# Do all breeds make good pets?



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

Following on from a post in another thread where one poster said "every breed makes a good pet in the right hands", what are members thoughts on breeds such as some of the Livestock Guardian dogs and others - with very strong guarding instincts and high defence drives being imported into the UK primarily as pets?

Is there a place for dogs such as the Caucasian Ovcharka, the Bully Kutta, the Cane Corso and others.

Should anyone be allowed to have any breed they wish?


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

In the UK there are four banned breeds of dog :-

Pit Bull Terrier
Japanese Tosa
Dogo Argentino
Fila Braziliero

Do these breeds make good pets? Would you by happy to see the ban lifted and the above breeds being imported to the UK as pets?


----------



## ellenlouisepascoe (Jul 12, 2013)

Its such a hard one to argue for or against. I am sure some people could make the Bully Kutta into a fabulous family pet , but I wouldn't have the know how to do so. 

It depends what you want from your dog, I think if you want a cuddle companion and something to be hardy and patient towards your young kids you shouldn't go out and buy a Cane Corso / Bully Kutta , but maybe if you wanted an independent companion and had older and respectful kids then why not get one?

I think a lot of people lack common sense when picking a breed for their family.


----------



## Guest (Nov 8, 2013)

Depends on a lot of things really like how experienced you are, the amount of living space you have, the environment and other dogs around.


So much depends a lot on how good you are with dogs generally. For example as an inexperienced owner I would have feel happier with a smaller breed then a larger one.

It really depends.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Why start a post of the same thing just phrased slightly different?

*Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) fails to protect dogs and people. It doesn't make people feel safer either.*​
If you wish to push breed bias.. prove it makes a difference.

In 1769, King Christian VII from Denmark made a regulation that all dogs would be killed if they were not kept on a leash.

Due to a single incident in the waiting room of a recognized doctor. A young patient with rabies showed up, clearly suffering and only wearing a sheet. And under the sheet: a properly erect penis, which outraged all other respectable patients.

They knew even back then that rabies primarily came from bats and rats, but because the young patient received so much attention for his amoral erection in a public space, the king clearly had to take action.

Let's not encourage similar thinking today. We need to deal with the real issues including education.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

I don't believe that all breeds make good pets at all. Many do but some such as the Bully Kutta quite frankly terrify me - and not many dogs do. I very much hope that any coming into the UK are with very, very responsible owners - but I fear that they will not be.

I think that any breed needs to be a very careful match to the right owner with the right personal circumstances. For instance I know that I couldn't provide (or don't want to provide) what a CO needs, a high drive working collie or, at the other end of the spectrum a pug or a Bulldog. 

What a "pet" consists of also varies from person to person - some expect a dog to lay around the house all day, content with an occasional play and to use the garden for their exercise and at the other end of the spectrum you have folk very involved with dog sports or people like myself who love to run or walk for hours.

I really think that the owners who choose a breed based upon looks or reputation but without researching the needs of the breed and it's origins are to blame for an awful lot of the problems seen today. 

I do not agree with BSL at all - maybe PSL (person specific legislation) :shocked:.


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

I don't think all breeds make good pets for the 'average' british household.
I do think that if you have the knowledge, the lifestyle, the circumstance and the resource then all breeds can be enjoyed by the right people.

The worry is that if someone living in a city flat chose to take on a Fox Hound with it's independent nature and strong desire to track or a large guarding breed that would struggle to cope with so much to 'guard' from his territory from it could all end in disaster.

I think it's about seeing beyond fashion and status and really looking at what you want from a canine companion and more importantly what you can offer.

When we 1st thought about getting a dog we looked at Retrievers - it would of been a disaster! My lifestyle is much better suited to companion dogs 

However I do admit I would be pretty terrified if I met a Bully Kutta - but I would assume that this breed was owned for 'status' I can't see a place for it in the urban environments of the UK


----------



## HLT93 (Aug 14, 2013)

I don't feel all breeds do make good pets, however it depends on your definition of a "pet". 

I have friends who have working Labradors which are kept outside in kennels and they do not class these as pets as they are working dogs. Then I have another friend who also has working Labradors but are kept in the home and she classes them as pets. So same situation but very different opinions and ways of doing things. 

I think it depends on your knowledge, experience, situation, environment, and loads more factors. 

Personally I would never have a husky as I don't feel they make good pets in my household with current situation etc, but that doesn't mean they don't make good pets for someone else. So really does depend on a lot of factors.


----------



## Guest (Nov 8, 2013)

There is a person with two Kutta's very closeby to where I live. Both imports from Pakistan, total k***end owns them who can barely control them on walks, one snapped it's lead a while back the owner couldn't get it back under control which resulted in the police being called because residents were so worried as this road accommodates a primary school.
Frightening animals, absolute forces to be reckoned with, definitely not a dog for the faint hearted, foolish and I daresay, a family


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Some of these breeds I have never even heard of so really couldn't say.

I think some people are good with some dogs.....meaning each to their own.

I prefer short coated un docked breeds.....personal preference and I just know I would be rubbish with a dog that needed constant grooming. Not the dogs fault, not mine either.a dog needing heavy grooming would not thrive well in my house.....doesn't meant to say I am a rubbish owner or a hairy dog is a bad breed.

The dogs I do have live a very good life, horses for courses.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

SirHiss said:


> There is a person with two Kutta's very closeby to where I live. Both imports from Pakistan, total k***end owns them who can barely control them on walks, one snapped it's lead a while back the owner couldn't get it back under control which resulted in the police being called because residents were so worried as this road accommodates a primary school.
> Frightening animals, absolute forces to be reckoned with, definitely not a dog for the faint hearted, foolish and I daresay, a family


Thats very sad cos the fact these dogs are harder to handle makes them more attractive to the wrong kind of person.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Maybe everybody should ask what attracts them about their own breed in the first place?


----------



## Guest (Nov 8, 2013)

lilythepink said:


> Thats very sad cos the fact these dogs are harder to handle makes them more attractive to the wrong kind of person.


The high price the offspring command also attracts the wrong sort too


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Pitbull mix dog helps Albuquerque teen with epilepsy | KOB.com

How Dogs Help Veterans Cope with PTSD - Video - TIME.com

Tell the veteran his dog isn't a good pet.


----------



## Gemmaa (Jul 19, 2009)

Goblin said:


> Pitbull mix dog helps Albuquerque teen with epilepsy | KOB.com
> 
> How Dogs Help Veterans Cope with PTSD - Video - TIME.com
> 
> Tell the veteran his dog isn't a good pet.


And of course, BBC News - Crufts bravery award win for three-legged dog Haatchi


----------



## pogo (Jul 25, 2011)

As an owner of a large guardian breed I can say hell yes he makes a damn good pet even with being HA and a million issues but hey he's a rescue god only knows bred from where. 

They certainly aren't a breed for everyone but those of us responsible owners to get one know what we are letting our selves in for but sadly ambulls seem to be the new status dog away from staffs, problem is they are not as tolerate to mistreatment as them hence why more owners are being bitten


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

i like the bull breeds, love the clean smooth coats, gentle natured with thie rown family, so loyal, learn so quickly.

I like pitbulls too, they tick all the boxes for me but I don't think I would ever have one cos of all the grief other people give over them.


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

Probably yes for the right person/environment. Take for example Zaros's lovely dogs, for Mr & Mrs Zee they are fabulous pets - would they be a good pet for the majority of UK homes, doubt it no


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

Goblin said:


> Why start a post of the same thing just phrased slightly different?
> 
> *Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) fails to protect dogs and people. It doesn't make people feel safer either.*​
> If you wish to push breed bias.. prove it makes a difference.
> ...


I am only trying to encourage some lively discussion - this is not a thread about bull breeds.

If you don't wish to take part, then that is entirely your prerogative.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

lilythepink said:


> i like the bull breeds, love the clean smooth coats, gentle natured with thie rown family, so loyal, learn so quickly.
> 
> *I like pitbulls too, they tick all the boxes for me but I don't think I would ever have one cos of all the grief other people give over them.*


They are also illegal in the UK - rightly or wrongly.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Moobli said:


> In the UK there are four banned breeds of dog :-
> 
> Pit Bull Terrier
> Japanese Tosa
> ...


Hell yes they do, with the right person in the right circumstances and the right dog.
There are thousands of dangerous drivers on our road killing more people than dogs do, do we ban all cars?
No, because there are responsible people out there that don't kill anyone...

All BSL did was make these breeds desirable to the idiots..which in turn put the dogs in a bad light..

Lets forget about banning dogs, and vilifying certain breeds and concentrate on the mass over breeding and irresponsible owners.. Rather than seizing dogs due to what they look like, target the owners that allow their off leash dogs to cause havoc..etc...etc

Maybe have something in place that means if a dog attacks there is a traffic light system of fines and warnings and if a dog kills then that person is then banned from having dogs as they have proven that they are not responsible enough. Not sure how that would work or how it would be implemented but something has to change, and fast....

I think it needs to be harder to acquire dogs (of all breeds) too, that way it would put off the opportunists picking up a dog because it was free/cheap.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Moobli said:


> I am only trying to encourage some lively discussion - this is not a thread about bull breeds.


Like it or not, with the current situation, having made another thread about the same subject, breedism, is this thread really necessary?

Are you doing exactly what we are saying the media does in shaping people's opinion, this time by simple repetition?


----------



## Sparkle22 (Oct 26, 2013)

SirHiss said:


> There is a person with two Kutta's very closeby to where I live. Both imports from Pakistan, total k***end owns them who can barely control them on walks, one snapped it's lead a while back the owner couldn't get it back under control which resulted in the police being called because residents were so worried as this road accommodates a primary school.
> Frightening animals, absolute forces to be reckoned with, definitely not a dog for the faint hearted, foolish and I daresay, a family


To be fair though, are these dogs actually aggressive or just badly trained and bouncy and excitable on lead? 
I can understand residents being very very worried, especially with their size but I have to say I would be scared of any dog bar something like a chihuahua snapping its lead and running loose, more so around a school.

I grew up in a rough area where it was and still is all staffies, larger bull breeds, Rottweilers, Akitas etc. 
I can honestly say I never in 22 years of living there encountered a single aggressive status dog. Not one.

I have however been bitten by a jack Russell, almost bitten by another Russell, met an extremely aggressive cocker spaniel (owned by a family with young kids!), encountered 3 aggressive springer spaniels, 2 aggressive standard poodles and a really vicious golden retriever.

I think any breed IS suitable as a pet.
Depends how you raise them, any dog can be aggressive given the right set of circumstances.


----------



## Guest (Nov 8, 2013)

Sparkle22 said:


> To be fair though, are these dogs actually aggressive or just badly trained and bouncy and excitable on lead?


Kutta's from my limited knowledge are bred for aggression, the more aggressive the better, this persons dogs really are not approachable hence why the police ended up being called when one snapped loose from it's lead. If you've never seen one, met one, or never come into contact with one, you can't really ever begin to understand, I would actually go as far as saying, they are not pet dogs.

We're told to ''Move out the way'' when this guy is on walks with them, so even that it's self, must say something :frown2: They certainly don't belong on a residential estate.


----------



## Sparkle22 (Oct 26, 2013)

SirHiss said:


> Kutta's from my limited knowledge are bred for aggression, the more aggressive the better, this persons dogs really are not approachable hence why the police ended up being called when one snapped loose from it's lead. If you've never seen one, met one, or never come into contact with one, you can't really ever begin to understand, I would actually go as far as saying, they are not pet dogs.
> 
> We're told to ''Move out the way'' when this guy is on walks with them, so even that it's self, must say something :frown2: They certainly don't belong on a residential estate.


From what I have read they are bred for dog fighting?

Abhorrent obviously but a really valid point that needs to be acknowledged is that fighting dogs have always been bred to be exceptionally gentle around people.
Sometimes in the course of a.fight, the 'trainers' would need to get in and separate the dogs.
The adrenaline would be so high during a fight most dogs would accidently lash out at the handler, any fighting dogs that did this were destroyed. 
They were bred to be totally focused on the other dog and not to harm people.

Course, if you say they are unapproachable they clearly haven't been socialised well or trained well and that is sad


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

I know dogoargentino and really depends how they are raised and socialised..same wiht pits and fila brasiliero (quite popular in Spain and often unfortunately: for dog fights)


but they come to dog shows here and are just very nice dogs that do not bother anyone and love kids etc...


