Can dogs really be bred for temperament?

DubVelo · 19-04-2014 5:00pm #1

I'm thinking of getting a dog when I have a chance and am trying to learn a bit more about them.
I was tempted to go for a rescue dog but some of the breeds I'm attracted to are maybe not beginner dogs and I'm a bit cautious about getting something I wouldn't be able to handle.

Anyway I was reading stuff about dogs being 'bred to be aggressive guard dogs' or 'bred to be pets' or 'bred to chase small animals'. Is there any truth in this or is it all about nurture over bred-in nature. At the end of the day what I need is a pet that's fine around the neighbourhood cats, children, strangers in the street etc. I'll probably want cats myself again in the future as well.

cruais · 19-04-2014 5:18pm

It's really down to how the owner rears them. Some of the "vicious" dogs such as staffs are absolute gentle dogs, while the more "cute" dogs such as shihtzus are yappy ankle biters.

andreac · 19-04-2014 5:19pm

cruais wrote: »

It's really down to how the owner rears them. Some of the "vicious" dogs such as staffs are absolute gentle dogs, while the more "cute" dogs such as shihtzus are yappy ankle biters.

Staffs vicious? Not vicious at all. Staffs are great dogs and have great temperaments.

DubVelo · 19-04-2014 5:21pm

Is a rescue Rottweiler or German Shepard just a stupid first dog?

I was kind of thinking of adopting a retired greyhound maybe instead but I'd worry about it being the cat-killer from hell?

Toulouse · 19-04-2014 5:56pm

I wouldn't say that those 3 breeds are stupid first time dogs. Yes, greyhounds are bred to chase but you do get some in rescue that will be cat friendly. I believe Pete the vet showed some photos on his Ireland-AM slot last week so it's not unheard of.

If you are thinking of going the rescue route, which I 100% think you should, then just be careful that you go with a good and reputable rescue. Typically this is one that will have their dogs in foster so you know what they are like with cats, kids, etc. They should also be able to provide any help with training that you might need and provide full rescue back-up in case you ever need it.

fatmammycat · 19-04-2014 6:00pm

It really depends on the dog. Personally I don't think GSDs are 1st time dogs for inexperienced owners. They're super intelligent, need quite a lot of exercise, mental stimulation and socialisation and can be very 'sharp', which is not a bad thing if you channel that energy into something positive. That's not to discount the breed if you have your heart set on one, but just do your research and be prepared for a lot of dog for you buck. I don't know much about Rotties, the two I know are lovely, but with experienced owners. Andrea here will set you right.
I will tell you that every single person I know that has rehomed a greyhound is WILD about them and they seem to be a delightful pets, although not always great with small animals such as cats. They appear to be liad back dogs with a pretty easy going personality and don't, as it turns out, need a vast amount of exercise. Ditto lurchers, who are just sweet hearts in my opinion.

Joeseph Balls · 19-04-2014 7:09pm

fatmammycat wrote: »

It really depends on the dog. Personally I don't think GSDs are 1st time dogs for inexperienced owners. They're super intelligent, need quite a lot of exercise, mental stimulation and socialisation and can be very 'sharp', which is not a bad thing if you channel that energy into something positive. That's not to discount the breed if you have your heart set on one, but just do your research and be prepared for a lot of dog for you buck. I don't know much about Rotties, the two I know are lovely, but with experienced owners. Andrea here will set you right.
I will tell you that every single person I know that has rehomed a greyhound is WILD about them and they seem to be a delightful pets, although not always great with small animals such as cats. They appear to be liad back dogs with a pretty easy going personality and don't, as it turns out, need a vast amount of exercise. Ditto lurchers, who are just sweet hearts in my opinion.

They sleep more than half the day:D Love their comfort

Pretzill · 19-04-2014 7:31pm

I'm of the (uneducated) opinion (just based on experience) the cross breeds are more easy going dogs than pure bred dogs of type - as in not all pure breds - I have had four collie x's and one pure bred from sheepdog stock - the others were and are laid back, easy going - she is highly focussed, single minded and has a tendency towards narkiness to other dogs - she needs loads of diverse playtime and exercise but is the best for chilling once all her high energy needs are met.

