Chow Chows
Joanne Anderson
A pet professionals two cents worth:
Over the past 20 years or so, I have instructed over 2000 people and their
dogs in obedience classes. From puppy classes to Utility training. I am
also a professional all breed dog and cat groomer of more than 12 years.
I can recall over 20 different Chows and Chow mixes that have participated
in my classes and/or had been in for grooming. At some point, EVERY single
one of the Chows actually bit their owner aggressively. Some even drawing
blood. To me, this is a red flag situation for the breed. I'm not saying
the breed is bad, only that I have made an observation of 20 out of 20 had
a discipline problem and should be monitored closely, especially around
children.
Generally speaking, I believe that Chow Chows may have a very loving and
devoted attitude towards their owners. This could be the case until they
are asked to do (or not to do something) they (the Chow) don't agree with.
In obedience you will come to a point of refusal with almost any dog.
Chows just don't seem to accept authority from anyone or anything.
Most owners may actually recognize the problem, but just avoids doing the
thing the dog doesn't like. This "thing" has been to known be: brushing,
cleaning the dog's ears, touching the dog's feet, rubbing his tummy,
pushing his rear end down to sit, pulling down on his collar while
teaching him to lay down, not setting his food dish down directly in front
of him, and making him get off the couch.
This behavior problem was even observed in a 3 month old male Chow puppy
that had been brought to me for private lessons because he had already bit
every member of the household (5 people). One child even had to have
stitches. We couldn't even get a collar on the puppy without drastic
restraint measures. The puppy was not frightened, he just didn't want
restraint. He actually went ballistic. I have a scar on my left thigh
where the little guy bit me. He was a loaded time bomb in a cute as a
button puppy outfit.
The owners were not up for my suggestions for drastic training measures
and to have him neutered immediately, so my final advice to that family
was to have the puppy put to sleep and find a new one. Be that as it may,
you know what they did? They gave the pup away to live on a farm so he
could roam free.
Joanne Anderson
ATI's K9's Etc
http://atik9setc.com
Jim
"Joanne Anderson" <j...@atik9setc.com> wrote:
>A pet professionals two cents worth:
>
>Over the past 20 years or so, I have instructed over 2000 people and their
>dogs in obedience classes. From puppy classes to Utility training. I am
>also a professional all breed dog and cat groomer of more than 12 years.
>
>I can recall over 20 different Chows and Chow mixes that have participated
>in my classes and/or had been in for grooming. At some point, EVERY single
>one of the Chows actually bit their owner aggressively. Some even drawing
>blood. To me, this is a red flag situation for the breed. I'm not saying
>the breed is bad, only that I have made an observation of 20 out of 20 had
>a discipline problem and should be monitored closely, especially around
>children.
>
SNIP
Joanne, prepare yourself to be told that you are an idiot from
this Gregh scum. He is totally blind concerning this breed and
becomes exceptionally obnoxious to anyone that sees ANY fault
in a Chow. I kill-filed the piece of dirt because of his stupid
rantings. I do agree with you and I have had many, many
handlers, judges, trainers, and vets tell me that they just
flat don't like the breed as they are unpredictable and often
just plain mean when it suits them.
Jim
gregh
On 22-Mar-97 02:48:54, Joanne Anderson assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
>A pet professionals two cents worth:
Joanne,
Honestly?
>Over the past 20 years or so, I have instructed over 2000 people and their
>dogs in obedience classes. From puppy classes to Utility training. I am
>also a professional all breed dog and cat groomer of more than 12 years.
>I can recall over 20 different Chows and Chow mixes that have participated
>in my classes and/or had been in for grooming. At some point, EVERY single
>one of the Chows actually bit their owner aggressively. Some even drawing
>blood. To me, this is a red flag situation for the breed. I'm not saying
>the breed is bad, only that I have made an observation of 20 out of 20 had
>a discipline problem and should be monitored closely, especially around
>children.
Joanne, I dont believe that for one moment. I would rather believe MANY more
years than you OWNING Chows, the experiences of a LIFETIME of my father who
had to live and work with dogs and sometimes depend on them for survival. Too
many people like you come out with that only because they have an axe to
grind. Too many people come out like you and paint a veneer of "I know what I
am talking about" and then proceed to paint their own inecusable PREJUDICE on
an entire breed, Chow or any other. This is not intended as a slight on
you, personally but an observation that MANY people do exactly as you did
on any number of breeds and they arent professionals at all. Shall we
believe them all? The simple fact is:
1) No entire breed is aggressive. This is the same as "The entire Caucasian
race is NOT aggressive" or "The entire black African race is NOT aggressive"
when referring to humans.
2) If you ARE a professional dog trainer who deals with dogs with disciplinary
problems then obviously you WILL see more of any particular breed with a
problem. This does NOT mean an entire breed is bad. Common sense tells anyone,
professionals included, this. To claim otherwise *IS* a slight against your
professional reputation. No true professional would make such a claim.
>Generally speaking, I believe that Chow Chows may have a very loving and
>devoted attitude towards their owners. This could be the case until they
>are asked to do (or not to do something) they (the Chow) don't agree with.
That is just pure rot. I have to, now and then, make my Chow do things she
doesnt want. For example, recently she was chewing on a bone and actually
shattered it at one end. I had to go grab that bone to take away from her,
right out of hee mouth. No problems at all though she showed reluctance to
give it up by following the bone and I to the house. This is to be expected.
If you can take food from a dog's mouth, surely that says something, doesnt
it? Added to this, ALL my Chows have been this way. I have known MANY Chows
over the years, mine and others and that would be significantly more than 20.
All with the exception of one have been well behaved in public. That one was
the dire of my first Chow. He was just a "dont bother me" type who preferred
to be alone. He was cranky and showed it by snorting and moving elsewhere. MY
Chow, his daughter, was not a bit like that. So, as I have claimed
SIGNIFICANTLY more than 20 and you have claimed 20, by the law of averages and
by YOUR example, should I claim ALL the breed is OK? Nope. Some Chows ARENT OK
but then some owners arent OK either.
>In obedience you will come to a point of refusal with almost any dog.
>Chows just don't seem to accept authority from anyone or anything.
Chows are not a dog I would bother to utility train. There have been
successful cases and so on but I have found that all but one of my own Chows
was "aloof" as they are supposed to be and highly intelligent. They are not
predisposed to do something unless they see a reason or want to do it just
because you tell them to do it - the ones I have owned, I mean. That one
exception, though, would do things for me without me having to say a word on
most occasions and was more obedient than most dogs in Utility trials. Her one
thing that would get her walking the opposite direction when you wanted her
was if you cuddled her. She liked a good pat and a scratch but never liked a
cuddle. ;-}
>Most owners may actually recognize the problem, but just avoids doing the
>thing the dog doesn't like. This "thing" has been to known be: brushing,
>cleaning the dog's ears, touching the dog's feet, rubbing his tummy,
>pushing his rear end down to sit, pulling down on his collar while
>teaching him to lay down, not setting his food dish down directly in front
>of him, and making him get off the couch.
None of the above has EVER been a prob for me for my Chows. However, you must
realise that in australia (and possibly other countries), if you are showing
in normal shows (not utility shows), teaching the dog to sit when you stop
walking isnt a good idea. Show judges prefer them to stand near you.
FYI, my most CHOWISH Chow is the one I have now near me as I type. She was
taught by me, however, to retrieve and to DROP purely because someone told me
you would never get a Chow to do that. The DROP command saved her life one day
when a painter painting my house opened the side gate against my wishes when I
was inside and she scooted out. I heard her running so ran out the front and
yelled DROP and she did. Lucky because if she kept going, she would have been
under a car as the gate out the front had been knocked down.
>This behavior problem was even observed in a 3 month old male Chow puppy
>that had been brought to me for private lessons because he had already bit
>every member of the household (5 people). One child even had to have
>stitches. We couldn't even get a collar on the puppy without drastic
A 3 month old biting everyone in the house and causing stitches? Now THIS is
something that has me laughing my arse off! What next? A 12 week old puppy
does this? HAHAHA! Why do you bother typing this? Surely no-one in their right
mind believes this.
>restraint measures. The puppy was not frightened, he just didn't want
>restraint. He actually went ballistic. I have a scar on my left thigh
>where the little guy bit me. He was a loaded time bomb in a cute as a
>button puppy outfit.
Tsk... sure. Pardon me whiule I check on the pigs flying in circles outside.
>The owners were not up for my suggestions for drastic training measures
>and to have him neutered immediately, so my final advice to that family
>was to have the puppy put to sleep and find a new one. Be that as it may,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You are a disgrace if that is what you did. A damned disgrace. You shouldnt be
allowed near pups or animals if this is your answer. A pup of that age may
have been mistreated and be fearful but they can be trained out of it.
>you know what they did? They gave the pup away to live on a farm so he
>could roam free.
I am glad they did. I hope they had the sense never to come your way again,
too.
All in all, I find your whole tirade disgraceful and unbelievable and point
out to anybody reading this that THIS is the reason for so many states in so
many countries actually starting to legislate against ALL dogs, regardless of
breed. This sort of CRAP.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Sysop of Amiga's Sci-Fi BBS gr...@hartingdale.com.au Chow Chow lover! |
|Are you old when you enjoy a good headbanger record with others over 40?|
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kenneth Cain
Jim wrote:> >*Snip*
> >I can recall over 20 different Chows and Chow mixes that have participated
> >in my classes and/or had been in for grooming. At some point, EVERY single
> >one of the Chows actually bit their owner aggressively. Some even drawing
> >blood. To me, this is a red flag situation for the breed. I'm not saying
> >the breed is bad, only that I have made an observation of 20 out of 20 had
> >a discipline problem and should be monitored closely, especially around
> >children.
> >
>
>
> Joanne, prepare yourself to be told that you are an idiot from
> this Gregh scum. He is totally blind concerning this breed and
> becomes exceptionally obnoxious to anyone that sees ANY fault
> in a Chow. I kill-filed the piece of dirt because of his stupid
> rantings. I do agree with you and I have had many, many
> handlers, judges, trainers, and vets tell me that they just
> flat don't like the breed as they are unpredictable and often
> just plain mean when it suits them.
> Jim
Jim,
Perhaps Joanne failed to recognize the owner as the chief contributor
in the discipline problem. Some people lack the skills it takes to
successfully own a strong willed breed and if a trainer lacks the
ability to correct the problem is it really the dogs fault?
Greg made some very valid points which you chose to ignore.
And YOU, unable to present a good counter argument, resorted to THE
name calling. Your lack of Critical Thinking skills is quite obvious.
Your statment "I have had many, many handlers, judges, trainers,
and vets tell me that they just flat don't like the breed as they
are unpredictable" is typical of breed bashers and it just doesn't
cut it. Anybody can say that. Is this the best you can do?
You, not having an in depth understanding of all the issues involved,
which Greg clearly stated, react like the typical breed bashing bigot.
Hopefully you can grow beyond this as bashing any breed on this group
will only serve to undermine your creditability.
Go ahead, call me all the names you want if it makes you feel better.(G)
Best,
Kenneth
Jim
Simply put, it's true.
>Go ahead, call me all the names you want if it makes you feel better.(G)
>
>Best,
>
>Kenneth
Okay Kenneth, you're a blinded idiot too. Hey, you're right! I
feel better. <g> Seriously Kenneth. I do not dislike this
breed. The question was asked if this breed was recommended for
kids. My answer is no. There are other breeds that aren't kids
breeds either. I have been around many, many Chows and I don't
trust them because of my personal experances with them. I also
consider AKC judges, professional trainers and handlers, as
well as Vets to be worthy of listening to and I don't know of
any that "praise" the breed, but many who are at least cautious
off if not dislike the breed.
Jim
Nancy E. Holmes or R. Nelson Ruffin
Joanne Anderson <j...@atik9setc.com> wrote in article
<01bc3617.c31df780$0a9472ce@default>...
> A pet professionals two cents worth:
snip some serious observations
One of the interesting points Ian Dunbar brought up in the last seminar of
his I attended was the 'problem' with some breeds including the chow. He
feels that this breed among others needs to start socialization with
multiple people before the eyes even open! He has seen this dramatically
improve the handleability of chows so raised.
He also observed that the chows were often considered "perfect" by the
owners. They housebroke easily for example and were little 'gentleman' or
'ladies' in their behavior.In puppy kindergarten where other pups were wild
and crazy the chow pups stood back like stuffed toys and acted very well
behaved i.e. they did not interact with the other pups. He felt that as the
pups did not interact they missed the benefits in learning bite inhibition
and control and rarely if ever got corrected as normally happens with pups
in that situation. These were the pups that graduated kindergarten with
flying colors then later came back as adult dogs with massive behavior
problems. So he changed his training for the breeds he noticed this in and
forced them to interact in PK with very good results in their future
behavior.
Maybe it depends on the line of chows in your area, maybe on the raising
both before and after you get a pup. I will say that Dr. Dunbar did target
the oriental breeds among those that had the most problems in that
behavioral area.
Nancy
Dogman
On a cold day in Hell, 22 Mar 1997 19:34:01 GMT, Jim <rob...@aug.com>
wrote:
[...]
>The question was asked if this breed was recommended for
>kids. My answer is no. There are other breeds that aren't kids
>breeds either. I have been around many, many Chows and I don't
>trust them because of my personal experances with them. I also
>consider AKC judges, professional trainers and handlers, as
>well as Vets to be worthy of listening to and I don't know of
>any that "praise" the breed, but many who are at least cautious
>off if not dislike the breed.
>
>Jim
Jim, I've known many, many "AKC judges, pro trainers and handlers, as
well as vets" who were mostly DOG DUMB people. I happen to like the
Chow.
I know that I would have absolutely no problem whatsoever with
allowing my own children to be around a WELL-BRED, WELL-SOCIALIZED,
and WELL-TRAINED Chow. I think the Chow can be an absolutely
wonderful dog -- but no, it's not a dog for EVERYBODY. Few dogs are.
Jim, you're simply blaming the wrong component. Blame the PEOPLE who
carelessly breed chows, do not socialize them properly, do not train
them correctly, and who put their chows into positions where they can
fail. Don't blame the dog, eh?
--
Dogman
qbt...@v1.arg
E-mail address rot13 encoded to foil advertising spam
Joey "Dogs" Vaffanculo Contract Locating and Communication Company
http://www.i1.net/~dogman
Remember the Pierce collies!
http://www.i1.net/~dogman/pierce.htm
gregh
On 22-Mar-97 15:07:59, Jim assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
>"Joanne Anderson" <j...@atik9setc.com> wrote:
>>A pet professionals two cents worth:
>>
>>Over the past 20 years or so, I have instructed over 2000 people and their
>>dogs in obedience classes. From puppy classes to Utility training. I am
>>also a professional all breed dog and cat groomer of more than 12 years.
>>
>>I can recall over 20 different Chows and Chow mixes that have participated
>>in my classes and/or had been in for grooming. At some point, EVERY single
>>one of the Chows actually bit their owner aggressively. Some even drawing
>>blood. To me, this is a red flag situation for the breed. I'm not saying
>>the breed is bad, only that I have made an observation of 20 out of 20 had
>>a discipline problem and should be monitored closely, especially around
>>children.
>>
>SNIP
>Joanne, prepare yourself to be told that you are an idiot from
>this Gregh scum. He is totally blind concerning this breed and
>becomes exceptionally obnoxious to anyone that sees ANY fault
>in a Chow. I kill-filed the piece of dirt because of his stupid
>rantings. I do agree with you and I have had many, many
>handlers, judges, trainers, and vets tell me that they just
>flat don't like the breed as they are unpredictable and often
>just plain mean when it suits them.
>Jim
For anyone TRULY wanting a complete description of the word "TWIT", please
read the letter above. How can you refute "I have had many, may tell me" etc?
As he used the word twice, it MUST be true.
It has been said "There are none so blind as they who will not see". It can be
translated into "There is nothing more stupid than prejudice" and in this
twit's case, "There is none so stupidly blind as a prejudicial person who will
not see".
You cannot learn if you dont take in new thoughts and he proves he doesnt WANT
to know the truth by shutting them out.
One day, we can only hope he grows enough to learn common sense. Until then,
we will all eventually end up in his twit list and he will wonder why it is so
quiet in here.
BTW, Jim, thanks for putting me there. I need not see any of your inadequately
thought out and prejudiced bleatings.
Jim
qbt...@v1.arg (Dogman) wrote:
>On a cold day in Hell, 22 Mar 1997 19:34:01 GMT, Jim <rob...@aug.com>
>wrote:
>
>[...]
>>The question was asked if this breed was recommended for
>>kids. My answer is no. There are other breeds that aren't kids
>>breeds either. I have been around many, many Chows and I don't
>>trust them because of my personal experances with them. I also
>>consider AKC judges, professional trainers and handlers, as
>>well as Vets to be worthy of listening to and I don't know of
>>any that "praise" the breed, but many who are at least cautious
>>off if not dislike the breed.
>>
>>Jim
>
>Jim, I've known many, many "AKC judges, pro trainers and handlers, as
>well as vets" who were mostly DOG DUMB people. I happen to like the
>Chow.
>
>I know that I would have absolutely no problem whatsoever with
>allowing my own children to be around a WELL-BRED, WELL-SOCIALIZED,
>and WELL-TRAINED Chow. I think the Chow can be an absolutely
>wonderful dog -- but no, it's not a dog for EVERYBODY. Few dogs are.
>
>Jim, you're simply blaming the wrong component. Blame the PEOPLE who
>carelessly breed chows, do not socialize them properly, do not train
>them correctly, and who put their chows into positions where they can
>fail. Don't blame the dog, eh?
D-man, I agree tht most of the problems DO in fact lie with the
owner of the dog. One of the points you make is "Carelessly
bred Chows". THESE are the ones that I mainy refer to as being
untrustworthy and often difficult. The same is true of a number
of other breeds. The Dobie and Rottie were originally wonderful
breeds BUT, because of so much backyard breeding, it is hard to
find a good one of either breed. This is also true of many
other breeds as well. Look at the poor Dalmation! Gosh, that
was a absolutely beautiful and great dog before 101 dalmations,
the original, came out and everybody and thier brother started
breeding them until they were mostly basket cases. Just when
breeders were making a comeback with the breed Disney does a
remake and guess what will happen again? There are some very
nice Chows out there, no arguement there but, I still am quite
a bit more watchful of them than most other breeds and would
not recommend them for kids.
Jim
Kenneth Cain
Dogman wrote:
>
> On a cold day in Hell, 22 Mar 1997 19:34:01 GMT, Jim <rob...@aug.com>
> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> well as vets" who were mostly DOG DUMB people. I happen to like the
> Chow.
[...]
Thanks Joe,
A Chow breeder in Canada told me that while showing her Chow a judge
ordered her removed from the ring.
When asked why, the judge replied that he would not tolerate a dog
being choked.
She insisted that her Chow was not being choked.
The judge said "It's obvious you are choking the dog because his tongue
is turning blue.
She said that it took several Chow owners to convince the judge
that he was wrong.
Needless to say the judge was quite embarrassed when it was found he
wasn't familiar with the Chow breed standard.
Best,
--
Ken
/\ /\
/^ \'''/ ^\
- -
@ @
___o00o__( )__o00o___
The Chow says "Woof!"
Nancy E. Holmes or R. Nelson Ruffin
gregh <gr...@hartingdale.com.au> wrote in article
<3612.702...@hartingdale.com.au>...
