# What Do Breeders Do With Returned Dogs



## Jack's Dad

There is a thread about someone who returned a fear aggressive dog to her breeder. The breeder informed her the dog was to be euthanised for a different health issue.

The thread made me realize that a lot of returned pups or dogs are probably euthanized. 

Why would a breeder want to deal with the health or temperament issues the animal was returned for. Especially temperament issue. 

I doubt many breeders would want to keep and work with a genetically fearful dog. They wouldn't want an extra dog and if it had been returned once they surely wouldn't want to pass it along.

I can't even say if it's right or wrong but I'll bet it happens a lot more than most would care to guess.

People fall in love with their dogs so quickly that some dogs that probably should be returned are not.

Just wonder how these dogs are dealt with.


----------



## juliejujubean

When i got Dia, i was told that if i ever could not keep her she would be required by contract to go back to melinda. knowing the person melinda is, i know she would keep her until she could be rehomed... but i would never give up my baby! i would rather live in a car than lose her.


----------



## JakodaCD OA

I know quite a few breeders (different breeds) who have taken dogs back for whatever reason, and honestly not one of them put the dogs down, they either kept them or placed them .

Hopefully they do whats in the best interest of the dog .


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Halo's breeder has taken back a couple of dogs, and she keeps them as long as necessary until she finds the right home for them.


----------



## Jack's Dad

I think it would be difficult for a breeder to find someone who wants a dog that was returned because of genetically based fearfulness or severe hip dysplasia for example.

It's a lot different if someone is returning an otherwise o.k. dog because of some situation in their own life.

People seek out reputable breeders and pay more to try to avoid those issues.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

True, but sometimes "temperament issues" really aren't, it's just that the person wasn't quite as prepared as they (or the breeder) thought they were for a GSD in general, or for that particular dog.


----------



## Josie/Zeus

Koda was returned to the breeder at 5 months, the breeder did the prelim xray for hips and elbow and then Koda was shipped to me. 

In our case, there was no problem with Koda but it was for personal reasons I can't say here.


----------



## qbchottu

From what I've seen, dogs with severe health issues like hip/elbow/DM/deforming overbites/heart murmurs and so on are put down. 
1: who wants to take on a dog with a crippling disease when there are plenty of very healthy dogs with no homes? 
2: it's unethical to place this burden on someone else. As a breeder, you owe it to give this animal a proper end. You brought him into this world, you should help him exit in a dignified manner.

Temperament/nerve issues are sometimes trained and rehomed if the issues are fixable. We had a pup with severe fear issues, one of the guys took the pup for a month, it came back like a new dog. It wasn't the pup, it was his old owner. Now this pup has a great home with a family that truly fits him.

Severe temperament issues are put down. Sometimes the breeders keep them. Older dogs (returned due to unforeseen circumstances but are good dogs) that are returned are sometimes rehomed or live out their lives with the breeder.


----------



## marshies

I know my breeder took back a pup from Amaretto's litter, and was/is keeping her until a good home can be found.

My contract also states if for any reason I don't want Puppy anymore, she is to go directly back to the breeder. I've been given this offer for temperament, fit, and health.

I think reputable breeders would have no issues taking back one of their dogs and housing it until a new home can be found or the issue can be properly addressed. Most breeders have housing set up so that they can house multiple dogs, and one more usually isn't going to be a deal breaker.

But I agree with putting down returned dogs for severe temperament and health. I think good breeders have the responsibility not to pass the problem onto someone else and controlling the outcome of the situation.


----------



## GatorDog

My dog Aiden was returned to the breeder at 4 months old because of "temperament issues." Really, the owner was just in over her head with a GSD and neglected him, resulting in his issues. I then adopted him through the breeder at 5 months and wouldn't ever consider giving him up! After lots of hard work and socialization, he is truly an amazing dog.

On the other hand, a woman in my Schutzhund club had a puppy that showed serious agression from 12 weeks old. He had no triggers and would attack anyone at any time for any reason. The same behaviors were also seen in two of his littermates. After months and months of discussing with the options, the owner and breeder both decided it would be in the pup's best interest to be humanely euthanized. He was too unstable and unpredictable to be placed with anyone where he wouldn't be capable of seriously hurting someone..

Sometimes you really don't have any other options...


----------



## DTS

I have a question with this. Say if for some reason I couldn't keep my dog (hypothetical) and I have a contract that says breeder gets first right of refusal. But when I email her pics and updates and get no reply back, she took down her fb site and never answered my calls or emails do I still have to give her back? I feel like I could do a better job at finding my girl a home than her byb because she didn't care where she went but we signed a contract. She hasn't held up her end and refuses to reply back to me especially since I mentioned I'm getting her hips and elbows done Which was also In The contract she has to either pay half of the sale price back to
Me or I get another pup, but I think she has quit breeding. If she quits breeding does that mean she quit her breeder duties to those that have dogs from her?


----------



## shepherdmom

I took a 2 year old dog that had washed out of S&R and been returned to my breeder "supposedly for chasing small animals". She was a sweetheart with me but whenever my husband came near she turned into a snarling, lunging scary creature. I loved her already but I was in over my head. Tried 2 week shutdown with only husband feeding her, tried taking her to a trainer who a said all she needed was her puppy classes w positive reinforcement (this was a 2 year old dog), and who also said I should not have crated her. Took to the vet who said she was fine medically. Finally had to admit I was in over my head and drove her 600+ miles back to the breeder. Breeder assures me she will live out her life with breeder. As we have been friends for years I feel confident in that or I wouldn't have taken her back.


----------



## onyx'girl

DTS said:


> I have a question with this. Say if for some reason I couldn't keep my dog (hypothetical) and I have a contract that says breeder gets first right of refusal. But when I email her pics and updates and get no reply back, she took down her fb site and never answered my calls or emails do I still have to give her back? I feel like I could do a better job at finding my girl a home than her byb because she didn't care where she went but we signed a contract. She hasn't held up her end and refuses to reply back to me especially since I mentioned I'm getting her hips and elbows done Which was also In The contract she has to either pay half of the sale price back to
> Me or I get another pup, but I think she has quit breeding. If she quits breeding does that mean she quit her breeder duties to those that have dogs from her?


I think sometimes a breeders life changes play into a contract. Especially one that isn't an established responsible kennel. 
Onyx's breeder had me sign a first rights but I know that if I ever re-homed Onyx(which I won't) the breeder would not be the one doing it. She no longer breeds GSD's either. 
I'd let her know(IF I could even find her!) that the dog was being re-homed but not expect her to help/and I'd never give Onyx back to her for any reason whatsoever.


----------



## Rerun

I know a couple good breeders personally who have had dogs returned for ZYX reason. One I know very well has an older female that was just returned, was dog aggressive with the new live in boyfriends dog. no other real issues. Owner didn't want to work through it, just wanted to get rid of her. Breeder just had her spayed, and she's up for adoption to an approved home.


----------



## Jack's Dad

I guess it just became clear to me that in most contracts there are no provisions spelled out for what happens to a returned dog.

I wonder if buyers would be as eager to sign contracts if they knew that their dog could be PTS when returned. It would be nice if that area of contracts were spelled out in bold.

I just never thought about that aspect before. 

If you return a dog and the contract is fulfilled with the buyer recieving another pup. Your say on the returned dog is over. The breeder can do whatever they want with the dog.


----------



## onyx'girl

I've thought of that often because I know that many commercial kennels would PTS a returned pup. They have so many pumping out, wasting time on vetting a health issue or working thru a temperament problem would be a detriment to their program and why bother, when they have several litters on the ground to profit from. 
I heard that one commercial kennel near my area will send unsold(unwanted) pups to a vet to be euth'd but not sure if that was true, though a rescue stepped in at the vets to home the pups instead of them being PTS(this was a few years ago, which brought my attention to that kennel)


----------



## bocron

The breeders I am very familiar with will try to rehome (or even resell) the dog if the situation warrants. In the case of a potentially dangerous dog or debilitating health issue, humane euthanasia is the kindest solution. Euthanasia is very hard on all involved. The breeders I deal with have their hearts and souls in their breeding program and each puppy is huge responsibility, physically and morally. When I was breeding Beaucerons, I never required the pup be returned to me in order to get a replacement (if the family loved the dog and wanted to continue with the dog as a member of their family then that was a good solution, assuming it was a health thing and not a behavior issue), although I would always take the dog back if they couldn't keep it. My only requirement was that I get the papers back and proof of neutering at that point. 
I also did Beauceron rescue for a while and would take in dogs that were discovered at local shelters (pretty rare obviously) and I would treat the dog as I would want one of mine treated if a fellow breeder happened to get the dog. 
I took in a few over the years that we ended up PTS since they were a danger and while they were fine in our care, the thought of them getting loose and encountering a stranger scared me to death.


----------



## Liesje

DTS said:


> I have a question with this. Say if for some reason I couldn't keep my dog (hypothetical) and I have a contract that says breeder gets first right of refusal. But when I email her pics and updates and get no reply back, she took down her fb site and never answered my calls or emails do I still have to give her back?


Many people misinterpret first right of refusal. It is exactly what it says. If you have to rehome or sell your dog, you have to offer the dog to the breeder first, but that doesn't mean just give the dog back. You can name your price/conditions. If the breeder doesn't respond, then you can do whatever you want because it's your dog. Unless your contract spells out something more specific, this is all first right of refusal means. It does not obligate the breeder to buy the dog or take it back nor does it obligate you to give the dog back for free.


----------



## selzer

I think it depends on the severity of the problem. I really like the dogs I produce and I feel responsible for a faulty placement or problem with the dog. Passing that problem on to someone else is really an iffy thing and I cannot foresee doing that. Though some dogs are returned, not for any issues, and I can see finding them a new home. Often times breeders have adults available, some may be returns, others drop out of their program, and some may be retired.

The dog that comes back becomes my dog, and I do with it exactly what I would do with any of my other dogs. I take them to training. I work with them. I vet them as I vet my other dogs. 

If any of my dogs had a temperament issue so severe that I could not manage the dog safely, I would have to make a trip to the vet. So far I never have with any that I whelped, and I am hoping I never will have to, but it is what I would do with any of my dogs. For example, if I had a dog with rage syndrome that had unpredictable vicious episodes, I would do what I could with medication if that was possible, and if that did not work, I would put the dog down. 

I have a couple of returns. They are not hard for me to handle. They were not in my plans but I cannot turn my back on them. And euthanizing a dog that is not in severe pain, or is totally unmanageable, is not an option if you care at all. So, breeders sometimes have more dogs than is good for them to have. And they make it work. 

I think what the breeder with the BBs is doing is disgusting.


----------



## TrickyShepherd

I got Duke as a "returned to breeder" Dog at 2years old.

He had aggression issues with the smaller dogs. He was picked on through his whole puppyhood and eventually (2 years old) showed them he was bigger. The owner brought him back to the breeder after their homeowners association told them to get rid of him or move. 