In my homeland the GSD , rotties and dobbies were feared...obviously owners to blame!


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

SirHiss said:


> They certainly don't belong on a residential estate.


I think perhaps this is the key thing with some breeds or individual dogs. They're perfectly suited to the right owner in the right environment but put them in the wrong environment and it can be a completely different matter.

I thought Bully Kuttas were bred to be guard dogs, not fighting dogs?


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Moobli said:


> They are also illegal in the UK - rightly or wrongly.


Yes, I remember them getting banned.....and any remaining had to be neutered and muzzled in public...so how come we have so many pits now?


----------



## Sparkle22 (Oct 26, 2013)

Not sure, Google is a chock a block with videos of kuttas used for dog fighting and dog fighting kutta websites, I saw Wikipedia stating they are used for fighting.

But then I found one website for them that says they are mostly used for protection and guarding but are sometimes used for dog fighting, raised to be aggressive towards other dogs.

So, I'm not sure really :001_huh:


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

lilythepink said:


> Yes, I remember them getting banned.....and any remaining had to be neutered and muzzled in public...so how come we have so many pits now?


Because "the Law is an ass".


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

Sarah1983 said:


> I think perhaps this is the key thing with some breeds or individual dogs. They're perfectly suited to the right owner in the right environment but put them in the wrong environment and it can be a completely different matter.


I completely agree with the above (but also think that "suitable owners" for some breeds are like gold dust in this country)


----------



## Guest (Nov 8, 2013)

Sparkle22 said:


> From what I have read they are bred for dog fighting?
> 
> Abhorrent obviously but a really valid point that needs to be acknowledged is that fighting dogs have always been bred to be exceptionally gentle around people.
> Sometimes in the course of a.fight, the 'trainers' would need to get in and separate the dogs.
> ...


Other breeds have also been subject to being used as 'fighting' dogs, non of which have the levels of aggression I have seen coming from those Kutta's. These dogs now fully grown don't like strangers, very suspicious of everything moving around them, they were fine as younger dogs I and others quite often fussed them or stopped to ask questions about them. That has all since changed, they've got to be at least 4 & 3 years old now and they have really matured into not very nice dogs at all, they are frightening :frown2: I think it really is the case they could be an accident waiting to happen and they don't belong here at all.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Moobli said:


> I completely agree with the above (but also think that "suitable owners" for some breeds are like gold dust in this country)


I would be a terrible owner for a newfie or st bernard......horses for courses.

Plenty good dogs out there, plenty good homes.....more dogs than homes though.

that seems to be the problem then........so we need to tighten up on all dog breeding.


----------



## GingerRogers (Sep 13, 2012)

Yes I think they do but as said they need to be matched to the home and owners need to be educated and realistic about the dog they pick.

No point having a high drive demanding dog in a home that just wants a fluffy companion to slot into family life with the minimal of fuss. 

No point having a fluffy companion dog in an family home who want a dog to compete with or exercise with, who want the dog to take active role in their life.

Its like getting a rabbit when you want a horse 

Sadly too many people buy breeds that appeal be that aesthetically, for status etc rather than practicality.

And I dont think that applies to just dogs, it can be any pet, a lady here has two bengals that have to live in a cage in her garden as she lives on a main road and is too scared to let them roam. Cars - how many people own sports cars that spend most of their time under cover as they just dont fit their 4 kids in, or hocked to the eyeballs for a flashy 4x4 when the closest they come to mud is driving past someones window box. People with 6 bed houses when there's only the two of them, or like a client I have, he's is just over six foot and so are the ceilings in his cute cottage, he has developed a stoop. Of course these examples dont actually harm helpless living creatures but owning a dog that doesn't fit your life does.


----------



## pogo (Jul 25, 2011)

I would have a pitty and dogo argentino in a heartbeat where they not banned, i absolutely love the breeds and was very fortunate to meet them (more pits then dogos) when i went to america, and LOVED it


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

A lot of the banned breeds are not banned in Ireland if they are so bad as pets why are their not news stories coming of Ireland everyday about attacks from these breeds met my first dogo in the flesh not long ago lovely boy!

I do think all breeds can make good pets with good responsible owners who understand their dogs, BSL doesn't work we know that, it's not about the breed, its the other end if the lead we should be worried about and looking to change!


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

MY answer to the original question is no.

I have just read an article stating that the Portugese Pointer is the latest breed to be recognised by the KC. It also stated that the Turkish Kangal has also been recognised. Now, I have to ask what the Kangal can bring to the UK? It cannot perform it's original function, and will only find it's way into the hands of the irresponsible or those who want a large, powerful dog to stroke their ego. I dont think it's a breed that anybody wants to get on the wrong side of and quite frankly, I am sat here wondering why we are allowing these kinds of breeds into the country. That may not be a popular view but I think they have the potential to be extremely dangerous - we already have enough breeds falling into the wrong hands and becoming a danger.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Leanne77 said:


> MY answer to the original question is no.
> 
> I have just read an article stating that the Portugese Pointer is the latest breed to be recognised by the KC. It also stated that the Turkish Kangal has also been recognised. Now, I have to ask what the Kangal can bring to the UK? It cannot perform it's original function, and will only find it's way into the hands of the irresponsible or those who want a large, powerful dog to stroke their ego. I dont think it's a breed that anybody wants to get on the wrong side of and quite frankly, I am sat here wondering why we are allowing these kinds of breeds into the country. That may not be a popular view but I think they have the potential to be extremely dangerous - we already have enough breeds falling into the wrong hands and becoming a danger.


I agree.

Personally I don't see the point in what I call penis extension dogs. They only attract a certain type of owner.


----------



## BenBoy (Aug 31, 2013)

Leanne77 said:


> MY answer to the original question is no.
> 
> I have just read an article stating that the Portugese Pointer is the latest breed to be recognised by the KC. It also stated that the Turkish Kangal has also been recognised. Now, I have to ask what the Kangal can bring to the UK? It cannot perform it's original function, and will only find it's way into the hands of the irresponsible or those who want a large, powerful dog to stroke their ego. I dont think it's a breed that anybody wants to get on the wrong side of and quite frankly, I am sat here wondering why we are allowing these kinds of breeds into the country. That may not be a popular view but I think they have the potential to be extremely dangerous - we already have enough breeds falling into the wrong hands and becoming a danger.


I agree, but just looked up the Kangal and was curious and it sounds quite nice...

Kangal dog - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## BenBoy (Aug 31, 2013)

labradrk said:


> I agree.
> 
> Personally I don't see the point in what I call penis extension dogs. They only attract a certain type of owner.


People who get a status dog aren't worth sh*t, excuse my French but it makes me mad


----------



## Colette (Jan 2, 2010)

> Personally I don't see the point in what I call penis extension dogs. They only attract a certain type of owner.


That's grossly unfair imo - plenty of people say the same about staffies, rotties, dobermanns, GSDs, etc. That these are status dogs, only bought buy numpties and drug dealers to scare people off or make them look 'ard.

And we know it's bull - you only have to look at the many bull breed / rottie / GSD etc owners on here to see that this assumption isn't true. It's certainly not "ONLY" a certain type of owner they attract - plenty of nice, normal, repsonsible people happen to like them too.

Personally I don't "see the point" in dogs that can't do a decent amount of exercise or behave like normal dogs (eg can't mate, whelp, run around, live(!) without help). But I'm not about to suggest we ban them, or prevent similar breeds entering the country, or making mass offensive judgements about every owner of these breeds.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Colette said:


> That's grossly unfair imo - plenty of people say the same about staffies, rotties, dobermanns, GSDs, etc. That these are status dogs, only bought buy numpties and drug dealers to scare people off or make them look 'ard.
> 
> And we know it's bull - you only have to look at the many bull breed / rottie / GSD etc owners on here to see that this assumption isn't true. It's certainly not "ONLY" a certain type of owner they attract - plenty of nice, normal, repsonsible people happen to like them too.
> 
> Personally I don't "see the point" in dogs that can't do a decent amount of exercise or behave like normal dogs (eg can't mate, whelp, run around, live(!) without help). But I'm not about to suggest we ban them, or prevent similar breeds entering the country, or making mass offensive judgements about every owner of these breeds.


Each to their own. I just do not see a place in society for large aggressive dogs and do not understand why anyone would want to own one, other than as an ego boost or status symbol.


----------



## PapillonBezza (Apr 30, 2013)

I firmly believe it comes down to environment. I love all dogs, big and small, but my experience is with small breeds. My house is big enough to accommodate my 6 littlies with ease but put 6 large breed dogs in and it would not be good. I know where I am with the little ones, can train them to a very high level and know how to care for them. If I did have to care for a large breed I am sure I would be able to research and deal with it but I choose my breeds based on their characteristics, my experience and the home I can offer them. The health and happiness of my dogs is paramount and because I select the right dogs carefully, I never (touch wood) have any problems I can't deal with.

What I'm trying to get at is that my dogs make fabulous pets with me, but might not with someone else.


----------



## sharloid (Apr 15, 2012)

labradrk said:


> Each to their own. I just do not see a place in society for large aggressive dogs and do not understand why anyone would want to own one, other than as an ego boost or status symbol.


But just because there may be a couple of aggressive dogs in a breed doesn't mean the breed as a whole is aggressive.

I don't think all breeds make good pets if we're using pets to mean companion, living in the house with the family.


----------



## pogo (Jul 25, 2011)

Well seeing as though i have currently the 2 most 'status' dogs i must have got them for the penis extension effect, ah hang on i'm a lass.....


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

sharloid said:


> But just because there may be a couple of aggressive dogs in a breed doesn't mean the breed as a whole is aggressive.
> 
> I don't think all breeds make good pets if we're using pets to mean companion, living in the house with the family.


Despite the fact that some breeds of dog are bred specifically for aggressive qualities? like Fila Brasileiros, Bully Kuttas etc? why would anyone want a dog like that?


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

labradrk said:


> Despite the fact that some breeds of dog are bred specifically for aggressive qualities? like Fila Brasileiros, Bully Kuttas etc? why would anyone want a dog like that?


Yet the Fila breed standard states they are to be docile, obedient and very tolerant of children, with a calm disposition? Major fault being aggressive so it's not a quality of the breed aggression is an eliminating fault? So not a quality a Fila is breed for?


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

I think all breeds make suitable pets for the right family. You wouldn't get a flock guardian if you lived in the middle of a city and no good breeder would sell you one, a terrier wouldn't be recommended for someone with lots of small furry things. If you wanted a drivey hard dog to do schutzhund or protection work you're not likely to get a golden retriever, some idiot wanting a penis extension isn't going to get a cavalier. If people got breeds that were suited for their lifestyle and that they could handle there would be far fewer bites.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

labradrk said:


> Despite the fact that some breeds of dog are bred specifically for aggressive qualities? like Fila Brasileiros, Bully Kuttas etc? why would anyone want a dog like that?


Strange that because before Bull Breeds became the devil dog of the media so many people asked the same question you just asked about Rottweiler's and GSD's before then!


----------



## Guest (Nov 8, 2013)

labradrk said:


> Each to their own. I just do not see a place in society for large aggressive dogs and do not understand why anyone would want to own one, other than as an ego boost or status symbol.


That just shows a limited experience with what others might need in a dog.

If your livelihood is livestock, and you want to keep them safe from predators, no better breed for you than a good, solid, livestock guardian breed that will willingly take on a wolf, bear, etc.

If you live on an expansive ranch in the middle of nowhere, it makes perfect sense to me to have a fila or dogo or cane or any of the large mollosers to help keep you and your livelihood safe.

Part of the reason we have large, intimidating-looking dogs is because we do live out in the middle of nowhere, with coyotes, bears, and other predators, and I like the deterrent/protection factor our dogs afford us.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

ouesi said:


> That just shows a limited experience with what others might need in a dog.
> 
> If your livelihood is livestock, and you want to keep them safe from predators, no better breed for you than a good, solid, livestock guardian breed that will willingly take on a wolf, bear, etc.
> 
> ...


But that doesn't apply to 99% of people in this country.


----------



## Guest (Nov 8, 2013)

*


labradrk said:



Each to their own. I just do not see a place in society for large aggressive dogs and do not understand why anyone would want to own one, other than as an ego boost or status symbol.