>
> On 23-Mar-97 06:06:01, Nancy E. Holmes or R. Nelson Ruffin assaulted me
about
> Re: Chow Chows
> >Maybe it depends on the line of chows in your area, maybe on the raising
> >both before and after you get a pup. I will say that Dr. Dunbar did
target
> >the oriental breeds among those that had the most problems in that
> >behavioral area.
>
> Nancy!! You keep changing addresses to hide, dont you? ;-}
Say what? - youmusthavemeconfusedwithsomeoneelse <g>- my home computer
address has been the same for the entire time I've been on the net.
snip
> In regards to owners, I can just PICTURE some new Chow owners who know no
> better and want a lap-dog to obey their every whim and clean the toilet
> ordering the dog about. It gets a case of the dirts with the owner and
ignores
> them so the owner starts with a hit here and there that gets worse if the
Chow
> doesnt obey immediately. In the end, you end up with a frightened dog
that may
> be defensive or even associate hitting with humans etc and become
> unmanageable.
snip
Actually what I was referring to is the educated opinion of a well know
behaviorist who was working with pups from homes that started off on the
absolute right foot with the dogs by attending puppy kindergarten - no
hitting implied.
His opinion was that the chows were so self contained that they did not
learn the basic inhibitions that puppy class teaches most dogs. But he did
not decide chows were bad - just that *his* approach to them was wrong and
so he changed it for his clients with excellent results which he was happy
to share with breeders and owners alike. He felt the self containment was
misinterpreted as *good* behavior when in fact the dog was missing out on
basic dog education by being aloof.
As he works with breeders as well as owners he was able to report that by
changing the timing of multiple person socialization and forcing
interaction with other puppies the resulting adult chows were better pets
than ones that he previously had worked with from the same bloodlines and
breeders as well as the 'random' dogs from all the uglier places dogs are
purchased from. I never got an impression that Dr. Dunbar feared or
disliked this breed or any other, just that he viewed them as a new
challenging puzzle as he figured out how best to enhance training and
socialization to fit them into the average dog owner's home.
Nancy
The Carrolls
Here shown is the start of a FIGHT. If we listen to eachother, we can stop
it here and realize the good points from BOTH sides. Jim says that many
dog professionals find chows to be "mean," or a word similar to that.
That's true...the vets & groomers & such usually see the poorer bred ones,
the ones with less care put into them, your everyday ones. But the other
person (who's name I can't find) says that these are the poorer bred ones.
Excellent point. Jim says he's careful with chows around kids. I'd be
careful with any breed around kids. Remember, labs are one of the best
breeds with kids, IMHO, but you really have to watch them cuz they tend to
overdo their love by washing faces, sharing food, and getting a little bit
too exhuberant when playing.
So can we see both sides of this one before it turns into World war 3?
Emily
Jim <rob...@aug.com> wrote in article <5h2boq$8...@news.southeast.net>...
> qbt...@v1.arg (Dogman) wrote:
> >On a cold day in Hell, 22 Mar 1997 19:34:01 GMT, Jim <rob...@aug.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >[...]
> >>The question was asked if this breed was recommended for
> >>kids. My answer is no. There are other breeds that aren't kids
> >>breeds either. I have been around many, many Chows and I don't
> >>trust them because of my personal experances with them. I also
> >>consider AKC judges, professional trainers and handlers, as
> >>well as Vets to be worthy of listening to and I don't know of
> >>any that "praise" the breed, but many who are at least cautious
> >>off if not dislike the breed.
> >>
> >>Jim
> >
> >Jim, I've known many, many "AKC judges, pro trainers and handlers, as
> >well as vets" who were mostly DOG DUMB people. I happen to like the
> >Chow.
> >
Kenneth Cain
Kathryn Langdon-Sparks wrote:
I have been involved with dogs for more years than I care to
admit, working as a groomer and trainer and breeding and showing
Chows.
While I concede the point that there are SOME Chows with questionable
temperament, I also realize from personal experience and observation
that this is not limited to the Chow Chow.
I am presently working with a client whose Golden bitch is dog
aggressive, with the greatest urge to eat any dog of any size or
breed that approaches her. Do we then describe all Goldens as vicious
based upon my experience and personal knowledge?
Another client has a Shorthaired Pointer. Sold, on the vet's advice, at six
weeks of age this pup missed the vital socialization stage with Mom
and siblings. The new owners in their wish to comfort this pup
overdid and at twelve weeks this pup ran the household, punishing the
humans if they didn't give in to his demands. A 12 week-old pup had
inflicted over fifty bite/puncture wounds on his owner and 43 on the
wife. Daily sessions and lots of homework and a couple of dedicated
owners and a trainer almost as crazy as they are saw this pup calm
down but he still (almost two years later) needs weekly refresher
sessions. Are ALL GSPs therefore vicious?
As for Chows and children, I have placed all but a few pups in
homes with children and the bond is well forged between Chows and
kids. The parents were careful and taught their children to respect
dogs in general and kid-proofed the puppy as I would hope all dog
owners do. The only pups from our litters not to go to homes with
kids are the ones that stay here as our children are grown up and
gone leaving us with room for another dog... thoughtful kids.
All generalizations are dangerous and your broad spectrum
statement that the Chow as a breed is not safe with children is as
dangerous as any. ALL breeds have their difficult cases and their
misfits, the Chow is no different. Perhaps if you looked beyond your
prejudices you would be surprised by what you see. There are Chows
out there doing therapy visits to hospitals and nursing homes, living
with families, working as Guide dogs and helping physically
challenged owners with household tasks. Some are acting as herd
dogs,other are loved pets doing the just be the family dog
routine.... take a good look...
And, while you are looking beyond those prejudices, come and talk
to the vets in this part of the world... we have several who are
totally comfortable with Chows.
Kathryn Langdon-Sparks
Tigh A'Ruadh Chow Chows Renfrew, Ontario
http://www.renc.igs.net/~chowchows/
There are two kinds of dog: Chows and
dogs that wish they were Chows.
--
Kenneth Cain
The Carrolls wrote:
> I don't know what the standard in Canada is, but here, it's a DQ if the dog
> doesn't have a black or blue tongue. And I don't study standards at
> all...the chow isn't even one of my favorite breeds (not saying anything
> against them, I just don't like the breed, like some of you think bulldogs
> are the ugliest things)
>
> Emily
Hi Emily,
It's a DQ in Canada too. You know more about Chows than the judge did
and yet some people will quote judges and others as though they are
some kind of infallable expert.
Best,
--
Ken
/\ /\
/^ \'''/ ^\
- -
@ @
___o00o__( )__o00o___
The Chow says..."Woof!"
gregh
On 23-Mar-97 05:34:01, Jim assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
>Okay Kenneth, you're a blinded idiot too. Hey, you're right! I
>feel better. <g> Seriously Kenneth. I do not dislike this
>breed. The question was asked if this breed was recommended for
>kids. My answer is no. There are other breeds that aren't kids
>breeds either. I have been around many, many Chows and I don't
>trust them because of my personal experances with them. I also
>consider AKC judges, professional trainers and handlers, as
>well as Vets to be worthy of listening to and I don't know of
>any that "praise" the breed, but many who are at least cautious
>off if not dislike the breed.
Jim,
Whereas, I can call on judges, vets, children, adults, the infirmed, the
crippled, the blind to tell you that you are wrong.
the problem is that your opinion IS your opinion but you dont allow others to
have theirs.
If you wish to call these people, just do it. However, what proof is that on
Internet? I could make myself out to be the President of the USA here if I
took a moment to reorganise my headers.
The only REAL proof is the truth and the truth is simple - an entire breed can
NOT be considered aggressive. That is just prejudice no matter WHO says it.
Anyone who is prejudiced is simply an idiot and not worth the effort of
listening to. Do you still insist on prejudice?
gregh
On 23-Mar-97 06:06:01, Nancy E. Holmes or R. Nelson Ruffin assaulted me about
Re: Chow Chows
>Maybe it depends on the line of chows in your area, maybe on the raising
>both before and after you get a pup. I will say that Dr. Dunbar did target
>the oriental breeds among those that had the most problems in that
>behavioral area.
Nancy!! You keep changing addresses to hide, dont you? ;-}
The thing pet behaviourists seem to miss out on in regards to Chows is that
they are dealing with a reasonably intelligent animal that doesnt necessarily
do what a human wants it to do unless there is a reason, for the most part.
Sure there are Chows that are very obedient but usually a Chow will turn the
other way. They, then, perceive this as a problem.
In regards to owners, I can just PICTURE some new Chow owners who know no
better and want a lap-dog to obey their every whim and clean the toilet
ordering the dog about. It gets a case of the dirts with the owner and ignores
them so the owner starts with a hit here and there that gets worse if the Chow
doesnt obey immediately. In the end, you end up with a frightened dog that may
be defensive or even associate hitting with humans etc and become
unmanageable. In a way, this all goes back to the breeder or pet store owner
who sold the Chow. If the would-be owner wants an obedient to the nth degree
dog, they should be TOLD the Chow is a strong willed dog and in all likeliness
isnt going to be that way BEFORE the dog is sold. I know with MY very first
Chow, I was told NOTHING of the sort. It was lucky I read everything I could
on them and talked to other Chow owners and got the idea what they were like.
It was, further, lucky, that I like that sort of individualism in a dog.
Maybe would-be breeders and pet store owners should be MADE to go through a
list of questions with a would-be dog owner to find out what the person is
like before trying to unload a breed on someone who really only sees a cute
puppy and not a "not-so-cute" adult. Then, we may get less dog bites occurring
in ANY breed.
Case in point: Today in the local shopping mall, in the biggest and best pet
shop there was a puppy Chow, 8.5 weeks old according to the store sales
assistants, happy as anything, jumping about and attracting attention because
he was SO CUTE. Everyone there wanted him. No-one there but me knew what breed
he was so you can guess that no-one there had a clue what they were like,
really. A prospective customer asks the sales assistant what height they grow
to. "Oh, not much bigger than it is now!"... oh sure - where did she get THAT?
The customer asked her to get the key to let the dog out of the pen so she
could look at it and when she went away, I told the woman I owned Chows and
showed her how big they get and a book on Chows in the store to prove the
point. It turned out she thought it was a crossbred Pommeranian originally!
HAHAHA! She wanted a small dog. Another customer asked and I told the sales
assistant on the spot that they grew "so high" and indicated the height. She
said "Oh yes, that's right!" Sigh..... Luckily, as it turned out, they wanted
$1200 for it and at that price, no-one REALLY wanted to buy it. Poor thing.
If only people SELLING pups took the time to find what the person wants.
The Carrolls
> A Chow breeder in Canada told me that while showing her Chow a judge
> ordered her removed from the ring.
> When asked why, the judge replied that he would not tolerate a dog
> being choked.
> She insisted that her Chow was not being choked.
> The judge said "It's obvious you are choking the dog because his tongue
> is turning blue.
> She said that it took several Chow owners to convince the judge
> that he was wrong.
>
> Needless to say the judge was quite embarrassed when it was found he
> wasn't familiar with the Chow breed standard.
>
I don't know what the standard in Canada is, but here, it's a DQ if the dog
Kenneth Cain
gregh wrote:
>
> On 23-Mar-97 16:18:13, Kenneth Cain assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
[...]
> Ken,
>
> At least the only time someone told me I was choking MY Chow because hr tongue
> was blue, the guy had the decency to be drunk and hanging out the door of a
> pub! ;-}
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> |Sysop of Amiga's Sci-Fi BBS gr...@hartingdale.com.au Chow Chow lover! |
> |Are you old when you enjoy a good headbanger record with others over 40?|
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg, that sure doesn't say much for the judge does it.(G)
BTW, have you noticed that Chows are a rare subject in
news:rec.pets.dogs.behavior
--
Ken
/\ /\ Kenneth Cain
/^ \'''/ ^\
- - ke...@txdirect.net
@ @
___o00o__( )__o00o___ San Antonio, Texas, USA
The Chow says "Woof!"
Susan Mudgett aka little gator
Ella (el...@saix.net) wrote:
: Dang! Life imitates crappy situation comedies and yet again the
: kid knows best and tells us adults how to behave. I think I'm
: going to vomit.
I'm not sure what your point is, since Emily's post was more polite,
mature, and reasonable than your reply to it.
Carol Dunster
On 22 Mar 97 22:43:36 +1000, gr...@hartingdale.com.au (gregh) wrote:
>Joanne, I dont believe that for one moment. I would rather believe MANY more
>years than you OWNING Chows, the experiences of a LIFETIME of my father who
>had to live and work with dogs and sometimes depend on them for survival. Too
>many people like you come out with that only because they have an axe to
>grind. Too many people come out like you and paint a veneer of "I know what I
>am talking about" and then proceed to paint their own inecusable PREJUDICE on
>an entire breed, Chow or any other. This is not intended as a slight on
>you, personally but an observation that MANY people do exactly as you did
>on any number of breeds and they arent professionals at all. Shall we
>believe them all? The simple fact is:
Joanne was very clear that her experience is limited, but that she has
some credentials to show that she understands it for what it is. She
does not show a prejudice - she had experience before she formed her
opinion. She does not say that all Chows are dangerous, or any other
claptrap like that. She says that IN HER EXPERIENCE AS A PROFESSIONAL
TRAINER, people should be careful with Chows around children. This
seems quite sensible to me - I think people should be careful with all
breeds around children!
>1) No entire breed is aggressive. This is the same as "The entire Caucasian
>race is NOT aggressive" or "The entire black African race is NOT aggressive"
>when referring to humans.
Joanne does not say anything like that!
>2) If you ARE a professional dog trainer who deals with dogs with disciplinary
>problems then obviously you WILL see more of any particular breed with a
>problem. This does NOT mean an entire breed is bad. Common sense tells anyone,
>professionals included, this. To claim otherwise *IS* a slight against your
>professional reputation. No true professional would make such a claim.
I think that you read a great deal more into the passages you are
quoting than I did. You might consider rereading a post and your
answer before posting it. You are obviously very passionate about your
breed, but not as obviously objective about what you read...
Joanne:
>>Generally speaking, I believe that Chow Chows may have a very loving and
>>devoted attitude towards their owners. This could be the case until they
>>are asked to do (or not to do something) they (the Chow) don't agree with.
>That is just pure rot.
>snip examples
> So, as I have claimed
>SIGNIFICANTLY more than 20 and you have claimed 20, by the law of averages and
>by YOUR example, should I claim ALL the breed is OK? Nope. Some Chows ARENT OK
>but then some owners arent OK either.
Joanne does not claim that all Chows are nasty, just that people
should be aware of a breed tendency to require special care. Something
that you go on to say yourself!
Joanne:
>>In obedience you will come to a point of refusal with almost any dog.
>>Chows just don't seem to accept authority from anyone or anything.
>Chows are not a dog I would bother to utility train. There have been
>successful cases and so on but I have found that all but one of my own Chows
>was "aloof" as they are supposed to be and highly intelligent. They are not
>predisposed to do something unless they see a reason or want to do it just
>because you tell them to do it - the ones I have owned, I mean.
Notice that you go on here to say that they are aloof and a not as
well suited for Obedience as some breeds. Joanne says that they tend
to be a bit stubborn and you say that they want a reason before they
will work for you. I don't see a huge difference of opinion here...
>snip
Joanne:
>>Most owners may actually recognize the problem, but just avoids doing the
>>thing the dog doesn't like. This "thing" has been to known be: brushing,
>>cleaning the dog's ears, touching the dog's feet, rubbing his tummy,
>>pushing his rear end down to sit, pulling down on his collar while
>>teaching him to lay down, not setting his food dish down directly in front
>>of him, and making him get off the couch.
>None of the above has EVER been a prob for me for my Chows. However, you must
>realise that in australia (and possibly other countries), if you are showing
>in normal shows (not utility shows), teaching the dog to sit when you stop
>walking isnt a good idea. Show judges prefer them to stand near you.
What I see is that you are a very experience owner of Chows. In all
probability you have the sort of dog handling habits that teach your
dogs early on to be subordinate to your wishes without giving you a
bad time. With that sort of upbringing, even a tough and touchy breed
(which I don't believe Chows to necessarily be) can be a good reliable
pet. A more average pet owner probably needs more dog handling skills
to be a good Chow owner and to get the sort of results that you get
without even thinking about it. If you are totally honest, you will
admit that your breed (like ALL others!) isn't for everyone! I have no
trouble with Chows myself, but I am an experienced dog handler/groomer
and can easily see where others might. They are not an "easy" breed
and may be more aggressive in the USA than they are in Australia -
blood lines differ.
>FYI, my most CHOWISH Chow is the one I have now near me as I type. She was
>taught by me, however, to retrieve and to DROP purely because someone told me
>you would never get a Chow to do that.
>snip
That proves that you are a good trainer, not necessarily that she
would be easy for a novice to train!
Joanne:
>>This behavior problem was even observed in a 3 month old male Chow puppy
>>that had been brought to me for private lessons because he had already bit
>>every member of the household (5 people). One child even had to have
>>stitches. We couldn't even get a collar on the puppy without drastic
>A 3 month old biting everyone in the house and causing stitches? Now THIS is
>something that has me laughing my arse off! What next? A 12 week old puppy
>does this? HAHAHA! Why do you bother typing this? Surely no-one in their right
>mind believes this.
Obviously you would never allow this to happen with your dogs (and I
wouldn't with mine, whatever their breed), but it certainly could
happen. There was a guy that couldn't control his 9 week old Beagle
puppy online last month...
Joanne:
>>restraint measures. The puppy was not frightened, he just didn't want
>>restraint. He actually went ballistic. I have a scar on my left thigh
>>where the little guy bit me. He was a loaded time bomb in a cute as a
>>button puppy outfit.
>snip ridicule
Joanne:
>>The owners were not up for my suggestions for drastic training measures
>>and to have him neutered immediately, so my final advice to that family
>>was to have the puppy put to sleep and find a new one. Be that as it may,
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>You are a disgrace if that is what you did. A damned disgrace. You shouldnt be
>allowed near pups or animals if this is your answer. A pup of that age may
>have been mistreated and be fearful but they can be trained out of it.
A pup that age could just as easily have been very poorly bred (not
all are as careful with their breeding stock as you are!) and just
plain nasty nuts. I have seen it happen occasionally with other
breeds. It can be genetic and you are not doing your breed a service
if you are afraid to admit that poor breeding practices can foster
this type of temperament. I have seen the occasional puppy in my first
breed (English Setters) that totally went against the breed type of
loving, sweet, English gentleman and was just plain unreliably nasty.
When it happened with one of my carefully raised dogs (from birth), I
realized that my breed has a problem. The dog was put to sleep (though
pointed in the show ring and fully obedience trained) and his parents
were desexed (though typically sweet and loving) and placed as pets.
The problem is rare, but it exists and I see breeders blaming poor
temperaments on environment. That is very dangerous to the breed's
future. Breeders must be very objective about their breed to make a
positive difference and all faults must be considered from a genetic
viewpoint.
Joanne:
>>you know what they did? They gave the pup away to live on a farm so he
>>could roam free.
>I am glad they did. I hope they had the sense never to come your way again,
>too.
Actually this action was totally irresponsible. If the puppy was
dangerous, it could injure someone and they would be responsible for
it (possibly even legally, as they knew the dog to have problems).
There is no excuse for letting a dog like this to go, except to a
fully informed owner that has the emotional and training tools to
properly deal with it! What if the dog were to kill a child? It
happens and, no matter what the reason, this dog was headed the wrong
direction. Not all owners have 20 years experience dealing with Chows
and could deal properly with this puppy. Children are more important
than dogs. (If we don't agree on that, I think we can't agree on
anything of importance!)
