Another dog attack in Calgary, another tragedy and more pain for many. Who is to blame, since we love to blame and it makes us feel better about ourselves. Who is to blame? The breed, the owner, the trainer, the treats, or society. Who is to blame? In some cases it is one of these. But I would like to direct your attention to facts, not blame.
Fact: Pitbulls are the number one killing breed. I know many good Pitbulls, but am always cautious around any breed of dog.
Fact: Pitbulls will protect and kill if the instinctual behaviour overrides the warning behaviour. Most other breeds don't know how to kill. Think of a Pitbull as a little kid with lots of power and strength who gets carried away because it has rage. The breed is not a bad breed. It does need special consideration! If any breed of dog feels threatened they respond in a variety of ways, running away, nipping, biting, attacking and killing are a few. Many dogs have a shorter fuse and will up the dose of harm if it feels a strong need.
Ownership plays a big part, if you can't manage and establish alpha over your dog. If you can't, regardless of breed, you should not own a dog. If you are going to have a low expectation for your dog, then you should not own a dog. If you want to baby your dog and treat it like a child then you should not own a dog. If you have to give your dog a treat for sitting you should not own a dog.
Some people hate me because I call it how it is. I make sure the dog understands its place in our society. We dog owners need a swift kick in the backend. We need to up the expectation and treat dogs as dogs, love them, care for them and lead them. Not allow the dog to make the rules and control us. Dogs are not a family pet first! A dog is an animal first. No species gives treats to one another for a basic request so act properly and put away the bribing-with-food trick -- it lowers your authority and how the dog views you. You are not a vending machine!
In the end the Pitbull will be hated and viewed as the devil of all dog breeds. But the fact is any dog can kill. That's why breed bans are stupid, but understanding breed guidelines make sense. Killing all the dogs does not resolve the issue.
My thoughts and prayers go out to all the people and dogs in Calgary this week. The people who will assess the dogs have a terrible decision to make and it is not easy. Many people will be affected. Do not blame, accuse or hate a person because of the breed they own. Not all dogs are bad and not all owners are. We need more love and understanding not hate and pain.
Follow Brad Pattison on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@BradPPattison
"Brad wrote "No species gives treats to one another for a basic request so act properly and put away the bribing-with-food trick -- it lowers your authority and how the dog views you."
You also made similar claims, saying something similar to the fact that animals do not 'treat' each other, or give each other 'treats'.
You might want to take a look at this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAFQ5kUHPkY
There is no such thing as Pit Bull. The term also grabs Lab crosses, Pointing crosses, Boxer crosses and anything that is 50 pounds and has a short coat.
BSL destroys based on appearance and allows owners of dangerous dogs that don't fit the description repeated warnings and a slap on the wrist.
I know for a fact there are breeders of "Pit Bull Type Dogs." They tell buyers that their dogs have an "exception."
People who follow the laws will do so regardless of BSL. Bad breeders, those who breed for pathology or fail to socialize and foster instability will do so regardless of the law.
BSL is dangerous to public safety. Which is why public health numbers in Ontario show stable and increasing injuries from dogs since BSL came into play.
Animals are dying. Mutts. Friendly mutts of mixed ancestry. Add Shepherds and Jacks into the mix, and nearly every dog out there can be seized at the drop of a hat.
If you had a pit bull but it was too young to fix the law allowed you to wait to fix it. If someone has a new pit bull they acquired it illegally from an illegal breeder. The only exemption for sterilization were pit bulls too old or infirm to be sterilized.
If you were unclear what a pit bull is, the term includes the American Pit Bull Terrier, the American Staffordshire Terrier, and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. It does not include German Shepherds or Jack Russel Terriers. If someone seizes your GSD then they've done so illegally.
Aren't all animals animals first. Isn't man an animal first? He's not suggesting that some animals are first plants is he?