Click to expand...




labradrk said:



But that doesn't apply to 99% of people in this country.

Click to expand...

*
So, your first quote, you meant UK society? Because worldwide, there are many different societies and needs from their dogs.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Meezey said:


> Yet the Fila breed standard states they are to be docile, obedient and very tolerant of children, with a calm disposition? Major fault being aggressive so it's not a quality of the breed aggression is an eliminating fault? So not a quality a Fila is breed for?


Dunno what breed standard you read, but it states on the breed club website:

CAFIB BRASIL - Clube Aprimoramento Fila Brasileiro - Padro de raa no CAFIB

That they "dislike" strangers and won't be penalized if the dog tries to attack the judge at dog show?


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

DoodlesRule said:


> Probably yes for the right person/environment. Take for example Zaros's lovely dogs, for Mr & Mrs Zee they are fabulous pets - would they be a good pet for the majority of UK homes, doubt it no


I think Zaros would be the first to say they're not suitable for 'ordinary' homes in the UK!  Gorgeous, but defo need space and probably not the easiest family dogs!



pogo said:


> Well seeing as though i have currently the 2 most 'status' dogs i must have got them for the penis extension effect, ah hang on i'm a lass.....


See, I don't agree there. I think the breeds you have are damned good family dogs. Staffs are friendly, popular, great with kids, soppy, as are mastiffs. There are two mastiffs I see regularly: they walk on the lead like angels, they're super sweet. It's all about the upbringing and the breeding.

The worst breed in terms of aggression that I've met has been a labrador. Total PITA, aggressive, attacked Jake every time he saw him. One of my springers is hugely aggressive with other dogs, despite otherwise having an amazing temperament and the same upbringing as his very sociable brother.

I think banning breeds is pointless, it makes people want them more and sometimes the idiots get them because of their BSL status and not because they're great dogs. So dumb.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

ouesi said:


> *
> 
> *
> So, your first quote, you meant UK society? Because worldwide, there are many different societies and needs from their dogs.


Well with this being a predominately UK based forum, yes I meant the UK. The discussion title is "do all breeds make good pets?". IMO the answer is "no". I do not see why someone in this country would wish to keep some of the breeds mentioned in this thread as they are not designed to be 'pets'.

How would some of these primitive livestock guardian breeds make good pets? by definition they are not pets, yet some people believe they can tame anything and make it into a 'pet'. It's human ego.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

This thread makes a sad read, the ignorance of some is astounding :frown2:


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2013)

labradrk said:


> Well with this being a predominately UK based forum, yes I meant the UK. The discussion title is "do all breeds make good pets?". IMO the answer is "no". I do not see why someone in this country would wish to keep some of the breeds mentioned in this thread as they are not designed to be 'pets'.
> 
> How would some of these primitive livestock guardian breeds make good pets? by definition they are not pets, yet some people believe they can tame anything and make it into a 'pet'. It's human ego.


I never said they would make good pets. I wrote a great long post on another thread about dogs who dont make good pets.
What I was responding to was your assertion of need. Why would someone need a dog like that? Well, lots of reasons. Some very practical. And not all of them have to do with compensating for something


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

StormyThai said:


> This thread makes a sad read, the ignorance of some is astounding :frown2:


Care to elaborate?

Do you believe that some of these primitive livestock guardian breeds that are kept solely as working/guard dogs in their native country could make good pets in urban Britain? if so, what leads you to that conclusion? personal experience of keeping such animals as pets in the UK?


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

labradrk said:


> Dunno what breed standard you read, but it states on the breed club website:
> 
> CAFIB BRASIL - Clube Aprimoramento Fila Brasileiro - Padro de raa no CAFIB
> 
> That they "dislike" strangers and won't be penalized if the dog tries to attack the judge at dog show?


FCI breed standard the CAFIB is the working standard also so working dogs not just show dogs or pet dogs ! Fila Brasileiro Breed Standards


----------



## Bexx (Oct 26, 2013)

I might be being naive, please tell me if I am. But I understand certain breeds have certain traits about them, but I would have thought that any breed would make a good pet provided it was brought up well, trained well, looked after etc?


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

labradrk said:


> Care to elaborate?
> 
> Do you believe that some of these primitive livestock guardian breeds that are kept solely as working/guard dogs in their native country could make good pets in urban Britain? if so, what leads you to that conclusion? personal experience of keeping such animals as pets in the UK?


They are kept safely in other countries outside the UK as pets? They are kept and shown in Ireland in Ireland as pets?

So all guarding breed should remain in their own country?


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

ouesi said:


> I never said they would make good pets. I wrote a great long post on another thread about dogs who dont make good pets.
> What I was responding to was your assertion of need. Why would someone need a dog like that? Well, lots of reasons. *Some very practical.* And not all of them have to do with compensating for something


But what could those practical needs possibly be in this country? It's worlds apart from environments certain breeds come from.


----------



## mummyschnauzer (Sep 30, 2008)

Meezey said:


> A lot of the banned breeds are not banned in Ireland if they are so bad as pets why are their not news stories coming of Ireland everyday about attacks from these breeds met my first dogo in the flesh not long ago lovely boy!
> 
> I do think all breeds can make good pets with good responsible owners who understand their dogs, BSL doesn't work we know that, it's not about the breed, its the other end if the lead we should be worried about and looking to change!


Sorry, not all breeds of dogs make good pets, if bred for working or fighting breeds, if they are left for over 8 hours or more, when their owners are out all day, and they don't make arrangements for dog walking or pet care etc, these dogs can become stressed out and frustrated, if left completely completely on their own. This could also be said for all breeds of dogs left on their own continually. I hear it often on my walks, dogs howling from loneliness and frustration, often locked up in garages for long periods of time. 
I'm sorry but in realistic terms this is what can and does happen.

Regarding dog breeds banned in Ireland:-

Sorry Meezey , THAT is not entirely true:-

don't forget that S. Ireland's rules are different to Northern Ireland as it is part of Great Britain.
..................................................................................................
Dogs Banned in Southern Ireland

No dog breeds are banned in Ireland. However, the City of Dublin has issued a ban on 11 breeds of dogs within their housing estates.

HOWEVER THESE BREEDS ARE RESTRICTED

Restricted dogs in Ireland

Certain breeds (or crossbreeds) of dogs must be kept under strict control, including being securely muzzled and on a lead when in a public place. Only persons over the age of 16 are allowed to supervise these dogs in public. The restricted breeds are:
	American Pit Bull Terrier 
	Bull Mastiff 
	Doberman Pinscher 
	English Bull Terrier 
	German Shepherd 
	Japanese Akita 
	Japanese Tosa 
	Rhodesian Ridgeback 
	Rottweiler 
	Staffordshire Bull Terrier

Banned dogs
There are four breeds of dogs that are banned in Northern Ireland:
	Pit Bull terrier 
	Japanese Tosa 
	Dogo Argentino 
	Fila Braziliero


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2013)

labradrk said:


> But what could those practical needs possibly be in this country? It's worlds apart from environments certain breeds come from.


IDK. Im not in the UK 
I just dont think its a good idea to judge others choices and needs based on my own admittedly limited experiences. 
Nor do I feel its my place to tell someone else what needs they should or should not have in a dog.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

labradrk said:


> Care to elaborate?
> 
> Do you believe that some of these primitive livestock guardian breeds that are kept solely as working/guard dogs in their native country could make good pets in urban Britain? if so, what leads you to that conclusion? personal experience of keeping such animals as pets in the UK?


I have outlined my thoughts in my initial post.
Of course I do not think every breed is suitable for every home, I don't think anyone on this thread has implied that they are.

Of course someone living in a city or large town would be a fool to think they could give a Caucasian Ovcharka everything they need, but then someone with acres of land and the right knowledge, choosing the dog for the right reason...Then why the hell not?

Just because you don't see a 'need' for certain breeds does not mean that no one in the country is capable of giving the breed what they need...


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Meezey said:


> They are kept safely in other countries outside the UK as pets? They are kept and shown in Ireland in Ireland as pets?
> 
> So all guarding breed should remain in their own country?


What are kept in Ireland as pets? 

I'm not how sure you derived that all guarding breeds (the list is fairly exhaustive) should be kept in their own country from what I said. However, these threads tend to go a particular way with people twisting what other people say to fuel their own agenda.

The question I asked was whether some of these primitive livestock/guardian breeds would make good pets in urban Britain? in your average household with the average family, like your average pet?


----------



## paddyjulie (May 9, 2009)

mummyschnauzer said:


> Sorry, not all breeds of dogs make good pets, if bred for working or fighting breeds, if they are left for over 8 hours or more, when their owners are out all day, and they don't make arrangements for dog walking or pet care etc, these dogs can become stressed out and frustrated, if left completely completely on their own. This could also be said for all breeds of dogs left on their own continually. I hear it often on my walks, dogs howling from loneliness and frustration, often locked up in garages for long periods of time.
> I'm sorry but in realistic terms this is what can and does happen.
> 
> Regarding dog breeds banned in Ireland:-
> ...


Call yourself a dog lover huh

Shame on me because i let me bull breeds snuggle up with my daughter


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

mummyschnauzer said:


> Sorry, not all breeds of dogs make good pets, if bred for working or fighting breeds, if they are left for over 8 hours or more, when their owners are out all day, and they don't make arrangements for dog walking or pet care etc, these dogs can become stressed out and frustrated, if left completely completely on their own. This could also be said for all breeds of dogs left on their own continually. I hear it often on my walks, dogs howling from loneliness and frustration, often locked up in garages for long periods of time.
> I'm sorry but in realistic terms this is what can and does happen.
> 
> Regarding dog breeds banned in Ireland:-
> ...


Thanks for that given as I live in Belfast I know the dog law thank you and my countries history, but I'll hopefully post some pictures of Dogo and Fila at the show in Dublin tomorrow!

I can assure you as a working breed Rottweiler's make very good pets. Thank you , you have made my point though, it's the owners at fault not the breed!


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

paddyjulie said:


> Call yourself a dog lover huh
> 
> Shame on me because i let me bull breeds snuggle up with my daughter


Love this xx So cute


----------



## pogo (Jul 25, 2011)

Meezey said:


> Thanks for that given as I live in Belfast I know the dog law thank you and my countries history, but I'll hopefully post some pictures of Dogo and Fila at the show in Dublin tomorrow!
> 
> I can assure you as a working breed Rottweiler's make very good pets. Thank you have made my point though, it's the owners at fault not the breed!


and a working guardian dog like american bulldogs also make very good pets, even stupid, mentally broke ones like mine


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

StormyThai said:


> I have outlined my thoughts in my initial post.
> Of course I do not think every breed is suitable for every home, I don't think anyone on this thread has implied that they are.
> 
> Of course someone living in a city or large town would be a fool to think they could give a Caucasian Ovcharka everything they need, but then someone with acres of land and the right knowledge, choosing the dog for the right reason...Then why the hell not?
> ...


I think you are being a little idealistic. It's nice to think that there are fantastic homes out there for some of these breeds, but really? I'm not saying it's an impossibility, but using the Bully Kuttas as an example as they have already been mentioned, is it wise to be championing such a breed in this country? are there enough adequate sprawling compounds and incredibly experienced people willing to accommodate such dogs? or will they end up being bred and paraded about on a chain lead by a chav, as they appear to already have been?


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

labradrk said:


> What are kept in Ireland as pets?
> 
> I'm not how sure you derived that all guarding breeds (the list is fairly exhaustive) should be kept in their own country from what I said. However, these threads tend to go a particular way with people twisting what other people say to fuel their own agenda.
> 
> The question I asked was whether some of these primitive livestock/guardian breeds would make good pets in urban Britain? in your average household with the average family, like your average pet?


Yes they are kept in Ireland as pets, they are not banned.

Most guarding came from other countries and people said the same thing about them, my only agenda is I am opposed to BSL banning certain breeds will do nothing to stop attacks, any breed is dangerous in the wrong hands, and I get sick of hearing it's the breeds, it's not it the owners who are the problems and if we keep blaming breeds we will never do anything to stop these attacks! BSL doesn't work and hasn't work in any country who have made this legislation in the UK alone attacks have gone up 60% since BSL has been put in place, don't people learn because we won't change it we will just start waxing lyrical about the new devil dog, guess it'll be the Bully Kutta next?