>All in all, I find your whole tirade disgraceful and unbelievable and point
>out to anybody reading this that THIS is the reason for so many states in so
>many countries actually starting to legislate against ALL dogs, regardless of
>breed. This sort of CRAP.
No, I saw no evidence of a tirade, except for yours! She stated her
experience and her evidence and came up with a reasonable conclusion.
As far as I can see, her advice was for people to be careful with
Chows around children and that they can be stubborn and some of them
resent training. I am quite sure that this is true and that Chows are
*not* a dog for every owner. This is not changed just because you are
an owner that is well suited to Chows and very well experienced. Chows
would have a better reputation, if people were more cautious about
purchasing them. If Chows are purchased by people that are prepared to
deal with there temperament, the owners will do better with them and
keep them under control and others will be impressed...
Carol
--
Patchwork English Setters and
Carwyn Silky Terriers
http://www.prodogs.com/dbn/carwyn/index.htm
gregh
On 23-Mar-97 16:18:13, Kenneth Cain assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
>>
>> Jim, I've known many, many "AKC judges, pro trainers and handlers, as
>> well as vets" who were mostly DOG DUMB people. I happen to like the
>> Chow.
>[...]
>Thanks Joe,
>A Chow breeder in Canada told me that while showing her Chow a judge
>ordered her removed from the ring.
>When asked why, the judge replied that he would not tolerate a dog
>being choked.
>She insisted that her Chow was not being choked.
>The judge said "It's obvious you are choking the dog because his tongue
>is turning blue.
>She said that it took several Chow owners to convince the judge
>that he was wrong.
>Needless to say the judge was quite embarrassed when it was found he
>wasn't familiar with the Chow breed standard.
Ken,
Ella
Dang! Life imitates crappy situation comedies and yet again the
kid knows best and tells us adults how to behave. I think I'm
going to vomit.
At fifteen I would say you have passed your 'sell by date' for
'cute', Emily, and are rapidly approaching Buttinski status.
Is this just an American phenomena (children being wiser, more
intelligent, moral, pacific and saintlier than adults)? And if
so, is this the real reason that Chelsea goes everywhere with
her folks: so that her pearls of wisdom and mediatory skills are
constantly and readily available? Tee-hee.
Ella
"Cute teenagers exist only on television, I
suspect. I know there are none in my
neighborhood".
Robert MacKenzie, TV Guide, 1979
gregh
On 25-Mar-97 08:53:05, Kenneth Cain assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
>>
>> At least the only time someone told me I was choking MY Chow because hr
>> tongue was blue, the guy had the decency to be drunk and hanging out the
>> door of a pub! ;-}
>Greg, that sure doesn't say much for the judge does it.(G)
Ken,
Judges can be odd creatures. I actually applied for and got a job at a place
where the boss turned out to be a dog show judge I had known for years. He
didnt have Chows but knew what they were supposed to be in "show terms" of
course. He ended up telling me that yes, he HAD disqualified more than one
Chow from the ring but in percentages per breed, Chows were way down the list.
Eg, percentages based on numbers of a particular breed. You would think with
less Chows here than a lot of other breeds and thus the percentage curve
caused by ONE Chow being disqualified having more effect than one animal in a
more popylar breed, we would have been higher. He was surprised, too. ;-} He
knows the reputation Chows have gotten and he agreed with me when I said it is
largely founded on the aspirations of others' needs rather than fact.
>BTW, have you noticed that Chows are a rare subject in
>news:rec.pets.dogs.behavior
It probably means well behaved animals dont need a lot said about them? ;-}
gregh
On 24-Mar-97 01:01:01, Nancy E. Holmes or R. Nelson Ruffin assaulted me about
Re: Chow Chows
>> >Maybe it depends on the line of chows in your area, maybe on the raising
>> >both before and after you get a pup. I will say that Dr. Dunbar did
>target
>> >the oriental breeds among those that had the most problems in that
>> >behavioral area.
>>
>> Nancy!! You keep changing addresses to hide, dont you? ;-}
>Say what? - youmusthavemeconfusedwithsomeoneelse <g>- my home computer
>address has been the same for the entire time I've been on the net.
Nancy,
Really? Oh so it was. It was ME who changed addresses. ;-} I have a saved
letter from you from Aug 21, 1996. ;-}
>snip
>> In regards to owners, I can just PICTURE some new Chow owners who know no
>> better and want a lap-dog to obey their every whim and clean the toilet
>> ordering the dog about. It gets a case of the dirts with the owner and
>ignores
>> them so the owner starts with a hit here and there that gets worse if the
>Chow
>> doesnt obey immediately. In the end, you end up with a frightened dog
>that may
>> be defensive or even associate hitting with humans etc and become
>> unmanageable.
>snip
>Actually what I was referring to is the educated opinion of a well know
>behaviorist who was working with pups from homes that started off on the
>absolute right foot with the dogs by attending puppy kindergarten - no
>hitting implied.
Yeah and I was referring generically and not to the doctor in particular with
that comment. I meant the animals he SEES may well be LIKE that because of the
scenario I gave you and how easy it is to visualise it happenign with owners
who know no better. As such, I contend that people working with problem
animals will see any particular breed they pick out of those they see as a
problem, more than anyone else would - or that at least the possibility of
that being the case is higher. In the case of Dr. Dunbar, this is probably not
true but in the case of others, probably so. Very few people seem to have the
ability to reason things out like my vet, for instance, who takes all animals
as individuals, though they are members of a breed.
> His opinion was that the chows were so self contained that they did not
>learn the basic inhibitions that puppy class teaches most dogs. But he did
>not decide chows were bad - just that *his* approach to them was wrong and
>so he changed it for his clients with excellent results which he was happy
>to share with breeders and owners alike. He felt the self containment was
>misinterpreted as *good* behavior when in fact the dog was missing out on
>basic dog education by being aloof.
It's good to see someone with sense enough to realise the mistake being made
was not the breed's fault.
> As he works with breeders as well as owners he was able to report that by
>changing the timing of multiple person socialization and forcing
>interaction with other puppies the resulting adult chows were better pets
>than ones that he previously had worked with from the same bloodlines and
>breeders as well as the 'random' dogs from all the uglier places dogs are
>purchased from. I never got an impression that Dr. Dunbar feared or
>disliked this breed or any other, just that he viewed them as a new
>challenging puzzle as he figured out how best to enhance training and
>socialization to fit them into the average dog owner's home.
There is no doubt that Chows are different. Their reactions to certain things
imply thought deeper than you would normally think a dog would be able to
attain. It is probably this ability which keeps me continually amazed with
them. I had a Chow who worked out that by pushing on one corner of her cage,
the frame pushed out of line and it sprung the gate so she could get into the
back yard. When I wired it shut, she worked out how to climb out the window of
the inside part of it and jump out. You really needed to be on your toes with
her! ;-}
gregh
On 24-Mar-97 14:41:36, Kenneth Cain assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
>> I don't know what the standard in Canada is, but here, it's a DQ if the dog
>> doesn't have a black or blue tongue. And I don't study standards at
>> all...the chow isn't even one of my favorite breeds (not saying anything
>> against them, I just don't like the breed, like some of you think bulldogs
>> are the ugliest things)
>>
>> Emily
>Hi Emily,
>It's a DQ in Canada too. You know more about Chows than the judge did
>and yet some people will quote judges and others as though they are
>some kind of infallable expert.
Ken,
Exactly! Yet they dont always see police as infallible when the actions of a
policeman are of a lot more importance than a show judge! Amazing, aint it?
gregh
On 25-Mar-97 01:46:38, Carol Dunster assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
>>Joanne, I dont believe that for one moment. I would rather believe MANY more
>>years than you OWNING Chows, the experiences of a LIFETIME of my father who
>>had to live and work with dogs and sometimes depend on them for survival.
>>Too many people like you come out with that only because they have an axe to
>>grind. Too many people come out like you and paint a veneer of "I know what
>>I am talking about" and then proceed to paint their own inecusable PREJUDICE
>>on an entire breed, Chow or any other. This is not intended as a slight on
>>you, personally but an observation that MANY people do exactly as you did on
>>any number of breeds and they arent professionals at all. Shall we believe
>>them all? The simple fact is:
>Joanne was very clear that her experience is limited, but that she has
>some credentials to show that she understands it for what it is. She
>does not show a prejudice - she had experience before she formed her
>opinion. She does not say that all Chows are dangerous, or any other
>claptrap like that. She says that IN HER EXPERIENCE AS A PROFESSIONAL
>TRAINER, people should be careful with Chows around children. This
>seems quite sensible to me - I think people should be careful with all
>breeds around children!
Carol,
Then you can see the prejudice if you typed it BACK at me. This isnt to say
that Joanne is KNOWINGLY prejudiced. Most humans are surprised and embarrassed
when their own prejudice is shown and proven to them.
What IS prejudice is to say "you should be careful around children with
Chows". It is prejudicial to pull one breed out of all breeds like that. IMHO,
you should be reasonably aware around ANY child with ANY dog of ANY breed or
crossbreed. The most lovely natured dog in the world may turn and snap at a
child purely because the child has purposely or accidentally done something to
hurt the animal. This doesnt make that animal OR it's breed bad.
I have HAD one Chow I wasnt comfortable to trust around children with me there
but when this Chow was about a 6 month old, I had her at a car show and a kid
jumped out of nowhere and slapped her SO hard and gave her SUCH a fright that
when I picked her up, crying and whimpering and took her out to a grassy spot
that was mostly clear of humans, she immediately evacuated her bowels in
fright. I thought, with the howling, that she had an eye damaged but
thankfully it was just the fright. From that moment on, she was afraid of kids
though not adults and a dog that is AFRAID of something may react in a way you
dont want it to react. Having said that, I still occasionally held her while
young neices and nephews gave her a pat. She didnt like it but she knew I
wouldnt let them hurt her. All the rest of my Chows, however, didnt have this
problem. Some werent really all that happy to play with kids and some let them
sleep on them, much the same as any breakup of any breed. In any breed, you
can get individuals who are the opposite of what the breed is supposed to be
like. Add this to my experience with ALL Chows I have known over the years
through shows and breeders and I have a much more extensive base of experience
to draw from, ON THIS BREED, to say: A) She is wrong in her contention. Chows
are no more or less trustworthy, AS A BREED, with kids than any other breeds.
2) Picking ONE breed out, be it Chows, Labradors, you name it, IS prejudicial.
>>1) No entire breed is aggressive. This is the same as "The entire Caucasian
>>race is NOT aggressive" or "The entire black African race is NOT aggressive"
>>when referring to humans.
>Joanne does not say anything like that!
Please read my comment as I typed it. You are making something out of nothing
here. Did I claim she said that about those human races mentioned?
>>2) If you ARE a professional dog trainer who deals with dogs with
>>disciplinary problems then obviously you WILL see more of any particular
>>breed with a problem. This does NOT mean an entire breed is bad. Common
>>sense tells anyone, professionals included, this. To claim otherwise *IS* a
>>slight against your professional reputation. No true professional would make
>>such a claim.
>I think that you read a great deal more into the passages you are
>quoting than I did. You might consider rereading a post and your
>answer before posting it. You are obviously very passionate about your
>breed, but not as obviously objective about what you read...
I think you read a great deal LESS in my reply than you want to admit. It is a
plain and simple truth. If you are a professional dealing with dogs with a
problem, then yes, you WILL see more of any breed you care to name that DOES
have a problem. If you are a TRUE professional, to claim that any particular
BREED as a whole, has more aggression problems than any other simply IS a
slight against your own professional reputation. It makes not one iota of
difference if you claim otherwise. It IS a fact. Would you take your car to a
mechanic who claims that the sort of car you have is crap just because 4 out
of 4000 have problems? I would have to think the mechanic has a problem.
>Joanne:
>>>Generally speaking, I believe that Chow Chows may have a very loving and
>>>devoted attitude towards their owners. This could be the case until they
>>>are asked to do (or not to do something) they (the Chow) don't agree with.
>>That is just pure rot.
>>snip examples
>> So, as I have claimed
>>SIGNIFICANTLY more than 20 and you have claimed 20, by the law of averages
>>and by YOUR example, should I claim ALL the breed is OK? Nope. Some Chows
>>ARENT OK but then some owners arent OK either.
>Joanne does not claim that all Chows are nasty, just that people
>should be aware of a breed tendency to require special care. Something
>that you go on to say yourself!
She DOES claim that they are a "very loving breed and caring breed ....until
asked to do something they dont want to do, by their owners". The inference
she makes is that when asked to do something they dont want to do, they ARENT
loving which leads the reader to believe something bad will happen. This is
just pure rot! There is no other word for it. I ask my Chows to do something,
daily, that they dont want to do - whether that is to come inside or to go to
bed etc when they dont want to - and though they openly DISPLAY that they dont
want to do it and as young animals, will go to lengths to get out of doing it
(such as running out of your reach), they will eventually do it, anyway. At no
time do my Chows - ANY of them - display any attitude other than reluctance or
a positive want to NOT do it by staying out of your reach.
If you read otherwise in her comment, then I agree that maybe her comment was
just badly worded but on the face of it, it didnt look a bit like anything
other than a veiled warning.
>Joanne:
>>>In obedience you will come to a point of refusal with almost any dog.
>>>Chows just don't seem to accept authority from anyone or anything.
>>Chows are not a dog I would bother to utility train. There have been
>>successful cases and so on but I have found that all but one of my own Chows
>>was "aloof" as they are supposed to be and highly intelligent. They are not
>>predisposed to do something unless they see a reason or want to do it just
>>because you tell them to do it - the ones I have owned, I mean.
>Notice that you go on here to say that they are aloof and a not as
>well suited for Obedience as some breeds. Joanne says that they tend
I said that they are not a breed *I* would bother to utility train. I am,
though, NOT someone personally predisposed to making animals jump through
hoops. I dont wish to denigrate utility training. Let me say it just isnt
something I consider *I* like. However, in all the cases I have known, I cant
say I have seen a lot of Chows that would MAKE great utility show dogs. I
owned one that probably would have beaten MOST other dogs into submission. She
was obedient on ANYTHING and so agile that she would have been able to do
those things they require at those shows.
>to be a bit stubborn and you say that they want a reason before they
>will work for you. I don't see a huge difference of opinion here...
Then the comment that she makes "Chows dont seem to accept authority from
anyone or anything" means nothing to you? It means to me she is saying, which
she IS saying, that they are totally untrainable. How you see otherwise, I
dont know. That contention of hers is not true, however.
>>snip
>Joanne:
>>>Most owners may actually recognize the problem, but just avoids doing the
>>>thing the dog doesn't like. This "thing" has been to known be: brushing,
>>>cleaning the dog's ears, touching the dog's feet, rubbing his tummy,
>>>pushing his rear end down to sit, pulling down on his collar while
>>>teaching him to lay down, not setting his food dish down directly in front
>>>of him, and making him get off the couch.
>>None of the above has EVER been a prob for me for my Chows. However, you
>>must realise that in australia (and possibly other countries), if you are
>>showing in normal shows (not utility shows), teaching the dog to sit when
>>you stop walking isnt a good idea. Show judges prefer them to stand near
>>you.
>What I see is that you are a very experience owner of Chows. In all
>probability you have the sort of dog handling habits that teach your
>dogs early on to be subordinate to your wishes without giving you a
^^^^^^^^^^^
No, sorry, that just ISNT the case except where the need to subordinate them
is paramount to their health. Some of my Chows hated needles and would squirm
when about to get one and I would darnedwell make sure I held them still so
the needle wouldnt hurt them but some just stand there and dont show any
reaction, such as my current one. However, in normal circumstances, I DONT
like to subordinate ANY animal. Intellectually, they arent the equal of humans
but I like to make my dogs aware that they are treated as well as I can treat
them. In part, I do this by NOT requiring that they change to meet MY needs
more than is necessary to their well being (eg, I refuse to let them run out
the gate when it is open etc). It is my *PERSONAL* opinion (that I hold
without proof other than my own dogs over the years) that the more natural you
can make your animal, the less the problems/chance of problems. My brother in
law has a lovely natured puppy miniature Daschy. It has a loving personality
and is a dog you could just take home with you the minute you meet it.
However, his wife has been making it do this, that and the other, in order to
show off it's tricks to people who visit. It has gone a little nutty since she
started that. I cant think of anything worse than driving my dogs insane for
personal vanity.
>bad time. With that sort of upbringing, even a tough and touchy breed
>(which I don't believe Chows to necessarily be) can be a good reliable
I often call my current girl in, who is not a TYPICAL Chow in that she is MORE
self-willed than any Chow I have known and she looks at me with her nose in
the air. I cant help but laugh and the moment I do, she grins back at me. She
tells me what SHE wants by either jumping on the spot (meaning "come out and
play" in her way) or she will then come in as I wanted. She just likes to play
tricks on me. Oh, dont believe it isnt possible in case that is what you are
thinking. I sometimes try and sneak up on her when she is on the opposite side
of our outside laundry and she will quickly sneak out of sight and come up
behind ME and stick a cold wet nose in the back of my leg. She thinks it is
funny because she sits there grinning at me, afterwards. I realise you stated
you dont necessarily believe the breed to be tough etc but if an individual of
a breed was to be called "tough", this current Chow of mine would deserve that
more than any other Chow. Even WITH that, she STILL is obedient. She also has
a lovely personality with a practical joker streak! Rotten Dog! ;-}
>pet. A more average pet owner probably needs more dog handling skills
>to be a good Chow owner and to get the sort of results that you get
Yes and no. Yes if you want to teach the dog to be a Utility trial dog and no
if you just want it to be reasonable and friendly as I do. If anybody with ANY
dog would just take the time out to study the dog's reactions when things
happen, they will get to know their dog that much better. I know people in
this group probably DO fall into that category but the majority of dog owners
DONT seem that able to see their pet as anything other than a dog. They can be
so much more, given a chance.
>without even thinking about it. If you are totally honest, you will
>admit that your breed (like ALL others!) isn't for everyone! I have no
Yes, I have said that and recently, because of the situation of one person who
owns a Chow, I advised that they contact the local Chow club in their area and
ask if there is any way they can help placing it in a home. This person had a
situation where, unfortunately, any strong dog would be a burden. I mean
PHYSICALLY strong, BTW. A Pommeranian or other small dog would be much better.
You cant say ANY breed is suited for ALL people. Eg, I love ALL dogs but I
wouldnt personally like to have a breed that just wont leave you alone all day
or bark all day. My Chows bark when there is a reason but unfortunately, that
reason is sometimes the local fence-walking cat and of course you cant let the
dogs bark on and on if you want good neighbour relationships. I make mine stop
if that is the case and if there is another good reason, I investigate it.
However, when the cat isnt around and there is no-one entering the front gate
etc, they are content not to be a noisy lot. ;-}
>trouble with Chows myself, but I am an experienced dog handler/groomer
>and can easily see where others might. They are not an "easy" breed
>and may be more aggressive in the USA than they are in Australia -
>blood lines differ.
Well to be honest I cant comment on that bit because I am not 100% sure what
you mean by "easy".
>>FYI, my most CHOWISH Chow is the one I have now near me as I type. She was
>>taught by me, however, to retrieve and to DROP purely because someone told
>>me you would never get a Chow to do that. snip
>That proves that you are a good trainer, not necessarily that she
>would be easy for a novice to train!