I was contacted by someone who knew the breeder and about Duke's story (they knew I was looking for an male around that age). I got Duke for no cost, just a promise to give him a great forever home. During the time we've had him, he's been through a lot of training, socialization, and strict rules here at home..... We have controlled his DA and he's now able to "tolerate" almost any dog, and actually enjoys playing with my friends dogs. He's really turned around with the proper handling and training. All he needed was a home that understood him and his breed... also, his mental/physical stimulation needs. He's an AMAZING dog who was definitely misunderstood.

With all that said (sorry for going off on a tangent), I would say if the breeder feels they can be placed safely in a home and with the right training, do well.. I am sure most breeders will re-home those dogs to where they think is appropriate, or keep them and work with them.


----------



## robk

My breeder had a voodoo h. bohemia pup returned. He was too much dog for the owners and my breeder admitted to going against her better judgment when she originally sold the pup. He was solid black and gorgeous. I inquired about buying him but she said she had already started some narcotics training on him and had him placed with a local L.E. department. It ended up being a situation that worked out better in the end for everyone involved.


----------



## Marnie

99.9% of the time, there is nothing wrong with the dogs breeders have to take back. It is always a case of wrong owner for that dog. Fearful owners make unstable dogs. In the hands of any experienced handler, the dog will make an excellent pet. Truthfully, 99% of the 'aggression' threads I read here are just hysterical owners who have read to many 'helpful' books. Read the current thread 'Holy Crabapples' on this forum. That's what happens when a good handler takes back a dog someone has almost ruined.


----------



## onyx'girl

I have a FA dog and I'm not a fearful hysterical owner....there are too many GSD's with unstable nerves~ that is a fact.

The breeder who does thorough screening of potential owners (and vice versa) eliminates the poor matching.


----------



## Wolfiesmom

Wolfie was a returned dog. I got him at 12 weeks. His first owner decided he couldn't handle him.


----------



## Marnie

onyx'girl said:


> I have a FA dog and I'm not a fearful hysterical owner....there are too many GSD's with unstable nerves~ that is a fact.
> 
> The breeder who does thorough screening of potential owners (and vice versa) eliminates the poor matching.


I'm sorry, but it is absolutely NOT a fact. There are not a lot of GSD with unstable nerves altho it is certainly easy to put the blame on the poor dog. Working in rescue, I hear these stories every day. Everybody always faults the unstable dog they are turning in. We work with the dogs, we place the dogs. They make wonderful family pets. That's the fact!


----------



## lhczth

onyx'girl said:


> The breeder who does thorough screening of potential owners (and vice versa) eliminates the poor matching.


And even that is not 100%. There is not a breeder on this board that can claim they have never made a poor match.


----------



## lhczth

Marnie said:


> I'm sorry, but it is absolutely NOT a fact. There are not a lot of GSD with unstable nerves altho it is certainly easy to put the blame on the poor dog. Working in rescue, I hear these stories every day. Everybody always faults the unstable dog they are turning in. We work with the dogs, we place the dogs. They make wonderful family pets. That's the fact!


Sorry, but Jane is correct. Nerve issues are a HUGE problem in this breed, but then your definition of sound nerves and ours may differ. In our puppy classes we see so many spooky, reactive, fearful GSD that having one come to class that has sound nerves is a rare treat. Yes, stupid owners can cause issues, but a dog that is sound in temperament doesn't need to be "worked with".


----------



## Marnie

lhczth said:


> Sorry, but Jane is correct. Nerve issues are a HUGE problem in this breed, but then your definition of sound nerves and ours may differ. In our puppy classes we see so many spooky, reactive, fearful GSD that having one come to class that has sound nerves is a rare treat. Yes, stupid owners can cause issues, but a dog that is sound in temperament doesn't need to be "worked with".


People repeat something enough and it becomes a fact whether there is any truth or not. I don't dispute that there are a lot of un or under socialized puppies out there. It's an epidemic, but it is poor or no socialization. It is not some congenital nervous disorder and the puppies could be made into perfectly good pets with the right handling. Poor behavior is made, dogs are seldom born with an inability to interact respectfully with people. A friend of mine took three 7 mo old shelties that you would not believe. They snapped, snarled and bit hands that reached for them. They screamed when picked up, it was really hard to witness. They were terrified of everything. She worked with them for three months before she placed the first one. There was nothing wrong with these dogs except they were not properly socialized. It's all about how these dogs are handled from birth up and beyond probably the second year. 

People need to stop blaming the dog and realize that respect and confidence in a companion animal is made, taught, built over time and with much work.


----------



## Chris Wild

Good screening of pups and homes can certainly help lessen the chances of a poor match, but nothing can eliminate it entirely. Sometimes pups change and don't turn out as expected. Sometimes health issues arise that the owner doesn't want to deal with. Sometimes owners flat out lie and misrepresent themselves, or don't hold up their end of the bargain. Every breeder needs to have a means in place to deal with those situations.

We've had 3 returns, and 1 that we repossessed due to owner neglect. One of those returns was due to lifestyle changes of the owner, and we kept the dog (Della). One return was due to a bad match, we rehomed the dog. One was due to temperament issues that developed as the dog matured. We took him back, worked with him a bit, came very close to putting him down due to those temperament issues, and then out of the blue someone came along who wanted him and was willing to work with them, and had the experience to do so. So we gave him the dog. The repossessed dog we worked with and rehomed. There have been a couple other situations where an owner turned out not to be what we'd thought, and in hindsight we'd have never sold the dog to them in the first place and would have preferred to get the dog back and find another home, but that wasn't possible.

If we were to get a dog back that had health problems that would seriously impact quality of life, or temperament problems that couldn't be easily managed or were dangerous, we would probably PTS. For situations where there isn't anything seriously wrong with the dog, we'd rehome.


----------



## Chris Wild

Marnie said:


> People repeat something enough and it becomes a fact whether there is any truth or not. I don't dispute that there are a lot of un or under socialized puppies out there. It's an epidemic, but it is poor or no socialization. It is not some congenital nervous disorder and the puppies could be made into perfectly good pets with the right handling. Poor behavior is made, dogs are seldom born with an inability to interact respectfully with people. A friend of mine took three 7 mo old shelties that you would not believe. They snapped, snarled and bit hands that reached for them. They screamed when picked up, it was really hard to witness. They were terrified of everything. She worked with them for three months before she placed the first one. There was nothing wrong with these dogs except they were not properly socialized. It's all about how these dogs are handled from birth up and beyond probably the second year.
> 
> People need to stop blaming the dog and realize that respect and confidence in a companion animal is made, taught, built over time and with much work.


Sorry, but I agree 100% with Lisa and Jane here. And this isn't "repeating what I've heard" but from real life experiences. Yes, there are times when the environment is to blame. But more often than not there is an underlying nerve weakness in the dog. And even in those cases where environment had a large impact, most of the time it was an inherent weakness in the dog's nervebase that allowed it to have that effect in the first place.


----------



## Liesje

IMO if the dog NEEDS work/socialization/effort to be able to handle stress and strange/new/chaotic environments then it's not a true strong nerved GSD. I take my dogs out and about because I like to and it's fun for us, not because I think my dog is going to be a terrible pet if I don't expose him to X, Y, Z before a certain age or whatever. A good dog is a good dog.


----------



## Marnie

Oh my Send them here and we will retrain and rehome. That's what we do with all these throw away dogs. They will make someone a good companion.


----------



## Vandal

I think there are MANY more people with nerve issues than there are dogs. For GSDs and all dogs really, these people are simply poison. If you tell a good GSD there is a problem, they will try to help you.
I have helped train thousands of dogs over the last few decades. People will come to me to help with their dog's "aggression problems". I work with the dog for a few days and then spend the rest of the time working with the people. Once I get the people under control, the dog's life and behavior changes in dramatic ways, for the better. People are just too good at making normal, everyday encounters into an attack on the handler. They behave like there is protection training going on with the tight leash, nervous behavior and complete over-reaction to the behaviors of their dog. People like Lies who spend a great deal of time with their dogs and have a grip on themselves, might have a hard time believing what I am saying but after you witness it over and over and over, for decades, you will believe it. Speaking just for GSDs, like I have said in the past...80% of the people who own them, shouldn't. 


I just finished helping a woman with a very nervy, nasty, lab mix. The woman was so afraid of what the dog would do, if I had to leave her for a minute, she would try to retreat to the car with her dog. I spent the entire seven sessions working on HER fear, so the dog could get some relief. The dog went from snarling and lunging at me the first day, to sitting calm and relaxed at the door of the local supermarket during our last session. Yes, that dog had some issues but the owner's issues were far worse. 

People say socialize your dog. Well, you can do that but if you do it wrong or you have a fearful, nervous personality, you can really make a mess of a dog. They are not machines, they are living creatures and they feel what the handler feels. I have a boarding kennel here. I watch the people coming in with their dogs and I observe their behaviors. There are only a very few who handle their dogs confidently and with the right demeanor. The breeds with aggressive tendencies are almost always handled in a way that triggers it. Job security for me but I have a great deal of sympathy for the dogs. Their handlers are constantly telling them something is wrong and then when the dog reacts, they punish them.


----------



## lhczth

Marnie said:


> People need to stop blaming the dog and realize that respect and confidence in a companion animal is made, taught, built over time and with much work.


While I will agree with you that bad handling by bad owners can make a problem where there should never have been a problem and the right home can make the world of difference for most dogs, even those with issues, a dog with good sound nerves does not need a lot of work and extensive amounts of socializing to be made into a good confident companion. 

Unfortunately I have a feeling that your definition of good nerves and mine are a bit like comparing apples and oranges. We are going to have to agree to disagree.


----------



## Castlemaid

Wolfiesmom said:


> Wolfie was a returned dog. I got him at 12 weeks. His first owner decided he couldn't handle him.


They couldn't handle a 12 week old?? That is sad and depressing . . .


----------



## FG167

Marnie said:


> *People repeat something enough and it becomes a fact whether there is any truth or not*. I don't dispute that there are a lot of un or under socialized puppies out there. It's an epidemic, *but it is poor or no socialization. It is not some congenital nervous disorder and the puppies could be made into perfectly good pets with the right handling.* *Poor behavior is made, dogs are seldom born with an inability to interact respectfully with people*.


That may be true in some cases. It was not in my own personal case. Which makes me someone that *knows* the truth, not someone repeating it. 

I was sent "that puppy" in the litter. I know this is so because I have since come across my puppy's littermates (who were social/stable dogs) and owners and they said "oh, you got *that* puppy, the one that no one was sure about". He was an aggressive, reactive, nervy mess of a dog. I adored him. I socialized him, I took him out to training, I met loads of experts in the field - and I have dog experience so I know they were good, solid trainers - and no one could give me anything but: sell him to a protection home or police dept, put him down or drug him until he stops doing these things. He was 1.5 years old when I was told that I did outstanding training with him, brought him farther than anyone believed I could, but he could go no farther. He was giving me everything he had and it wasn't enough to be "normal" - aka, not bite strangers. He would NEVER in a million years be happy as a "pet". He needs to be in a situation where the nerves aren't an issue.

I also think Shelties, who are not bred for aggression, are not a good comparison (nor any other dogs not bred for aggression) to GSDs or other dogs bred to _have _aggression. It's a fine line to have aggression and have nerve and proper threshold.