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

In answer to the original question, no, not all breeds make good pets.

Obviously, different people will have different 'requirements' for a pet and this will vary from country to country, from family home to family home as well as what an individual wants from pet ownership. However, the fact is that there are far too many dogs in the UK that are living in homes that are not suitable for their needs because the owners 'want' that kind of dog. It is a disaster waiting to happen and is largely down to the good natures or the canine species that more problems aren't encountered. That doesn't make them suitable as family pets.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

rocco33 said:


> So again this is down to owners not breeds! We can't demonise breeds because people do it wrong, it doesn't work, no out of control dog has a place as a pet irrespective of breed! Rather than focusing on breeds we need to look at the people starting from the breeders!


----------



## Bexx (Oct 26, 2013)

rocco33 said:


> In answer to the original question, no, not all breeds make good pets.
> 
> Obviously, different people will have different 'requirements' for a pet and this will vary from country to country, from family home to family home as well as what an individual wants from pet ownership. However, the fact is that there are far too many dogs in the UK that are living in homes that are not suitable for their needs because the owners 'want' that kind of dog. It is a disaster waiting to happen and is largely down to the good natures or the canine species that more problems aren't encountered. That doesn't make them suitable as family pets.


I kind of took it to mean that yes all breeds can make good pets but you still need to be sensible enough to get a breed that is right for your situation and that you can give it everything it needs. Example, don't get an Irish Wolfhound if you live in a 1 bedroom flat and I imagine they'd need a lot of space!


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Bexx said:


> I kind of took it to mean that yes all breeds can make good pets but you still need to be sensible enough to get a breed that is right for your situation and that you can give it everything it needs. Example, don't get an Irish Wolfhound if you live in a 1 bedroom flat and I imagine they'd need a lot of space!


Well, I can see what you're saying but see it from the other angle. No, not all breeds make good pets. The fact that someone, somewhere keeps a (for want of an example and as it's already been mentioned) bully kutter as a pet and does so successfully, does not make it a breed that can make a good pet.

Just because some breeds are kept successfully as pets does not make them good as pets generally.


----------



## paddyjulie (May 9, 2009)

Bexx said:


> I kind of took it to mean that yes all breeds can make good pets but you still need to be sensible enough to get a breed that is right for your situation and that you can give it everything it needs. Example, don't get an Irish Wolfhound if you live in a 1 bedroom flat and I imagine they'd need a lot of space!


Xx I'm finished  I have tried and tried , they just cannot get it!


----------



## redroses2106 (Aug 21, 2011)

paddyjulie said:


> Call yourself a dog lover huh
> 
> Shame on me because i let me bull breeds snuggle up with my daughter


awhh best picture ever! they look like they are deep in conversation

ok as you all were - I have no comment but loveeed the pic


----------



## Bexx (Oct 26, 2013)

rocco33 said:


> Well, I can see what you're saying but see it from the other angle. No, not all breeds make good pets. The fact that someone, somewhere keeps a (for want of an example and as it's already been mentioned) bully kutter as a pet and does so successfully, does not make it a breed that can make a good pet.
> 
> Just because some breeds are kept successfully as pets does not make them good as pets generally.


I see what you mean but I would have thought that it does mean that.

If someone has successfully kept it as a pet then that breed is obviously capable of being kept as a pet providing it is well trained and looked after.

In my eyes it would be the other people who couldn't manage to keep that breed who are the ones that have not trained it, not looked after it or trained it to do bad things.

Surely every breed has the capability to be a good pet provided it's given the right care, training and situation?


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Meezey said:


> So again this is down to owners not breeds! We can't demonise breeds because people do it wrong, it doesn't work, no out of control dog has a place as a pet irrespective of breed! Rather than focusing on breeds we need to look at the people starting from the breeders!


I'm not demonising any breed and I don't see it as demonising a breed to say it is unsuitable to be kept as a pet. I will probably upset a few and that is not my intention, when I say that I actually find it sad and somewhat disrespectful of what the dog really to consider keeping some breeds as just a family pet. Does that mean that there can never be a case where that breed has been kept successfully as a pet, no, I'm not saying that, there will always be exceptions, but that doesn't mean it is a breed that will be good kept as a pet.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Bexx said:


> I see what you mean but I would have thought that it does mean that.
> 
> If someone has successfully kept it as a pet then that breed is obviously capable of being kept as a pet providing it is well trained and looked after.
> 
> ...


IMO, no, not as purely a pet. Yes, situations, knowledge of owners etc vary considerably, so it may be successful but what concerns me is that there are far too many people owning breeds in circumstances that are not adequate for the breed's needs, without knowledge because people say that any breed can be a good pet.


----------



## Bexx (Oct 26, 2013)

rocco33 said:


> IMO, no, not as purely a pet. Yes, situations, knowledge of owners etc vary considerably, so it may be successful but what concerns me is that t*here are far too many people owning breeds in circumstances that are not adequate for the breed's needs, without knowledge because people say that any breed can be a good pet.*


But again that's down to the people owning the breed, it's up to them to know if they can give the dog what that breed needs.

I see what you're saying that by people saying such and such breed is suitable as a pet that people will go out and get them without a second thought, but again that's not the breeds fault. That breed is fully able to be a good family pet but because it's been bought by someone who didn't research, doesn't know it's energy levels, doesn't know possible health problems, doesn't know how to train it properly, it's going to end up being a dog with a bad name


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Bexx said:


> But again that's down to the people owning the breed, it's up to them to know if they can give the dog what that breed needs.
> 
> I see what you're saying that by people saying such and such breed is suitable as a pet that people will go out and get them without a second thought, but again that's not the breeds fault. That breed is fully able to be a good family pet but because it's been bought by someone who didn't research, doesn't know it's energy levels, doesn't know possible health problems, doesn't know how to train it properly, it's going to end up being a dog with a bad name


All this is true, but I still say that not all breeds are suitable as a pet. Perhaps it's because I work my dogs / 'pets' but I do think there are breeds that while they may muddle along as pets are not suitable as pets. And, I'll add that although this could apply to behaviour/aggression issues (which I think was the purpose of the thread), I see it as not fulfilling the needs of the dog in all sorts of ways, not simply whether they are safe as a pet or not.

So, in conclusion.... no, not all breeds of dog are suitable as pets.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

DoodlesRule said:


> Probably yes for the right person/environment. Take for example Zaros's lovely dogs, for Mr & Mrs Zee they are fabulous pets - would they be a good pet for the majority of UK homes, doubt it no





cinnamontoast said:


> I think Zaros would be the first to say they're not suitable for 'ordinary' homes in the UK!  Gorgeous, but defo need space and probably not the easiest family dogs!


As Sar's owners we have always emphasised that these dogs were never designed for a life in suburbia. Keeping the breed confined too a small back yard/garden is not only life diminishing for the dog but also cruel and could easily be likened to that of keeping a bird of prey cooped up in a cage for the remainder of its days.

They require space and the freedom to wander in that space uninterrupted.

Most of all they also demand a fairly constant and tranquil environment. A recognised and accepted familiarity because, by their essential nature, these dogs are a peace loving animal desiring order and, although it is very therapeutic for them to bark at somethings, it is not so for them to bark at everything. A life in suburbia and its ever changing patterns offers them neither peace nor quiet nor rest.

Socialising is a strict regime and, despite commitment to the animal's best interests and welfare, the careless behaviour of others within society can soon undo all your endeavours.
Once a Sar' recognises an individual as a threat that individual will always remain an imminent threat in the eyes of the dog. These dogs need too be steered/kept away from bad influences.

Sar' ownership isn't necessarily always about what you know of the breed. It's also about what you know of your own individual dog. His or her tolerances to specific situations.

Most Sarplaninacs here in Finland live within the family unit.:001_smile:


----------



## ClaireandDaisy (Jul 4, 2010)

Define Good? 
If by that you mean `what the owner wants` then yes - someone somewhere will want a demented ratter or hairy couch potato. 
People are very odd.


----------



## Hudson87 (Aug 11, 2013)

labradrk said:


> I agree.
> 
> Personally I don't see the point in what I call penis extension dogs. They only attract a certain type of owner.


Do you have a list of what you deem penis extension breeds?

Do you include Akitas on that? I have to be honest until I joined this forum I had no idea about the amount of people that had an issue with the breed.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

mummyschnauzer said:


> Sorry, not all breeds of dogs make good pets, if bred for working or fighting breeds, if they are left for over 8 hours or more, when their owners are out all day, and they don't make arrangements for dog walking or pet care etc, these dogs can become stressed out and frustrated, if left completely completely on their own. This could also be said for all breeds of dogs left on their own continually. I hear it often on my walks, dogs howling from loneliness and frustration, often locked up in garages for long periods of time.
> I'm sorry but in realistic terms this is what can and does happen.
> 
> Regarding dog breeds banned in Ireland:-
> ...


Well done for highlighting that it is down to the type of owner of these dogs rather than the dogs themselves 
I don't think you meant to but there ya go :thumbsup:



pogo said:


> and a working guardian dog like american bulldogs also make very good pets, even stupid, mentally broke ones like mine


Nope, don't buy it


----------



## BenBoy (Aug 31, 2013)

cinnamontoast said:


> I think Zaros would be the first to say they're not suitable for 'ordinary' homes in the UK!  Gorgeous, but defo need space and probably not the easiest family dogs!
> 
> See, I don't agree there. I think the breeds you have are damned good family dogs. Staffs are friendly, popular, great with kids, soppy, as are mastiffs. There are two mastiffs I see regularly: they walk on the lead like angels, they're super sweet. It's all about the upbringing and the breeding.
> 
> ...


This ^^^^^

It is definitely about the upbringing and the breeding.

You can spot a 'status' dog a mile off, chains as collars, those harnesses with studs on etc.

I have nothing against bull breeds or so called status breeds, but in the wrong hands its a recipe for disaster.

I have a dog aggressive Labrador, people are always shocked by that who I meet walking!


----------



## Huskybob (Apr 18, 2013)

One of the things I find odd about this thread is that people seem to see a huge difference between the dogs we often find as pets here and those people are most argue about. Once upon a time nearly all the dogs we have as pets would never have been considered being kept for that purpose alone, they were working dogs first and foremost.

These breeds that are currently banned in the UK, some of them I would presume wouldn't make great pets in the hands of the average owner but I personally wouldn't go and outright ban them either. Probably in the same way most other working dogs have integrated into human society those breeds probably would also, given the chance to be allowed into countries with that society and the breeding of lines which promote this lifestyle.

This happens in many breeds we are allowed to own over here already, there is a massive difference in some breeds temperaments in lines bred in one country or region to those in a difference area.

This is easier to see in our more common breeds, many people would agree that in Labradors, a working bred one would be a harder to keep pet than one bred for show purposes. If these so-called "not pet breeds" were to be allowed to be kept as pets I am quite there would be at least some responsible owners who would try to breed lines more suited to this environment.


----------



## BenBoy (Aug 31, 2013)

Huskybob said:


> This is easier to see in our more common breeds, many people would agree that in Labradors, a working bred one would be a harder to keep pet than one bred for show purposes. If these so-called "not pet breeds" were to be allowed to be kept as pets I am quite there would be at least some responsible owners who would try to breed lines more suited to this environment.


Ben is a working bred Labrador, you wouldn't know it tho, he loves to laze around the house


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

BenBoy said:


> Ben is a working bred Labrador, you wouldn't know it tho, he loves to laze around the house


I'm not sure what Spen is but the ones we know who are supposedly from working lines are a lot more laid back than he is. Some of them are practically comatose. But I dunno whether that's down to the owners or breeding or perhaps both. I've heard and seen some Lab people say that the show and pet bred ones are actually harder to handle than the working bred, they're not as focused and less inclined to just chill out though.

It's not just about status breeds though is it? There are people who question whether huskies and malamutes and the like should be kept in an urban environment. Same with collies and livestock guardian breeds. I've been told I shouldn't have a lab as I live in a flat, I should have a companion breed instead. And I don't necessarily think it's as simple as does this breed or that breed make a good pet. What exactly makes a good pet? Or a good pet owner?


