How much does breed influence behavior?

I think dogs' personalities are much more genetic than people sometimes believe. Like the idea that a puppy is a "blank slate" is completely false. Breeds certainly do have different characteristics and they're genetic. Lab and Golden puppies don't have strong instincts to retrieve because of the way the litter was raised. It's a temperament characteristic that they inherit. There are individual differences, but those are also the personalities that they inherited. Gingerbread is the same dog that he was when I met him at 9 weeks old. Every dog I've known has been the same. I think nature has much more influence than nurture.

Not to say that you can't have some influence on a dog's behavior, but the basic personality will be the same. Like for example a dog that is prone to being very suspicious of strangers, like the Fila Brasileiro- you can social the puppy to the end of the earth, but it will still end up with that mistrust of strangers because it is their nature.

I agree.  Look what happened to the Aussie.  A dog with "strong herding and guarding instincts" is suddenly a white-collared, heavy-boned, family dog blue merle version of the Golden Retriever.
I have the original stockdog type, and people come up to me and ask me what she is. [sm=uhoh.gif]  They no longer recognize the "original" (in this case, dark liver red merle), medium coated, lithe and athletic, dog in need of a job. 

most folks agree you can breed out instinct behavior; but why would you?

I don't think breeders should try and breed out instincts.  Thats what makes all these breeds so interesting and unique.  For example, I wanted a JRT because I was familar with the breed's traits and tendancies and that is what I wanted in a dog.  I knew if I got a JRT he/she would be drivey, motivated, gamey and energetic.  I think if breeders tried to breed instincts out of their breeds you may end up with all dogs acting exactly the same....what fun would that be? []

ORIGINAL: dasher

most folks agree you can breed out instinct behavior; but why would you?

I don't think breeders should try and breed out instincts.  Thats what makes all these breeds so interesting and unique.  For example, I wanted a JRT because I was familar with the breed's traits and tendancies and that is what I wanted in a dog.  I knew if I got a JRT he/she would be drivey, motivated, gamey and energetic.  I think if breeders tried to breed instincts out of their breeds you may end up with all dogs acting exactly the same....what fun would that be? []

Some would argue that Pit Bull breeders should breed away from dog aggressiveness...what do you all think?  What's the tradeoff - would that mean eliminating some of the "gameness" from that breed?  Would it mean that the dog is fundamentally changed in a bad way? 

Some instincts shuld be bred OUT because it is either that, or losing the breed entirely to BSL...as in the case of the Akita and dog aggression. I would rather have Akitas around even if they are "goofy", rather than keep the temperament strictly as they were when they first arrived...and lose them altogether or restrict their ownership to such a point where they are lost.
 
I am not a 'purist' as relates to animal or people aggression...no matter how historical or relevant it "was" at one time.

Some would argue that Pit Bull breeders should breed away from dog aggressiveness...what do you all think? What's the tradeoff - would that mean eliminating some of the "gameness" from that breed? Would it mean that the dog is fundamentally changed in a bad way?

I would agree that dog on dog or dog on human aggressiveness should not be something that breeders should try and maintain within any breed.  But I would also have to say that I have yet to read any breed standard that states that that type of aggressiveness is part of the standard.  Usually "shyness" and "aggressiveness" are considered faults.  (Although I have not read every breed standard out there...there may be some breeds that these traits are considered desirable per breed standards.)

The Akita, Scotty, and Rottweiler all mention within their standards the propensity to dog aggression or that it is not to be faulted. Think there are a couple of others...I once went thru them all for mention of it []
 
The Scottish Terrier, while loving and gentle with people, can be aggressive with other dogs.
 
Temperament
Alert and responsive, dignified and courageous. Aggressive toward other dogs. (Akita)
 
The behavior of the Rottweiler in the show ring should be controlled, willing and adaptable, trained to submit to examination of mouth, testicles, etc. An aloof or reserved dog should not be penalized, as this reflects the accepted character of the breed. An aggressive or belligerent attitude towards other dogs should not be faulted
 
Temperament
A spirited boldness, a good nature, and an unaffected forthrightness, which together yield dignity and natural beauty. The Shiba has an independent nature and can be reserved toward strangers but is loyal and affectionate to those who earn his respect. At times aggressive toward other dogs, the Shiba is always under the control of his handler. (Shiba Inu)
 
 

 

I had this discussion with a ridgeback breeder who was working toward dogs that are not so aloof/protective for similar reasons. She found what she was doing quite controversial, but stuck to her guns. She felt responsible for her dogs living in the world as it is today, and doesn't see a place for "One Owner" dogs, and was doing something about it.

(Her dogs, BTW, had fantastic temperaments.)

I want a dog that matches the temperment description in the standard.  I want a dog that is civil, not friendly.  I am willing to work on the socialization necessary to channel that instinct.  Although I understand that some manipulation of temperment is appropriate (may be even needed in some cases), I do not want to live in a world of goldens in  different breed suits.  Sure they are nice dogs,,,,but I really dont want belgian breeders changing their dogs temperments by specific breeding programs that changes their temperment into something else.  Any more than I want the unintended (and ignored) outcomes of over emphasis on head type.
 
If DPU sees this he is likely to frown at me (that's ok []),  I dont want a dog breed to be modified so that JQP can own it. 