Correction: In this case you should get a toy Pomeranian.
http://www.jarvm.com/articles/Vol4Iss2/Lund.pdf
Chose this one because the full study is available online.
Sigh. Guess I'll have to just leave this entire debate.
The APDT is the Association Professional Dog Trainers, though membership is open to anyone, they are working hard at encouraging people to move forward in dog training, not backwards in time.
How do you know that no species gives treats to one another? I am just asking in case you have published peer-reviewed research in this area that you haven't spoken about. Do other species use your hustle up products to request proper behaviour? So how come treats are inappropriate, but leashes and collars are perfectly acceptable? I want your readers to know that bribing and using food to reinforce behaviour are NOT the same thing. Any +R trainer will agree that bribing is not an effective way to train. Using pain and intimidation, such as pulling up on a leash, stepping on a dogs's feet and smacking a dog on the nose will lower your authority and cause your dog to distrust you.
Here is a small sample of proof in favor of using treats.
Preliminary analysis of an adjective based dog personality questionnaire developed to measure some aspects of personality in the domestic dog – Mirko
Relationship between management factors and dog behavior in a sample of Argentine Dogos – Tami
Factors associated with aggressive responses in pet dogs – Hsu
A Survey of the management of Intra-dog aggression – Orihel
Behaviour of smaller and larger dogs: Effects of training methods, inconsistency of owner behaviour and level of engagement in activities with the dog – Arhant
Behavioral assessment of child-directed canine aggression – Reisner
Effects of the Application of Neck Pressure by a Collar or Harness on Intraocular Pressure in Dogs – Pauli
Owner-companion dog interactions: Relationships between demographic variables,
potentially problematic behaviours,training engagement and shared activities – Bennett
Factors affecting dog–dog interactions on walks with their owners – Rezac
Training methods of military dog handlers and their effects on the team’s performances – Haverbeke
Obedience training effects on search dog performance – Alexander
Training methods and owner–dog interactions: Links with dog behaviour and learning ability – Rooney
Dog Training Methods: Their use, effectiveness and interaction with behaviour and welfare – Hiby
The relationship between training methods and the occurrence of behavior problems, as reported by owners, in a population of domestic dogs – Blackwell
Understanding of human communicative motives in domestic dogs - Pettersson
If You're Aggressive Your Dog Will be Too - Herron
#1 - does not say it favours treats
#6 - does not say it favours treats
#9 - does not say it favours treats
#15 - does nat say it favours treats
#16 - Does not say it favours treats
The list shows has multiple studies that positive reinforcement works better.
Shows that punishment is less effective.
Punishment is associated with increase aggression. (Not treats like the article claims)
Spoiling is not problematic.
There is physical harm that can result from putting pressure on a dog's neck.
The studies show that treats are a viable option because other options are potentially dangerous, and increase behaviour problems and come with physical risk.
In light of all the risks of punishment, I'm not sure anyone would want to use it.
Still waiting. Crickets.
Without proof, it stands to reason that it does not exist.
Even the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior (AVSAB) has come out officially opposing the aggresive-submissive dichotomy.
I realize there are trainers/behaviorists who can't let this go because it has been their schtick for so long it is difficult to admit they relied on a faulty study. There is no shame in relying on experts, only in standing fast in the face of better information.
Solution: Mandatory annual temperament testing with your dog license at owners expense.
one example ... a dog is taught by its owner not to jump on people yet when a stranger walks by that owner and dog, rather than say hello to the human being the stranger opens a verbal dialogue with the dog and the dog gets excited and jumps and the stranger pets the dog while its jumping
If you don't educate your kids they are taken away from you by the state. The same should be true for dogs. I'd bet my right arm the rate of dog attacks, pit bull or otherwise by dogs who have gone to obedience school and were properly socialized is close to zero. I've taken care of two pit bulls and they were both amazing dogs but I spent a lot of time making sure they were good dog citizens.
I do agree that people lack some common sense. but as owners, we can prevent much of what they do.