To be honest, I thought she would be near impossible to get to do this but
fortunately she wasnt. It was quite easy. The "Good girl" and cuddle are a
real incentive to do something when I really want her to do it. ;-}
>Joanne:
>>>This behavior problem was even observed in a 3 month old male Chow puppy
>>>that had been brought to me for private lessons because he had already bit
>>>every member of the household (5 people). One child even had to have
>>>stitches. We couldn't even get a collar on the puppy without drastic
>>A 3 month old biting everyone in the house and causing stitches? Now THIS is
>>something that has me laughing my arse off! What next? A 12 week old puppy
>>does this? HAHAHA! Why do you bother typing this? Surely no-one in their
>>right mind believes this.
>Obviously you would never allow this to happen with your dogs (and I
>wouldn't with mine, whatever their breed), but it certainly could
>happen. There was a guy that couldn't control his 9 week old Beagle
>puppy online last month...
Like any puppy of any breed with the snout/mouth large enough to do it, a Chow
may grab your hand and/or arm in excitement. Pups do this. ALL my life with
fullbreds and crossbreds, it has been the same. No particular breed was any
more or less this way. However, I have never seen ANY breed cause stitches
with milk teeth. Sure, I have been moving my hand when a pup grabs it and it
causes a scratch (and believe me, milk teeth scratches STING!) but none have
ever caused one stitch. My sister's crossbreed dog, when a pup, used to do the
same thing and even grabbed her 7 month old daughter's arm with milk teeth. No
marks, no probs. I can understand a NEWBORN human baby may well get a tear
inthe skin even from milk teeth but you would have to be a dope to put a
newborn near a puppy so that this happens, dont you think?
I seriously doubt the statement that a 12 week old pup caused all that damage.
>Joanne:
>>>restraint measures. The puppy was not frightened, he just didn't want
>>>restraint. He actually went ballistic. I have a scar on my left thigh
>>>where the little guy bit me. He was a loaded time bomb in a cute as a
>>>button puppy outfit.
>>snip ridicule
>Joanne:
>>>The owners were not up for my suggestions for drastic training measures
>>>and to have him neutered immediately, so my final advice to that family
>>>was to have the puppy put to sleep and find a new one. Be that as it may,
>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>You are a disgrace if that is what you did. A damned disgrace. You shouldnt
>>be allowed near pups or animals if this is your answer. A pup of that age
>>may have been mistreated and be fearful but they can be trained out of it.
>A pup that age could just as easily have been very poorly bred (not
>all are as careful with their breeding stock as you are!) and just
That is just unprovable rubbish with TWO exceptions. Constant in-breeding CAN
lead to unforseen consequences. A HEALTH problem may ALSO lead to
unforseen consequences. They are the ONLY exceptions. ANY pup from ANY
breeding can be trained to be a civil animal. ANY breed, also. Otherwise it
cant be proven. I dont know of anyone ever proving a genetic link in any breed
or breeding predisposing it towards aggression. If someone ever DOES prove
that, then their's the proof.
>plain nasty nuts. I have seen it happen occasionally with other
>breeds. It can be genetic and you are not doing your breed a service
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
*ONLY* if there is a recessive gene inside a particular breeding that causes a
recurring and provable health problem that leads towards canine mental
instability. If you mean otherwise, sorry but that is rubbish.
>if you are afraid to admit that poor breeding practices can foster
>this type of temperament. I have seen the occasional puppy in my first
Poor breeding has nothing to do with temperament and you have NO clinical
proof of the opposite. You have a lot of breeders who continually say they
breed AWAY from aggression or that someone else's stock are agressive because
they dont bother to do that but it is simple provable logic that ANY dog can
be aggressive and it is based upon their upbringing or circumstances in
their lives in nearly every case and their health in others. In very RARE
cases, a genetic disorder may cause health probs which cause aggression but
this is RARE and in no way anything that breeders can claim for nearly every
occasion that they state "poor breeding" as the problem. Poor breeding often
produces non-show quality animals but at the moment of their birth, they are a
blank slate just like human children.
>breed (English Setters) that totally went against the breed type of
>loving, sweet, English gentleman and was just plain unreliably nasty.
OK but why? Did you realise that some people see "nasty" because of a
misconception on their part? Eg, a boisterous pup who is teething may
occasionally decide to use you as a teething ring and this is seen as nasty.
It is nothing but puppy bad judgement. However, it takes the ability to SEE
this for what it is. I even had to correct a pet shop owner the other day who
said a pup was badly biting his staff. I got it out and it grabbed my arm but
you could tell there was no vicious intent. I told him to put something in
there for it to chew on and that was all it took. Of course, the pup wouldnt
let go of the chew toy when picked up so I guess if you buy the pup, you get
it's chew toy as part of the package. ;-}
>When it happened with one of my carefully raised dogs (from birth), I
>realized that my breed has a problem. The dog was put to sleep (though
>pointed in the show ring and fully obedience trained) and his parents
>were desexed (though typically sweet and loving) and placed as pets.
I would love to know what ALL the facts were, though. I am not having a go at
YOU when I say this but I contend we never WILL know, now. I contend there was
something you missed in your summation of the situation, not that you were
wrong in what you came up with based on what you could recognise. I am sorry
to say that to you but without proof (and it is all gone now) then there can
never be a way to say this to you that you will believe. Just think on it for
the future. Maybe whatever made your dog aggressive happened outside of your
sight. My Chows used to be teased by a local brat of a kid and the elder of
them that was alive at the time heard the kid coming (he was talking and I was
watching from inside the house as I just happened to look out the window at
what my girls were up to at that time). She pushed into the garden to be out
of sight and when the kid came into her sight, she jumped at him from out of
the bushes - she was behind the fence the whole time - and scared the heck
out of the kid and she was actually grinning at her success. The kid was about
to throw the tennis ball he had into her head when I intervened. He never DID
tease them again after that. Now, you can imagine how I would have reacted to
seeing her jump out at him had I not known he teased them, before that time. I
would have been very worried. Without the WHOLE proof, you can only make
judgements based on what you know.
>The problem is rare, but it exists and I see breeders blaming poor
>temperaments on environment. That is very dangerous to the breed's
>future. Breeders must be very objective about their breed to make a
>positive difference and all faults must be considered from a genetic
>viewpoint.
There is NO genetic proof that aggressive traits are passed from one dog to
another in the normal run of things. Sure, they have to be trained to be
socially acceptable but so do your HUMAN kids! The unfortunate fact is that
more dogs are socially acceptable than human kids near me!
>Joanne:
>>>you know what they did? They gave the pup away to live on a farm so he
>>>could roam free.
>>I am glad they did. I hope they had the sense never to come your way again,
>>too.
>Actually this action was totally irresponsible. If the puppy was
>dangerous, it could injure someone and they would be responsible for
>it (possibly even legally, as they knew the dog to have problems).
I guess it depends on the facts again. Maybe the people taking it knew the
probs and took it thinking they could cure them. When I was 6 years old, my
father took an adult Collie from people up the road when they offered it to
him. They said it was going to be put down if he didnt take it. The poor dog
had been mistreated and it took weeks before the poor thing would come out of
it's hiding spot in our yard even to eat. It would only eat when everyone was
inside and only then facing the house. If any of us went outside, it would go
into hiding again. After many weeks, my father succeeded in getting it to come
out for him and weeks after that, it allowed us to get near it but no-one
other than my father to pat it. Eventually, because of the way my father
insisted we treat it and the way it saw we responded, it eventually came out,
became a socially acceptable well adjusted dog and liked to have us kids sit
on a hessian bag and drag us around the yard on it. However, before coming to
us, it was labelled "vicious". It simply was NOT. It probably DID try to
attack the guy mistreating it, though. I am sure *I* would have a go at
someone kicking into me, too!
>There is no excuse for letting a dog like this to go, except to a
>fully informed owner that has the emotional and training tools to
>properly deal with it! What if the dog were to kill a child? It
How do you know they DIDNT know the full facts?
>happens and, no matter what the reason, this dog was headed the wrong
>direction. Not all owners have 20 years experience dealing with Chows
>and could deal properly with this puppy. Children are more important
>than dogs. (If we don't agree on that, I think we can't agree on
>anything of importance!)
There's no reason to be smart about this subject, really.
>>All in all, I find your whole tirade disgraceful and unbelievable and point
>>out to anybody reading this that THIS is the reason for so many states in so
>>many countries actually starting to legislate against ALL dogs, regardless
>>of breed. This sort of CRAP.
>No, I saw no evidence of a tirade, except for yours! She stated her
Then you refuse to see that which is in evidence.
>experience and her evidence and came up with a reasonable conclusion.
Oh - it is reasonable to tell someone to put the dog down, is it? You replace
or get rid of a car that is bad but you dont treat a dog like an appliance. If
you cant believe this, then you shouldnt have dogs OR animals at all.
>As far as I can see, her advice was for people to be careful with
>Chows around children and that they can be stubborn and some of them
...yes and as I said, that is just plain prejudice. You have to have a certain
amount of awareness around children with ANY breed. Not Chows in particular.
>resent training. I am quite sure that this is true and that Chows are
It isnt a case of resnting to be trained. It is a case of an intelligence that
wants to know a reason for doing something. They dont just get up and come
because YOU feel like it at all times (my Chows at least, with the exception
of 1) but they WILL do just that if THEY feel like it.
>*not* a dog for every owner. This is not changed just because you are
Of course they arent a breed for everyone. ALL breeds are equally not for
everyone. Some people dont like red dogs so individuals within a breed that
are red dont suit some people!
>an owner that is well suited to Chows and very well experienced. Chows
It doesnt change the TRUTH, either, no matter how much you deny it.
>would have a better reputation, if people were more cautious about
>purchasing them. If Chows are purchased by people that are prepared to
>deal with there temperament, the owners will do better with them and
>keep them under control and others will be impressed...
The same, however, can be said of ANY breed. I hope you dont seriously
disagree with that. Joanne's having picked CHOWS out *IS* prejudicial, if you
DO agree.
Paul Green
Susan Mudgett aka little gator <s...@harvee.billerica.ma.us> wrote in
article <5h6t98$f...@harvee.billerica.ma.us>...
>
> Ella (el...@saix.net) wrote:
> : Dang! Life imitates crappy situation comedies and yet again the
> : kid knows best and tells us adults how to behave. I think I'm
> : going to vomit.
>
> I'm not sure what your point is, since Emily's post was more polite,
> mature, and reasonable than your reply to it.
>
I agree. I'm new to this NG, but have been lurking for a few weeks.
If Emily really is only 15, I thought her post was outstanding, and Ella's
response to it meanspirited.
Julia (owner of an IW --soon to be two IWs, and two mixed breeds from the
shelter)
Paul Green
Carol Dunster <cdun...@Ritzville.org> wrote in article
<33399a03...@news.brigadoon.com>...
> Joanne does not claim that all Chows are nasty, just that people
> should be aware of a breed tendency to require special care. Something
> that you go on to say yourself!
>
> and may be more aggressive in the USA than they are in Australia -
> blood lines differ.
I was wondering about that too. Could very well be the case.
>
> No, I saw no evidence of a tirade, except for yours! She stated her
> experience and her evidence and came up with a reasonable conclusion.
> As far as I can see, her advice was for people to be careful with
> Chows around children and that they can be stubborn and some of them
> resent training.
Very nice defense of Joanne's comments. I once had a similar run-in with
RR breeders and it was clear that passionate breeders have a hard time
being objective about their breed.
Julia
Paul Green
> Poor breeding has nothing to do with temperament and you have NO clinical
> proof of the opposite.
Haven't you watched as once temperamentally sound dogs have, through
careless breeding (often once the breed became really popular) become
nasty? Like the American Cocker Spaniel? Maybe this hasn't happened so
much in Australia?
>> Poor breeding often
> produces non-show quality animals but at the moment of their birth, they
are a
> blank slate just like human children.
What makes you think human children are a "blank slate"? They aren't and
more and more evidence is pointing away from such a theory. Children are
born with their own unique genetic make-up which interacts with the
environment. It's not an either/or thing.
> There is NO genetic proof that aggressive traits are passed from one dog
to
> another in the normal run of things. Sure, they have to be trained to be
> socially acceptable but so do your HUMAN kids! The unfortunate fact is
that
> more dogs are socially acceptable than human kids near me!
Some HUMAN kids are *much easier to "train" to be socially acceptable. A
kid whose temperament is stubborn, or quick to anger, etc. will be much
harder to "train" to behave in socially acceptable ways. In dogs as well
as people, certain genetic *tendancies *are inherited. If a breeder
doesn't know or care about what he doing, you will find that their
offspring are likelier to have temperament problems.
Julia
.
Paul Green
Kenneth Cain <ke...@txdirect.net> wrote in article >
> Jim
>
> Has anyone bothered to point out to this so obviously well-informed
> person that ALL breeds have specimens that are best kept away from
> children? There is no reason to single out the Chow as being
> unsuitable when the opposite is so much the truth.
You are right that there was no reason to single out the Chow, but I think
most reasonable people agree that there are a number of breeds, which,
because of unscrupulous breeding, have *generally become less reliable in
their temperament.
Of course, all breeds have their bad breeders and bad specimens, but some
breeds (usually ones that have become "fads" at one time or another) have
more than their share. And a breed that is naturally more protective, in
the wrong hands, (both with breeding and with owners) has more potential
for becoming aggressive, imo.
Julia
dogsnus
Ella wrote:
>
> Dang! Life imitates crappy situation comedies and yet again the
> kid knows best and tells us adults how to behave. I think I'm
> going to vomit.
>
*wonderful one*?? NOT
I happen to ENJOY Emily's posts, at least they are informative ,
introspective and not a waste of band width, like yours are.
>
> Is this just an American phenomena (children being wiser, more
> intelligent, moral, pacific and saintlier than adults)?
If indeed, her posts are indicitive of the American phenomena, then
Im damn grateful! There's hope for our country!!!
>
> Ella
> "Cute teenagers exist only on television, I
> suspect. I know there are none in my
> neighborhood".
> Robert MacKenzie, TV Guide, 1979
By this quote, I gather you know NOTHING about teenagers.
I wouldn't know about TV guide, I don't waste my time reading that
crap.
If I want to know about reality, I read the real news!
Terri
dogsnus
Jim wrote:
>
> qbt...@v1.arg (Dogman) wrote:
> >On a cold day in Hell, 22 Mar 1997 19:34:01 GMT, Jim <rob...@aug.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >[...]
> >>kids. My answer is no. There are other breeds that aren't kids
> >>breeds either. I have been around many, many Chows and I don't
> >>trust them because of my personal experances with them. I also
> >>consider AKC judges, professional trainers and handlers, as
> >>well as Vets to be worthy of listening to and I don't know of
> >>any that "praise" the breed, but many who are at least cautious
> >>off if not dislike the breed.
> >>
> >>Jim
> >
> >well as vets" who were mostly DOG DUMB people. I happen to like the
> >Chow.
> >
> >allowing my own children to be around a WELL-BRED, WELL-SOCIALIZED,
> >and WELL-TRAINED Chow. I think the Chow can be an absolutely
> >wonderful dog -- but no, it's not a dog for EVERYBODY. Few dogs are.
> >
> >Jim, you're simply blaming the wrong component. Blame the PEOPLE who
> >carelessly breed chows, do not socialize them properly, do not train
> >them correctly, and who put their chows into positions where they can
> >fail. Don't blame the dog, eh?
>
> D-man, I agree tht most of the problems DO in fact lie with the
> owner of the dog. One of the points you make is "Carelessly
> bred Chows". THESE are the ones that I mainy refer to as being
> untrustworthy and often difficult. The same is true of a number
> of other breeds. The Dobie and Rottie were originally wonderful
> breeds BUT, because of so much backyard breeding, it is hard to
> find a good one of either breed.
I interject here to say: It isn't hard at all to find a good
dog of the breeds mentioned, provided that the person is willing
to wait, do research and ask the necessary questions to insure
a good dog, AND be an informed owner.
Terri
Jim
dogsnus <Te...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
>Jim wrote:
SNIP
>> owner of the dog. One of the points you make is "Carelessly
>> bred Chows". THESE are the ones that I mainy refer to as being
>> untrustworthy and often difficult. The same is true of a number
>> of other breeds. The Dobie and Rottie were originally wonderful
>> breeds BUT, because of so much backyard breeding, it is hard to
>> find a good one of either breed.
>
>I interject here to say: It isn't hard at all to find a good
>dog of the breeds mentioned, provided that the person is willing
>to wait, do research and ask the necessary questions to insure
>a good dog, AND be an informed owner.
>Terri
Terri,
You made my point. Unless you LOOK and do your homework
and know what to ask and what to look for, you will likely get
a badly breed dog. There are too many bad one running around
and it takes a little work to find the good ones. That makes it
hard.
Jim
Ella
On 3/24/97 2:55PM, in message <5h6t98$f...@harvee.billerica.ma.us>,
Susan Mudgett aka little gator <s...@harvee.billerica.ma.us> wrote:
> Ella (el...@saix.net) wrote:
> : Dang! Life imitates crappy situation comedies and yet again the
> : kid knows best and tells us adults how to behave. I think I'm
> : going to vomit.
>
> I'm not sure what your point is, since Emily's post was more polite,
> mature, and reasonable than your reply to it.
And when was this a newsgroup about 'polite'? Generally, I've
noticed very little of it from anybody and you must be easily fooled
if you interpret supercilious smarm as 'polite'.
You want mature? Stick it in your freakin' ear.
Ella
Carol Dunster
On 24 Mar 97 00:18:59 +1000, gr...@hartingdale.com.au (gregh) wrote:
>snip
>Case in point: Today in the local shopping mall, in the biggest and best pet
>shop there was a puppy Chow, 8.5 weeks old according to the store sales
>assistants,
>snip
>If only people SELLING pups took the time to find what the person wants.
Here is where you make the point that pet stores just plain should not
sell puppies! They are under qualified to explain the needs of the
puppies to the public and frankly, this puppy is probably from a puppy
mill and will go on to give Chows the bad name that you despise. The
problem is that badly bred Chows exist and when they do, they can tend
to be aggressive. You may not like this, but it doesn't make it go
away.
While there are nicely bred Chows and well raised ones, it still
shouldn't blind people to those that aren't and I still would
recommend care if a family was looking for a Chow and didn't know a
whole lot about dogs. I don't think this disagrees very much with what
you have said, or with what the person you keep getting upset with
said! So, calm down! You are sounding a bit over the line when you
start to rant at people that are quite normal and not cutting your
breed down particularly at all. Wait until you get one of those
(other?) crazies that thinks all Chows are killers before you get all
wound up...
Carol Dunster
On 26 Mar 1997 22:51:24 GMT, "Paul Green" <pgr...@cris.com> wrote:
>I agree. I'm new to this NG, but have been lurking for a few weeks.
>
>If Emily really is only 15, I thought her post was outstanding, and Ella's
>response to it meanspirited.
Ella was *trying* to make a joke, as I am quite sure Emily can
understand (being only 15!). I think Emily does very well and I know
she can stand up for herself, if she thinks someone is out of line!
The point is (for the humor impaired - get off the computer and get
some sleep!) that a 15 year old is making more sense than most of the
adults on this issue and Ella wanted to point out that Emily is only a
kid and making serious sense and wanted to do it in a humorous manner.
(There - is that right Ella? and clear everyone else?)
So, let's step back adults and think carefully about what we read and
what we are going to respond with before we get out of line and get in
big fights over nothing.