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

Hudson87 said:


> Do you have a list of what you deem penis extension breeds?
> 
> Do you include Akitas on that? I have to be honest until I joined this forum I had no idea about the amount of people that had an issue with the breed.


 The only person I've really seen on here going on about issues with Akitas is you. They're not a breed that I've noticed getting a lot of mentions.


----------



## BenBoy (Aug 31, 2013)

Sarah1983 said:


> I'm not sure what Spen is but the ones we know who are supposedly from working lines are a lot more laid back than he is. Some of them are practically comatose. But I dunno whether that's down to the owners or breeding or perhaps both. I've heard and seen some Lab people say that the show and pet bred ones are actually harder to handle than the working bred, they're not as focused and less inclined to just chill out though.
> 
> It's not just about status breeds though is it? There are people who question whether huskies and malamutes and the like should be kept in an urban environment. Same with collies and livestock guardian breeds. I've been told I shouldn't have a lab as I live in a flat, I should have a companion breed instead. And I don't necessarily think it's as simple as does this breed or that breed make a good pet. What exactly makes a good pet? Or a good pet owner?


A lot of the show labs I see on the park are so bouncy and all over the place! They are generally overweight with joint problems 

I think that some people don't do enough research when getting breeds like huskies or Collies. I would never have either of these breeds. I openly admit I didn't research Labradors before getting Ben as I saw him advertised and had him that same day. I will definitely learn from this.

I think Ben is a great companion breed, he gives me lots of companionship


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

BenBoy said:


> A lot of the show labs I see on the park are so bouncy and all over the place! They are generally overweight with joint problems
> 
> I think that some people don't do enough research when getting breeds like huskies or Collies. I would never have either of these breeds. I openly admit I didn't research Labradors before getting Ben as I saw him advertised and had him that same day. I will definitely learn from this.
> 
> I think Ben is a great companion breed, he gives me lots of companionship


I knew enough about Labs to know they ticked the important boxes for me. Energy levels, grooming requirements, reasonably biddable and highly trainable. Not a breed I really wanted though despite that so I have no idea what made me reply to the ad rehoming Spen. He's pretty much my perfect dog though and I can certainly see me having another Lab in the future. If I can find a good breeder who'd let me have one anyway. But then I may not be in a flat by then 

Most of the working bred Labs I know are pets who are expected to lie around all day except when taken out for their 15 minute ball throwing session. Spen would NOT cope with that at all. Yet providing he gets a half decent walk each day and some mental stimulation he's happy to chill out.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

BenBoy said:


> This ^^^^^
> 
> It is definitely about the upbringing and the breeding.
> 
> I have a dog aggressive Labrador, people are always shocked by that who I meet walking!


I have a dog aggressive springer, again people are always surprised. 3rd most common breed in the UK and meant to be brilliant all rounders. Brought up the same way as his brother who ignores other dogs. Some dogs, I believe, either have an incident which makes them aggressive (mine was attacked as a puppy) or have a 'switch' that flicks. Maybe we didn't socialise him enough  Amazing with people, crap with dogs he hasn't met, fine with dogs he has met.

Any dog has the potential to turn, the vast majority never will, but those deliberately bred for aggression are more likely to do so, surely.


----------



## Wilmer (Aug 31, 2012)

I think that each breed/type of dog has the "right" owner out there somewhere, the trouble is, there are always more dogs being bred than there are right owners for. Also, as has been raised earlier in the thread, the majority of people choose their breed by its look, not its likely breed traits. 

Because the more established (in the UK) guarding breeds like GSD, Rotties, Dobes, etc. are popular and often do well in suburban/urban environments, people think any guarding breed will. They forget that established breeds have been selectively bred (talking show/pet lines here) to be suitable for pet homes over decades. So they bring in a more primitive guard, like a Sar or an imported Anatolian and wonder why they are incredibly stressed by the crowded environment they find themselves in. 

We travel to Brittany a fair bit, and I do like some of the traditional french hounds, like the standard fauve Bretagne - but these dogs are very rare and generally only bred for the hunt. It would have a terrible time living with me, so I won't get one. How many people (outside of PFers) seriously make that kind of decision of suitability over looks. How many newbies have disappeared in a huff when they've asked for advice (ie. approval) for their breed choice only to be told (generally pretty nicely) why their personal circumstances make that breed (or any dog) a bad idea.

I suppose what I'm waffling on about is, there's no such thing as an unsuitable breed, just lots of bad breed/owner combinations. I have nothing against bully kuttas or fila brasileiro, but I do worry about the homes/breeding "programmes" they're likely to find themselves in.


----------



## BenBoy (Aug 31, 2013)

cinnamontoast said:


> I have a dog aggressive springer, again people are always surprised. 3rd most common breed in the UK and meant to be brilliant all rounders. Brought up the same way as his brother who ignores other dogs. Some dogs, I believe, either have an incident which makes them aggressive (mine was attacked as a puppy) or have a 'switch' that flicks. Maybe we didn't socialise him enough  Amazing with people, crap with dogs he hasn't met, fine with dogs he has met.
> 
> Any dog has the potential to turn, the vast majority never will, but those deliberately bred for aggression are more likely to do so, surely.


Sounds exactly like Ben who was attacked at a young age but he does also seem to have a switch as u describe, he has been playing with dogs before and all of a sudden attacked them.

Those bred for aggression are more likely it's common sense really!


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

I think the problem is that many folk tend to assume that a dog is a dog is a dog - they don't realise how much variation there can be between breeds and also *within* a given breed.

I doubt there is one breed that would be suitable for everyone.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Of course, what people haven't started from is the definition used for "pet"


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

I think the question in the title should really be 'Do all people make good owners?'


----------



## Howl (Apr 10, 2012)

There have been a few references to hunting dogs and foxhound type breeds. Just wanted to stick my neck out and say I think they definitly could live in a city flat with the right owner. I went down to London recently and when you see the easy access to parks it really opened my eyes. Better access to dog park areas where they could go off lead. So many scents around and fox tracks to snuffle. It is the mental exercise that is as much if not more important than the physical. I moved to a national park for my dogs but if we had to move to a big city it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world certainly not a reason for rehoming. 
These breeds can be a nuisance when they are allowed to bark from boredom but again, in the wrong hands. 
Size is not as important as behaviour. I have a medium 22-25kg but I wouldn't own a smaller breed that is active at home, cravensmum can correct me but a foxhound or french scent hound that is well walked behave like cuddley cushions. So many people in hunting have objected to scent hounds becoming pets they see them hyped up in hunt mode and think pet owners couldn't keep up with that but this is simply not the case. Many breeds are breed purely for one purpose which needs to be addressed by the owner. 
These dogs are breed to be full of energy when they go out but relaxed for hours when they get back. Most of these hounds are similar in the right hands with the right exercise they make good pets. I do wonder how many dogs are as above.


----------



## mummyschnauzer (Sep 30, 2008)

Paddyjulie replied to my post:-

Call yourself a dog lover huh 

Shame on me because i let me bull breeds snuggle up with my daughter 

Yes I am an animal lover, and where in my post did I suggest that dogs shouldn't snuggle up to kids?

AND if you didn't know Meezey, I am from Ireland originally.


----------



## 2Hounds (Jun 24, 2009)

Ex-racing greyhounds weren't considered to make good pets at one time & in Ireland that view still exists. Same with foxhounds, yet cravensmum & other's show its possible. I know someone in US with grey's that also has 2 sweet Dogo's as family pets & are very tolerant of the kid & other dogs.
Choosing a dog on looks alone and not considering its breeds needs & traits is where many go wrong often with beagles,collies, jack Russells and now huskies. I think where these folk also take on a dog for protection purposes is scary anyway, but bringing in those breeds that are more used to large open spaces guarding livestock etc to shove them in typical small British home where threats must seem constant is recipe for disaster, its possible with right home, training & outlet for that type to be a good pet too but are probably in a minority to the idiot owners about.


Maybe the law changing to make owners of dogs that attack or use as weapons responsible will eventually effect those thinking of getting an unsuitable status dog. I don't feel its right to ban more breeds as it doesn't do anything.


----------



## cravensmum (Jun 28, 2010)

Howl said:


> There have been a few references to hunting dogs and foxhound type breeds. Just wanted to stick my neck out and say I think they definitly could live in a city flat with the right owner. I went down to London recently and when you see the easy access to parks it really opened my eyes. Better access to dog park areas where they could go off lead. So many scents around and fox tracks to snuffle. It is the mental exercise that is as much if not more important than the physical. I moved to a national park for my dogs but if we had to move to a big city it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world certainly not a reason for rehoming.
> These breeds can be a nuisance when they are allowed to bark from boredom but again, in the wrong hands.
> Size is not as important as behaviour. I have a medium 22-25kg but I wouldn't own a smaller breed that is active at home, cravensmum can correct me but a foxhound or french scent hound that is well walked behave like cuddley cushions. So many people in hunting have objected to scent hounds becoming pets they see them hyped up in hunt mode and think pet owners couldn't keep up with that but this is simply not the case. Many breeds are breed purely for one purpose which needs to be addressed by the owner.
> These dogs are breed to be full of energy when they go out but relaxed for hours when they get back. Most of these hounds are similar in the right hands with the right exercise they make good pets. I do wonder how many dogs are as above.


Aghh you beat me to it.

I joined the Horse and Hound forum as I had heard there was a heated discussion on there about keeping Foxhounds as pets.

To say they were against it is an understatement.A few of us Foxhound owners were trying to put our point of view but frankly it was :mad2:

They wouldn't open their eyes to Foxhounds as pets.


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

Saw some bloodhounds on tv this morning and I guess they would be considered a breed that would not be an ideal "pet". They were absolutely gorgeous and were let off to "hunt down" the presenter and apart from the baying noise and excited behaviour they certainly looked like they didn't have an aggressive bone in their bodies. 

Given the correct lifestyle and considerations of their breed I think they could make a suitable pet for a suitable owner 

Bit like my Jack, a lurcher with a strong hunt/prey drive. He is absolutely ok for me cos I am a strong, fit person with an understanding and acceptance of the vagaries of such an animal, with a secure, high fenced garden.

In the wrong hands he could be a liability/nuisance and possibly have been handed back to the rescue in the first week 

80% of the time he is asleep  Out walking he is very active/focussed on hunting; He has a super temperament, dog and people friendly and to me is absolutely no trouble at all. 

It is a combination of nature and nurture imo coupled with an educated and flexible owner.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Lurcherlad said:


> Saw some bloodhounds on tv this morning and I guess they would be considered a breed that would not be an ideal "pet". They were absolutely gorgeous and were let off to "hunt down" the presenter and apart from the baying noise and excited behaviour they certainly looked like they didn't have an aggressive bone in their bodies.
> 
> Given the correct lifestyle and considerations of their breed I think they could make a suitable pet for a suitable owner
> 
> ...


I met a bloodhound in our vets a few months back. Lovely natured dog & very pretty too :thumbup1: she was really tall, I didn't realise they were that big, I imagine they would definitely need a MASSIVE sofa


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2013)

Lurcherlad said:


> Saw some bloodhounds on tv this morning and I guess they would be considered a breed that would not be an ideal "pet". They were absolutely gorgeous and were let off to "hunt down" the presenter and apart from the baying noise and excited behaviour they certainly looked like they didn't have an aggressive bone in their bodies.


Awesome dogs, but yep, not really inside pet dogs. What a lot of people dont realize is that all those skin folds in their face serve to trap smells so they can go long distances and not lose the original scent. What that translates in to in practical terms is that they are very stinky dogs! Super dogs, but having one inside the house = stink! Never mind the whole need to work aspect


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

Whilst I would hate to suggest that ANY dog is unsuitable as a pet, I had no idea what a Caucasian Ovtcharka was as mentioned earlier in this thread so did a quick google.

I copied this section from the breed's own website:

The Caucasian Ovtcharka or the Cacausian Mountain Dog, originated in Russia as a flock guarding dog, guarding sheep against wolves. They remain an ever watchful guardian today, a unique mixture of a sweet natured child-lover, who will look after your family and be a lifelong companion and friend, *but can be ferocious when they or their human family are threatened. For this reason the Caucasian is not for everyone. You must be aware that they need strict training when pups*, with lots of loving affection and playtime as well. *As adults they are typically aloof and suspicious of strangers and need careful socializing to make them relax into a state of calm watchfulness in the presence of visitors. They are intelligent sensitive giants but not everyone can handle a Caucasian. Indeed, not everyone who wants one should have one!*

The two bits in bold make me feel that there are very few people who could HONESTLY say that they could be suitable owners for such a dog. There are many, many breeds of dog that would be more suitable for a family than this particular breed IMO. Breeds where it is NOT a trait to be protective/wary of strangers/aggressive/FEROCIOUS.


