because if the dog does make a mistake in the future, and you had been warned in the past, a BIG loser in civil court. The GSD needs to be softened in the area of biting, and should be more directed and bred for, in the other areas whereupon it works nicely, for the PUBLIC PERCEPTION to soften. Otherwise the breed as a whole is going to be more insurance costly, more shunned and banned, and more feared by the average person. IMO. I could be wrong, as any human can be wrong. Even you. Have we beat this dead horse enough. I really do not believe I am going to convince anyone and I also do not believe that you (the opponents of my views) are going to sway anyone, either way. Twenty years from now, we will know which was more on track. Either the GSD will be viewed with much more distrust than now, or it will not be. I hope that you are right, but I believe I am.

So, then you're saying that all of these mixed breeds were bred to bite and be hardasses? So you're saying all the German Shepherd Bites are from dogs bred to bite as a form of obedience instead of biting because they are NOT controlled? So you're saying, in America, the American bred Shepherds that are NOT trained to bite are NEVER biters? Even though they are the majority of GSD's in this country? Are you saying that the miniscule number of dogs in this country trained to prove themselves breedworthy thru Sch OB are the biters? Are you saying that the mixed breed dogs that do the majority of the biting were ALSO bred to bite? Yeah. That is what you convey anytime the subject comes up. Dogs wouldn't bite on their own. The problem is using obedience to teach a dog NOT bite from impulse but only with permission. Understanding and bridling a dog's natural impulses so the handler becomes the judge of when they may be used instead of the dog deciding is the problem? A dog would never bite a human unless "trained through the taboo" and taught to bite humans. 4.7 MILLION people would say you're wrong. Let's face it. This is your pet theory of the month. You have (as usual)no basis in fact for saying it's the absolute minority of of GSDs in the U.S. who were bred to the SV requirements which are doing the biting. None. Nada. Zilch. Then you get bent out of shape when people won't just take your word on it and see your baseless opinion as inevitable fact.

Okay, whatever "the sky is falling, the breed is going to hell & dudley thinks he's up for the job of saving it. He's going to breed petstock from german lines and is looking for validation. Go american lines, dudley, they are the GSDs in poodle suits you are looking for. The rest of us will limp along despite your disaproval.

"You see, it is not the Schutzhund trained GSD's that I and others are saying are the problem. It is the people who breed only from dogs that have a propensity for "good" biting, and for the "hardass" dogs(word borrowed from GARD). When you keep breeding for a specific trait, then you get that trait eventually, more often and more strong in the breed. It is the "breeding" for this that is the problem, with public perception." Quote from Diddles himself often So people are breeding GSD's that bite randomly? This is what hardass means? I think you are twisting, stretching or are just confused Dudley. GARD happens to be Mr Safety first when it comes to dogs and would never put a dangerous dog on the streets or in someones hands that couldn't handle it. I can vouch he would put a dog down first before letting his emotions or $$$ get in the way. I'm fairly certain hardass would be better described as... a dog that was as tough as nails, didn't crumble under pressure, and isn't nervy enough to snap at just anybody walking by. A hard dog doesn't mean a ruthless terror of a dog, an indiscriminate biter, or a killing machine, he too must have control. Hard may just mean he can take a ton of pressure from his handler without falling apart. Nothing to do with biting at all. Just thought I'd throw my hat in so all us peas can join the same pod once again.

Sue she's trying to weasel into our pod again!! She just doesn't want to stay in that run down pod on the wrong side of the vine. I don't know. Maybe we should just let her move in. Hate to think of her being podless.