Let's use our energy to shut down puppy sales in pet stores, or
something else useful...
gregh
On 29-Mar-97 14:49:50, Carol Dunster assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
>>snip
>>Case in point: Today in the local shopping mall, in the biggest and best pet
>>shop there was a puppy Chow, 8.5 weeks old according to the store sales
>>assistants,
>>snip
>>If only people SELLING pups took the time to find what the person wants.
>Here is where you make the point that pet stores just plain should not
>sell puppies! They are under qualified to explain the needs of the
It may have sounded that way to you but it wasnt meant that way. I have been
in pet stores where I would say the pet store people were really decent
people who cared where their sales were placed. Unfortunately, I havent found
many local pet stores like that. Come to think of it, I havent found ANY like
that in some time but then recently, I havent gone looking for them, either,
admittedly. ;-}
>puppies to the public and frankly, this puppy is probably from a puppy
>mill and will go on to give Chows the bad name that you despise. The
I have no idea if it was or wasnt but on a previous occasion, last year, I
wrangled the kennel name out of the guy and knew where it had come from, on
that occasion. That breeder WASNT a puppy farm person but OTOH, she may have
been so hard up for cash that she did the unthinkable. Luckily, I dont have
contact with her anymore......
>problem is that badly bred Chows exist and when they do, they can tend
>to be aggressive. You may not like this, but it doesn't make it go
>away.
Yes, Chows can be aggressive. So can Golden Labradors but in most cases, it
isnt the BREEDING but the CIRCUMSTANCES that lead to this. In other cases, it
is health. Yes, I have seen a dog when I was a kid who had a health problem
and snapped at people as a result. Breeding AGGRESSIVE is not a genetically
provable point. You can breed dogs to be large, small, have red coats or black
and on one occasion, even a HARLEQUIN Chow was bred in USA (I think it was).
Aggression, though, is a learned trait. If the parents of a pup are aggressive
and the pup allowed to stay around them long enough, it will pick up on that.
If the parents are mild mannered but the HUMAN is aggressive towards the dog,
then it may also pick up on that. Note that in both cases, it doesnt HAVE to
follow as true all the time, either.
>While there are nicely bred Chows and well raised ones, it still
>shouldn't blind people to those that aren't and I still would
>recommend care if a family was looking for a Chow and didn't know a
>whole lot about dogs. I don't think this disagrees very much with what
Yes but you can say that about ANY breed. It isnt limited JUST to any one
particular breed.
>you have said, or with what the person you keep getting upset with
>said! So, calm down! You are sounding a bit over the line when you
>start to rant at people that are quite normal and not cutting your
Sorry but *I* didnt rant. The problem is that I point out the truth and some
people just dont like it. No BREED of dog can be said to be more or less
aggressive than any other as a BREED. Indivduals within a breed, yes.
>breed down particularly at all. Wait until you get one of those
>(other?) crazies that thinks all Chows are killers before you get all
>wound up...
I have had people like that before, too. The truth always wins though and it
matters not how much they rant. NO-ONE can yet prove any genetic link between
any single breed of dog and aggression. It may happen one day but it isnt
there now. Of course, if you keep INBREEDING, then you increase the risk of
health problems that may LEAD to aggression.
Pb...@hotmail.com
I really think you are both right to a degree. I have had an Akita/
Chow mix, and then a full Akita. Both dogs have bad reputations with
alot of people.
Both of my dogs absolutely love people and children, and guess what?
So did their Sires and Dams, and Grandparents. (However, the mix was
very dog aggressive)
Breeders who really have the best interest of the breed at heart (not
in the business of making money, just breeding a better and better
dog) seem to agree that it is very important to get to know the
temperment of Mom and Dad when deciding to get a puppy.
When shopping for my Akita, I would ask about the parents temperment,
even aluding to wanting a protection dog. When one breeder told me
that her dogs wouldn't be suitable for protection work because they
liked people too much, I bought one of her puppy's.
Dogman
On a cold day in Hell, 30 Mar 97 23:59:44 +1000,
gr...@hartingdale.com.au (gregh) wrote:
[...]
> Of course, if you keep INBREEDING, then you increase the risk of
>health problems that may LEAD to aggression.
I was on your side until you got to this point, Greg.
Inbreeding doesn't INCREASE anything, it only PERPETUATES whatever is
there, or isn't there. Inbreeding can actually HELP knowledgeable
breeders of Chows to eliminate undesirable traits from their lines.
Think of inbreeding as a poor man's way to CLONE dogs, eh? And if you
start with ROCK SOLID specimens (foundation stock), you end up with,
PREDICTABLY, even more rock solid specimens.
Of course if you start off with POOR specimens --that's what you're
going to get -- even MORE poor specimens.
Inbreeding is a powerful breeding technique and, in the right hands,
can work wonders. Learnmore about it before you comment on it, eh?
--
Dogman
qbt...@v1.arg
E-mail address rot13 encoded to foil advertising spam
Joey "Dogs" Vaffanculo Contract Locating and Communication Company
http://www.i1.net/~dogman
Remember the Pierce collies!
http://www.i1.net/~dogman/pierce.htm
ROGER AND HERMINE STOVER
gregh wrote:
>
> On 01-Apr-97 03:38:43, Dogman assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
> >On a cold day in Hell, 30 Mar 97 23:59:44 +1000,
> >gr...@hartingdale.com.au (gregh) wrote:
>
> >[...]
> >> Of course, if you keep INBREEDING, then you increase the risk of
> >>health problems that may LEAD to aggression.
>
> >I was on your side until you got to this point, Greg.
>
> >Inbreeding doesn't INCREASE anything, it only PERPETUATES whatever is
> >there, or isn't there. Inbreeding can actually HELP knowledgeable
> >breeders of Chows to eliminate undesirable traits from their lines.
>
>
> Inbreeding can lead to a lot more problems not there before it but I am not
> talking about one inbreeding per se but as I suggested, continual inbreeding.
>
> >Think of inbreeding as a poor man's way to CLONE dogs, eh? And if you
> >start with ROCK SOLID specimens (foundation stock), you end up with,
> >PREDICTABLY, even more rock solid specimens.
>
> there is no reason to believe there is a minor fault in the male which, by
> inbreeding with the female, wont be largely accentuated. That is ALWAYS
> possible. Also, a rock solid breeding can ALWAYS throw a fault that is
> inherited but not actually evident in the generation to be bred or the one
> before it.
>
> >Of course if you start off with POOR specimens --that's what you're
> >going to get -- even MORE poor specimens.
>
>
> >Inbreeding is a powerful breeding technique and, in the right hands,
> >can work wonders. Learnmore about it before you comment on it, eh?
>
> than you think YOU know, unfortunately.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> |Sysop of Amiga's Sci-Fi BBS gr...@hartingdale.com.au Chow Chow lover! |
> |Are you old when you enjoy a good headbanger record with others over 40?|
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
opinion.
gregh
Carol Dunster
On 30 Mar 97 23:59:44 +1000, gr...@hartingdale.com.au (gregh) wrote:
>snip
>Yes, Chows can be aggressive. So can Golden Labradors but in most cases, it
>isnt the BREEDING but the CIRCUMSTANCES that lead to this.
I disagree completely with this. I have bred dogs for many years and
trained them and shown them and groomed them. It is very clear that
the basic temperament is *very* hereditary and that aggression is also
*very* hereditary. I have seen bloodlines in English Setters (a breed
known for sweet temperaments) that were generally aggressive and other
bloodlines that were very sweet and it didn't matter who raised
them...
We are talking about Chows, but what I have to say holds for all
breeds. I have every reason to believe that a poorly bred Chow is
likely to be aggressive,no matter how it was raised. Same for my
breed, English Setters. Heck, even a well bred Silky is likely to be
dog aggressive - it's just a bit cuter in a 10 pound dog than in a
large breed!
>In other cases, it
>is health. Yes, I have seen a dog when I was a kid who had a health problem
>and snapped at people as a result. Breeding AGGRESSIVE is not a genetically
>provable point.
Yes, it is. I have seen certain stud dogs adversely affect a whole
breed when widely used. This is hereditary, not environmental, because
the effect was too widely spread in animals from widely different
environments. I have also seen sub-lines within my own bloodline that
has specific temperament traits that followed the genetic ties and
ignored the environment (which I had control over). The one dog that I
had the turned out crazy was the one that I had spent the most time
and trouble socializing and training. The connection is obvious.
>snip
>Aggression, though, is a learned trait. If the parents of a pup are aggressive
>and the pup allowed to stay around them long enough, it will pick up on that.
>If the parents are mild mannered but the HUMAN is aggressive towards the dog,
>then it may also pick up on that.
It is true that the basic temperament is inherited and the personality
is the result of the environment acting on the temperament. Aggression
can be aggravated by environment. Aggressive behaviors can be taught
or untaught, but the basic temperament is there when the animal is
born. When I see a puppy born screaming, it is always a screamer. Of
course a dog with a brain tumor may not act normally, or a dog in
pain.
> Note that in both cases, it doesnt HAVE to
>follow as true all the time, either.
This goes to support my opinion that the dog has a basic temperament -
that is why one dog is abused and turns on the abuser and another,
treated similarly does not. That is why one dog well treated is
unreliable and another is a good pet. People that don't understand
this breed inappropriate dogs and create dogs that are harder than
usual to live with. They ruin breeds.
>Yes but you can say that about ANY breed. It isnt limited JUST to any one
>particular breed.
I would say that any breed can have well bred dogs and poorly bred
ones with poor temperaments. You are the one that has tried to say
that it doesn't happen in Chows.
>Sorry but *I* didnt rant. The problem is that I point out the truth and some
>people just dont like it. No BREED of dog can be said to be more or less
>aggressive than any other as a BREED. Indivduals within a breed, yes.
That is not true. Some breeds have a higher than average percentage of
aggressive dogs. Chows are one of them. It really doesn't matter
whether you like it. It would be useless to try to breed a breed for a
given purpose, if you couldn't breed temperament traits that would be
most useful for that purpose. English Setters were selected for the
trait that causes them to freeze up when under stress. This makes them
useful pointing birds. Other non-pointing breeds do this, but not
reliably enough to make them bird dogs. Some breeds were bred for
fighting and will do it more reliably than English Setters. They will,
as a breed, be more aggressive than English Setters are.
I have heard several things about what Chows were bred to do. I am not
sure which ones have any validity, but none of them included gentle
nonagressive pursuits. I have heard guard dogs, fighting dogs and
dinner. I think that the modern Chow temperament is much improved due
to breeders that realize that there can be a problem and take action
(and keep their heads out of the sand!). The attitude that aggression
is not genetic will ruin your breed faster than any anti-Chow fanatic,
which I am definitely not.
>I have had people like that before, too. The truth always wins though and it
>matters not how much they rant. NO-ONE can yet prove any genetic link between
>any single breed of dog and aggression.
There definitely links between genetics and aggression and therefor
between breeds and aggression.
> It may happen one day but it isnt
>there now. Of course, if you keep INBREEDING, then you increase the risk of
>health problems that may LEAD to aggression.
If you inbreed thoughtfully, you DECREASE the risk of health problems
that MAY lead to aggression. Chows are a fine breed, but they are
somewhat more difficult on the whole to own and train than many other
breeds. If your personal Chows (individuals within the breed) are
spectacularly sweet and easy to live with, you are lucky and careful
in your selection. It doesn't change the fact that poorly bred Chows
exist and that pet stores are the most likely place to find them.
You would do your breed more good by pointing out to people that good,
caring breeders don't sell to pet stores. Good caring breeders want to
know exactly where there puppies are and they can't do that through a
retail outlet. Therefor pet store puppies aren't bred by the best
breeders, even though the prices are just as high or higher.
I don't know if I can explain what I see so that you will understand
me, but do know that I clarify my understanding every time I attempt
to do it, so the effort is not wasted! At this time there are a couple
of key issues that we just don't agree on, such as the inheritability
of temperament and the value of careful inbreeding as a useful tool
for a knowledgeable breeder. That is okay - the debate will also help
to clarify the opinions of the others reading this (if they don't die
of boredom wading through this first! <gr>).
Remember - I have no grudge against Chows, but I do against sloppy
thinking...
Chip Douglas
ROGER AND HERMINE STOVER wrote:
>
> gregh wrote:
> >
> > On 01-Apr-97 03:38:43, Dogman assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
> > >gr...@hartingdale.com.au (gregh) wrote:
> >
> > >[...]
> > >> Of course, if you keep INBREEDING, then you increase the risk of
> > >>health problems that may LEAD to aggression.
> >
> opinion.
>
> her...@endangeredspecies.com
Inbreeding is ok sometimes. In a number of species it does not
effect the health of the animals at all. It used to be thought
that they would come out with "so called bushy eyebrows". We have
learned a lot and this is not true. (Dogman just has to express
himself a little hastily sometimes..he's just short of tactfulness.)
Chip
Carol Dunster
On 26 Mar 97 10:27:47 +1000, gr...@hartingdale.com.au (gregh) wrote:
>
>On 25-Mar-97 01:46:38, Carol Dunster assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
>snip bad experience of Chow with child
> From that moment on, she was afraid of kids though not adults and a
>dog that is AFRAID of something may react in a way you
>dont want it to react. Having said that, I still occasionally held her while
>young neices and nephews gave her a pat. She didnt like it but she knew I
>wouldnt let them hurt her. All the rest of my Chows, however, didnt have this
>problem. Some werent really all that happy to play with kids and some let them
>sleep on them, much the same as any breakup of any breed. In any breed, you
>can get individuals who are the opposite of what the breed is supposed to be
>like. Add this to my experience with ALL Chows I have known over the years
>through shows and breeders and I have a much more extensive base of experience
>to draw from, ON THIS BREED, to say: A) She is wrong in her contention. Chows
>are no more or less trustworthy, AS A BREED, with kids than any other breeds.
>2) Picking ONE breed out, be it Chows, Labradors, you name it, IS prejudicial.
Answering a question asked about one breed is not prejudicial. Each
breed has an overall character due to the traits selected and bred for
so that the breed could preform its function. While individuals vary
within the breed, most of the members of the breed will cluster around
those traits that the breed was designed to have, or we wouldn't have
breeds! While the Chows that you have experience with sound like
lovely dogs and many are, you are on a different continent than I am
and have a different gene pool to work with. We have many lovely Chows
here, but we also have many irresponsible breeder and many poorly bred
dogs. Some of these are unstable and aggressive and more dangerous
than an average dog around children. People with children need to know
this to protect their kids!
End of Part 2
Carol Dunster
On 26 Mar 97 10:27:47 +1000, gr...@hartingdale.com.au (gregh) wrote:
gregh:
>>>1) No entire breed is aggressive. This is the same as "The entire Caucasian
>>>race is NOT aggressive" or "The entire black African race is NOT aggressive"
>>>when referring to humans.
>
>>Joanne does not say anything like that!
>
>Please read my comment as I typed it. You are making something out of nothing
>here. Did I claim she said that about those human races mentioned?
You are inferring with this statement that she said the entire Chow
breed was aggressive. She did not. She said that people should be
careful with Chows and children when asked a question about Chows. Big
deal!
gregh:
>I think you read a great deal LESS in my reply than you want to admit. It is a
>plain and simple truth. If you are a professional dealing with dogs with a
>problem, then yes, you WILL see more of any breed you care to name that DOES
>have a problem. If you are a TRUE professional, to claim that any particular
>BREED as a whole, has more aggression problems than any other simply IS a
>slight against your own professional reputation.
No, I disagree with this. Some breeds *do* have more problems than
others and even more so do some bloodlines. As a breeder you are doing
your beloved breed a serious disservice by continually stating that
temperament is not hereditary rather than looking into the problem and
being sure that you are not part of the cause of it. I know that
temperament is hereditary and have worked hard to improve it in my
breed (English Setters). I am not afraid to admit that some English
Setters do NOT have desirable temperaments and I have not bred those
dogs. My breed will be improved because I am willing to realize they
are not perfect and they need to be reliable even when not properly
raised.
>It makes not one iota of
>difference if you claim otherwise. It IS a fact.
You are right that the facts don't care what we claim! <gr> However
that holds out for you as well as for me - I would like to see some
research stating that breeds don't have breed specific temperament
tendencies, as you claim! I have never read a researched book that
stated anything like that, quite the contrary! I have also never seen
any research to indicate the temperament is *not* hereditary!
>Would you take your car to a
>mechanic who claims that the sort of car you have is crap just because 4 out
>of 4000 have problems? I would have to think the mechanic has a problem.
Joanne was talking as an Obedience instructor. I don't know about your
country, but most of the people that I know taking Obedience classes
here (myself included) are not usually dealing with problem dogs, just
owners looking for better manners or a desire to compete.
I take my car to a mechanic for maintenance as well as repair... My
mechanic is perfectly capable of telling me that cars of brand A are
more likely to have transmission problems than cars of brand B (and
much more likely to be right than the owner of brand A that hasn't had
problems with his particular car...)
End of part 3
Carol Dunster
On 26 Mar 97 10:27:47 +1000, gr...@hartingdale.com.au (gregh) wrote:
>On 25-Mar-97 01:46:38, Carol Dunster assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
>She DOES claim that they are a "very loving breed and caring breed ....until
>asked to do something they dont want to do, by their owners". The inference
>she makes is that when asked to do something they dont want to do, they ARENT
>loving which leads the reader to believe something bad will happen. This is
>just pure rot!
Actually I took the inference to be that *some* Chows might resent
being asked to do things they don't wish. She uses the qualifier
"could", not "will". Like I said - read more carefully and with less
prejudice!
>There is no other word for it. I ask my Chows to do something,
>daily, that they dont want to do - whether that is to come inside or to go to
>bed etc when they dont want to - and though they openly DISPLAY that they dont
>want to do it and as young animals, will go to lengths to get out of doing it
>(such as running out of your reach), they will eventually do it, anyway. At no
>time do my Chows - ANY of them - display any attitude other than reluctance or
>a positive want to NOT do it by staying out of your reach.
Remember that you have well bred Chows raised by someone that is quite
experienced. You are not a child that might do something stupid, you
are an adult that knows exactly how to deal with your Chows (which you
state are not always willing to do what you wish...)
>If you read otherwise in her comment, then I agree that maybe her comment was
>just badly worded but on the face of it, it didnt look a bit like anything
>other than a veiled warning.
Rot.
> >Joanne:
>>>>In obedience you will come to a point of refusal with almost any dog.
>>>>Chows just don't seem to accept authority from anyone or anything.
>
>>>Chows are not a dog I would bother to utility train. There have been
>>>successful cases and so on but I have found that all but one of my own Chows
>>>was "aloof" as they are supposed to be and highly intelligent.
Here you are talking about an inherited temperament trait - something
you claim doesn't exist when it doesn't suit you for it to exist...
>I said that they are not a breed *I* would bother to utility train. I am,
>though, NOT someone personally predisposed to making animals jump through
>hoops.
You were, however, speaking as an expert on the breed (supposedly), so
that when you say you would not train a Chow to a high level, it is
reasonable to assume that you think they are difficult to train.
>I dont wish to denigrate utility training. Let me say it just isnt
>something I consider *I* like. However, in all the cases I have known, I cant
>say I have seen a lot of Chows that would MAKE great utility show dogs.
Is this because of inherited temperament traits? (Aggression is just
as inherited as "aloof" and "intelligent".) Your statement here
clearly says that you think they would be more difficult to train for
utility than, for instance, Border Collies.
>I owned one that probably would have beaten MOST other dogs into
>submission. She was obedient on ANYTHING and so agile that she
> would have been able to do those things they require at those shows.