Marnie said:


> Oh my Send them here and we will retrain and rehome. That's what we do with all these throw away dogs. They will make someone a good companion.


I did the best I could with the dog I had, I loved him and worked him. He was not a throw away dog. Period.

He would never have made a good companion. His nerves could not handle even sleeping properly.

I have a GSD pup now, he'll be a year in a couple of weeks. I raised him the exact same way that I raised Madix - he has turned out fine. His nerve is outstanding. That does make a difference. The household/situation/sports I raised them for are no different, only the genetics behind the dogs.

ETA: Oh and I contacted my breeder time and again for support when I was trying to get information/help on Madix's issues and then when I decided that he would be happier/safer in a different atmosphere - she did not respond to me. I have a contract, I gave her the right of refusal and got no reply.


----------



## Wolfiesmom

Castlemaid said:


> They couldn't handle a 12 week old?? That is sad and depressing . . .


I see it as wonderful because I ended up with a fabulous dog.


----------



## NewbieShepherdGirl

onyx'girl said:


> I have a FA dog and I'm not a fearful hysterical owner....there are too many GSD's with unstable nerves~ that is a fact.
> 
> The breeder who does thorough screening of potential owners (and vice versa) eliminates the poor matching.


I agree with this. Sasha's not fear aggressive, but she did come to me very very fearful, and I am not that way at all so I know it's not me. Now, some of it could have been she was abused. I will buy that nurture had some to do with it, as she is now 100 times more confident than she was when I got her. You actually wouldn't know she was a fearful dog 99% of the time if you just met her. However, little things will pop up that I don't believe have anything to do with how she was raised as a pup. She just don't have rock solid nerves. The girl snapped a choke chain trying to run from fireworks. I don't think that was environmental. She wouldn't pee for 15+ hours because she refused to go outside during the fireworks. I really believe that's her nerves. 

I say this because I had the opportunity to have one of the most stable dogs I've ever met in my life as my best friend growing up. My golden was a rock, a goofy rock, but a rock none the less nerve wise. We used to say that that dog could've been beaten everyday and he'd just stand there wagging his tail, and I really believe (though of course we never tested it) that it's true. He was just 100% solid, nothing phased him. No loud noises scared him, no children being obnoxious bothered him, no correction left him scarred, nothing.We didn't really socialize him, persay. I mean he was an outside dog, a kennel dog actually for most of his life, and he had daily interaction with our family, but we lived outside of town so he didn't have a ton of contact with new situations and people. We didn't take him everywhere we went. In fact, he usually only got to go into town when he was going to the vet. Yet, when I decided to show him in 4-H he met a ton of new dogs (he was about 6 or 7 at this point), a ton of new people, got put in a noisy show arena, and he didn't skip a beat. Sasha's not like that. Sasha will never be like that. I love her. I wouldn't give her up for the world, but she's not 100% sound.


----------



## NewbieShepherdGirl

FG167 said:


> I also think Shelties, who are not bred for aggression, are not a good comparison (nor any other dogs not bred for aggression) to GSDs or other dogs bred to _have _aggression. It's a fine line to have aggression and have nerve and proper threshold.


I agree with this to a point. My disagreement comes in the form of: solid nerves are solid nerves regardless of the breed. The meanest dogs at our dog park, or that I have come across are labs. Labs aren't supposed to be aggressive, and a good one isn't, but poor breeding=poor nerves and when you get poor nerves you often get Fear Aggression regardless of breed. My cousin has a lab who is exactly what the breed should be. She goes hunting with him, she's a big love bug, she's never met a stranger, and the girl is a rock nerve wise. He's always so upset when he sees labs that lunge at people or dogs. It happens in every breed.


----------



## Catu

Marnie said:


> People repeat something enough and it becomes a fact whether there is any truth or not.


This is the only part I agree with.

People repeat over an over that pups need socialization and that if you don't do so the dog will turn being a mess that they finally believe it.
I won't deny socialization helps, but guess what? There are no puppy classes in Chile, and there are good dogs and bad dogs just as anywhere in the world.

With my first SAR dog, a Border Collie, I socialized the heck out of her! I did everything by the book and everybody loved her, but she had nerve problems and no amount of socialization could fix what genes brought. She reached her roof in SAR training and I rehomed her into an agility home where she soon became the favorite of all dogs. With Diabla we took the decision to get her into SAR at 3 years old. Her first training session was a few months after the 27/2 earthquake in a scenario where an entirely block of buildings was being demolished and we were surrounded by a team of bulldozers that were literally eating apartments all around us. Diabla didn't care at all, and it is not something you can socialize to.

Diabla nor Akela were never socialized with kids. I don't have kids available and they randomly see one, yet none of them have any problem with children. Diabla seek them to play with and has a display of trick for demonstrations in events, my big boy naturally knows how to be soft around them. Bagheera, the pup I'm raising cowered the first time she saw one at 9 weeks old and she will need a lot of socialization with kids because something is lacking in what she genetically brings.


----------



## FG167

NewbieShepherdGirl said:


> I agree with this to a point. My disagreement comes in the form of: solid nerves are solid nerves regardless of the breed.


Oh no, I agree with you 100%. My point was that training fear "aggression" out of a dog that should not have aggression bred into it may be slightly different than training fear aggression out of a dog that is *meant* to have aggression. A dog showing aggression because it's scared vs a dog that is showing aggression because it's scared _and_ has a genetic tendency that way would be trained differently and would manifest differently. I like aggression in my GSD, it manifests in correct ways and he is a very social confident dog. I'm not saying aggression itself is bad but it's easier to fix when it's a behavioral problem alone than if it's behavioral *and* genetic.

I don't think I'm being very clear but I agree with what you say. Does that make sense?


----------



## NewbieShepherdGirl

FG167 said:


> Oh no, I agree with you 100%. My point was that training fear "aggression" out of a dog that should not have aggression bred into it may be slightly different than training fear aggression out of a dog that is *meant* to have aggression. *A dog showing aggression because it's scared vs a dog that is showing aggression because it's scared and has a genetic tendency that way would be trained differently and would manifest differently. *I like aggression in my GSD, it manifests in correct ways and he is a very social confident dog. I'm not saying aggression itself is bad but it's easier to fix when it's a behavioral problem alone than if it's behavioral *and* genetic.
> 
> I don't think I'm being very clear but I agree with what you say. Does that make sense?


I get what you're saying. I'm not sure I 100% agree, but I understand the logic of your argument. I'm with you on liking a bit of aggression in my GSD. Sasha has it, and since we've worked on her confidence, she's very appropriate in her aggression. I'm not 100% sure if I agree with you on the part I have in bold. My thinking is on this is if a dog has poor nerves there's not a whole lot that can be done about it. You can work on it, sure, but regardless of the breed, if it's there it's there and if the aggression stems from fear, regardless of breed, it's just there. That being said, I do believe there are different levels of nerve issues. For instance, if I have a dog that starts shaking and peeing itself every time it thunders outside, that's more more extreme than a dog that just jumps for a min. and then recovers. Same with aggression. Sasha's agression was a resource guarding thing. She finally had a person, and she wasn't going to let anyone take that person away from her. This, in my opinion since it stemmed from fear, was fear based aggression. However, I feel like she had a good enough nerve foundation that we were able to, for the most part, fix it. I think the same could be said of any breed with the same problem. I could be wrong; those are just my thoughts.


----------



## FG167

NewbieShepherdGirl said:


> My thinking is on this is if a dog has poor nerves there's not a whole lot that can be done about it. You can work on it, sure, but regardless of the breed, if it's there it's there and if the aggression stems from fear, regardless of breed, it's just there.


I still agree with you. The statement I quoted is directly in line with my thinking but also, for me, combines with the bit you bolded before that


----------



## Marnie

lhczth said:


> While I will agree with you that bad handling by bad owners can make a problem where there should never have been a problem and the right home can make the world of difference for most dogs, even those with issues, a dog with good sound nerves does not need a lot of work and extensive amounts of socializing to be made into a good confident companion.
> 
> Unfortunately I have a feeling that your definition of good nerves and mine are a bit like comparing apples and oranges. We are going to have to agree to disagree.


My response may sound harsh, but a lot of folks on this forum feel like I do. I'm always on the side of the dog. I always want what is best for him. The owner is either making a good dog or making the dog into a train wreck. 

I agree with Ihczth. I won't quibble over the 'definition' of nerves. The original thread dealt with what happens to all the throw away dogs that don't make their owners happy and get returned to the breeder or a rescue or a county shelter. Responsible breeders rehome them because they will make good pet dogs. Rescues rehome them because they will make good pets. 

I think it was Vandal who said a whole lot of people should never own a dog. Combinations of owner/dog are often incompatible but it is the owners fault, not the dogs. It takes effort, hard work and knowledge to make a good dog. If the dog doesn't turn out to be a good companion, man-up and stop blaming the dog. 

Catu, you know not every dog is right for SAR. Don't loose site of the original post. We aren't discussing working dogs or sporting dogs. We are talking about what happens to dogs that people cannot control or that don't make the owners happy. And, FWIW, if the BC is now an agility dog, it is now a very successful dog with no problems. Your point is totally invalid.

NewbieShepherdGirl, you say labs should not be 'mean'. Agreed but how in the world could you know it's the breeding and not the environment. You can't know. Tell me in some meaningful way how you 'know' this. It is just convenient to believe what you want to believe. And sometimes doing your best isn't good enough if you do the wrong things. 

Anyone can say the dog has no nerves so he is a bad, uncontrollable, damaged. Then why can Vandal or I any number of people take that dog and make him a very good pet? Not a sporting dog, not an attack dog, just a good, happy companion.


----------



## NewbieShepherdGirl

FG167 said:


> I still agree with you. The statement I quoted is directly in line with my thinking but also, for me, combines with the bit you bolded before that


Lol perhaps there was never a disagreement. Maybe all these finals that I'm preparing for just have me a little confrontational


----------



## NewbieShepherdGirl

Marnie said:


> NewbieShepherdGirl, you say labs should not be 'mean'. Agreed but how in the world could you know it's the breeding and not the environment. You can't know. Tell me in some meaningful way how you 'know' this. It is just convenient to believe what you want to believe. And sometimes doing your best isn't good enough if you do the wrong things.


Well considering the amount of labs that I've come into contact with who were aggressive, I have a hard time believing that they all had owners who didn't socialize correctly, or didn't do x,y,and z correctly. Especially since 90% of these labs I've come into contact with were because the owners were doing something extra like training classes, or hiking, or things like this where you don't do it unless you really care about your dog. I'm not talking about dogs that people just leave in the yard all day, only to feed and water, and maybe a quick pat on the head. I'm talking about dogs that get just as much love and devotion as we give our dogs, and yet still there's something wrong. By the way the basis of your whole, "how in the world could you know it's the breeding and not the environment. You can't know." is a fallacious argument that adhears to the logical fallacy known as _argumentum ad ignorantiam. _I could easily pose the reverse of your question, and the result would be the same. 