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

ouesi said:


> Awesome dogs, but yep, not really inside pet dogs. What a lot of people dont realize is that all those skin folds in their face serve to trap smells so they can go long distances and not lose the original scent. What that translates in to in practical terms is that they are very stinky dogs! Super dogs, but having one inside the house = stink! Never mind the whole need to work aspect


Take your point  Although the ones on tv this morning didn't look particularly wrinkly and presumably, if they lived indoors they would be cleaner anyway. I know certain breeds are smellier than others - apparently Yorkies are renowned for being a bit pongy *according to my neighbour who has one* (and she's a bit OCD - so probably not her ideal dog!) (No offence btw to yorkie owners )

As for the needing to work aspect - provided that an outlet for energy and enough mental and physical stimulation are provided - that can possibly be accommodated.

n.b. That is another plus point for sighthounds - extremely clean and UNSMELLY


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

Lurcherlad said:


> Saw some bloodhounds on tv this morning and I guess they would be considered a breed that would not be an ideal "pet". They were absolutely gorgeous and were let off to "hunt down" the presenter and apart from the baying noise and excited behaviour they certainly looked like they didn't have an aggressive bone in their bodies.
> 
> Given the correct lifestyle and considerations of their breed I think they could make a suitable pet for a suitable owner


I know someone who has 3 who are mostly pets. She used to do search and rescue, not sure whether she still does though but I think she does something to give them an outlet for their behaviour. Love seeing pics of hers on facebook and hearing her talk about them, they're such characters!


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Lurcherlad said:


> The two bits in bold make me feel that there are very few people who could HONESTLY say that they could be suitable owners for such a dog. There are many, many breeds of dog that would be more suitable for a family than this particular breed IMO. Breeds where it is NOT a trait to be protective/wary of strangers/aggressive/FEROCIOUS.


You could say the same about many breeds which are brilliant "pets". Take the Hovawart for example, they make excellent family "pets" in the right situation and with the right people. Popular in Germany where they are not as rare as the UK. They are a "guarding breed". This is what someone writes about the difference between Golden Retrievers and Hovawarts:



> A hovawart loves its family and wants to please them. This is also important for a golden retriever. However, I think a golden retriever just wants to please, period. With a hovawart strangers will be accepted if the owner accepts the visitor. A visitor that is not accepted will be barked at and possibly attacked. A golden retriever will bark loudly, but they usually won't attack someone.


Right people, right dog, right situation but first and foremost.. education.


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

So long as the dog doesn't get the wrong idea then. But having a dog in my home that could potentially turn ferociously on a harmless "stranger" because I or someone in my family did not follow a particular introduction procedure correctly would not be something I could entertain.

I'd choose the lab over the other breed for that reason.


----------



## Bexx (Oct 26, 2013)

I can't work out if people are agreeing or disagreeing lol

To me, a 'pet' is a dog that lives in a family home. It can be worked and have a job spend a lot of time outside or whatever but if you love it like a family member and it lives in your home then it's your pet.

I think as long as the owner can provide what the breed needs, the right exercise, space, stimulus, diet, living in the right area, the right situation, as well as being caring and looking after them, all those other things. Then I don't see any reason why any breed cannot be a pet.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

mummyschnauzer said:


> Paddyjulie replied to my post:-
> 
> Call yourself a dog lover huh
> 
> ...


I struggle to understand why you told me the difference between North and South and about banned and restricted breed hence me letting you know where I live, I'm very well aware of the law and restricted and banned breeds, and again Fila's and Dogo live as pets in Ireland I am still unsure what your post meant?


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Lurcherlad said:


> So long as the dog doesn't get the wrong idea then. But having a dog in my home that could potentially turn ferociously on a harmless "stranger" because I or someone in my family did not follow a particular introduction procedure correctly would not be something I could entertain.
> 
> I'd choose the lab over the other breed for that reason.


Any breed can do that, again it boils down to the owner of the dog.
Personally I wouldn't own a Cacausian because I couldn't give them what they need, but it doesn't mean they can't be pets..

As far as I am aware Zaros' (sp) two are pets, they look like very happy pets to me :thumbup1:


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Lurcherlad said:


> So long as the dog doesn't get the wrong idea then. But having a dog in my home that could potentially turn ferociously on a harmless "stranger" because I or someone in my family did not follow a particular introduction procedure correctly would not be something I could entertain.
> 
> I'd choose the lab over the other breed for that reason.


Then you exclude most of the working and some of the pastoral group as pets? Yet a lot of them make amazing pets yet most are aloof and do not take well to strangers!

Today I was stood next to an entire adult male Rottweiler, he's never met me before in his life, I in kind of second nature let him sniff my hand and started stroking his head, within seconds he'd rested his head against my leg, then moved his body over so he was totally resting his whole body against my leg while sat on my foot nodding off! Unique behaviour for a guarding breed who by their breed standard are naturally protective and aloof with strangers? No pretty standard male Rottweiler behaviour, why? Because even though their standard tells you it's a trait all responsible Rottweiler owners socialise their dogs to within an inch of their life!

Don't judge breeds unless you've lived with them or had prolonged contact with a well bred and brought up dog, you'll be surprised and wonder where they got the rep from!


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Lurcherlad said:


> So long as the dog doesn't get the wrong idea then. But having a dog in my home that could potentially turn ferociously on a harmless "stranger" because I or someone in my family did not follow a particular introduction procedure correctly would not be something I could entertain.
> 
> I'd choose the lab over the other breed for that reason.


Wonder if you compare bite statistics.. I would bet those who own Hovawarts are more aware and educate themselves so that their dogs cause less bites than the golden retriever even adjusting appropriately for numbers. Is this as goldies are mean spirited.. no, studies have shown they are not, it's education and awareness.

Another aspect not being considered. There are three main types of aggression. Two are commonly talked about. You have Dog vs Owner, Dog vs Stranger and Dog vs Dog. Personally I feel dog vs dog and dog vs stranger are controllable and manageable. Dog vs owner is far less manageable and yet dogs known for this type of aggression many here would classify as being good "pets".

It's seems to me to be about perception rather than education. That's the problem with breedism. Who says that dog vs owner aggression isn't manageable. I wouldn't want to. Many do successfully.


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

StormyThai said:


> Any breed can do that, again it boils down to the owner of the dog.
> Personally I wouldn't own a Cacausian because I couldn't give them what they need, but it doesn't mean they can't be pets..
> 
> As far as I am aware Zaros' (sp) two are pets, they look like very happy pets to me :thumbup1:


That's why I would not have one. I can have people enter my house without having to worry that I have "introduced" them to the dog so that I know he won't attack them. Not something that I could cope with. If people can, and they are prepared to, then fine  (Until, of course, something goes wrong :frown2 And, who makes the decision on who are suitable owners? Hopefully, no-one ever makes the wrong decision 

Choosing a dog with those characteristics is surely increasing the chances of a negative outcome?

I think we know what happens when things don't go according to plan - it's all over the news right now.

I have not referred to anyone on this forum or their choice of dog btw


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Lurcherlad said:


> That's why I would not have one. I can have people enter my house without having to worry that I have "introduced" them to the dog so that I know he won't attack them. Not something that I could cope with. If people can, and they are prepared to, then fine  (Until, of course, something goes wrong :frown2 And, who makes the decision on who are suitable owners? Hopefully, no-one ever makes the wrong decision
> 
> *Choosing a dog with those characteristics is surely increasing the chances of a negative outcome?*
> 
> ...


I think that actually being very aware of these characteristics can perhaps reduce the chances of a negative outcome. I don't just assume that my dogs will be OK with strangers entering the house, therefore I have measures in place to ensure that the dogs are correctly introduced to a stranger if necessary. If it someone who won't be visiting socially I do not introduce the dogs, they are segregated from the person. We see so many posts on here where the assumption has been made that a dog is fine with anyone who enters the house, yet has bitten a workman (for instance) who just walked in, fussed the dog etc. I am alert to ensuring that any interaction is a safe one and my dogs aren't pushed past their comfortable limits of interaction.

When I was a district nurse I soon learnt to ask that ANY dog was shut away when I entered a property (unless a service dog). Those dogs who are "OK" are often not.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Lurcherlad said:


> That's why I would not have one. I can have people enter my house without having to worry that I have "introduced" them to the dog so that I know he won't attack them. Not something that I could cope with. If people can, and they are prepared to, then fine  (Until, of course, something goes wrong :frown2 And, who makes the decision on who are suitable owners? Hopefully, no-one ever makes the wrong decision
> 
> Choosing a dog with those characteristics is surely increasing the chances of a negative outcome?
> 
> ...


But your assuming it's some huge process and if not done right certain dogs are going to fly off the handle? It's not true! It's about educating yourself about your breed and training and socialising them! I've never had a Rottweiler react to a stranger in my house or me being a stranger in another Rottweiler house hold! It's being sensible around and respecting all breeds in their home!

How many people on here have dogs that have issues with strangers and they are not guarding breeds?


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

MEEZY & GOBLIN

I merely pointed out the characteristics of a breed I knew nothing about, prompted by this thread, that would steer me away from owning one.

I am not judging ANY breed or owner of such. 

There are, of course, many dogs of certain breeds that do not show any of the characteristics that some may consider undesirable.

There is no definitive answer to any of the questions posed with regard to breeds and their characteristics and there will always be dogs that go completely against any of those, both good and bad.

I am not arguing, one way or the other. It was an observation.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Not sure what the winky face is all about, I used those two as an example that with the right people in the right circumstances (as myself and others have repeatedly said throughout the thread) they can be kept as pets.

There will always be people that go out and get a dog for the wrong reason, which is why I say that it should be harder to acquire *any* dog. You can't say that a particular breed can't make good pets just because idiots exist :shocked:

We already have guardian breeds in the country with countless responsible owners that make great pets 

Just because you (general you) don't think you could give a breed what they need, doesn't mean that no one can give a breed what they need..

Responsible owners will get the dog for the right reasons and make sure that they take all the breed traits into account and then work with them, why should responsible people miss out on owning a breed that they love because the minority are idiots?


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

That's the problem with this kind of thread. It's ignoring the problem and trying to place responsibility on breeds. It's up to the owners being responsible and educating themselves on their dogs and requirements, doing research before they get the dog etc.


----------



## Alice Childress (Nov 14, 2010)

Goblin said:


> You could say the same about many breeds which are brilliant "pets". Take the Hovawart for example, they make excellent family "pets" in the right situation and with the right people. Popular in Germany where they are not as rare as the UK. They are a "guarding breed". This is what someone writes about the difference between Golden Retrievers and Hovawarts:


(Completely off topic  but there is a BEAUTIFUL Hovawart at the dog park, who loves to play with Maggie. She is just gorgeous in every way. Always makes me think of you Goblin!)


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Lurcherlad said:


> MEEZY & GOBLIN
> 
> I merely pointed out the characteristics of a breed I knew nothing about, prompted by this thread, that would steer me away from owning one.
> 
> ...


But that's part of the issue people do make judgements on breeds they know nothing about, based on things they read or one or two dogs they have met, and I personally find it so frustrating because if we keep pointing the finger at the breed ( which ever breed is the devil dog of choice at the time) we keep ignoring where the real issue lies!


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

StormyThai said:


> Not sure what the winky face is all about, I used those two as an example that with the right people in the right circumstances (as myself and others have repeatedly said throughout the thread) they can be kept as pets.
> 
> The winky face was to show no malice - but I wanted to make it clear to anyone reading that I had not singled out an individual on this forum and their choice of dog - given how these things have a way of blowing up through misunderstanding
> 
> ...


We know responsible owners do. I haven't said that anyone else should not own a particular breed - just why I would not.