Many rescue dogs are cross breeds - I have one cuddled up on my lap at the mo - the most lovable little guy who settled into the family from day one - I know he's a BC cross but I have no idea what other breed made up this perfect little dog!

19-04-2014 8:18pm

Genetics affect dogs too. My Akita was brought on holidays with us to France/Spain as a puppy and around loads of people all the time growing up but is still very territorial and uncomfortable when people are in the house so I just tell him to go to his crate when people are over.. He's very well trained but that is one trait I just have to manage and deal with.

cruais · 19-04-2014 8:54pm

andreac wrote: »

Staffs vicious? Not vicious at all. Staffs are great dogs and have great temperaments.

That's what I was saying. My post meant that some "vicious" dogs (as in what people perceive to be vicious, judging on breed ignorance basically) are gems of dogs and the "cute" ones (as in people think small and cute = kid friendly), are little weapons.

My friend has a beautiful staff.

DubVelo · 19-04-2014 9:04pm

cruais wrote: »

That's what I was saying. My post meant that some "vicious" dogs (as in what people perceive to be vicious, judging on breed ignorance basically) are gems of dogs and the "cute" ones (as in people think small and cute = kid friendly), are little weapons.

My friend has a beautiful staff.

I'd rather be bit by a shihtzu though...

tk123 · 19-04-2014 9:26pm

DubVelo wrote: »

I'd rather be bit by a shihtzu though...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2529232/Im-happy-I-50th-year-Mother-four-lost-THREE-LIMBS-bitten-pet-Shih-Tzu-Buster-returns-home-Christmas.html

cruais · 19-04-2014 9:58pm

tk123 wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2529232/Im-happy-I-50th-year-Mother-four-lost-THREE-LIMBS-bitten-pet-Shih-Tzu-Buster-returns-home-Christmas.html

Proves my point

Cherry Blossom · 19-04-2014 11:51pm

cruais wrote: »

That's what I was saying. My post meant that some "vicious" dogs (as in what people perceive to be vicious, judging on breed ignorance basically) are gems of dogs and the "cute" ones (as in people think small and cute = kid friendly), are little weapons.

My friend has a beautiful staff.

The part of your post I have highlighted is 'breed ignorance' at it's finest. So it's ok for you to spout this nonsense but not others?

All dogs regardless regardless of breed or size are products of their owners and yes also their breeding and more importantly their breeder.

Cherry Blossom · 19-04-2014 11:55pm

cruais wrote: »

Proves my point

Did you even bother to read that article, she got septic shock as a result of a small nick she got by accident playing with the dog which she then let another dog lick. She hardly got mauled by a 'little weapon'

SingItOut · 20-04-2014 12:44am

DubVelo wrote: »

I'm thinking of getting a dog when I have a chance and am trying to learn a bit more about them.
I was tempted to go for a rescue dog but some of the breeds I'm attracted to are maybe not beginner dogs and I'm a bit cautious about getting something I wouldn't be able to handle.

Anyway I was reading stuff about dogs being 'bred to be aggressive guard dogs' or 'bred to be pets' or 'bred to chase small animals'. Is there any truth in this or is it all about nurture over bred-in nature. At the end of the day what I need is a pet that's fine around the neighbourhood cats, children, strangers in the street etc. I'll probably want cats myself again in the future as well.

There are plenty of puppies or elderly dogs in rescue centres who make perfect pets if you were unsure about getting a young adult. Whichever breed or cross breed you decide to go for make sure you research each breed as much as you can. I adopted a 6 month old collieXspringer from a rescue centre and she inherited both breed traits. She is a handful and needs a ton of exercise but is the sweetest dog who will go out of her way to say "hi" to every person and dog she meets on her walk.

When I worked in rescue the majority of the dogs in there were Labradors, lurchers, Staffies and German shepherds or crosses of these breeds. Many of the dogs who were at the centre, German shepherds and Rottweilers, were simply left into the centre because they "failed" as guard dogs, while this is the job they were Initially bred to do this doesn't mean they were cut out for it or had the personality for it, again it comes down to how their owners trained and treated them.