I think where you're getting a bit defensive is you view this as people blaming the dog when they say there's something wrong with their nerves. I can't speak for everyone, but I at least don't believe this at all. It's not Sasha's fault she's not as strong nerved as a lot of dogs on this forum, any more than it's my fault that in order to eat to the point of being full I have to take medicine or I get really sick. We just got the short end of the genetic stick in those regards. I LOVE Sasha, and I don't blame her for her faults, just like I don't think she blames me for mine. We're a team. I help her try and become more confident, she licks my tears when the Sarah Mclachlan commercials come on. 

Who I do blame is her breeder. I don't know it for 100% but I just have very little doubt (especially given the area she came from) that Sasha either came from a puppy mill or a BYB. Whoever bred her is to blame. It doesn't make her a bad dog. She is what she is. Regardless of her nerves, what's most important is she's my girl. Now I will say that someone more inexperienced or less stubborn, probably would have given her back to the rescue. It wouldn't have been her fault or their fault, but not everyone can handle a nervy dog. They can become liabilities in a heartbeat. For a good 9 months, I had to stay very on top of things to make sure nothing serious happened. We worked through it, but there are still little glitches; however, I'm able to manage them and it works out fine. In another house, she could have been allowed to progress and she could have hurt someone. Regardless, the fact is, nervy dogs happen. It's genetic, but it's not the dogs fault. The dog didn't ask to be born that way, they just were. Some of them can be managed, some of them can't be. It's sad, but sometimes the kindest thing to do is to put some of them down.


----------



## Catu

Marnie said:


> Catu, you know not every dog is right for SAR. Don't loose site of the original post. We aren't discussing working dogs or sporting dogs. We are talking about what happens to dogs that people cannot control or that don't make the owners happy. And, FWIW, if the BC is now an agility dog, it is now a very successful dog with no problems. Your point is totally invalid.


My point was not about working dogs, but about the old nature v/s nurture discussion, and if you know that not all dogs are cut for SAR, then my point is not invalid at all.

Chemukh was not a bad dog, I never said that, probably she is even a better pet (at least for your average owner) than Diabla, who has some nerve problems too, but is environmentally sound, and who requires a harder hand to handle.

With exceptions, there are no bad dogs, but dogs for different people. I'd have never chosen Bagheera for myself, but she will do fine on her family. I just think that recognizing the root of the problems you help more the dog than imaging a fairy-tell of how a dog may have been abused on the past and you create realistic expectations for the owners. It may exist a 1% of dogs who have no hope, and the rate of rehoming v/s PTS returned dogs to breeders reflect that reality. In assuming that every dog returned to a responsible breeder will be put to sleep is where Jack's dad is wrong.


----------



## Vandal

NewbieShepherdGirl said:


> I think where you're getting a bit defensive is you view this as people blaming the dog when they say there's something wrong with their nerves. I can't speak for everyone, but I at least don't believe this at all.


 
First, of course nerve issues are genetic. Training can never change who the dog is genetically. It's a pretty tricky thing to change the people with training also, but if you have a good student, you can make the world a much more bearable place for the dog. Would that Lab I talked about make a great pet with just anyone? Not IMO. However, the owner cared enough to try to do something about the problem. I will tell you this though, the majority of the people who come here with aggression problems or fear problems or whatever you want to call it, do NOT think it is them. It has to be demonstrated before they will believe that they have anything to do with it.

What I see the most is dogs who have reacted to something they encountered, usually as a younger dog. That moment in time is where everything goes downhill. The owner will "get ready" the next time a similar situation presents itself. They send the signal to their dog that something is wrong and the dog reacts with aggression in an attempt to drive the "problem" away. Usually, that "problem" is another dog or a person. If the dog has a nerve problem, ( like that Lab I talked about), the people will constantly push on those weak nerves with their really BAD handling. The handler of the Lab was consistently telling that dog that she needed her help. She needed the dog to take care of the problem and clearly, she was so weak and nervous herself, the dog felt the responsibility. If any of you could have seen the expression of relief on that dog's face when she was sitting at the supermarket, surrounded by people, carts and cars, you might understand what I am saying. The handler had become the one in charge and the dog felt the responsibility shift to her. I can't put it a better way but fear and insecurity in the people is rampant in pet owners and the dogs are paying a really big price for it.

Come to think of it, I spend quite a bit of time pointing out what SchH handlers are telling their dogs with their handling as well. In all the phases a good handler, a confident, patient handler, can make just an average dog look quite good in SchH. They can take a great dog and make him a champion. I understand people about as well as I do dogs by this time. People are not that willing to take a hard look at themselves or to accept responsibility for their own actions. It is not just a young person behavior either. If you want to be a good dog trainer, you have to have the character to be able to look at yourself and what you might be doing wrong. Dogs don't miss the subtle things we do and it is easy to send the wrong message if you are unwilling to look at yourself.


----------



## NewbieShepherdGirl

Marnie said:


> And, FWIW, if the BC is now an agility dog, it is now a very successful dog with no problems. Your point is totally invalid.


I missed this earlier, but this is a fallacious argument as well, can't think of the name of the fallacy off the top of my head. Just because a dog is now in agility does not mean that is "a very successful dog with no problems". It may very well be a very successful dog in its own right, but that doesn't mean that it has no problems just because it is successful in agility.


----------



## NewbieShepherdGirl

Vandal said:


> the people will constantly push on those weak nerves with their really BAD handling.


I agree this can often exasperate an already present problem, for sure. Like I said in my post, not every home would have been right for Sasha. What was a mild problem, could have become a major problem if she had gone to a home with an owner that didn't have calm and confident leadership. The fact remains, and I think we agree on this, that the problem already existed within her. I could make it worse or better, but the problem was already there.


----------



## LARHAGE

Liesje said:


> IMO if the dog NEEDS work/socialization/effort to be able to handle stress and strange/new/chaotic environments then it's not a true strong nerved GSD. I take my dogs out and about because I like to and it's fun for us, not because I think my dog is going to be a terrible pet if I don't expose him to X, Y, Z before a certain age or whatever. A good dog is a good dog.


 
I agree with this, I have a 6 year old WGSL female that only leaves my property to go on trail rides, yet she is solid with everyone that comes over, including kids, after riding we go to the feed stores to shop, and she is rock solid in any situation, she's one of the most perfect dogs I have ever had, extremely intelligent and self confident dog. I have never had formal training with her other than backyard life lessons, I can tell her to "watch" a horse while I clean it's stall and she will block it from going out the door, I tell her to stay in the yard and can open the front gates for the feed truck or shoer and she lays by the barn and comes to get me when they arrive, she's truly remarkable when I sit here and think of everything I have come to expect of her and get from her in return.


----------



## Jack's Dad

NewbieShepherdGirl said:


> Well considering the amount of labs that I've come into contact with who were aggressive, I have a hard time believing that they all had owners who didn't socialize correctly, or didn't do x,y,and z correctly. Especially since 90% of these labs I've come into contact with were because the owners were doing something extra like training classes, or hiking, or things like this where you don't do it unless you really care about your dog. I'm not talking about dogs that people just leave in the yard all day, only to feed and water, and maybe a quick pat on the head. I'm talking about dogs that get just as much love and devotion as we give our dogs, and yet still there's something wrong. By the way the basis of your whole, "how in the world could you know it's the breeding and not the environment. You can't know." is a fallacious argument that adhears to the logical fallacy known as _argumentum ad ignorantiam. _I could easily pose the reverse of your question, and the result would be the same.
> 
> I think where you're getting a bit defensive is you view this as people blaming the dog when they say there's something wrong with their nerves. I can't speak for everyone, but I at least don't believe this at all. It's not Sasha's fault she's not as strong nerved as a lot of dogs on this forum, any more than it's my fault that in order to eat to the point of being full I have to take medicine or I get really sick. We just got the short end of the genetic stick in those regards. I LOVE Sasha, and I don't blame her for her faults, just like I don't think she blames me for mine. We're a team. I help her try and become more confident, she licks my tears when the Sarah Mclachlan commercials come on.
> 
> Who I do blame is her breeder. I don't know it for 100% but I just have very little doubt (especially given the area she came from) that Sasha either came from a puppy mill or a BYB. Whoever bred her is to blame. It doesn't make her a bad dog. She is what she is. Regardless of her nerves, what's most important is she's my girl. Now I will say that someone more inexperienced or less stubborn, probably would have given her back to the rescue. It wouldn't have been her fault or their fault, but not everyone can handle a nervy dog. They can become liabilities in a heartbeat. For a good 9 months, I had to stay very on top of things to make sure nothing serious happened. We worked through it, but there are still little glitches; however, I'm able to manage them and it works out fine. In another house, she could have been allowed to progress and she could have hurt someone. Regardless, the fact is, nervy dogs happen. It's genetic, but it's not the dogs fault. The dog didn't ask to be born that way, they just were. Some of them can be managed, some of them can't be. It's sad, but sometimes the kindest thing to do is to put some of them down.


Love this post.

Thanks to the breeders who responded.

Catu. I never meant to imply that every dog returned to a breeder would be put to sleep. 
It simply occurred to me that we often don't know what happens to dogs who are returned.
As Jane said there are some very large breeders in the U.S. and I have a hard time believing that some of them want to waste their time on a problem dog but I can't say that factually. 
In the thread that prompted this one the breeder recieved the dog for fear issues and promptly put it to sleep for a supposed orthopedic problem.
I was simply wondering how frequently these things might happen.

Vandal made an important point also. Many should not own these dogs.
I'm not an expert but some of the threads on here convince me that there are people buying something they will not be able to handle.


----------



## robinhuerta

Andy...I would say (for myself)......it would entirely depend on the specific dog, & specific reason.....whether a re-home is an "honest, ethical & humane" thing to pursue........human feelings/emotions aside, what would be *best* for the dog itself.


----------



## Jack's Dad

robinhuerta said:


> Andy...I would say (for myself)......it would entirely depend on the specific dog, & specific reason.....whether a re-home is an "honest, ethical & humane" thing to pursue........human feelings/emotions aside, what would be *best* for the dog itself.


Thanks Robin.

I'm sure there are a few dogs that are returned that have such genetic disabilities that the breeders only ethical choice is to PTS the dog.

Marnie: The GSD is becoming a physical and temperamental mess along with a lot of other breeds. People want what they want and it is hurting the breeds.
Can I prove that to you? No. Just do some reading on what is happening with breeding (in many breeds)these days and you can believe it or not.
I do agree that owners are also responsible for many of the problems in their own dogs.
Our county just passed laws against any dog considered to have an aggression problem. This law does not require a bite just aggression.
It is not breed specific but it's a beginning,


----------



## marshies

LARHAGE said:


> I agree with this, I have a 6 year old WGSL female that only leaves my property to go on trail rides, yet she is solid with everyone that comes over, including kids, after riding we go to the feed stores to shop, and she is rock solid in any situation, she's one of the most perfect dogs I have ever had, extremely intelligent and self confident dog. I have never had formal training with her other than backyard life lessons, I can tell her to "watch" a horse while I clean it's stall and she will block it from going out the door, I tell her to stay in the yard and can open the front gates for the feed truck or shoer and she lays by the barn and comes to get me when they arrive, she's truly remarkable when I sit here and think of everything I have come to expect of her and get from her in return.