Too bad you didn't see fit to *prove* it...
>>to be a bit stubborn and you say that they want a reason before they
>>will work for you. I don't see a huge difference of opinion here...
>
>Then the comment that she makes "Chows dont seem to accept authority from
>anyone or anything" means nothing to you? It means to me she is saying, which
>she IS saying, that they are totally untrainable. How you see otherwise, I
>dont know. That contention of hers is not true, however.
She was a bit strong on that statement, but taken in the context of
more balanced views, I think it just means that she was getting
frustrated with your totally unbalance view that Chows would never do
anything aggressive unless forced into it by poor treatment.
>snip
>No, sorry, that just ISNT the case except where the need to subordinate them
>is paramount to their health. Some of my Chows hated needles and would squirm
>when about to get one and I would darnedwell make sure I held them still so
>the needle wouldnt hurt them but some just stand there and dont show any
>reaction, such as my current one. However, in normal circumstances, I DONT
>like to subordinate ANY animal.
However, earlier you state that your Chows are required to do things
they don't like every day. This is a clear case of teaching them to be
subordinate (followers rather than leaders). Do you understand the
word? It has nothing to do with treating them well, my dictionary
defines it as meaning "submissive to or controlled by authority".
Certainly good pets are controlled by authority!
> Intellectually, they arent the equal of humans but I like to make my
>dogs aware that they are treated as well as I can treat
>them. In part, I do this by NOT requiring that they change to meet MY needs
>more than is necessary to their well being (eg, I refuse to let them run out
>the gate when it is open etc).
Therefor they are subordinate and follow your wishes when it is
important and I am sure that you do this kindly and when they are
quite young. I doubt that you are even aware of the small habits that
teach your dogs to listen to you when you need them to.
> It is my *PERSONAL* opinion (that I hold
>without proof other than my own dogs over the years) that the more natural you
>can make your animal, the less the problems/chance of problems.
Of course not - if you demand very little of your dogs, they will not
show you whether they will take your training and you will not have to
admit when you are wrong and they will resent being asked to do a bit
more...
> My brother in
>law has a lovely natured puppy miniature Daschy. It has a loving personality
>and is a dog you could just take home with you the minute you meet it.
>However, his wife has been making it do this, that and the other, in order to
>show off it's tricks to people who visit. It has gone a little nutty since she
>started that. I cant think of anything worse than driving my dogs insane for
>personal vanity.
Perhaps she is not a good trainer. Most dogs that I know that are
properly trained are much happier because of it, not nutty! Either
that or the dog is of an age to reach sexual maturity and would be
nutty anyway due to some defect in its breeding...
Well, this part is getting long, so
End of part 4
Carol Dunster
On 26 Mar 97 10:27:47 +1000, in rec.pets.dogs.breeds you wrote:
>On 25-Mar-97 01:46:38, Carol Dunster assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
>>Joanne was very clear that her experience is limited, but that she has
>>some credentials to show that she understands it for what it is. She
>>does not show a prejudice - she had experience before she formed her
>>opinion. She does not say that all Chows are dangerous, or any other
>>claptrap like that. She says that IN HER EXPERIENCE AS A PROFESSIONAL
>>TRAINER, people should be careful with Chows around children. This
>>seems quite sensible to me - I think people should be careful with all
>>breeds around children!
>
>Carol,
>
>Then you can see the prejudice if you typed it BACK at me. This isnt to say
>that Joanne is KNOWINGLY prejudiced. Most humans are surprised and embarrassed
>when their own prejudice is shown and proven to them.
"Prejudice" breaks down into pre (before) judice (judging) - she did
not judge before she had information. She has years of experience with
dogs, including Chows.
>What IS prejudice is to say "you should be careful around children with
>Chows". It is prejudicial to pull one breed out of all breeds like that. IMHO,
>you should be reasonably aware around ANY child with ANY dog of ANY breed or
>crossbreed.
That is exactly what I say on the next line. To quote," I think people
should be careful with all breeds around children!" I am not pulling
out one breed!
>The most lovely natured dog in the world may turn and snap at a
>child purely because the child has purposely or accidentally done something to
>hurt the animal. This doesnt make that animal OR it's breed bad.
I agree 100%, if you will just read what I wrote, instead of
pre-judging my answers!
I am going to break this up into pieces for my response it is getting
too lone and unwieldy...
Chip Douglas
Carol Dunster wrote:
>
> On 26 Mar 97 10:27:47 +1000, in rec.pets.dogs.breeds you wrote:
>
>
> >>some credentials to show that she understands it for what it is. She
> >>does not show a prejudice - she had experience before she formed her
> >>opinion. She does not say that all Chows are dangerous, or any other
> >>claptrap like that. She says that IN HER EXPERIENCE AS A PROFESSIONAL
> >>TRAINER, people should be careful with Chows around children. This
> >>seems quite sensible to me - I think people should be careful with all
> >>breeds around children!
> >
> >Carol,
> >
> >Then you can see the prejudice if you typed it BACK at me. This isnt to say
> >that Joanne is KNOWINGLY prejudiced. Most humans are surprised and embarrassed
> >when their own prejudice is shown and proven to them.
>
> not judge before she had information. She has years of experience with
> dogs, including Chows.
>
> >Chows". It is prejudicial to pull one breed out of all breeds like that. IMHO,
> >you should be reasonably aware around ANY child with ANY dog of ANY breed or
> >crossbreed.
>
> should be careful with all breeds around children!" I am not pulling
> out one breed!
>
> >child purely because the child has purposely or accidentally done something to
> >hurt the animal. This doesnt make that animal OR it's breed bad.
>
> pre-judging my answers!
>
> I am going to break this up into pieces for my response it is getting
> too lone and unwieldy...
>
> Carol
>
> --
> Patchwork English Setters and
> Carwyn Silky Terriers
> http://www.prodogs.com/dbn/carwyn/index.htm
Chows are beautiful animals, just keep them away from the orientals.
They are bred over there for food. How terribly disgusting.
Chip
Dogman
On a cold day in Hell, 01 Apr 97 09:51:17 +1000,
gr...@hartingdale.com.au (gregh) wrote:
[...]
>>> Of course, if you keep INBREEDING, then you increase the risk of
>>>health problems that may LEAD to aggression.
>
>>I was on your side until you got to this point, Greg.
>
>>Inbreeding doesn't INCREASE anything, it only PERPETUATES whatever is
>>there, or isn't there. Inbreeding can actually HELP knowledgeable
>>breeders of Chows to eliminate undesirable traits from their lines.
>
>I'm sorry but you HAVE to be joking, surely?
Absolutely not. Inbreeding doesn't CAUSE health defects, Greg, it
only discovers and perpetuates them -- IF THEY EXIST. You do
understand why this is true, don't you?
By breeding closely, you can QUICKLY find out what kinds of genes
exist in your dogs and how well they go together (meaning, do any
mostly hidden and deadly recessives exist, etc.).
Once it's relatively quickly determined that there are none (or only
tolerable ones), you then have a ROCK SOLID foundation upon which to
base a ROCK SOLID line of dogs.
One must have a VERY strong ability to read and understand pedigrees
before ever contemplating a close breeding program (line breeding,
inbreeding). He must have the rare ability to select OUTSTANDING
breed specimens, truly EXEMPLARS of the breed.
I've only been breeding for 35 years, Greg, and if you'd like to lose
some of your Australian dollars I'd be willing to bet the same number
of American ones that I'm right. Whaddya say? As Cuba Gooding said,
"SHOW ME THE MONEY!" Heh-heh-heh.
>Inbreeding can lead to a lot more problems not there before it but I am not
>talking about one inbreeding per se but as I suggested, continual inbreeding.
Inbreeding CAN, yes sir, lead to SOME problems if you don't know what
you're doing (and people who don't know what they're doing shouldn't
be breeding dogs in the first place). Reduced fertility, shortened
life spans, and reduced litter size, for example can occur IF REALLY
close breeding is undertaken for too long.
However, if a breeder does run into a problem while inbreeding, ONE
carefully selected outcrossing can put you right back on solid ground.
Whereas a random breeder who runs into a problem really has few places
to turn for help.
>>Think of inbreeding as a poor man's way to CLONE dogs, eh? And if you
>>start with ROCK SOLID specimens (foundation stock), you end up with,
>>PREDICTABLY, even more rock solid specimens.
>
>No, not necessarily.
Yes. A-B-S-O-L-U-T-E-L-Y!
>For a start, no matter HOW good the stock you have IS,
>there is no reason to believe there is a minor fault in the male which, by
>inbreeding with the female, wont be largely accentuated.
FAULTS as well as STRENGTHS are EQUALLY "accentuated" and perpetuated
by close breeding. That's why the foundation stock must be truly
EXEMPLARS of the breed.
But by being able to DISCOVER the existence of a "faulty" gene
QUICKLY (because of the POWER of close breeding), and before a gene
pool is contaminated with it, you can AVOID having unrecoverable
problems later on down the road. Do you understand what I'm saying
here?
>That is ALWAYS
>possible.
Of course. But by closely breeding you get to discover exactly what
these "faults" are QUICKLY without already having polluted a large
gene pool with a defective gene. That's one of the BENEFITS of close
breeding. It's a GOOD thing -- not a bad one.
>Also, a rock solid breeding can ALWAYS throw a fault that is
>inherited but not actually evident in the generation to be bred or the one
>before it.
No, it can't. Whatever is there, good or bad, is going to turn up
VERY QUICKLY BECAUSE of the POWER of close breeding!
You won't have to wait GENERATIONS and GENERATIONS to find out that
you made a mistake, like you can EASILY do when you breed randomly.
And then it's really too late to do anything about it. That is, the
bad genes are ALREADY out there being carried by many, many dogs.
>>Of course if you start off with POOR specimens --that's what you're
>>going to get -- even MORE poor specimens.
>Naturally.
>>Inbreeding is a powerful breeding technique and, in the right hands,
>>can work wonders. Learnmore about it before you comment on it, eh?
>I know more than it appears you give me credit for and it would appear more
>than you think YOU know, unfortunately.
SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!!! And we'll go from there, eh? Heh-heh-heh.
Carol Dunster
On 26 Mar 97 10:27:47 +1000, gr...@hartingdale.com.au (gregh) wrote:
>
>On 25-Mar-97 01:46:38, Carol Dunster assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
>That is just unprovable rubbish with TWO exceptions. Constant in-breeding CAN
>lead to unforseen consequences.
I forgot to mention that constant outcrossing CAN also lead to
unforseen consequences - so does any breeding.
>snip
>There is NO genetic proof that aggressive traits are passed from one dog to
>another in the normal run of things. Sure, they have to be trained to be
>socially acceptable but so do your HUMAN kids! The unfortunate fact is that
>more dogs are socially acceptable than human kids near me!
I will say that, while young mammals are certainly not in any way born
a "blank slate", they are also changed by their environment. Puppies
and children need a great deal of raising to become members of
society, no matter how well bred. However, there are children and
puppies that cannot be raised to fit in, no matter how well trained.
>>Actually this action was totally irresponsible. If the puppy was
>>dangerous, it could injure someone and they would be responsible for
>>it (possibly even legally, as they knew the dog to have problems).
>
>I guess it depends on the facts again. Maybe the people taking it knew the
>probs and took it thinking they could cure them.
That does not absolve the original owner from responsibility. If the
dog goes on the injure someone else, there is (in the USA) a legal
liability and (anywhere) a moral liability. It is one that I would not
want to feel.
>snip Collie story
The Collie was mistreated and did not start nasty. It was fearful
(which can be either inherited or learned) and bit from fear.
>>There is no excuse for letting a dog like this to go, except to a
>>fully informed owner that has the emotional and training tools to
>>properly deal with it! What if the dog were to kill a child? It
>
>How do you know they DIDNT know the full facts?
That is not as important as whether they were qualified to deal with
the problem dog and letting it run loose (to be teased, etc) is not
the way to do it!
>>happens and, no matter what the reason, this dog was headed the wrong
>>direction. Not all owners have 20 years experience dealing with Chows
>>and could deal properly with this puppy. Children are more important
>>than dogs. (If we don't agree on that, I think we can't agree on
>>anything of importance!)
>
>There's no reason to be smart about this subject, really.
I'm not being "smart", I have found that there are people that seem to
think that a dog is more important than the well being of a child.
Unbelievable, but true. I have no way of knowing whether you are one
of them until you actually answer this basic question. You are being
"smart" and not answering...
Joanne:
>>>All in all, I find your whole tirade disgraceful and unbelievable and point
>>>out to anybody reading this that THIS is the reason for so many states in so
>>>many countries actually starting to legislate against ALL dogs, regardless
>>>of breed. This sort of CRAP.
Carol:
>>No, I saw no evidence of a tirade, except for yours! She stated her
>Then you refuse to see that which is in evidence.
The evidence of a tirade that I see is a preponderance of capital
letters (shouting) that comes from your quotes... Joanne used them
much less than you and used much less absolute language and more
qualifiers to soften her message.
>>experience and her evidence and came up with a reasonable conclusion.
>
>Oh - it is reasonable to tell someone to put the dog down, is it? You replace
>or get rid of a car that is bad but you dont treat a dog like an appliance. If
>you cant believe this, then you shouldnt have dogs OR animals at all.
There are times that it is reasonable, no matter how hard. She was
there, she is experienced and we were not there and know very little
about the situation.
>>As far as I can see, her advice was for people to be careful with
>>Chows around children and that they can be stubborn and some of them
>
>...yes and as I said, that is just plain prejudice. You have to have a certain
>amount of awareness around children with ANY breed. Not Chows in particular.
You yourself have said that people should be careful with Chows around
children... She wasn't answering a general question, but one about
Chows.
>>resent training. I am quite sure that this is true and that Chows are
>
>It isnt a case of resnting to be trained. It is a case of an intelligence that
>wants to know a reason for doing something. They dont just get up and come
>because YOU feel like it at all times (my Chows at least, with the exception
>of 1) but they WILL do just that if THEY feel like it.
And you have been trying to tell me that temperament traits are not
hereditary, but my English Setters are very different and my Silkys
different again in terms of training (and basic levels of aggression).
I can walk a strange dog through the yard (do it often when grooming)
and the Silkys go into Terrier attack mode and the ES just give a
couple of friendly barks, or watch. Do you see the inconsistency of
your position?
>>*not* a dog for every owner. This is not changed just because you are
>
>Of course they arent a breed for everyone. ALL breeds are equally not for
>everyone. Some people dont like red dogs so individuals within a breed that
>are red dont suit some people!
Some people don't like Chows due to the basic temperament. This is not
bad, just a fact. One that you can't seem to see.
>>an owner that is well suited to Chows and very well experienced. Chows
>
>It doesnt change the TRUTH, either, no matter how much you deny it.
And which "truth" are you talking about? The one where you say
temperament is not hereditary, or the one where you say your dogs
share common temperament traits that my dogs of another breed do not,
but other Chows I know do? Make up your mind.
>>would have a better reputation, if people were more cautious about
>>purchasing them. If Chows are purchased by people that are prepared to
>>deal with there temperament, the owners will do better with them and
>>keep them under control and others will be impressed...
>
>The same, however, can be said of ANY breed. I hope you dont seriously
>disagree with that. Joanne's having picked CHOWS out *IS* prejudicial, if you
>DO agree.
Joanne was answering a question that someone asked about Chows. How is
that "prejudicial"? (leading to premature judgment or unwarranted
opinion according to Webster's - she had reason for her opinion, which
she stated. She has experience with many breeds as well.)
Carol Dunster
On 26 Mar 97 10:27:47 +1000, gr...@hartingdale.com.au (gregh) wrote:
>
>On 25-Mar-97 01:46:38, Carol Dunster assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
>snip
>snip cute story of funloving Chow
>>pet. A more average pet owner probably needs more dog handling skills
>>to be a good Chow owner and to get the sort of results that you get
>
>Yes and no. Yes if you want to teach the dog to be a Utility trial dog and no
>if you just want it to be reasonable and friendly as I do. If anybody with ANY
>dog would just take the time out to study the dog's reactions when things
>happen, they will get to know their dog that much better. I know people in
>this group probably DO fall into that category but the majority of dog owners
>DONT seem that able to see their pet as anything other than a dog. They can be
>so much more, given a chance.
Actually I see that too many pet owners see their pets as "little
people" when the dog would benefit by being seen as a dog! So many of
them are so spoiled that they are unlivable. You obviously treat your
as beloved companions, but also as dogs - they must follow your rules
for their safety and for making life pleasant for all. This is not
"more" than a dog - this is a dog at its best! Few people know enough
to do this (judging from your background, since your father bred Chows
as well) and you probably learned how without even realizing what you
learned.
>Yes, I have said that and recently, because of the situation of one person who
>owns a Chow, I advised that they contact the local Chow club in their area and
>ask if there is any way they can help placing it in a home. This person had a
>situation where, unfortunately, any strong dog would be a burden.
Wouldn't a strong dog be questionable around children, unless watched?
(Remember, I advocate care with *all* dogs around children, no matter
what breed.) Perhaps a bit more trouble than a small dog? It might
play and knock them over...
>I mean
>PHYSICALLY strong, BTW. A Pommeranian or other small dog would be much better.
>You cant say ANY breed is suited for ALL people. Eg, I love ALL dogs but I
>wouldnt personally like to have a breed that just wont leave you alone all day
>or bark all day.
Oh, but according to you, you can't have inherited temperament traits,
so you can't have "a breed that just wont leave you alone all day or
bark all day". If it is a breed trait, such as aggression can be, it
has to be inheritable!
> My Chows bark when there is a reason but unfortunately, that
>reason is sometimes the local fence-walking cat and of course you cant let the
>dogs bark on and on if you want good neighbour relationships. I make mine stop
Here is an example of making your dogs subordinate...
>if that is the case and if there is another good reason, I investigate it.
>However, when the cat isnt around and there is no-one entering the front gate
>etc, they are content not to be a noisy lot. ;-}
Another inherited temperament trait that you have worked with on their
training. My Silkys would find something to bark at - even each other
if nothing else is around. I don't recommend them for children either,
unless you are careful to pick out your puppy and train the child not
to snatch at it.
>>trouble with Chows myself, but I am an experienced dog handler/groomer
>>and can easily see where others might. They are not an "easy" breed
>>and may be more aggressive in the USA than they are in Australia -
>>blood lines differ.
>
>Well to be honest I cant comment on that bit because I am not 100% sure what
>you mean by "easy".
An "easy" bred is very willing to follow instruction, wants to please
is easy to train. Golden Retrievers tend to be "easy", if you get a
reasonably well bred one. Many Labs are "easy". Most of the breeds
that are bred to work closely with people are easy to train. Some are
rather high energy, though.
>>That proves that you are a good trainer, not necessarily that she
>>would be easy for a novice to train!
>
>To be honest, I thought she would be near impossible to get to do this but
>fortunately she wasnt. It was quite easy. The "Good girl" and cuddle are a
>real incentive to do something when I really want her to do it. ;-}
See - I told you so! <gr>
>>Obviously you would never allow this to happen with your dogs (and I
>>wouldn't with mine, whatever their breed), but it certainly could
>>happen. There was a guy that couldn't control his 9 week old Beagle
>>puppy online last month...
>Like any puppy of any breed with the snout/mouth large enough to do it, a Chow
>may grab your hand and/or arm in excitement. Pups do this. ALL my life with
>fullbreds and crossbreds, it has been the same. No particular breed was any
>more or less this way. However, I have never seen ANY breed cause stitches
>with milk teeth.