I am a huge advocate of jack Russell's as pets and first time pets, they get a bad reputation due to being in the wrong hands however my own jack Russell and the ones of friends or neighbours have never once showed an ounce of aggression. They can live harmoniously with cats but some can't. They are happy with two long walks or runs, some digging in the Garden and then taking over your bed at night

tk123 · 20-04-2014 12:59am

adrenalinjunkie wrote: »

Did you even bother to read that article, she got septic shock as a result of a small nick she got by accident playing with the dog which she then let another dog lick. She hardly got mauled by a 'little weapon'

+1 My point with that was that any bite can be dangerous no matter what breed it comes from not to fuel the argument that 'cute dogs are vicious'.
Certain breeds definitely have breed traits - that's what they were bred for after all so imo you need to work with it rather than think you can 'nurture' it away. Having 'big dogs' I'll be honest and say I'm not always a fan of smaller dogs but it's because of their lax owners not socialising their dogs and thinking it's fine 'because they're small'. There's plenty of big dogs who act the same because they were never socialised. I tend to avoid our park when there's going to be a lot of dogs there because half of the owners are so lax

cruais · 20-04-2014 11:21am

adrenalinjunkie wrote: »

The part of your post I have highlighted is 'breed ignorance' at it's finest. So it's ok for you to spout this nonsense but not others?

All dogs regardless regardless of breed or size are products of their owners and yes also their breeding and more importantly their breeder.

Maybe I'm not communicating very well here. My point of the post is that it doesn't matter what type of breed you acquire, it's how a dog is raised by its owner that 9/10 determines the dogs temper meant.

I have owned various breeds over the years, labs, collies and shihtzu. All were beautifully natured because of how we reared them.

I am talking about ignorant people who see the likes of a staff or pit bull and without knowing the dogs tempermeant, they make a ignorant assumption.

What they perceive to be cute and playful, in relation to small dogs is not always the case.

That is not my ignorant view at all. In fact quite the opposite. Hopefully my view has been explained a little better to you all.

DBB · 20-04-2014 12:23pm

cruais wrote: »

Maybe I'm not communicating very well here. My point of the post is that it doesn't matter what type of breed you acquire, it's how a dog is raised by its owner that 9/10 determines the dogs temper meant.

I have owned various breeds over the years, labs, collies and shihtzu. All were beautifully natured because of how we reared them.

How can you definitively say it's because of how you reared them? How can anyone possibly say that DNA has not played a huge role here? You simply can't!
I'm not sure that nature vs nurture argument has been answered, indeed maybe it can't ever be, but I can tell you that if you ask any behaviourist (qualified), they will tell you that nature/genetics plays a hugely bigger role than just 1/10. At this point in time, I would be more inclined to suggest that most behaviourists will tell you it's at least 50/50, and indeed may be even higher in favour of nature.
If it was as easy as nurture playing as much as 9/10ths of the role in temperament, it'd be hugely, hugely easier to "create" dogs of superlative temperament. Yet thousands of dogs who were extensively socialised, never abused, and medically healthy are seen by behaviourists every year, for nervousness, phobias, aggression etc.
Indeed, it is known that fearfulness is one of the most strongly heritable behavioural traits in dogs. It's a fact that if your dog is "born fearful" (and so, so many are), you've got it all to do to remedy that via nurture. In fact, it's unlikely you ever fully will.
Contrarily, there are a huge amount of dogs out there who had a crappy upbringing, never properly socialised nor exposed to life, and they have remarkable temperaments. It simply cannot have been nurture that produced these dogs. Sure enough, you'll find that when you can trace their lines, that all dogs in these lines were the same... Gentle, playful, happy.
In my view, if we could tap into these lines, and exclusively breed pet dogs of super temperament, the world would have a lot more good dogs and happy owners.

nala2012 · 20-04-2014 1:12pm

Definatly think genetics have huge part to play. There's a big dog (american bulldog x) in rescue i volunteer with. He spent his first 4 years in a tiny concrete back yard never walked etc and he has a great temperment and gets on with dogs, cats people etc. and he has no behavioural problems. Another example would be racing greyhounds. They are kept with their litter mates until they're about 12 months. In that time they don't get put on a lead, meet lot's of different people etc in fact i know a man who's pup's were just moved from pen to pen untill they were 12 months then they were seperated (some went to their new home's). They have lead and collar put on them for first time and they take to it very quickly. They're brought walking on the main road meeting people, seeing cars other dogs etc and they seem to cope remarkably and adapt very quickly. Nervous dogs don't make it at the track so aren't bred from so as not to carry on the trait. Genetics definatly play big part in a dogs temperment in my opinion/experience.