Can you elaborate on what you do to teach life lessons? I, and a few other new owners I know, seem to have a disconnect between class and life. Our dogs are marvelous in class settings, but these skills don't transfer into life.


----------



## Marnie

NewbieShepherdGirl said:


> By the way the basis of your whole, "how in the world could you know it's the breeding and not the environment. You can't know." is a fallacious argument that adhears to the logical fallacy known as _argumentum ad ignorantiam. _I could easily pose the reverse of your question, and the result would be the same.
> 
> I think where you're getting a bit defensive is you view this as people blaming the dog when they say there's something wrong with their nerves.




LOL, I think you may be confused about Argumentum ad ignoratiam. It is you who just 'knows' dog genetic temperament of stranger's dogs with absolutely no logical basis for that knowledge. If so many dogs are damaged goods because of 'nerves', why can they be so easily fixed and made into good pets? That is my argument. If you cannot fix your dog, I'm pretty sure there are people who can. So lets talk specifics. 

Is your dog a good pet or not? If so, she certainly is not damaged or badly bred. And what is your definition of 'nerves'? Is she fearful, is she reactive? Does she bite you? Does she hunt down and kill children? Do you have to use a tractor to pull her out from under the porch? What is this 'nerve' she has or lacks that makes her a bad pet? It's difficult to understand where people are coming from when they make these huge blanket pronouncements about the entire breed going to heck using vague phrases that have meaning for only those who have problem dogs.

And no, I am not defensive. I am never defensive. I am on the offensive because it is very difficult to read these posts about people giving up pet puppies because the pup had no 'nerve' or whatever trendy catch phrase we are using Not every dog is cut out for every sport or every type of work. That does not make them nervy or damaged, or unstable throw away dogs. That does not mean there is anything wrong with the dog at all. It just means that the dog doesn't fulfill the owner's golden vision of what dogs should be. 

People who make dogs reactive and fearful don't mean to do so. I'm sure you didn't mean to do so with your dog. What do you think should be done with all these dogs and puppies that lack nerve, this single most important temperament component? If they are so congenitally damaged, is euthanization the answer? How can they ever be anyone's companion if they lack 'nerve'? Nerve being the making or breaking of all worth while dogs, right? Should breeders hold their dog until they are old enough to temperament test? Should they kill the ones who don’t pass? Is this Nazi Germany and I've been napping? Do you think most people who own a GSD dislike their dogs? Here's what I think. I think a some few people like the ideal of a German Shepherd but don't really know what these dogs are like when not trained. They think the dog will just know what is expected of it. They think the dog should spend his spare time looking for wells to pull Timmy out of. They think the dog should be polite to strangers and strange dogs even tho they haven't been taught to do so. Dogs should know better than to play bite and why do they not know that doggie excitement is not a good thing? GSD should just know all these things like you know most GSD are poorly bred and lack nerve. How is it that so many GSD have wonderful homes with no problems? Now this is just an Argumentum ad ignoratiam but I think the reason most people love their GSD is they  understand the dog's needs and how to use strengths and weaknesses to make the best possible companion dog.


----------



## Vandal

> Our county just passed laws against any dog considered to have an aggression problem. This law does not require a bite just aggression. It is not breed specific but it's a beginning


 
...and here is one source of the fear in pet owners. We have a VERY strong Animal Rights movement in this country that the lazy, "go ahead and take my rights away" dog owners are doing very little to stop. This idea that dogs are not allowed to act like dogs, that they are "Fur kids" who must behave like human children, is now a mentality that exists in huge numbers of people. Lately, I am getting more calls from people with aggressive breeds who are looking for a place to board their dog. They can't find a place where the dogs are kenneled separately because in Los Angeles, mostly what is offered is day care with a huge mob of dogs all running loose while being supervised by a teenager with a week of "training". This mentality is being shoved down their throats. I have one client who uses a nylon cover collar to hide the pinch collar on his very large Bull Dog. He is actually being responsible by using that collar but if people in downtown LA, where he lives, see it, they harass him about being "cruel" to his dog. Ain't no way I would be hiding it from those idiots but he handles it in a way that fits his personality.


Mostly, people now want dogs that look a certain way but possess none of the characteristics of that breed. Most do not understand that there IS a difference between the breeds, they think it is all looks. 


I find myself breeding less and less because frankly, I am tired of the ignorance that exists and is being promoted by AR fanatics, Petco, and the so called "dog trainers" who offer classes to the general public. 
I don't want to take a dog back. It is exceptionally hard on loyal dogs like GSDs and on me. It is not that easy to place older dogs and the idea that breeders want the dogs back so they can make a ton of money on them, is simply not based in reality. I find myself to be exceptionally protective of the dogs that have come back here. I do not want to let the dog down again after the first mistake. Finding a person who understands and believes that an older dog can take a little time to adjust, or even how to help that dog adjust , is also rather difficult.


----------



## LARHAGE

marshies said:


> Can you elaborate on what you do to teach life lessons? I, and a few other new owners I know, seem to have a disconnect between class and life. Our dogs are marvelous in class settings, but these skills don't transfer into life.


Marshies, what I mean is just functioning and living in "our" realm of life together, in other words I have dogs that live with me and my horses, they are trained to interact in this lifestyle safely and obediently, ie no chasing horses etc... this dog of mine is even a self taught herding dog, she almost thinks before I tell her, what I mean about life lessons is just how to be a cool, acceptable dog/companion, they learn to look to me for guidance and this transfers over to our outside trail rides and other activities, they have no formal training other than the basics I've taught them while going about our activities, heel, stay, sit, move, kennel-up and all the other commands are taught as we go along and become a huge vocabulary as they mature,my dogs heel by the horse as well as on a leash. I don;t give them sessions, but rather they learn as we go along, even the hard headed terriers are solid in their commands, they just don't always abide.


----------



## LARHAGE

Vandal said:


> ...and here is one source of the fear in pet owners. We have a VERY strong Animal Rights movement in this country that the lazy, "go ahead and take my rights away" dog owners are doing very little to stop. This idea that dogs are not allowed to act like dogs, that they are "Fur kids" who must behave like human children, is now a mentality that exists in huge numbers of people. Lately, I am getting more calls from people with aggressive breeds who are looking for a place to board their dog. They can't find a place where the dogs are kenneled separately because in Los Angeles, mostly what is offered is day care with a huge mob of dogs all running loose while being supervised by a teenager with a week of "training". This mentality is being shoved down their throats. I have one client who uses a nylon cover collar to hide the pinch collar on his very large Bull Dog. He is actually being responsible by using that collar but if people in downtown LA, where he lives, see it, they harass him about being "cruel" to his dog. Ain't no way I would be hiding it from those idiots but he handles it in a way that fits his personality.
> 
> 
> Mostly, people now want dogs that look a certain way but possess none of the characteristics of that breed. Most do not understand that there IS a difference between the breeds, they think it is all looks.
> 
> 
> I find myself breeding less and less because frankly, I am tired of the ignorance that exists and is being promoted by AR fanatics, Petco, and the so called "dog trainers" who offer classes to the general public.
> I don't want to take a dog back. It is exceptionally hard on loyal dogs like GSDs and on me. It is not that easy to place older dogs and the idea that breeders want the dogs back so they can make a ton of money on them, is simply not based in reality. I find myself to be exceptionally protective of the dogs that have come back here. I do not want to let the dog down again after the first mistake. Finding a person who understands and believes that an older dog can take a little time to adjust, or even how to help that dog adjust , is also rather difficult.


 
I agree, here in Los Angeles the animal rights wackos are the worst, I have a horse from the set of Luck I'm holding for a friend, that show cancelled because the idiot animal rights wackos forbid the use of a lip chain on a horse that susequently flipped over and killed itself without the control the lip chain provided, the wackos were responsible for that horses death, but HBO caved to the pressure, it makes me sick.


----------



## Marnie

Jack's Dad said:


> I'm sure there are a few dogs that are returned that have such genetic disabilities that the breeders only ethical choice is to PTS the dog.
> 
> Marnie: The GSD is becoming a physical and temperamental mess along with a lot of other breeds. People want what they want and it is hurting the breeds.
> Can I prove that to you? No. Just do some reading on what is happening with breeding (in many breeds)these days and you can believe it or not.
> I do agree that owners are also responsible for many of the problems in their own dogs.
> Our county just passed laws against any dog considered to have an aggression problem. This law does not require a bite just aggression.
> It is not breed specific but it's a beginning,


Remember the original post. Eveybody go back and read the op. 

Andy, I’m not arguing the point that the dogs are becoming health hazards and this is congenital. I’ll concede the dogs aren’t mentally what they once were. So what is the answer? Grab our pitchforks and torches and visit every backyard kennel in the country? Kill all pups who don’t live up to our ideals? We need to be reasonable. Heartbreaking tho it is, we cannot stop breeding for profit. Everything is about profit. What concerns me is the idea that dogs cannot be good pets because they failed to live up to one person’s vision of the ideal dog. 

GSD were once farm dogs. Herding sheep, protecting the livestock, pulling a wagon, whatever it took. People didn’t keep pets, everybody worked. Life was hard and no one could afford to feed a big dog that did not do his share. A sick dog was worthless and therefore had no place. A dog that gave trouble got hit in the head with a hammer. Definitely limiting the gene pool.

When war broke out, the Germans bred selectively for certain traits. Dogs passed the required tests or they were put down. Breeding dogs needed permits to assure there were no congenital flaws in the gene pool. Germans were serious about their dogs and profit was not the driving force behind breeding. 

Those days are gone and not coming back. We all want dogs of sound temperament and health.. Sadly, that’s not always what we get. But what about the dogs that are here right now? Do we kill them because someone has pronounced them lacking in nerve? Do we need to eliminate all dogs that do not have some kind of title proving they have value? Do we take the word of disappointed owners or do we do a little work and make the dog into a good pet? Do you think most throw away dogs cannot be retrained? My original statement was that dogs that seem uncontrollable are made that way by the wrong owners doing the wrong things. That has been true in every case I’ve been party to. When the dogs were rehomed carefully the new owners were happy. These dogs play ball with their owners and bark if they hear a suspicious noise. They lay on the furniture and track mud into the kitchen. They are normal dogs. I feel they have value and are worth while to someone.

Vandal, your viewpoint as a breeder about letting your dogs down if the owners bring them back to you. It's sad but it really makes my point. You want the best life for your dogs but now they come back to you with a more limited likely hood of that good life. You sent out a puppy of sound mind and body and got back a unhappy dog who was not trained or handled properly. 

Andy, When we get the village peasants together to attack the puppy mills, I'll march with you. As it happens, I have a pitchfork. In the meanwhile, I am only concerned with the best interest of the dogs here and now. That would be all dogs from competitive kennels or from for-profit breeders.


----------



## onyx'girl

Marnie said:


> Anyone can say the dog has no nerves so he is a bad, uncontrollable, damaged. Then why can Vandal or I any number of people take that dog and make him a very good pet? Not a sporting dog, not an attack dog, just a good, happy companion.


I don't think anyone says a dog is bad, uncontrollable, damaged if the nerves aren't strong. 