IMO....lots. I wouldn't generalize to "groups", tho. I would generalize to breeds...and then advise that there will be a spectrum within that breed ranging from almost no noticeable traits general to the breed...to extremely marked traits general to the breed...based on the lines and how they've been used and handled and the individual preferences of the people breeding them.

ORIGINAL: rwbeagles

true...there are "strains" of Beagles who have been bred exclusively for pet/companionship that have a somewhat softer scenting drive than many of the hunting Beagles we see.

the long and short of it in my opinion is...
breed genetics does have influence...which is influenced again by breeding strain or bloodline...which is influenced again by environment and training...
genetics is not the be all end all of any dog, just the baseline on which people need to begin their understanding of their dog...it is like the foundation of your house...it is a beginning...and like a foundation that does not mean you cannot add or subtract from that foundation ( breeding for preference)...and the foundation does not limit what kind of house you can build on top of it ( training and environment)...
 

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs
Some would argue that Pit Bull breeders should breed away from dog aggressiveness...what do you all think? What's the tradeoff - would that mean eliminating some of the "gameness" from that breed? Would it mean that the dog is fundamentally changed in a bad way?

I asked something like this on a pit bull forum that I am a member of. I asked when reputable breeders are going to breed their dogs and they're going to breed this rock solid temperamented dog that is extremely human friendly, do they also take into consideration breeding dogs that are less likely to be dog aggressive.
Well, besides my question being blown up into a suggestion, my question wasn't really answered and a LOT of opinions were thrown around. Yes, some believe that breeding out DA could also mean breeding out the gameness. Some believe that if you start messing with traits like that, you're liable to make a dog who is more "user friendly" which would in turn ruin the breed.

Some believe that it should be a goal for reputable breeders because if the APBT was originally bred to be a working dog then it should be able to do so without go insane around other dogs/animals.


I personally think it's all in what you breed a dog for. But I also believe that people need to be conscience of the fact pit bulls are dogs that are genetically predisposed for being DA and have a game plan set just in case it happens to come out in the dog. But even dog aggressive dogs, if handled, worked with, and trained properly can exist with other dogs. Just not unsupervised.

There is no one single factor that makes a dog what it is.  There are some things certain breeds of dogs were born with.  That's great since eople all have different lifestyles.  For example, we wanted a breed of dog that was smart, active, and not too big and would be a great companion and watchdog.  Like most (all?) Eskies, ours definitely have those traits since that's a part of the nature of this breed.  In fact, many Eskies take their "watchdog" job too seriously and drive their owners crazy with all the barking at anything that blows across the lawn.

However, I can't tell you how many people have mentioned to us that the "Spitz" they've met are mean and have horrible temperaments.  That shouldn't be so with this breed.  Yes, they can be wary of strangers at first (even though ours aren't in public), but they shouldn't be mean.  These same people are amazed at how sweet and friendly our Eskies are, so I mention that the breeder can make all the difference in the world.  

Dakota and Cheyenne's breeder rarely breeds her dogs and when she does, she makes sure to use those dogs with great temperaments.  The breeder also really socializes the puppies so that they are already very well-rounded when they go to their new homes.  She also expects the new owners to continue the socialization by having the puppy attend at least two obedience classes.  Genetics play a role, but so does the environment.  BTW, Dakota's daddy is goofy, so he is too.  Cheyenne's daddy is more of a barker, so unfortunately, she is too (and we are making progress with this!!).

in reagards to the pittie...
 
I guess maybe I have a somewhat different understanding of the pit bull. For me it is a question of whether aggressiveness is actually a trait pit. Their "gameness" as it was referred to, as far as I am concerned, is not really aggressiveness as much as it is a certian tenacity and dominance. I do not feel being aggresive and being a tenacious are really the same thing. I feel aggression in ANY breed is a flaw...but I understand aggression to be a unpredictable and unwarranted behavior. I do not feel that this is actually a trait of the pit bull...their trait is to be a dominant, protective, tenacious dog with a very limited tolerance for being bullied...
as far as I am concerned that is most terriers...
 
as far as breeding for aggression...I do not know how to answer that...
Can you breed for agression? Can you breed for hunting skill? Does breeding two really good hunters guarantee good hunting pups???
I think it increases the likelihood, but I am not convinced that there is any certianty you will get good hunters. There are too many variables in a dog's behavior, as far as I am concerned, to say that breeding to aggressive pits will produce aggrressive pups. I think it is more likely that raising pups with aggressive dogs will produce aggression in the pups.

I wonder, regarding pit bulls, whether there isn't a happy medium somewhere. All terriers have that fiesty gameness, and the terrier group in general has a higher propensity for dog aggression. But that trait is a lot more prevalent in the APBT. I wonder if it can be toned down to "normal terrier" levels so that the gameness and courage is retained but the very high chance of serious DA is dialed down several notches.
 
The thing of it is is that this is a really different world than when these breeds were first developed. Once upon a time not just anyone could own a purebred malinois or bull terrier. Now anyone with a credit card can. Not everyone should own these dogs, but there it is--they do. They like the look, or the scary reputation, they plunk down their plastic and now they have a purebred high-drive dog with genetic predisposition toward rotectiveness or dog aggression. The choice for breeders is to either tone down some of these traits or to have less than scrupulous people out there selling these dogs to any joe schmoe with $1000 and have a potential deadly weapon out there being mismanaged.