tk123 · 20-04-2014 1:15pm

DBB wrote: »

How can you definitively say it's because of how you reared them? How can anyone possibly say that DNA has not played a huge role here? You simply can't!
I'm not sure that nature vs nurture argument has been answered, indeed maybe it can't ever be, but I can tell you that if you ask any behaviourist (qualified), they will tell you that nature/genetics plays a hugely bigger role than just 1/10. At this point in time, I would be more inclined to suggest that most behaviourists will tell you it's at least 50/50, and indeed may be even higher in favour of nature.
If it was as easy as nurture playing as much as 9/10ths of the role in temperament, it'd be hugely, hugely easier to "create" dogs of superlative temperament. Yet thousands of dogs who were extensively socialised, never abused, and medically healthy are seen by behaviourists every year, for nervousness, phobias, aggression etc.
Indeed, it is known that fearfulness is one of the most strongly heritable behavioural traits in dogs. It's a fact that if your dog is "born fearful" (and so, so many are), you've got it all to do to remedy that via nurture. In fact, it's unlikely you ever fully will.
Contrarily, there are a huge amount of dogs out there who had a crappy upbringing, never properly socialised nor exposed to life, and they have remarkable temperaments. It simply cannot have been nurture that produced these dogs. Sure enough, you'll find that when you can trace their lines, that all dogs in these lines were the same... Gentle, playful, happy.
In my view, if we could tap into these lines, and exclusively breed pet dogs of super temperament, the world would have a lot more good dogs and happy owners.

+1 to all of this. I have 2 retrievers and they're like chalk and cheese because of where they came from. My older boy can be fearful, may resource guard and has separation anxiety.. the pup is the complete opposite!

DubVelo · 20-04-2014 1:31pm

So doesn't that mean it's a big gamble to get a rescue dog, where you don't know the breeding background of the dog? Especially if it's a big powerful breed.

DBB · 20-04-2014 1:39pm

DubVelo wrote: »

So doesn't that mean it's a big gamble to get a rescue dog, where you don't know the breeding background of the dog? Especially if it's a big powerful breed.

Honestly, I'd say you're much safer to get an assessed rescue dog from a good rescue, than to buy a pedigree puppy from a website. Indeed, if it's a pup you want, in many cases rescues at least have mammy assessed before or shortly after giving birth. Either that, or go with an excellent breeder.
My last two GSDs were from one line... One was bought as a pup years ago, the other rescued a couple if years ago as we knew what we were getting from this marvellous line of bombproof GSDs!

nala2012 · 20-04-2014 1:40pm

But the rescue will have assessed the dog? You'll have a much better idea of what the dogs temperment is like especially if the dog has been in foster

Mark Tapley · 20-04-2014 1:59pm

I wonder how my dog knows how to do things . For instance she will rise up on her back legs and stamp the canal bank to get birds to fly from the reeds. Maybe I just underestimated how smart dogs are. When she circles and scratches about on the couch to settle I always think she is harking back to another time living in the wild. Is this part of genetics or some kind of hereditary behaviour or is that the same thing?

muddypaws · 20-04-2014 2:09pm

cruais wrote: »

Maybe I'm not communicating very well here. My point of the post is that it doesn't matter what type of breed you acquire, it's how a dog is raised by its owner that 9/10 determines the dogs temper meant.

I understood what you were saying in your earlier posts

But, I don't agree that its 9/10ths nurture, I think that nature has a huge part to play.