My dog isn't any of those things, yet I can't do agility or SchH with her. She is a bit too reactive and her weak nerves won't have her doing any protection work. She also is not a biddable dog, a bit difficult to train! She is a companion pet and I am happy with her, but sure wouldn't want another like her ever. Onyx is NOT what the GSD should represent. And Anne or you could have taken her as a pup and made her better than I did....but I did the best I could by her.

People who won't step up and deal with their dogs issues are the ones that dump them in shelters,etc. Had Onyx been placed into such a home, I doubt she'd last long or have been put down due to bite history. 
A breeder taking back dogs because of temperament sometimes have to look at their program and decide if what they are breeding is contributing to help the breed. 
I know fluke dogs pop up but some breeders just don't do enough research into what they are matching and putting more pups into the wrong hands. And the fact that they aren't careful in placement of what they are breeding. 
FWIW, I don't think _any_ breeder on this forum falls into what I just wrote, it is the breeder who is always labeled the BYB that do so, and Marnie, those are probably the dogs you see....not the ones from good breeders.


----------



## Vandal

> Vandal, your viewpoint as a breeder about letting your dogs down if the owners bring them back to you. It's sad but it really makes my point. You want the best life for your dogs but now they come back to you with a more limited likely hood of that good life. You sent out a puppy of sound mind and body and got back a unhappy dog who was not trained or handled properly.


I wasn't arguing your point. I see what goes on and I have seen "problem dogs" change homes and very quickly become "super dog" . I really think that people who do not deal with this day in and day out, can appreciate how common the right dog in the wrong home is. Like I said, training won't change a nerve issue but it certainly can help to manage that dog and yes, even increase the dog's confidence in situations that once disturbed them.


Some, ( very few), have a real feel for dogs and animals in general. You can actually see how gifted they are in the way the dogs behave around them. I have a friend who came to visit from Indiana. He trains SchH dogs and I have always thought he was talented in his way of reading and relating to dogs. I had a young dog I imported from Holland who was more on the aggressive side when it came to strangers. He was out free in my yard and my friend went out to sit on my deck. I forgot the dog was there and when I remembered, I looked out to see my friend and my aggressive dog there playing like old buddies. Not only can he make dogs aggressive as the SchH helper, he can do the opposite. Why? Because he reads and understands their behavior and is simply natural in how he interacts with them. No hesitancy or fear , he treats them like they are not a problem for him and they respond in kind. I used to work at a kennel when I was 18. The owners would always call me to get the frightened, aggressive dog out of the dog run. I am like my friend. I just do not have a fear of dogs and the dogs can see that. I don't take my dogs places and behave like we are walking into a torture chamber when they go to the Vet or anywhere else. I walk in with confidence, tell my dog what I want them to do with obedience commands and they behave like it is just a walk in the park. I don't give them a reason to want to protect me, because I make it clear that I have the situation under control. I have seen very few people handle their dogs this way. They wait for something to go wrong and then are there struggling with their dog. Most of my friends who are GSD people for years and years would immediately understand what I am saying here.


Even really good dogs can be turned into a mess by inept owners. I have seen that many times. Come to think of it, I have seen SchH dogs look like crap out on the protection field because someone wanted to play with them instead of work them in a way that fit the dog. Some dogs are confused by helpers who have a tendency to play vs looking more like a bad guy. Change helpers or adjust the behavior of the one out there working the dog, and voila, new dog. I have sat and listened to the SchH people talking about how the dog must have bad nerves only to shut up once someone who knew how to work the dog went out and did it right. I can't tell you how many times I am doing that for people nowadays, where dogs who really are more serious, more like a GSD should be, need to see something that looks like protection vs what SchH training has now become. It is a case where a dog like I am talking about might be sold because he was "no good" or had "weak nerves" when in fact, he wasn't being worked correctly.


----------



## NewbieShepherdGirl

Marnie said:


> LOL, I think you may be confused about Argumentum ad ignoratiam. It is you who just 'knows' dog genetic temperament of stranger's dogs with absolutely no logical basis for that knowledge. If so many dogs are damaged goods because of 'nerves', why can they be so easily fixed and made into good pets? That is my argument. If you cannot fix your dog, I'm pretty sure there are people who can. So lets talk specifics.
> 
> I am not confused at all. There are two sides of the same coin with Argumentum ad ignorantiam. One side: something cannot be dis proven so it must be considered true. Second side: something has not been proven so it must be considered false. This very accurately describes your logic here. And yes I can reverse it on you. For instance you say, "it is you who just 'knows' dog genetic temperament of stranger's dogs without absolutely no logical basis for that knowledge." I can easily flip that and say, " It is you who just 'knows' the environment in which a dog was raised caused its problems without any logical basis for your analysis.
> 
> By the way, my logical basis is, yes there are some bad dog owners. This is true. However, there are far more nervy dogs than it is likely there are bad dog owners. This is especially true when you see far fewer "rare" or "less popular" breeds of dog that have individuals within the breed with nerve issues. Why is this? Well, one could certainly make an argument for dogs that are less popular, or for which there is less of a market, do not attract breeders that don't care about the breed. Consequently the breeders breeding those dogs generally care a great deal about the breed, and are much more strict in regards to their breeding program.
> 
> Also, the very fact that you used the word "fixed" implies that something is indeed broken. Can some fearful/nervy things be "fixed" I would argue that in the right environment one can improve, through nurture, what genetically is lacking. Not in all cases, but I would consider Sasha a more mild case. I believe that a lot of what was wrong with her was she was already weak nerved genetically, and then her environment when she was young exasperated the problem. I manage a lot of Sasha's environment. I cannot take her everywhere with me because her nerves aren't good enough. For example, she is fearful, and children make her nervous. She does not like children. I allow her to be around individual children when they come to my home because I always closely monitor the situation and make sure she is always allowed to exit the situation, because she is very sweet and would much rather choose flight than fight. However, I will not take her to big family functions where there will be lots of kids running around because I don't trust her not to bite in a high stress situation. Whereas my cousin's dog is not phased at all by any of the commotion. So much of the "fixing" is more like managing. I put her in situations where she is set up for success. When I put her in these situations, and she succeeds, she gets many rewards. She gets loving by me and often treats. The more she succeeds, the more confident she gets, I know that it has its limit, but it is always my goal to get her as comfortable with as many different things as she can be without overwhelming her. This is not something you would have to do with a stable dog, as per my example of my golden living in a kennel most of his life, being exposed to very little outside of us and our acreage, yet when I put him in a training/show environment he thrived. There was no socializing, or desensitizing needed.
> 
> Is your dog a good pet or not? If so, she certainly is not damaged or badly bred. And what is your definition of 'nerves'? Is she fearful, is she reactive? Does she bite you? Does she hunt down and kill children? Do you have to use a tractor to pull her out from under the porch? What is this 'nerve' she has or lacks that makes her a bad pet? It's difficult to understand where people are coming from when they make these huge blanket pronouncements about the entire breed going to heck using vague phrases that have meaning for only those who have problem dogs.
> 
> Is Sasha a good pet? Yes, she is a wonderful pet. I never said shew wasn't. I believe I said over and over how I love her and how we are a team. Is she a great representative of the breed? Nope. She is badly breed. Just because she is a good pet does not mean she was well bred. It means nothing more than she is a good pet. Is she fearful/reactive? Absolutely. Does she bite me? No, but she was reactive enough at one point that I knew she may very well bite someone else. A stable dog would not bite when there was no real threat or their handler was not nervous. I am not going to address your more hysterical statements that follow the question regarding does she bite me, other than to say hysterical statements start weaken arguments. The nerve she lacks does not make her a bad pet, but it does make her a dog that shouldn't be bred. Her poor nerves mean she's fearful. Fearful can take many forms. It could be a dog that hides when scared, or it could mean a dog that bites when scared. These are not good things. I am lucky in that Sasha prefers to hide when scared.
> 
> And no, I am not defensive. I am never defensive. I am on the offensive because it is very difficult to read these posts about people giving up pet puppies because the pup had no 'nerve' or whatever trendy catch phrase we are using Not every dog is cut out for every sport or every type of work. That does not make them nervy or damaged, or unstable throw away dogs. That does not mean there is anything wrong with the dog at all. It just means that the dog doesn't fulfill the owner's golden vision of what dogs should be.
> 
> I agree that it is very upsetting to see people give up on dogs that may have problems that can be managed. It is my genuine hope that I have the opportunity in a few years to adopt or foster another dog with the same "issues" as Sasha as I feel I do well with being able to minimize them well as is possible. Not every dog is cut out for every sport, you are right, and that does not always mean that the dog is nervy. It could mean they lack drive or desire; it in no way implies they are "throw away dogs". However, sometimes it does mean they're nervy. If I took Sasha to a Sch. field, she would not be cut out for it because of her nerves. I believe she is every bit smart enough, every bit driven enough, but as soon as they shot that gun it would all be over. To watch her when she hears loud noises....it just breaks your heart to see that kind of fear in her. You don't know how upset I was during the 4th of July because she was so terrified, and there was nothing I can do. This year we're going to try medication during that time because I can't see her go through that again. It doesn't make her a throw away dog. It makes her my baby that I have to protect from herself at times.
> People who make dogs reactive and fearful don't mean to do so. I'm sure you didn't mean to do so with your dog. What do you think should be done with all these dogs and puppies that lack nerve, this single most important temperament component? If they are so congenitally damaged, is euthanization the answer? How can they ever be anyone's companion if they lack 'nerve'? Nerve being the making or breaking of all worth while dogs, right? Should breeders hold their dog until they are old enough to temperament test? Should they kill the ones who don’t pass? Is this Nazi Germany and I've been napping? Do you think most people who own a GSD dislike their dogs? Here's what I think. I think a some few people like the ideal of a German Shepherd but don't really know what these dogs are like when not trained. They think the dog will just know what is expected of it. They think the dog should spend his spare time looking for wells to pull Timmy out of. They think the dog should be polite to strangers and strange dogs even tho they haven't been taught to do so. Dogs should know better than to play bite and why do they not know that doggie excitement is not a good thing? GSD should just know all these things like you know most GSD are poorly bred and lack nerve. How is it that so many GSD have wonderful homes with no problems? Now this is just an Argumentum ad ignoratiam but I think the reason most people love their GSD is they  understand the dog's needs and how to use strengths and weaknesses to make the best possible companion dog.


I don't feel bad because I didn't make my dog fearful. I got her at two years old. I will grant you that some of her problems most likely stem from how she was treated IN COMBINATION WITH her genetics. If I ever got the chance to meet the  that hurt her I'd rip them apart. However, her reaction to what happened to her wouldn't have been so sever had she had better nerves. It took me about a year of really working with her to get her to where she is, and she's still not perfect but I at least believe right now that she feels safe, she's pretty much safe for others to be around, and she's happy. What do I think should be done with dogs and puppies that lack nerve? I think they should go into very loving homes; homes equip to handle them, and they shouldn't be bred. I think you're right that many times people bite off more than they can chew, in which case they should either A) step up and put in the work or B) give the dog back. A dog that is not a danger, or is not in incurable pain, should not be put down. I think you're right that people need to examine their dog's strengths and weaknesses so that they can help make the best possible dog for their family, but first one has to admit there is a weakness, and blaming it or excusing it due to environment doesn't help the dog. Sasha didn't get any free passes because she was abused or because she doesn't have the best nerves (they aren't the worst, they aren't the best). I had expectations, and I worked as hard as I could to make sure they met them. Did I want a dog that could do Sch.? Yep. Is she that dog? Nope. So what are we gonna do? Something else! Because I love her, and just because she isn't sound enough to do one thing doesn't mean I'm some horrible person who's just going to throw her to the wolves.