I was joining in a discussion as my OH and son have gone to football, me and the dog have had our walk and are chilling and there is nothing on TV so I came on the forum to pass a little time. I am not interested in arguing. But please don't put words into my mouth.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Alice Childress said:


> (Completely off topic  but there is a BEAUTIFUL Hovawart at the dog park, who loves to play with Maggie. She is just gorgeous in every way. Always makes me think of you Goblin!)


We are actually far more careful with our Hovawart than would normally be the case with the breed. As Benny is blind, we have to make sure he doesn't show aggression due to being startled. Bikes used to be a problem for example. It's therefore a case of not just breed, but indivídual dog and the need to be aware and manage situations appropriately.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Goblin said:


> That's the problem with this kind of thread. It's ignoring the problem and trying to place responsibility on breeds. It's up to the owners being responsible and educating themselves on their dogs and requirements, doing research before they get the dog etc.


Completely agree, but the reality is you cannot trust that people will do that, because so many don't.

How do you propose to manage those situations?

We have rescues that do their bit, but they are overflowing because of irresponsible owners who have not done the above.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

It's not only breed but also the *age *of the dog that is key.

I know a few folk with young adult Labs and the dogs simply do not get enough exercise and/or mental stimulation. In my humble opinion these are the 'wrong' owners for these dogs because they underestimated how much time and exercise their dogs would need once fully grown, and they overestimated their own willingness to provide what the dogs needed.


----------



## shetlandlover (Dec 6, 2011)

Me and my husband were talking about this the other day, I don't believe all breeds make good pets. I think some of the banned breeds are banned for their safety as much as the humans around them, even more dogs in the hands of idiot chavs.:frown2:


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Lurcherlad said:


> We know responsible owners do. I haven't said that anyone else should not own a particular breed - just why I would not.
> 
> I was joining in a discussion as my OH and son have gone to football, me and the dog have had our walk and are chilling and there is nothing on TV so I came on the forum to pass a little time. I am not interested in arguing. But please don't put words into my mouth.


Nor am I interested in arguing, I am having a discussion the last I looked 

This thread is about about all breeds making good pets so my replies are tailored to that...

I'll leave it there I think, I'm particularly sensitive today sand I don't want to come across in the wrong way


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

rocco33 said:


> Completely agree, but the reality is you cannot trust that people will do that, because so many don't.
> 
> How do you propose to manage those situations?


Well a good start would be to get away with ideas of "X breed does not make a good pet". Instead go with the idea of "Dogs do not make good pets.. unless..". Start with a baseline of the lowest denominator.

Groups like the Kennel club need to actually push ideas to non dog environments and society as a whole. It's important they seem to be acting for all dogs. After all educating society about dogs isn't simply about "pedigree" breeds.

In general, everything I see is reactive based on a tragedy. It needs to change.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

cravensmum said:


> Aghh you beat me to it.
> 
> I joined the Horse and Hound forum as I had heard there was a heated discussion on there about keeping Foxhounds as pets.
> 
> ...


They have a good point.

It's worth pointing out that research has shown that animals (not just dogs) loose their 'working instincts' quite quickly if not used - it only takes a few generations to notice the loss. This is why there can be such a distinction between show and working types of the same breed. So, for a lot of these breeds, generations of breeding for pets rather than their original purpose can lead to a dog more suitable as a pet. While they still retain the traits, they are less. Equally, sadly in the case of many of the bull breeds/crosses, their appeal as status dogs has led idiots and byb to breed them for their undesirable traits.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Goblin said:


> *Well a good start would be to get away with ideas of "X breed does not make a good pet". *Instead go with the idea of "Dogs do not make good pets.. unless..". Start with a baseline of the lowest denominator.
> 
> Groups like the Kennel club need to actually push ideas to non dog environments and society as a whole. It's important they seem to be acting for all dogs. After all educating society about dogs isn't simply about "pedigree" breeds.
> 
> In general, everything I see is reactive based on a tragedy. It needs to change.


The KC already has an online 'find a suitable breed' app. The lowest denominator will take no notice of that - they buy a dog because of what it looks like, or they've met one they like.

I don't understand what you mean by pushing ideas to non dog environments and society as a whole. Pushing what ideas?


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

StormyThai said:


> Nor am I interested in arguing, I am having a discussion the last I looked
> 
> *This thread is about about all breeds making good pets so my replies are tailored to that...*
> I'll leave it there I think, I'm particularly sensitive today sand I don't want to come across in the wrong way


I think the term 'pet' needs to be defined in order to answer that fully, but there is no doubt that not all breeds are suitable to be kept as a 'pet' when you consider how the average pet owner considers a pet.


----------



## cravensmum (Jun 28, 2010)

rocco33 said:


> They have a good point.
> 
> It's worth pointing out that research has shown that animals (not just dogs) loose their 'working instincts' quite quickly if not used - it only takes a few generations to notice the loss. This is why there can be such a distinction between show and working types of the same breed. So, for a lot of these breeds, generations of breeding for pets rather than their original purpose can lead to a dog more suitable as a pet. While they still retain the traits, they are less. Equally, sadly in the case of many of the bull breeds/crosses, their appeal as status dogs has led idiots and byb to breed them for their undesirable traits.


But that could be said of any breed,None of them started out as pets.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

rocco33 said:


> *I think the term 'pet' needs to be defined* in order to answer that fully, but there is no doubt that not all breeds are suitable to be kept as a 'pet' when you consider how the average pet owner considers a pet.


Pet = a domestic or tamed animal or bird kept for companionship or pleasure.
Pretty simple really..


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

I think, from my own POV, is not whether a dog is suitable as a 'pet' or not, i'm far more concerned about whether a breed is suitable to live in society or not. As Zaros pointed out, some breeds simply arent suitable for the kind of environment that we have here in the UK. We are a small, crowded island where there simply isnt the space or the ambience that certain dogs need.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

StormyThai said:


> Pet = a domestic or tamed animal or bird kept for companionship or pleasure.
> Pretty simple really..


Not simple - if it were that simply, why is rescue overflowing with dogs that did not fit in as pets! 

The environment that the dog is being brought into needs to considered as does the lifestyle and experience of the owner.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

rocco33 said:


> Not simple - if it were that simply, why is rescue overflowing with dogs that did not fit in as pets!
> 
> The environment that the dog is being brought into needs to considered as does the lifestyle and experience of the owner.


Because there are idiot owners that think pets are disposable. They didn't fit into the life of a particular person, that does not equate to them not making good pets at all 
I agree that everything has to be considered before bringing a pet into your life but it has no relevance on the definition of what a 'pet' is.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

rocco33 said:


> Not simple - if it were that simply, why is rescue overflowing with dogs that did not fit in as pets!
> 
> The environment that the dog is being brought into needs to considered as does the lifestyle and experience of the owner.


Again that's more about the people than dogs, because unless those dogs in rescue have been damaged beyond repair by people, they normally go on to make a perfect pet within another family.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Meezey said:


> Again that's more about the people than dogs, because unless those dogs in rescue have been damaged beyond repair by people, they normally go on to make a perfect pet within another family.


Yes, and no, part of it is. Often it is that the dog has not suitable for the type of pet home that is being offered and rather than adapt to the dog, they would rather get rid of it.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

StormyThai said:


> Because there are idiot owners that think pets are disposable. They didn't fit into the life of a particular person, that does not equate to them not making good pets at all
> I agree that everything has to be considered before bringing a pet into your life but it has no relevance on the definition of what a 'pet' is.


There are still some breeds that are NOT suitable as pets


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

rocco33 said:


> Yes, and no, part of it is. Often it is that the dog has not suitable for the type of pet home that is being offered and rather than adapt to the dog, they would rather get rid of it.


But again that's because the person chose the wrong breed, more so if it goes on the be a fantastic pet in another home! Same dog different homes the dog is not the issue it's the home!


----------



## JulieNoob (Oct 22, 2008)

As a general rule - I don't think Malamutes or huskies are good pets for most people.
Most people seem to want a biddable dog that can have a trot off lead round the park etc ... hence so many in rescue - if only breeders were more picky - idiot breeders I mean, decent breeders vet their puppy buyers.

I think some breeds are not compatible with life in urban UK. But I'd rather there be legislation on onwers than on dogs


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

JulieNoob said:


> As a general rule - I don't think Malamutes or huskies are good pets for most people.
> Most people seem to want a biddable dog that can have a trot off lead round the park etc ... hence so many in rescue - if only breeders were more picky - idiot breeders I mean, decent breeders vet their puppy buyers.
> 
> I think some breeds are not compatible with life in urban UK. But I'd rather there be legislation on onwers than on dogs


So flip that and say most owners are not right for Malamutes or Huskies because again with the right owner they are amazing pets  Nothing wrong with the breed something wrong with some of the people the breeders are placing them with


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

not necessarily anything wrong with either ......just some people are not suited to have some dogs.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

rocco33 said:


> Yes, and no, part of it is. Often it is that the dog has not suitable for the type of pet home that is being offered and rather than adapt to the dog, they would rather get rid of it.


I don't know which is worse..having made a terrible mistake and keeping it going or trying to rehome a dog.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

rocco33 said:


> The KC already has an online 'find a suitable breed' app. The lowest denominator will take no notice of that - they buy a dog because of what it looks like, or they've met one they like.


The kennel club pushes its messages to people who know dogs already and are normally involved in the "scene". It needs to push influence outside it's comfort zone and not simply expect people to come to it. It needs to be proactive. Of course that's harder when it really only represents a portion of dogs and keeps failing to include/support all dogs but that's another topic entirely.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

rocco33 said:


> There are still some breeds that are NOT suitable as pets


In your opinion


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2013)

We have two Livestock Guardians (Sarplaninacs) and for us they make excellent pets. But not for all, and not for all places.

I researched the academic studies of the LGDs in Finland by Teets Otstavel and some of the results were very interesting. Perhaps this will be helpful for those, who are interested in finding some real facts about them instead of just exchanged opinions.

First, most LGDs are pets here but there are 50 or more used for working. All experiences have been positive. In Italy they still use LGDs (Maremma) as a working dog. The breed is very popular as they have lots of wolves in the mountain regions

According to Teets, *none* of these dogs are aggessive by nature, all aggression is learned behavior due to bad experiences caused by humans, other animals or poor conditions.

Guardians only fight as the last resort against a threat. In real life there is hardly ever a need to fight. Barking and growling is usually enough. A fight would only occur if they are cornered, the threat doesn´t retreat or the dog has a medical problem affecting its natural behaviour.

The LGD guards by instinct, and will protect its family whether that family is four legged or two. It works independently unlike other breeds. It does not obey orders unless he thinks they make sense. Without this quality they wouldn´t be able to perform their duties adequately. Socialising and appropriate conditions are a must. They need a lot of space and freedom which still allows them close proximity with the flock.

It is the duty of the owner to protect them from all bad experiences as they are easily influenced and will not forget who or what has upset them.
When you are able to provide these dogs with all their requirements you will find you have a most loyal, fun and independent family member. If you cannot you will only nurture problems for yourself, the dog and everyone else around.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

I am one of the minority here who don't believe all dogs make good pets. In fact, looking much closer to home than bull breeds and livestock guardians, I don't think that there are that many working bred border collies that make good pets for the average family in Britain.

There is a reason for this. The border collie is still very much a working dog. It has been bred for generation upon generation to work sheep. It's drives and instincts have not been watered down over generations as some of the other working breeds have. Therefore the modern working bred border collie retains as much instinct and drive for work as it has always done. Of course not all border collies are destined to work sheep and so plenty do end up in either sport and active homes, but some also end up in your average pet home, and I also believe this is why there are so many border collies with behaviour issues and why the rescue centres are full of them.

The above could also be the reason why so many on the H&H forum believe foxhounds don't make good pets. These are another breed who are fundamentally a working dog, and a pack dog. Of course, there will be some individuals who do well in a pet home, but the majority (I would guess) do not.

Taking the Caucasian Ovcharka as another example. This breed is very few in number in the UK at the moment - but growing in popularity it would seem. A Russian CO website says this ...