DBB wrote: »

How can you definitively say it's because of how you reared them? How can anyone possibly say that DNA has not played a huge role here? You simply can't!
I'm not sure that nature vs nurture argument has been answered, indeed maybe it can't ever be, but I can tell you that if you ask any behaviourist (qualified), they will tell you that nature/genetics plays a hugely bigger role than just 1/10. At this point in time, I would be more inclined to suggest that most behaviourists will tell you it's at least 50/50, and indeed may be even higher in favour of nature.
If it was as easy as nurture playing as much as 9/10ths of the role in temperament, it'd be hugely, hugely easier to "create" dogs of superlative temperament. Yet thousands of dogs who were extensively socialised, never abused, and medically healthy are seen by behaviourists every year, for nervousness, phobias, aggression etc.
Indeed, it is known that fearfulness is one of the most strongly heritable behavioural traits in dogs. It's a fact that if your dog is "born fearful" (and so, so many are), you've got it all to do to remedy that via nurture. In fact, it's unlikely you ever fully will.
Contrarily, there are a huge amount of dogs out there who had a crappy upbringing, never properly socialised nor exposed to life, and they have remarkable temperaments. It simply cannot have been nurture that produced these dogs. Sure enough, you'll find that when you can trace their lines, that all dogs in these lines were the same... Gentle, playful, happy.
In my view, if we could tap into these lines, and exclusively breed pet dogs of super temperament, the world would have a lot more good dogs and happy owners.

We took a bitch in that was in pup, the pups were born in a foster home, but then came to me at 5 weeks as the mum wasn't looking after them, so the whole litter came to me and one of my own bitches acted as foster mum, teaching them social skills, that bitch is incredibly laid back and has helped raise a few litters very well. I kept one of the pups, and he is extremely nervous. I would say that he was brought up properly, lots of socialisation, never been hit in his life, lots of positive reinforcement training, in fact when I did a behaviour and training course, we did 2 residential weekends and he was the dog I took with me, he was the star of the course - when nothing else was going on. His Mum was adopted, but then unfortunately came back into me, and she acted exactly the same as her son, it was amazing to see how their behaviour really is identical. I hadn't noticed it previously, but that experience made me realise what a huge part nature has to play.

So, in answer to the original question, yes, I do believe that dogs can be bred for temperament, in fact I think it is as important as all of the physical, genetic tests that breeders should do. I don't think that dogs that show aggression or a nervous disposition should be bred from, no matter what their physical attributes.

muddypaws · 20-04-2014 10:40pm

Interesting link, in light of this discussion for anyone that has the time and energy to read through it http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1601-183X.2005.00155.x/full

fatmammycat · 21-04-2014 9:30am

That was interesting Mudddypaws, thanks for posting it up. I agree that genetics have a lot to do with temperament. When we got our dog his breeder was able to tell us exactly what type of dog he would become, and he was spot on. His own dogs were pleasant, people friendly and easy going and that's exactly what I have on my hands, an easy going, people friendly (particularly children) German Shepherd. Because I'm interested in shepherds I'm a member of a number of breed specific forums, and it's amazing to see how jittery and skittish badly bred GSDs exist. Weak nerved dogs, fear biters, HA and DA dogs being bred willy nilly.
Just awful and I wish people would stop breeding these dogs. A fearful or aggressive shepherd is a difficult dog to do anything with, and unless you're an experienced handler, something of a liability. Witness the man on these forums a while back who had his dog euthanised after she bit his son, something that could and should have been avoided with proper training put in place.

borderlinemeath · 21-04-2014 3:16pm

And it takes two to tango;).

The litter of GSDs that were born here last year were born to a bitch who was dumped in a shelter, along with the father. The new owners only adopted the bitch who is the sweetest, most even tempered shep I have ever met. They kept one of the pups and he has a slightly nervous disposition on meeting new people, always barks nervously and is shy to approach, slightly skittish. Good with all dogs once he gets to know them, but sometimes a bit nervous at the outset. His nervousness must come from the father as the mother is extremely friendly and confident when meeting new people and dogs.

cat_dog · 22-04-2014 12:18pm

andreac wrote: »

Staffs vicious? Not vicious at all. Staffs are great dogs and have great temperaments.

Staffies are great family dogs but ime they can be aggressive w/ other dogs.

tk123 · 22-04-2014 12:31pm

cat_dog wrote: »

Staffies are great family dogs but ime they can be aggressive w/ other dogs.

You could say that about any breed though?

Can dogs really be bred for temperament?

Comments