Neither have I, but I can imagine that it would be possible, if the
puppy were biting in anger and not just play. As you stated earlier,
Chows are strong dogs. Obviously these people should either learn how
to handle a dog, or this dog was nuts and should have been put down. I
agree that this can happen in any breed, but certainly my Silkys
couldn't put more than scratches in your hand. My setters could, but
never would.
>Sure, I have been moving my hand when a pup grabs it and it
>causes a scratch (and believe me, milk teeth scratches STING!) but none have
>ever caused one stitch. My sister's crossbreed dog, when a pup, used to do the
>same thing and even grabbed her 7 month old daughter's arm with milk teeth. No
>marks, no probs. I can understand a NEWBORN human baby may well get a tear
>inthe skin even from milk teeth but you would have to be a dope to put a
>newborn near a puppy so that this happens, dont you think?
I thought that you didn't need to be careful with Chows and children..
>I seriously doubt the statement that a 12 week old pup caused all that damage.
A totally unsocialized pup with a temperament problem certainly could.
>>A pup that age could just as easily have been very poorly bred (not
>>all are as careful with their breeding stock as you are!) and just
>
>That is just unprovable rubbish with TWO exceptions. Constant in-breeding CAN
>lead to unforseen consequences.
It CAN, but it does not necessarily, any more than Chows CAN be mean,
but are not necessarily.
>A HEALTH problem may ALSO lead to
>unforseen consequences. They are the ONLY exceptions. ANY pup from ANY
>breeding can be trained to be a civil animal. ANY breed, also.
I suppose that you could consider a crazy dog to have health problems
in that the temperament flaw may be caused by poor brain chemistry,
but I still say that there are dogs that CANNOT be trained that don't
have any other health problems. I had a perfectly healthy, well
trained, well raised English Setter that became unpredictable and
dangerous at sexual maturity. I put him down and sold his son as a
neutered pet. As a breeder, I take my responsibilities seriously.
>Otherwise it cant be proven. I dont know of anyone ever proving a
>genetic link in any breed or breeding predisposing it towards
> aggression. If someone ever DOES prove that, then their's the proof.
As a breeder, can you justify breeding a dog that is nasty just
because you feel no one has proven that the trait is genetic? Would
you feel responsible is your nasty dog sired a nasty dog? I strongly
believe that when there is a question, a fault of health or
temperament must be bred as if the fault were hereditary. That is the
only truly responsible way to behave.
>*ONLY* if there is a recessive gene inside a particular breeding that causes a
>recurring and provable health problem that leads towards canine mental
>instability. If you mean otherwise, sorry but that is rubbish.
You are oversimplifying the genetic picture. There are many cases of
gene action shown to be multigenetic or cases where genes are not
clearly dominant or recessive. I have seen bloodlines in breeds that I
am familiar with that predictably throw bad temperaments. To me this
is more proof than your assertion that it can't happen. I have seen
even small specific behaviors skip generations and show up in grand
kids that never met the dog that they got their behavior from. Why
wouldn't a nasty, difficult temperament be just as inheritable?
>>if you are afraid to admit that poor breeding practices can foster
>>this type of temperament. I have seen the occasional puppy in my first
>
>Poor breeding has nothing to do with temperament and you have NO clinical
>proof of the opposite.
You have no clinical proof of your assertion and a large body of
anecdotal evidence that suggests you are wrong.
>You have a lot of breeders who continually say they
>breed AWAY from aggression or that someone else's stock are agressive because
>they dont bother to do that but it is simple provable logic that ANY dog can
>be aggressive and it is based upon their upbringing or circumstances in
>their lives in nearly every case and their health in others.
So, I raise a dog with my children. I am a knowledgeable breeder with
years of experience. I socialize and obedience train this dog. He is
still a bit spooky. He bites my kid for doing something very minor to
him. I raise another dog around kids, do less socialization with him
and less training, but he (as an adult) goes to a home with kids,
where they proceed to use him as a step stool to get on the couch and
he won't even move. (True stories) If there is not a genetic
component, what makes the difference? They were both healthy, very
similarly raised dogs.
You keep saying it is simple provable logic, but you have failed to
provide any evidence at all, much less logic or proof. Let's see it!
> In very RARE
>cases, a genetic disorder may cause health probs which cause aggression but
>this is RARE and in no way anything that breeders can claim for nearly every
>occasion that they state "poor breeding" as the problem. Poor breeding often
>produces non-show quality animals but at the moment of their birth, they are a
>blank slate just like human children.
This is where you make your mistake. Puppies and children are most
definitely NOT born a blank slate! I have seen that time and again. My
two children are very different from each other and have traits very
similar to some of mine and some of my husband's. My children are much
more like us than they are like their friends. Twin studies have
clearly shown that genetics play a large part in temperament in
humans. Twins will live very similar lives even when raised in very
different environments. There is quite a bit of scientific proof of
this!
>
>>breed (English Setters) that totally went against the breed type of
>>loving, sweet, English gentleman and was just plain unreliably nasty.
>
>OK but why? Did you realise that some people see "nasty" because of a
>misconception on their part? Eg, a boisterous pup who is teething may
>occasionally decide to use you as a teething ring and this is seen as nasty.
>It is nothing but puppy bad judgement. However, it takes the ability to SEE
>this for what it is.
You seem to lack the ability to see nasty when it happens! I am not
talking about a boisterous pup - I am willing to bet that in 20 years
of raising, studying, breeding, showing, training dogs as well as 20
years of being a professional groomer (whose dogs are not presented to
me because of any possible temperament flaw, but just for grooming)
that I have seen, handled, bred and trained for more dogs than you
have.
This dog was a carefully raised adult that attacked his owners child
for a minor incident after becoming less predictable as the dog
reached sexual maturity. Can you SEE this for what it is?
My mother was sitting on the couch in a house with a sleeping dog on
the floor (also at the age of sexual maturity and a show dog). The dog
awoke and attacked her. She did nothing to set off the incident. Can
you SEE this for what it is?
>I even had to correct a pet shop owner the other day who
>said a pup was badly biting his staff. I got it out and it grabbed my arm but
>you could tell there was no vicious intent. I told him to put something in
>there for it to chew on and that was all it took. Of course, the pup wouldnt
>let go of the chew toy when picked up so I guess if you buy the pup, you get
>it's chew toy as part of the package. ;-}
That is normal puppy behavior - irrelevant to the issue of nasty
tempers.
>>When it happened with one of my carefully raised dogs (from birth), I
>>realized that my breed has a problem. The dog was put to sleep (though
>>pointed in the show ring and fully obedience trained) and his parents
>>were desexed (though typically sweet and loving) and placed as pets.
>
>I would love to know what ALL the facts were, though. I am not having a go at
>YOU when I say this but I contend we never WILL know, now. I contend there was
>something you missed in your summation of the situation, not that you were
>wrong in what you came up with based on what you could recognise. I am sorry
>to say that to you but without proof (and it is all gone now) then there can
>never be a way to say this to you that you will believe. Just think on it for
>the future. Maybe whatever made your dog aggressive happened outside of your
>sight.
I lived in the country - no neighbors. The dog's interaction with
people was under my supervision. As he matured he became weirder and
weirder around about 1 out of every 3 men he met. I was a stay at home
Mom (work at home), so the dog had very little opportunity to interact
without my knowledge. I knew more about this dog than I have most of
the nice dogs I have owned.
>My Chows used to be teased by a local brat of a kid and the elder of
>them that was alive at the time heard the kid coming (he was talking and I was
>watching from inside the house as I just happened to look out the window at
>what my girls were up to at that time). She pushed into the garden to be out
>of sight and when the kid came into her sight, she jumped at him from out of
>the bushes - she was behind the fence the whole time - and scared the heck
>out of the kid and she was actually grinning at her success. The kid was about
>to throw the tennis ball he had into her head when I intervened. He never DID
>tease them again after that. Now, you can imagine how I would have reacted to
>seeing her jump out at him had I not known he teased them, before that time. I
>would have been very worried. Without the WHOLE proof, you can only make
>judgements based on what you know.
But your Chow, with a good temperament did not actually attack the kid
and injure it. My setter would have, even without the teasing. Maybe
you have been lucky and not had a bad one, but they do exist.
End of part 5 and time for me to do some grooming! More later!
gregh
On 01-Apr-97 08:45:43, ROGER AND HERMINE STOVER assaulted me about Re: Chow
Chows
>gregh wrote:
>>
>> On 01-Apr-97 03:38:43, Dogman assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
>> >On a cold day in Hell, 30 Mar 97 23:59:44 +1000,
>> >gr...@hartingdale.com.au (gregh) wrote:
>>
>> >[...]
>> >> Of course, if you keep INBREEDING, then you increase the risk of
>> >>health problems that may LEAD to aggression.
>>
>> >I was on your side until you got to this point, Greg.
>>
>> >Inbreeding doesn't INCREASE anything, it only PERPETUATES whatever is
>> >there, or isn't there. Inbreeding can actually HELP knowledgeable
>> >breeders of Chows to eliminate undesirable traits from their lines.
>>
>> I'm sorry but you HAVE to be joking, surely?
>>
>> Inbreeding can lead to a lot more problems not there before it but I am not
>> talking about one inbreeding per se but as I suggested, continual
>> inbreeding.
>>
>> >Think of inbreeding as a poor man's way to CLONE dogs, eh? And if you
>> >start with ROCK SOLID specimens (foundation stock), you end up with,
>> >PREDICTABLY, even more rock solid specimens.
>>
>> No, not necessarily. For a start, no matter HOW good the stock you have IS,
>> there is no reason to believe there is a minor fault in the male which, by
>> inbreeding with the female, wont be largely accentuated. That is ALWAYS
>> possible. Also, a rock solid breeding can ALWAYS throw a fault that is
>> inherited but not actually evident in the generation to be bred or the one
>> before it.
>>
>> >Of course if you start off with POOR specimens --that's what you're
>> >going to get -- even MORE poor specimens.
>>
>> Naturally.
>>
>> >Inbreeding is a powerful breeding technique and, in the right hands,
>> >can work wonders. Learnmore about it before you comment on it, eh?
>>
>> I know more than it appears you give me credit for and it would appear more
>> than you think YOU know, unfortunately.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> |Sysop of Amiga's Sci-Fi BBS gr...@hartingdale.com.au Chow Chow lover! |
>> |Are you old when you enjoy a good headbanger record with others over 40?|
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Sorry. You know diddley-squat about genetics. All you have is a wrong
>opinion.
Sorry but if you believe that, stop taking your own advice. You know nix.
Chip Douglas
Roger is a butthead and given the opportunity he will send you a lot
of stupid emails to fill you up...just knotheads.
Chip
Ann Sweeney
>
> Chows are beautiful animals, just keep them away from the orientals.
and keep ignorant cretins away from computers... they post useless and
offensive dung to rec.dog.* newsgroups.
> They are bred over there for food. How terribly disgusting.
too bad ignorant cretins are not used for food. at least then they
wouldn't be a complete waste of space. (hee hee!)
>
> Chip
you know mr. chips & dips, you never cease to amaze and amuse!
ann & thumper
Chip Douglas
It is true sweety, they do breed chows for food, or didn't you know
that?
Chip
Joanne Trianon
gregh said:
>
>
>On 02-Apr-97 04:14:15, Carol Dunster assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
(Part
>4)
Why do you keep accusing people of "assaulting" you?
gregh
On 01-Apr-97 17:02:55, Carol Dunster assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
>>snip
>>Yes, Chows can be aggressive. So can Golden Labradors but in most cases, it
>>isnt the BREEDING but the CIRCUMSTANCES that lead to this.
>I disagree completely with this. I have bred dogs for many years and
>trained them and shown them and groomed them. It is very clear that
>the basic temperament is *very* hereditary and that aggression is also
>*very* hereditary. I have seen bloodlines in English Setters (a breed
Carol,
Fine. Point out the genetic reason for your belief. I havent found one as yet
but I surely am open to proof. The gene controlling aggression is: ?
>known for sweet temperaments) that were generally aggressive and other
>bloodlines that were very sweet and it didn't matter who raised
>them...
That really is a sweeping statement. There are so many factors that can turn a
dog aggressive and some arent obvious. If it isnt a health problem that does
it, then it could be something occurring every day outside of the knowledge of
the owners. Some health probs that could cause this can also be hard to spot,
even for a VET!
>We are talking about Chows, but what I have to say holds for all
>breeds. I have every reason to believe that a poorly bred Chow is
>likely to be aggressive,no matter how it was raised. Same for my
Good. Point out to me the gene controlling aggression, then. Actually, when
you think about it, if that sort of identification had been made, surely it
would have been used by now....or at least published somewhere....?
>breed, English Setters. Heck, even a well bred Silky is likely to be
>dog aggressive - it's just a bit cuter in a 10 pound dog than in a
>large breed!
I have reason to believe that smaller dogs mixed in the same yard with larger
dogs can become aggressive. There is no real problem with the smaller breeds
per se but I have noted this quite often and in a lot of cases, the smaller
dog feels insecure. It also depends on the dog's relationships to each other,
too. I had a Pommy who was in the same yard as a Greyhound/Labrador cross and
the two got on well and both were well adjusted, until the Grey/Lab decided to
take it upon itself to wash the Pommy by holding it down with one paw and
licking it all over. I was very annoyed at this as it was my Pommy and my
parent's Grey/Lab. Good as the big dog (female) was, it was causing slight
snappiness in my Pommy. Added to that, the Pommy used to stink and look
terrible and I had to wash him too often.
However, my belief hasnt been documented, proven, etc. So, until someone
thinks it matters enough to do research on it, it remains my belief only and
not really PROOF.
>>In other cases, it
>>is health. Yes, I have seen a dog when I was a kid who had a health problem
>>and snapped at people as a result. Breeding AGGRESSIVE is not a genetically
>>provable point.
>Yes, it is. I have seen certain stud dogs adversely affect a whole
Point out to me the gene controlling aggressive traits.
>breed when widely used. This is hereditary, not environmental, because
>the effect was too widely spread in animals from widely different
The answer to that contention, then, is that you couldnt see the reason why so
ASSUMED it to be genetic. You cant assume one thing to be true without the
proof of it and so far, I have yet to see which gene actually reoccurs in
aggressive animals, indicating a predisposition to aggression. Dogs, I mean,
BTW.
>environments. I have also seen sub-lines within my own bloodline that
>has specific temperament traits that followed the genetic ties and
>ignored the environment (which I had control over). The one dog that I
Had you ever given thought to the fact that there MAY have been a provable
genetic defect in the bloodline causing health probs that made the animals
snappy, rather than just "BAD BREEDING EQUALS AGGRESSIVE ANIMAL"? Sick animals
are, as far as I have noticed, more likely to be snappy if the sickness doesnt
actually sap the energy out of them. I know HUMANS who have the flu, for
example, can be more snappy than normal.
>had the turned out crazy was the one that I had spent the most time
>and trouble socializing and training. The connection is obvious.
No, again you draw too much from one possible event. Sure, there may be a
genetic reason why this animal went bad but it may be because you were
breeding a line that was just SICK, missed something or other in it's
development that make up the normal balance of the animal. I have said,
repeatedly, sick dogs often DO lead to aggression and yes, you can breed bad
bloodlines from health defects but not actually know you are doing it. Could
you tell, for example, that a dog was mostly deaf - though not fully deaf - if
the dog had been this way from birth? Maybe YOU could but a lot of people
would just think it a dog that doesnt answer well. That is something easily
hidden. Gee, I have apparently been 30% deaf in my right ear because of the
way I was born but growing up with that, I knew no difference. It wasnt until
I was tested for a job that they found I was that bad in that ear. Surprised
the heck out of me! So, you could have a small health problem in an animal
that you cant see and really need to be a vet with the right equipment to find
or even more, a small animal specialist and not JUST a normal vet. This prob
MAY cause aggression.
>>snip
>>Aggression, though, is a learned trait. If the parents of a pup are
>>aggressive and the pup allowed to stay around them long enough, it will pick
>>up on that. If the parents are mild mannered but the HUMAN is aggressive
>>towards the dog, then it may also pick up on that.
>It is true that the basic temperament is inherited and the personality
>is the result of the environment acting on the temperament. Aggression
>can be aggravated by environment. Aggressive behaviors can be taught
>or untaught, but the basic temperament is there when the animal is
>born. When I see a puppy born screaming, it is always a screamer. Of
>course a dog with a brain tumor may not act normally, or a dog in
>pain.
When I got a pup back in the 80s for show, she was sound for that purpose and
also a WILD one. She wasnt BAD but just puppy playful but about 10 times a
normal puppy's playfulness. The reason she was like this was that her
littermates were all male and she was the only female. She was more used to
fighting for food and attention. It took a little while but she eventually got
the idea that THAT wasnt necessary now and she turned out to be the most
obedient Chow I have ever owned and a LOVELY one, too. Added to that, she
developed an ever-so-small undershot jaw though none other in the breeding
lines had had THAT prob for many generations back. The pup I bought was
nothing like the adult that lived with me till she died. She LEARNED her
temperament from the surroundings I gave her and the way in which I approached
her and my other dogs. I am no-one special but every dog I have owned that I
can remember, since a kid, has always learned in this way. Breeding had
nothing to do with the outcome, in that Chow's case at all, really. She was
unlucky to have an undershot jaw and lucky to lose the... well it want really
ever AGGRESSION but more like a really ASSERTIVE character. She wanted to be
the centre of attention at all times, because of the makeup of her litter and
when she came to live with me, found she didnt need to do that so dropped it.
;-}
>> Note that in both cases, it doesnt HAVE to
>>follow as true all the time, either.
>This goes to support my opinion that the dog has a basic temperament -
>that is why one dog is abused and turns on the abuser and another,
>treated similarly does not. That is why one dog well treated is
You also have to realise that most people undervalue the intelligence of a
dog. Dogs CAN and DO think for themselves. SOME abused dogs may decide that it
is easier to take the hurt than rebel against it while some decide they have
had enough. Sound like humans in similar situations, does it?
>unreliable and another is a good pet. People that don't understand
>this breed inappropriate dogs and create dogs that are harder than
>usual to live with. They ruin breeds.
No, in fact BREEDING is NOT the cause of a dog that is hard to live with. It
is either a person who cannot understand the breed or some other problem in
it's environment. These probs CAN be corrected.
>>Yes but you can say that about ANY breed. It isnt limited JUST to any one
>>particular breed.
>I would say that any breed can have well bred dogs and poorly bred
>ones with poor temperaments. You are the one that has tried to say
>that it doesn't happen in Chows.
I didnt say that at all, as you well know. I have said ALL along that
INDIVIDUALS within a breed can be bad but breeds - ANY breeds - as a whole,
are not. No use telling lies about this.
>>Sorry but *I* didnt rant. The problem is that I point out the truth and some
>>people just dont like it. No BREED of dog can be said to be more or less
>>aggressive than any other as a BREED. Indivduals within a breed, yes.
>That is not true. Some breeds have a higher than average percentage of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Oh yes it IS!
>aggressive dogs. Chows are one of them. It really doesn't matter
So let's see - you claim numbers presented mean that a breed is MORE
aggressive than another because NUMBERS dont LIE? OK then if you beliebe that,
let me say that only 10% of what you believe about Chows and aggressiveness
being a problem is true. Now as you have seen that in print, it MUST be true.
Surely you can think beyond that?