----------



## sabledog

Marnie said:


> I'm sorry, but it is absolutely NOT a fact. There are not a lot of GSD with unstable nerves altho it is certainly easy to put the blame on the poor dog. Working in rescue, I hear these stories every day. Everybody always faults the unstable dog they are turning in. We work with the dogs, we place the dogs. They make wonderful family pets. That's the fact!


Seriously? I think it's easier to find an UNSTABLD GSD than a stable one. The modern, poorly bred German Shepherd has some of the worst temperaments I've ever seen. And I've been around a lot of dogs.

Just because a dog can be placed in a pet home does not make it a stable dog.


----------



## Shaina

You should meet my lab that Ive raised since he was born and socialized and loved and had positive experiences with. He is the most fearful, nervey dog.. looks like he has been beaten his whole life. People assume he was abused.. nope, just bad genetics that can't be fixed.

Then look at my GSD, who came from a well respected breeder and has great genetics. She is the most outgoing, loving, bubbly dog I've ever had the pleasure of owning. Raised the exact same way.


----------



## TrickyShepherd

I have a fine example of breeding and genetics right here in my home.

Zira... puppy mill dog. Rescued from a pet store situation. I got her at 3.5 months old when I pulled her out of their kennels. I raised her very well, I socialized like crazy, she was in training classes once she received a clean bill of health. She's been given the best care, the best food, and every bit of love a dog could get! She is the worst bag of nerves I have EVER been around. I was raised with large dogs, and have been around/rescued/owned/raised/worked with more dogs then I could ever count in my lifetime. I have never raised a dog so difficult in my life. Am I at fault?! No, absolutely not! She was raised just as any dog I ever owned, and she was socialized and everything else "the perfect owner" could do for a dog..... yet.... she turned out to be a nervous mess. Is she a bad dog? No, not at all! Is she a good pet? Yes, very much so!! That doesn't mean she doesn't have issues... genetics play a huge role. If she landed in a home with little or no canine knowledge, she would have been handed over the a shelter before she even hit 6 months. There is no amount of training/care that could ever make her 100%. We are working with a professional trainer with her and even he agreed with this.... we can train her well, work with her issues to make them less life consuming, but she will never be rid of them. We have to work around them, and just learn to coexist with her and all her flaws. She has poor breeding and I can't recode her DNA. She is the WORST example of a GSD!

My other is Duke. He is very well bred, but possibly has an even MORE stressful background then Z. Duke did NOT have any socialization, he did NOT get proper exercise, he was not worked with often, and he was picked on by all the small dogs in his neighborhood, I can tell he's been struck by hands in the past and possibly harmed by an elderly person.... up until he was 2 years old. I got him just a week or so after his 2nd birthday, started socializing and training, and also working on some of his "issues". He was DA (small dogs mostly), and fearful. He had no confidence in himself! However, after a few months of a strict schedule and lots of training and proper handling.... Duke is now training in Schutzhund (doing fantastic!!!), and an AMAZING family dog. His nerves are solid, he no longer has any DA issues, and can tolerate almost any dog. He goes everywhere with me, and never flinches at anything going on around him. He's almost 100% trusting of elderly people now as well, and actually goes up to THEM for attention.

Now... if what is being said on here is true.... then wouldn't Zira be in the same boat as Duke? She's even had an advantage over him... I got her at 3.5 months, and starting working with her immediately... I got Duke at 2 years old.

I'm sorry, but I far from agree. Owners can most definitely make a huge difference in the dog... but they absolutely do not MAKE the dog. The dog is who they are in their DNA, their genetics. If a dog has "nervy" in their DNA.... you will not, and can not "correct" that.... all you can do is understand the dog, and work around it. This way everyone can coexist happily. That is what makes a good home for the dog, and that is what makes those dogs turn into great pets.... not that they were "fixed" or that their DNA/breeding was changed. They just found the right puzzle piece for their shape.


----------



## selzer

But both dogs were exhibiting signs of nervyness and problems. One was able to be turned around and the other not, probably due to their genetics. But what handler is going to say, "Me, I am the reason this dog is so screwed up."? Whether the dogs problem is genetic or not, the tendency is to say genetics because that puts the owner/handler off the hook, and also whoever now has the dog, if they fail to get the dog beyond its fears. And yet some owners might NEVER be able to get a dog to a better place, and another owner might be able to.


----------



## Jack's Dad

TrickyShepherd:

Those dogs have to have the right owner too. Lots of people probably including me would not have the patience to deal with a dog like your Zira.

It sounds like you did a great job.

Shaina: I agree and don't understand why it is so hard for some to understand. Some dogs are genetically fearful messes and all that can be done is to work with and manage them.


I've seen most of the breeder's web sites that are known breeders on this forum. That coupled with comments from them over a period of time tells me they are exceptional with caring for the kind of dogs they produce. I'm sure they would do the best for a returned dog even if it ultimately resulted in euthanasia.

There are huge breeders out there though that I don't think would have much concern about returned dogs. Then there are the small ones that have a few registered dogs that produce regularly and sell for around $500 dollars. The closest GSD breeder to me is one of these. Has litters all year round. I don't think they would waste there time on a returned dog.
There is no way for me to state that as a fact though.


----------



## TrickyShepherd

selzer said:


> But both dogs were exhibiting signs of nervyness and problems. One was able to be turned around and the other not, probably due to their genetics. But what handler is going to say, "Me, I am the reason this dog is so screwed up."? Whether the dogs problem is genetic or not, the tendency is to say genetics because that puts the owner/handler off the hook, and also whoever now has the dog, if they fail to get the dog beyond its fears. And yet some owners might NEVER be able to get a dog to a better place, and another owner might be able to.


I've known a few people who've admitted that. It's called honesty, and I know that is very uncommon these days. So I am sure people use that as an easy excuse.. but that doesn't make it 100% always that scenario. I wont deny it, I've messed a dog up before, not on purpose, but I did. Do I turn to the genetics answer? No. Thankfully, the mistake didn't lead to anything that would harm someone, or the dog, and the dog lived a happy long life with us. We live, we learn. I do not see that as a negative, I see that as learning and being human. On the other side of things, there ARE dogs like Zira out there.... I don't care what anyone says.... No one could make this dog 100%. No one could get rid of her nerves and make her a solid dog. She doesn't take certain situations well, or recover like another dog would. I've been to a few professionals through the past year that I've had her... to try to help her, to try to "change her DNA".... but, that will never be. It's so far into her brain and her whole being, that that is who she is. Now, that doesn't make her a bad dog, or a "throw away"... that just means she can't do some things and that she needs to be handled with extra precaution and care. I have to be a very observant handler when I have her out to make sure I catch any signs she sends me before there's a hysterical fit. That also means I had to work extra hard on socializing and trainer her.... but, again.. she will never be 100%. She is a nerve bag, and always will be.

With that said... yes, there are many dogs that are one way with one owner and a completely different dog with the next. I don't believe that has to do with anything other then just finding the right person to match the dog or someone who understands the dog. If you can read the coding in their DNA (understand their background) and what's going on in their head.... it's much easier to, what most people like to call it, "fix" the dog. All that really is, is finding the right way to work with that specific dog and working with and around their issues. Can't fix a nerve bag, but you can work with them and find a good home that can also work with that, understand them, and mesh well with the dog. Everyone's happy. Not a bad dog... just a "special" case.


----------



## TrickyShepherd

Jack's Dad said:


> TrickyShepherd:
> 
> Those dogs have to have the right owner too. Lots of people probably including me would not have the patience to deal with a dog like your Zira.
> 
> It sounds like you did a great job.


Thank you! She's not an easy dog, but she's a very happy dog even with her issues and is definitely a wonderful pet. Just not for everyone. I wouldn't blame someone for feeling overwhelmed with her. Occasionally, we even get overwhelmed.


----------



## sabledog

TrickyShepherd, you've nailed it and I agree with you 100%. There are just some dogs who would not succeed with anybody.


----------



## TrickyShepherd

sabledog said:


> TrickyShepherd, you've nailed it and I agree with you 100%. There are just some dogs who would not succeed with anybody.


Exactly. The ones that look "fixed" are just understood and managed appropriately.... not "fixed". If you were to put them back in their original situation... they'd fall apart again with the same issues. The same goes for humans... genetics is genetics... you can't change or fight it. If it didn't mean anything, then why do breeders rely so heavily on the study of genetics? Why is it so important to research a dogs lines when considering what their offspring will show? You wouldn't catch a working line breeder to breed to a nerve bag... just like you wouldn't catch a golden retriever breeder using a highly reactive, FA, DA dog in their program... It will follow through in the offspring's genetics. Something you can't change. Unfortunately, those types of dogs will always be faced with that challenge, and their owners will always have to "manage" that.


----------



## Jack's Dad

Off topic but here is part of an ad from our local (closest to me breeder).

He is going to be 2 yrs. old and is from (I removed names). He should be a big guy, I expect him to be around 100 lbs when fully grown and filled out. Right now he is tall and skinny and very active. He is a great stud dog already, and his OFA prelim. at 18 months GOOD! Available for stud to females that are: 1. AKC registered 2. OFA prelim at no less than 18 months good or excellent only or Certified Fair at the least. 3. Has Brucellosis test done in the first few days of heat and confirmed NEGATIVE. All 3 items must be done or no breeding. These pups will have my name on them and this is the minimum anyone should have before breeding their girls!

The puppies are now $750 but if they don't sell that will drop based on my seeing these ads regularly. Oh well.


----------



## onyx'girl

Oh, boy....


----------



## selzer

TrickyShepherd said:


> Exactly. The ones that look "fixed" are just understood and managed appropriately.... not "fixed". If you were to put them back in their original situation... they'd fall apart again with the same issues. The same goes for humans... genetics is genetics... you can't change or fight it. If it didn't mean anything, then why do breeders rely so heavily on the study of genetics? Why is it so important to research a dogs lines when considering what their offspring will show? *You wouldn't catch a working line breeder to breed to a nerve bag... just like you wouldn't catch a golden retriever breeder using a highly reactive, FA, DA dog in their program..*. It will follow through in the offspring's genetics. Something you can't change. Unfortunately, those types of dogs will always be faced with that challenge, and their owners will always have to "manage" that.


Because everyone on this site knows that there are no less than stellar working line breeders out there, and that little thing called bite statistics must be all wet when GRs are increasing their numbers to #3 on the bite list according to a GR forum, because every GR breeder is just as sweet and wonderful as their dogs.