>whether you like it. It would be useless to try to breed a breed for a
Whether you like it or not, the numbers presented are not really properly
researched so you base your conclusions on data that, at best, is
questionable. If you say there are 1000 Chows with aggression problems for
example, how many Chows are there in USA as a whole? I doubt I have ever seen
THAT sort of data presented against each other. Dont place your faith in
figures that really need more investigation before they can be considered
trustworthy. Eg, if there were 10 bites, why did they occur? Were 9 because
the animal was attacked to begin with?
>given purpose, if you couldn't breed temperament traits that would be
>most useful for that purpose. English Setters were selected for the
>trait that causes them to freeze up when under stress. This makes them
>useful pointing birds. Other non-pointing breeds do this, but not
>reliably enough to make them bird dogs. Some breeds were bred for
>fighting and will do it more reliably than English Setters. They will,
>as a breed, be more aggressive than English Setters are.
I dont know enough about "pointing" to be able to tell you anything
worthwhile, to be honest, as it was never something I was interested in. About
all I can tell you is from a very remote source that insisted in the wetlands
near him in duck season in Melbourne, you could take a "pointer" dog out and
it worked because it had been taken out, young, with an adult trained in doing
that and for no other reason. I dont offer this to you as proof but just as a
counterpoint. Maybe youhave heard the same thing said, too?
>I have heard several things about what Chows were bred to do. I am not
BRED to do? You have "heard"? Well, there is significant data to show you
that Chows were used as temple guards. Not attack dogs. They were also brought
into China by "The Mongol Hordes" but not as a fighting dog. There is also a
report from a Chinese military leader that tying more than one Chow to the
saddle of a horse was bad because with 2 or more, they could pull the horse
over. Of course, the horses in China in those days were small compared to what
we see these days. So, you can see that some "heard" statements can be true
and some need to have more corroborating evidence before the reason WHY can be
seen.
>sure which ones have any validity, but none of them included gentle
>nonagressive pursuits. I have heard guard dogs, fighting dogs and
>dinner. I think that the modern Chow temperament is much improved due
To be totally honest, the one about them being guards is the most believable
of the lot for me, personally. I know a guy who was in the Korean war who
claims that he used to give a Monk a lift back and forth each day while he was
doing his rounds (he was what I guess you would call a courier in the
military). The Monk invited him in to the outer courtyard of the temple and in
there, he saw "odd blue tongued dogs" which, some 10-15 years later, he saw
again and found were Chows. He said the Monk told him they were guard dogs.
This guy was the husband of the second breeder I ever bought from.
>to breeders that realize that there can be a problem and take action
>(and keep their heads out of the sand!). The attitude that aggression
>is not genetic will ruin your breed faster than any anti-Chow fanatic,
>which I am definitely not.
Well, prove to me which gene controls aggression, then. I am sure that I
havent found out which it is yet but then I dont claim I didnt miss something.
;-}
>>I have had people like that before, too. The truth always wins though and it
>>matters not how much they rant. NO-ONE can yet prove any genetic link
>>between any single breed of dog and aggression.
>There definitely links between genetics and aggression and therefor
>between breeds and aggression.
OK, put up or shutup! (just an expression. Dont take it personally. ;-}).
Where's the proof? Which gene?
>> It may happen one day but it isnt
>>there now. Of course, if you keep INBREEDING, then you increase the risk of
>>health problems that may LEAD to aggression.
>If you inbreed thoughtfully, you DECREASE the risk of health problems
>that MAY lead to aggression. Chows are a fine breed, but they are
Depends. Thoughtful people can also go too far.
>somewhat more difficult on the whole to own and train than many other
Again, that is only your opinion and not, as such, a fact. I have no problems
training my Chows. I have a personal belief that any animal will have a better
disposition IF it is allowed to be as normal as it can be within normal
socialisation needs etc. I dont like to train my Chows to do things just for
the fun of it but I HAVE trained them to come on command, drop things from
their mouths and DROP as in down on the belly as well and even trained one to
retrieve though this last one was done against my usual judgement to prove
Chows can be trained to do what you want them to do. I still find that Chows
DO need a reason though, a lot of the time. For example, mine knows COME but
wont ALWAYS come straight away from the back yard UNLESS it can see an
immediate reason why it should. If I am out with her, she will come EVERY time
because I have made her aware that she must do what I say, when outside the
yard, all the time. In the yard, I generally give her a choice though. This is
the sort of thing I mean. So, as you can see, I could utility train a chow if
that were my interest. Some already HAVE been.
>breeds. If your personal Chows (individuals within the breed) are
>spectacularly sweet and easy to live with, you are lucky and careful
>in your selection. It doesn't change the fact that poorly bred Chows
>exist and that pet stores are the most likely place to find them.
Nope about careful about picking for my first and seecond Chows. They were
picked on the basis of what my wife liked and she likes open faced more. ;-}
Poorly bred chows such as the provable HD problem that can occur, sure.
>You would do your breed more good by pointing out to people that good,
>caring breeders don't sell to pet stores. Good caring breeders want to
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Oh rubbish. How can you make such a SWEEPING statement without knowing the
breeders that DO sell to pet stores? Sure, a lot DO sell to them to get rid of
animals that arent show worthy or have health probs etc but that doesnt mean
ALL are like that, as you state.
>know exactly where there puppies are and they can't do that through a
>retail outlet. Therefor pet store puppies aren't bred by the best
>breeders, even though the prices are just as high or higher.
SOME "good caring breeders" unfortunately sometimes find themselves in an
unexpected financial crisis and have no other choice. This doesnt make them
bad people or bad breeders.
>I don't know if I can explain what I see so that you will understand
>me, but do know that I clarify my understanding every time I attempt
>to do it, so the effort is not wasted! At this time there are a couple
>of key issues that we just don't agree on, such as the inheritability
>of temperament and the value of careful inbreeding as a useful tool
>for a knowledgeable breeder. That is okay - the debate will also help
>to clarify the opinions of the others reading this (if they don't die
>of boredom wading through this first! <gr>).
No 2 people ever agree fully on everything. That's why we have cops! ;-}
>Remember - I have no grudge against Chows, but I do against sloppy
>thinking...
Yes and so do I which is why you cannot prove the gene controlling aggression
in dogs. It is sloppy thinking to say that aggression is passed on in breeding
where such breeding doesnt include some health problem, without that proof.
gregh
On 02-Apr-97 04:14:15, Carol Dunster assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows (Part
4)
>On 26 Mar 97 10:27:47 +1000, gr...@hartingdale.com.au (gregh) wrote:
>>On 25-Mar-97 01:46:38, Carol Dunster assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
>>She DOES claim that they are a "very loving breed and caring breed ....until
>>asked to do something they dont want to do, by their owners". The inference
>>she makes is that when asked to do something they dont want to do, they
>>ARENT loving which leads the reader to believe something bad will happen.
>>This is just pure rot!
>Actually I took the inference to be that *some* Chows might resent
>being asked to do things they don't wish. She uses the qualifier
>"could", not "will". Like I said - read more carefully and with less
>prejudice!
Carol,
Pardon but it is *I* who is NOT prejudiced in this case. Trying to use that
statement on me is ridiculous. I am the one calling for open thinking, here.
Therefore, your statement really does only reflect on you - DONT be prejudiced
in YOUR thinking.
>>There is no other word for it. I ask my Chows to do something,
>>daily, that they dont want to do - whether that is to come inside or to go
>>to bed etc when they dont want to - and though they openly DISPLAY that they
>>dont want to do it and as young animals, will go to lengths to get out of
>>doing it
>>(such as running out of your reach), they will eventually do it, anyway. At
>>no time do my Chows - ANY of them - display any attitude other than
>>reluctance or a positive want to NOT do it by staying out of your reach.
>Remember that you have well bred Chows raised by someone that is quite
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
How can you claim that? You dont even KNOW my Chows, breeding, kennel name
etc. Even by your own standards, that really is a strange claim.
>experienced. You are not a child that might do something stupid, you
>are an adult that knows exactly how to deal with your Chows (which you
>state are not always willing to do what you wish...)
No, again you make statements without proof and this is SLOPPY thinking. When
I got my first Chow, I didnt know a lot about them.
As to not being a child, that sort of stamtent can also hold true with any
breed, not just Chows. CHILDREN are their own worst danger with ANY breed
because they are unpredictable and may hurt an animal unintentionally. This
may lead to ANY dog biting them.
>>If you read otherwise in her comment, then I agree that maybe her comment
>>was just badly worded but on the face of it, it didnt look a bit like
>>anything other than a veiled warning.
>Rot.
Oh no - only from YOUR point of view but definitely not from just reading it.
>> >Joanne:
>>>>>In obedience you will come to a point of refusal with almost any dog.
>>>>>Chows just don't seem to accept authority from anyone or anything.
>>
>>>>Chows are not a dog I would bother to utility train. There have been
>>>>successful cases and so on but I have found that all but one of my own
>>>>Chows was "aloof" as they are supposed to be and highly intelligent.
>Here you are talking about an inherited temperament trait - something
>you claim doesn't exist when it doesn't suit you for it to exist...
No I am NOT. Where did I say that? I referred specifically to MY OWN CHOWS!
Sloppy thinking on your part and definitely bad reading skills.
>>I said that they are not a breed *I* would bother to utility train. I am,
>>though, NOT someone personally predisposed to making animals jump through
>>hoops.
>You were, however, speaking as an expert on the breed (supposedly), so
>that when you say you would not train a Chow to a high level, it is
>reasonable to assume that you think they are difficult to train.
No it is NOT. If you continue to ASSUME, you will continue to jump to
conclusions instead of making decisions based upon proof.
>>I dont wish to denigrate utility training. Let me say it just isnt
>>something I consider *I* like. However, in all the cases I have known, I
>>cant say I have seen a lot of Chows that would MAKE great utility show dogs.
>Is this because of inherited temperament traits? (Aggression is just
>as inherited as "aloof" and "intelligent".) Your statement here
>clearly says that you think they would be more difficult to train for
>utility than, for instance, Border Collies.
OK so where did I mention that? Again, I said the Chows I have known. Good
Lord if you can make a case out of this, let me send you a bale of hay. I need
a pot of gold!
>>I owned one that probably would have beaten MOST other dogs into
>>submission. She was obedient on ANYTHING and so agile that she
>> would have been able to do those things they require at those shows.
>Too bad you didn't see fit to *prove* it...
Did you forget, already, that I stated I dont personally like making dogs jump
through hoops or was that just a snide remark?
>>>to be a bit stubborn and you say that they want a reason before they
>>>will work for you. I don't see a huge difference of opinion here...
>>
>>Then the comment that she makes "Chows dont seem to accept authority from
>>anyone or anything" means nothing to you? It means to me she is saying,
>>which she IS saying, that they are totally untrainable. How you see
>>otherwise, I dont know. That contention of hers is not true, however.
>She was a bit strong on that statement, but taken in the context of
>more balanced views, I think it just means that she was getting
>frustrated with your totally unbalance view that Chows would never do
>anything aggressive unless forced into it by poor treatment.
Ahh I see so my views are totally unbalanced? Well, just for the record, my
views, once more, are:
1) NO breed can be said, as a breed, to be "aggressive".
2) Any individual WITHIN a breed CAN be aggressive depending on circumstances
but excepting cases of health problem, even those aggressive individuals can
learn to be normal.
In MY opinion, YOUR *prejudiced* views are unbalance. There is *NO* place in
society for prejudice.
>>snip
>>No, sorry, that just ISNT the case except where the need to subordinate them
>>is paramount to their health. Some of my Chows hated needles and would
>>squirm when about to get one and I would darnedwell make sure I held them
>>still so the needle wouldnt hurt them but some just stand there and dont
>>show any reaction, such as my current one. However, in normal circumstances,
>>I DONT like to subordinate ANY animal.
>However, earlier you state that your Chows are required to do things
>they don't like every day. This is a clear case of teaching them to be
>subordinate (followers rather than leaders). Do you understand the
>word? It has nothing to do with treating them well, my dictionary
>defines it as meaning "submissive to or controlled by authority".
>Certainly good pets are controlled by authority!
Do you understand what you read or are you intentionally trying to make
something out of nothing? I can only speak English so typing in any language
isnt one of my skills. Try to read what I type. If you continue to try to put
something into what I say that isnt there, you will only continue to make your
case ridiculous even moreseo than it is.
How else can I say "In normal circumstances I dont like to subordinate them"
in any other way that will make it more plain to you? If you cant understand
what I type, please say so. I dont know how I can make it more SIMPLE for you
to understand but I will try.
>> Intellectually, they arent the equal of humans but I like to make my
>>dogs aware that they are treated as well as I can treat
>>them. In part, I do this by NOT requiring that they change to meet MY needs
>>more than is necessary to their well being (eg, I refuse to let them run out
>>the gate when it is open etc).
>Therefor they are subordinate and follow your wishes when it is
>important and I am sure that you do this kindly and when they are
>quite young. I doubt that you are even aware of the small habits that
>teach your dogs to listen to you when you need them to.
Good lord, you go on about a point that you have taken wrong and then go to
town on it. What can I say that you can understand? I have a good grasp on
English but I am not a teacher. I dont know how to make things simpler for you
to understand. I dont know any other way to say it.
>> It is my *PERSONAL* opinion (that I hold
>>without proof other than my own dogs over the years) that the more natural
>>you can make your animal, the less the problems/chance of problems.
>Of course not - if you demand very little of your dogs, they will not
>show you whether they will take your training and you will not have to
>admit when you are wrong and they will resent being asked to do a bit
>more...
Again, you make a sweeping statement without proof. How do you know how EVERY
dog will react? I cant tell you how YOURS will react in any given situation so
how can you say how MINE will react? I have had a Chow accidentally let out
onto the street and because I taught her to drop for safety reasons, she
dropped. Of COURSE they can show me the little I make them learn for safety
and social reasons.
>> My brother in
>>law has a lovely natured puppy miniature Daschy. It has a loving personality
>>and is a dog you could just take home with you the minute you meet it.
>>However, his wife has been making it do this, that and the other, in order
>>to show off it's tricks to people who visit. It has gone a little nutty
>>since she started that. I cant think of anything worse than driving my dogs
>>insane for personal vanity.
>Perhaps she is not a good trainer. Most dogs that I know that are
>properly trained are much happier because of it, not nutty! Either
>that or the dog is of an age to reach sexual maturity and would be
>nutty anyway due to some defect in its breeding...
You cant assume a defect. Neither can I. I dont know the breeder nor anything
much about what PROVABLE defects the breed may have. Not a good trainer? I
dont know how to answer that one because I dont know upon what criteria you
base your judgements on that. All I can say is that when she wants it to go to
bed, it does, etc etc etc.
gregh
On 02-Apr-97 15:32:56, Chip Douglas assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows (Part 1
of response)
>Chows are beautiful animals, just keep them away from the orientals.
>They are bred over there for food. How terribly disgusting.
Ahhhhh Chip!! Gee! ;-}
Intreppid
If you are interested in Chows and Assaults, see the ZenMaster's new
link, go ahead, it takes a long time to download, but you'll love it.
Michael T.
!ZenGuerrillaDog!
Changing the Muzzle of Dog Training
http://members.aol.com/ZZendog/ZenDogTest.html
CHECK OUT NEW LINK!
WHO'S THE BOSS?
http://members.aol.com/Intreppid/whodaboss.html
Parrothead
As the owner of what is now a 10 year old chow-chow my only comment
about chows and children is if they grow up together - no problem but
a stranger (and this doesn't even have to be a child) no way. My chow
when we walk the neighbourhood will lay at your feet and cuddle - but
try to enter my yard or house and you take your life in your own
hands. She wasnt trained this way - dhe just is. From other owners I
have heard the same thing - they are territorial dogs.
Parrothead
If the phone doesn't ring, it's me
sava...@sd.znet.com
In article <17701.70...@hartingdale.com.au>, <gr...@hartingdale.com.au>
> On 01-Apr-97 17:02:55, Carol Dunster assaulted me about Re: Chow Chows
>
> >>snip
>
> >>Yes, Chows can be aggressive. So can Golden Labradors but in most cases,
it
> >>isnt the BREEDING but the CIRCUMSTANCES that lead to this.
>
> >I disagree completely with this. I have bred dogs for many years and
> >trained them and shown them and groomed them. It is very clear that
> >the basic temperament is *very* hereditary and that aggression is also
> >*very* hereditary. I have seen bloodlines in English Setters (a breed
>
> Carol,
>
> Fine. Point out the genetic reason for your belief. I havent found one as
yet
> but I surely am open to proof. The gene controlling aggression is: ?
>
>
There are numerous studies that show aggression to be genetic. You don't need
to identify the gene to do this. One thing that researchers initially did was
to take away pups of an aggressive mother from birth, and put them with a
foster mom who is sweet and gentle. They found that aggression was passed down
to a substantial number of the pups. They are continuing research, but of
course this is controversial, because if behavior is hereditary in animals, it
is probably so in humans too. (Like most parents haven't already figured this
out!) Anyone who has been a serious breeder of any kind of domestic animal can
tell you that temperament is inherited.
When it comes down to it. Where do you draw the line between behavior and
temperament? Clearly behaviors (such as retrieving, herding, guarding) are all
genetic. There are temperament factors that are key to these behaviors i.e.
you have an Anatolian Shepherd dog (my breed) which are great guards, but
tempermentally they are not predispositioned to focus on humans for direction
(they may decide not to let go during bite work-- after all a bad guy is a bad
guy). They are not good at police dog work for this reason, even though all
the behaviors, intelligence and physical ability needed for police work are
there. Every serious performance or working dog trainer I've met
pays very careful attention to a dog's pedigree.
Random mutations can creep into a breeding program. If those are not watched
for explicitly, they can infiltrate a breed, whether it is health or
temperament related.
In our breed we feel it is important to present the negative aspects and
potential problems with the breed. This means less rescues and more satisfied
owners and hopefully less tragic events.
Julie Adams
Savaskan Anatolians
http://www.idyllmtn.com/homepage.html
http://www.lgd.org/
MorrisSM
I've had my chow for almost 13 years and have never had a more devoted,
loving dog in my life. He has been my constant companion and protector
for these same 13 years. He still follows me from room to room and never
lets me out of his sight. If there are guest over he stays where he can
watch what is going on. He has been around many children through out the
years and has never attempted to snip at any of them although I always
watch very closely when children are playing with him. I think chows
temperment has alot to do with how they are raised, and how much love and
attention you give them. My chow understands everything I say to him. You
can tell he understands by the facial expressions. Chows are a very
intelligent breed. I do have a friend who had a chow and did not pay any
attention to it, left it pinned up in a barn yard all the time. Kids
teased it daily. Finally it got out and ended up biteing one of her
visitors. They put the dog to sleep right away. I don't believe it was
the dogs faught. Chows need companionship, they are not the type of dog
to be pinned up. They need love and affection. I wouldn't trade my chow
for any other dog in this world. He is my best friend, I know if I needed
protection he would be there to provide it.
Kingsley Hernandez
We have a stunning litter of chow chow puppies available to go to their forever homes. They have been raised to be very sociable and around lots of household noise. They are gorgeous little bundles of fur and love attention and cuddles. They will be excellent family pets and have also been socialized with children whilst growing up.
https://skychowchowhome.com/
We are small family breeders that specialize in raising the highest quality and confirmation of the Chow Chow breed. It is very important that trust and the health of puppies are met at a high standard when adopting a new family member
All puppies comes as
*KC registered
*5 weeks free insurance
*Vet Checked
*Microchipped
*Wormed up to date
*Puppy Pack
https://skychowchowhome.com/available-puppies/