#3 on Bite list! - Golden Retrievers : Golden Retriever Dog Forums


----------



## NewbieShepherdGirl

selzer said:


> Because everyone on this site knows that there are no less than stellar working line breeders out there, and that little thing called bite statistics must be all wet when GRs are increasing their numbers to #3 on the bite list according to a GR forum, because every GR breeder is just as sweet and wonderful as their dogs.
> 
> #3 on Bite list! - Golden Retrievers : Golden Retriever Dog Forums



I think the point is responsible breeders won't do those things. A responsible Golden breeder isn't going to breed dogs with aggression because the breed isn't supposed to be aggressive. Yes, there are goldens out there that bite, probably because there's right up there on the list of most popular breeds, so you have every joe shmoe out there breeding them for a quick buck. Sort of like all the health problems you see in goldens, shepherds, or other popular breeds.


----------



## TrickyShepherd

selzer said:


> Because everyone on this site knows that there are no less than stellar working line breeders out there, and that little thing called bite statistics must be all wet when GRs are increasing their numbers to #3 on the bite list according to a GR forum, because every GR breeder is just as sweet and wonderful as their dogs.
> 
> #3 on Bite list! - Golden Retrievers : Golden Retriever Dog Forums


And those are breeders who do NOT do their research. I most definitely did not say "All" breeders, there are the good, the bad, and the ugly in ALL areas of life and human actions. A good breeder will research and KNOW what they are putting into their lines. To use a dog that shows signs of being outside standards or a complete nut case... would not be used. If they are... I do not consider that a knowledgeable breeder, and I will have to agree to disagree with them. 

No need to educate me on Goldens. GSDs, fine... but, I know my goldens. I grew up with them, and worked with them for 16 or so years. A decent breeder, and the ones I've worked with and gotten mine from do their research and you wouldn't catch their dogs going outside standard. You also wouldn't catch them using breeding dogs that are nervy, or aggressive (which is NOT in the GR standards in any way, shape, or form). No, not 100% of them are those happy go lucky, friendly, loving dogs... but that IS what is in their standard.. so anything other then that shouldn't be bred. Not a bad dog... but, not stable enough to be a breeding dog.


----------



## TrickyShepherd

NewbieShepherdGirl said:


> I think the point is responsible breeders won't do those things. A responsible Golden breeder isn't going to breed dogs with aggression because the breed isn't supposed to be aggressive. Yes, there are goldens out there that bite, probably because there's right up there on the list of most popular breeds, so you have every joe shmoe out there breeding them for a quick buck. Sort of like all the health problems you see in goldens, shepherds, or other popular breeds.


Exactly! Very well said.. thank you!


----------



## selzer

TrickyShepherd said:


> And those are breeders who do NOT do their research. I most definitely did not say "All" breeders, there are the good, the bad, and the ugly in ALL areas of life and human actions. A good breeder will research and KNOW what they are putting into their lines. To use a dog that shows signs of being outside standards or a complete nut case... would not be used. If they are... I do not consider that a knowledgeable breeder, and I will have to agree to disagree with them.
> 
> No need to educate me on Goldens. GSDs, fine... but, I know my goldens. I grew up with them, and worked with them for 16 or so years. A decent breeder, and the ones I've worked with and gotten mine from do their research and you wouldn't catch their dogs going outside standard. You also wouldn't catch them using breeding dogs that are nervy, or aggressive (which is NOT in the GR standards in any way, shape, or form). No, not 100% of them are those happy go lucky, friendly, loving dogs... but that IS what is in their standard.. so anything other then that shouldn't be breed. Not a bad dog... but, not stable enough to be a breeding dog.


I think I took offense at your statements that you wouldn't catch a working line breeder or golden retriever breeder using a dog with poor nerves. You did not qualify either with a term like, responsible, like you assume all working-line breeders and all GR breeders are excellent, which suggests that all the nutjobs out there are in American lines or show lines, which I disagree with.


----------



## TrickyShepherd

selzer said:


> I think I took offense at your statements that you wouldn't catch a working line breeder or golden retriever breeder using a dog with poor nerves. You did not qualify either with a term like, responsible, like you assume all working-line breeders and all GR breeders are excellent, which suggests that all the nutjobs out there are in American lines or show lines, which I disagree with.


I would think we are (for the most part) knowledgeable about the good and the bad in breeding (at least the basics).... I apologize for the lack of explanation. However, I thought everyone could understand that obviously there are horrible breeders out there that do not follow any plan. Yes, there are many WL breeders that add horribly nervy dogs to their programs, and I am sure there are also GR breeders that add aggressive and out of control nerve bags to their program as well. If those breeders did their research though, that wouldn't be allowed. Which, in the end, is exactly my point. Obviously it DOES mean something if that's what the top breeders rely on and research so heavily. If they didn't... they wouldn't be where they are with their lines.

(this goes for every breed of dog, every type in that breed, and even every species of animal... horse, cats, etc.... I'm not separating, or pointing fingers at any specific one of those. Just used those as an easy example to understand)


----------



## Jack's Dad

TrickyShepherd said:


> I would think we are (for the most part) knowledgeable about the good and the bad in breeding (at least the basics).... I apologize for the lack of explanation. However, I thought everyone could understand that obviously there are horrible breeders out there that do not follow any plan. Yes, there are many WL breeders that add horribly nervy dogs to their programs, and I am sure there are also GR breeders that add aggressive and out of control nerve bags to their program as well. If those breeders did their research though, that wouldn't be allowed. Which, in the end, is exactly my point. Obviously it DOES mean something if that's what the top breeders rely on and research so heavily. If they didn't... they wouldn't be where they are with their lines.
> 
> (this goes for every breed of dog, every type in that breed, and even every species of animal... horse, cats, etc.... I'm not separating, or pointing fingers at any specific one of those. Just used those as an easy example to understand)


Part of the problem is there are so many breeders like the example I gave in the post #73 above that the genetic issues will continue to be spread. I mean look at the requirements they stated for the girls to qualify for breeding to their stud. These breeders outnumber the decent breeders by far. The easy-ads or craigslist are full of them.


----------



## TrickyShepherd

Jack's Dad said:


> Part of the problem is there are so many breeders like the example I gave in the post #73 above that the genetic issues will continue to be spread. I mean look at the requirements they stated for the girls to qualify for breeding to their stud. These breeders outnumber the decent breeders by far. The easy-ads or craigslist are full of them.


Never disagreed with that. Of course there are a ton of terrible "breeders" out there. We own one of the most popular, demanded, breeds here in the US (and I am sure many other countries).... with that, comes a LOT of people breeding that don't even know their head from their rear end.. let alone genetics, breed standards, correct drive, conformation, training.. etc. But yet again.. that's exactly my point. Genetics is a BIG factor in a dog's whole being: Internal and external.... psychological and physical. It brings the good.... and the bad. It's exactly the same in humans.

Breeders were never the topic though, just merely an example. My posts were never about good vs. bad breeder. It was about genetics role (or lack of, as some believe) in a dogs life, temperament, & rehabilitation.


----------



## Catu

But how many of those terrible "breeders" do actually have a right of refusal, or even a contract?


----------



## TrickyShepherd

Catu said:


> But how many of those terrible "breeders" do actually have a right of refusal, or even a contract?


Very few and far in between! Most of THOSE go to the shelter.... or left to roam the streets.


----------



## Catu

TrickyShepherd said:


> Very few and far in between! Most of THOSE go to the shelter.... or left to roam the streets.


My point is that then this thread is not about them...


----------



## TrickyShepherd

Catu said:


> My point is that then this thread is not about them...


Yep, got that. Which is why I didn't mention them as the topic. I only mentioned breeders for an easy example to understand why genetics DOES play a role in how a dog would react to rehabilitation/re-homing/and every day life. Which was in many posts starting about 3-4 pages back.


----------



## RebelGSD

Vandal said:


> I wasn't arguing your point. I see what goes on and I have seen "problem dogs" change homes and very quickly become "super dog" . I really think that people who do not deal with this day in and day out, can appreciate how common the right dog in the wrong home is. Like I said, training won't change a nerve issue but it certainly can help to manage that dog and yes, even increase the dog's confidence in situations that once disturbed them.
> 
> 
> Some, ( very few), have a real feel for dogs and animals in general. You can actually see how gifted they are in the way the dogs behave around them. I have a friend who came to visit from Indiana. He trains SchH dogs and I have always thought he was talented in his way of reading and relating to dogs. I had a young dog I imported from Holland who was more on the aggressive side when it came to strangers. He was out free in my yard and my friend went out to sit on my deck. I forgot the dog was there and when I remembered, I looked out to see my friend and my aggressive dog there playing like old buddies. Not only can he make dogs aggressive as the SchH helper, he can do the opposite. Why? Because he reads and understands their behavior and is simply natural in how he interacts with them. No hesitancy or fear , he treats them like they are not a problem for him and they respond in kind. I used to work at a kennel when I was 18. The owners would always call me to get the frightened, aggressive dog out of the dog run. I am like my friend. I just do not have a fear of dogs and the dogs can see that. I don't take my dogs places and behave like we are walking into a torture chamber when they go to the Vet or anywhere else. I walk in with confidence, tell my dog what I want them to do with obedience commands and they behave like it is just a walk in the park. I don't give them a reason to want to protect me, because I make it clear that I have the situation under control. I have seen very few people handle their dogs this way. They wait for something to go wrong and then are there struggling with their dog. Most of my friends who are GSD people for years and years would immediately understand what I am saying here.
> 
> 
> Even really good dogs can be turned into a mess by inept owners. I have seen that many times. Come to think of it, I have seen SchH dogs look like crap out on the protection field because someone wanted to play with them instead of work them in a way that fit the dog. Some dogs are confused by helpers who have a tendency to play vs looking more like a bad guy. Change helpers or adjust the behavior of the one out there working the dog, and voila, new dog. I have sat and listened to the SchH people talking about how the dog must have bad nerves only to shut up once someone who knew how to work the dog went out and did it right. I can't tell you how many times I am doing that for people nowadays, where dogs who really are more serious, more like a GSD should be, need to see something that looks like protection vs what SchH training has now become. It is a case where a dog like I am talking about might be sold because he was "no good" or had "weak nerves" when in fact, he wasn't being worked correctly.


I am with Vandal on most of these statements. I think a handler can make or break a dog. A bad handler/owner can ruin the most stable solid nerved German Shepherd and turn them into a liability. I was blessed with raising two of those, fearless, energetic, smart, outgoing, strong willed guys. I was lucky to find a good Sch/PP trainer after several disaster attempts at training. It is scary the people that call themselves trainers and behaviorist. With the average dog owner and "trainer" these awesome dogs would have ended up a disaster and probably would have ended up in a shelter.

Handled hundreds of rescues. There were dogs that I walked in crowds, introduced them to people/children and other animals in all kinds of situations. Only days later, in their adoptive homes these same dogs can end up being "nerve bags" that lunge and bark at people or animals. 

And it is not necessarily that the most solid dogs do best in pet homes or adoptive homes. The weaker nerved ones, that are somewhat timid and easier to handle do best. The energetic, outgoing, stronger willed ones are harder to place and harder to handle by average pet owners. And yes, many people should not own dogs.

There are the really weak ones that are fear aggressive badly abused, those are a different class. Some can be managed and rehabilitated fully or partially, a few cannot.


----------