_"Years ago, I have had a male CO, but finding this breed of dog too dangerous to people, I switched to different breeds that are more suitable for life in a modern human society, especially in bigger cities. After I gained a lot of experiences and info about diverse breeds of dog, I have been comparing them with one another. Then I reappraised the hierarchy of all the important values and I realized, that there is nothing like the Caucasian Ovcharka, who has the most important qualities listed bellow in the highest possible extend:

1) Distrustful and aggressive behavior toward strange people.
2) Resistance against colds and bad weather to be kept outside all the year long.
3) Height 70 cm at withers and above to be higher than most of other breeds of dog and to be able to easily reach the upper part of the human enemy's body and his head to quickly bring him down.
4) Weight 50 kg and more to have a sufficient mass in order to overpower both other dogs, wolves and people.
5) Swiftness similar to that of German Shepherd to be capable to use its mass quickly and effectively.
6) Sense to hit the enemy on his weakest and most vulnerable place.
7) Good coat that would protect the dog in a fight.
8) Little tiredness to be able to go ten miles without exhaustion.
9) Not much demanding as far as its need for food* concerns.

There are two main and most important things:

1. Protection work - Dog's ability to protect its owner, his family and possession against human enemies.

2. Dog fighting - Dog's ability to protect its owner, his family and possession against wolves and endeavor to dominate the other dogs."
_
The rest of the website makes interesting reading too (particularly the part about protection and dog fighting) - Caucasian Ovcharka

In short, I believe that any breed that has been bred for generations to work - without any dilution of such strong genes - will not make a good pet for the average bod on the street.


----------



## cravensmum (Jun 28, 2010)

Moobli said:


> I am one of the minority here who don't believe all dogs make good pets. In fact, looking much closer to home than bull breeds and livestock guardians, I don't think that there are that many working bred border collies that make good pets for the average family in Britain.
> 
> There is a reason for this. The border collie is still very much a working dog. It has been bred for generation upon generation to work sheep. It's drives and instincts have not been watered down over generations as some of the other working breeds have. Therefore the modern working bred border collie retains as much instinct and drive for work as it has always done. Of course not all border collies are destined to work sheep and so plenty do end up in either sport and active homes, but some also end up in your average pet home, and I also believe this is why there are so many border collies with behaviour issues and why the rescue centres are full of them.
> 
> The above could also be the reason why so many on the H&H forum believe foxhounds don't make good pets. These are another breed who are fundamentally a working dog, and a pack dog. Of course, there will be some individuals who do well in a pet home, but the majority (I would guess) do not.


But having Foxhounds as pets is no different than any other scenthound or Sighthound or any working breed.

It all comes down to the owner and what they are prepared to do,the last thing I want to do is train out their natural instincts,that's why I am prepared to wait for hours on a walk when they are following scents in a secure area.

Some people might think I'm stupid for letting them off the lead at all,but in my mind it would be cruel to keep them on a lead.And if they were always on a lead yes a Foxhound or any working breed would not make good pets.

Again it comes down to the individual owner and how they manage the breed.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

MrsZee said:


> We have two Livestock Guardians (Sarplaninacs) and for us they make excellent pets. But not for all, and not for all places.
> 
> I researched the academic studies of the LGDs in Finland by Teets Otstavel and some of the results were very interesting. Perhaps this will be helpful for those, who are interested in finding some real facts about them instead of just exchanged opinions.
> 
> ...


Thankyou for sharing this with us  I have 2 Romanian ex street mongrels who are believed to have Carpatin (another breed of LGD) in them.

Rogue definitely has traits of the breed, despite intensive socialisation she can be challenging with dogs & people she doesn't know.

I recognise the 'independent thinking' as well, though I often call it 'stubborn'  I love the bones of her, but I can see that she isn't for everyone, so many people ask what she is & where we got her, but I always tell them she's a rescue mutt so one of a kind


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Prowl said:


> Depends on a lot of things really like how experienced you are, the amount of living space you have, the environment and other dogs around.
> 
> So much depends a lot on how good you are with dogs generally. For example as an inexperienced owner I would have feel happier with a smaller breed then a larger one.
> 
> It really depends.


So you would be happier that an inexperienced owner have say a Working Cocker Spaniel (as opposed to a show/pet bred one) than say, a pet/show bred labrador?????????????


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

I have not read the whole thread, but I would say IMHO and IME no not ALL breeds make great pets.

To think otherwise is foolish, short sighted and demonstrates, IMHO, a lack of experience with a wide variety of breeds, their predispositions, etc.

When you look at the Breed Standards (of whatever country and no matter if they are "official" or not) you will be able to determine whether or not that breed is going to be a "good bet" for a pet.

Most people do not read breed standards, or think they do not apply to them.

Also, whilst we breed to breed standards (rather than for good pets) many breeds will make good pets by chance, rather than design.


----------



## springerpete (Jun 24, 2010)

Do we perhaps need to define the word 'Pets' here. My dogs are kind, gentle natured and biddable. But I do not regard them as pets, for sure they are my constant companions but I don't believe I regard them as in that way. They work for me, they are loyal to me, but I don't think they would be suitable as pet dogs in the way I understand the word. They're both pretty driven and would be a handful for anyone not fully aware of that drive and therefore unable to satisfy it.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Which is why many breeds have split between working and pet/show. David Ryan reckons that many breeds require "petification" to make them suitable for most people's wants/needs nowadays (ie those who are not going to work or compete with their dogs)


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

smokeybear said:


> To think otherwise is foolish, short sighted and demonstrates, IMHO, a lack of experience with a wide variety of breeds, their predispositions, etc..


No, not everyone has the same definition of "pet" and that's just a start.

Look at chihuaha's and beagles. Two "pet" dog breeds and yet two breeds who show most aggression to their own owners. Do these make good pets? They do as decent owners make allowances and learn about them. It's down to education and picking dogs to match circumstances, not simply X breed is not suitable as a pet.

By the way there was one study which showed some show lines were more generally aggressive towards their owners than the equivalent working line. Is this your definition of a good "pet"?

It should not about breedism, you can't say X breed is not a good pet. It's matching X breed with person Y. Name me a breed and I'm sure you could find someone who has one as a decent "pet" even if they have to manage certain encounters.


----------



## Barefootgirl (Sep 6, 2013)

Smokey, how many breeds really do have a clear split between working and show lines? English Springers do for sure - there were several lovely dogs on the ESS stand at Discover Dogs today which showed the differences between working and show springers quite clearly. I'm not aware of too many other breeds where the difference is so extreme - or is it more of a mental divide between the differing lines?


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

Meezey said:


> But your assuming it's some huge process and if not done right certain dogs are going to fly off the handle? It's not true! It's about educating yourself about your breed and training and socialising them! I've never had a Rottweiler react to a stranger in my house or me being a stranger in another Rottweiler house hold! It's being sensible around and respecting all breeds in their home!
> 
> How many people on here have dogs that have issues with strangers and they are not guarding breeds?


My collie would bite strangers coming into the house or garden. It's why the garden was set up the way it was, people could come to the front door without any risk. My probably lab/gwp mix welcomed anyone we invited into the house and people he knew could just walk in with no problems although he'd give a bark to let us know someone was there. There was no huge process to this, just us being friendly towards them was enough to let him know they were welcome. The few times a stranger just walked in though it was a completely different matter! I have never been so glad of a large, aggressive seeming dog in my life as I was when a strange bloke just walked into my house one night while my hubby was away! He left very promptly indeed.

My rottie mix however welcomed anyone and everyone. As did his mother. As does our friends rottie, even when complete strangers broke in to get him out he welcomed them with open arms. So I would not assume that a non guarding breed will welcome people into the house or that a guarding breed won't.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Goblin said:


> No, not everyone has the same definition of "pet" and that's just a start.
> 
> Look at chihuaha's and beagles. Two "pet" dog breeds and yet two breeds who show most aggression to their own owners. Do these make good pets? They do as decent owners make allowances and learn about them. It's down to education and picking dogs to match circumstances, not simply X breed is not suitable as a pet.
> 
> By the way there was one study which showed some show lines where generally aggressive towards their owners than the equivalent working line. It not about breedism, it's about matching breed to situation.


But whether or not a breed is suitable as a pet is not purely down to aggression issues. There plenty of other considerations, not merely this one.

That is merely ONE aspect of a dog's make up

The four most aggressive breeds of dogs ranked from 1 - 4 are

Dachshunds
Jack Russell Terriers
Chihuahuas
Pit Bull Terriers

(Not sure where Beagles came)

It is not even a question about "breedism" (whatever that means to the individual).


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

Barefootgirl said:


> Smokey, how many breeds really do have a clear split between working and show lines? English Springers do for sure - there were several lovely dogs on the ESS stand at Discover Dogs today which showed the differences between working and show springers quite clearly. I'm not aware of too many other breeds where the difference is so extreme - or is it more of a mental divide between the differing lines?


Cockers immediately spring to mind, as do Labs and collies.


----------



## snoopydo (Jan 19, 2010)

Moobli said:


> In the UK there are four banned breeds of dog :-
> 
> Pit Bull Terrier
> Japanese Tosa
> ...


No I wouldn't .heaven help us imagine one of these breeds in the hands of the Chavs who think a staffy makes them "look hard"


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

smokeybear said:


> But whether or not a breed is suitable as a pet is not purely down to aggression issues. There plenty of other considerations, not merely this one.
> 
> That is merely ONE aspect of a dog's make up
> 
> ...


If you read previous discussion points I mentioned dog vs dog, dog vs strangers and dog vs owners can be classified differently. Beagles average high in dog vs owner aggression, pits are high in dog vs dog but are low in dog vs owners.

The very title of this thread is to try to push the idea of some breeds do not make good pets. A point you agree with. I disagree and say that whilst some breeds are not suitable for some settings and for some environments, they are suitable for other people in other environments. It's about education making sure a dog is suitable for the environment they are going to be in.

I know people who call their horse a pet. I don't expect their "pet" to be in their flat as it's not suitable. According to the idea of this thread, this means people shouldn't keep horses.


----------



## Wildmoor (Oct 31, 2011)

Barefootgirl said:


> Smokey, how many breeds really do have a clear split between working and show lines? English Springers do for sure - there were several lovely dogs on the ESS stand at Discover Dogs today which showed the differences between working and show springers quite clearly. I'm not aware of too many other breeds where the difference is so extreme - or is it more of a mental divide between the differing lines?





Leanne77 said:


> Cockers immediately spring to mind, as do Labs and collies.


GSDs are split more than show/workline the showlines are split so are the worklines, then you have what I term pet lines, each are different both in looks and temperment, there are plenty of pastoral breeds that are split


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

Leanne77 said:


> Cockers immediately spring to mind, as do Labs and collies.


English Setters too. From what I've seen there's a HUGE difference between working and show types there. In looks at least.


----------



## sharloid (Apr 15, 2012)

Barefootgirl said:


> Smokey, how many breeds really do have a clear split between working and show lines? English Springers do for sure - there were several lovely dogs on the ESS stand at Discover Dogs today which showed the differences between working and show springers quite clearly. I'm not aware of too many other breeds where the difference is so extreme - or is it more of a mental divide between the differing lines?


There's a divide becoming more noticeable in the looks of Siberian Huskies too. More so in America and Europe. I'm not sure if it makes any difference to the working ability or temperament though.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Rottweiler in the UK also have a split.


----------



## Howl (Apr 10, 2012)

cravensmum said:


> But that could be said of any breed,None of them started out as pets.


Also, correct me if I am wrong but foxhounds are only usually pets when they are rehomed after being unclaimed from hunts.I don't think you can sell a foxhound puppy in the same way as a lab. So no danger at the moment. 
Trailhounds (faster and more energetic) are often rehomed as pets near me, not a breed for me but I would imagine someone like Dogless could keep up with one. 
Also having researched and found a bloodhound breeder for my mum this year never noticed any significant smell. The breeders animals were all indoor pets. My wrinkly basset has a slight cheesy odour but has very few wrinkles. When mentioning living with a bloodhound scentwork judge an unbearable smell was never mentioned. :laugh:
In the UK bloodhounds are predominantly indoor pets even when used for drag sports many seem to do this as a hobby.


----------



## cravensmum (Jun 28, 2010)

Howl said:


> Also, correct me if I am wrong but foxhounds are only usually pets when they are rehomed after being unclaimed from hunts.I don't think you can sell a foxhound puppy in the same way as a lab. So no danger at the moment.
> Trailhounds (faster and more energetic) are often rehomed as pets near me, not a breed for me but I would imagine someone like Dogless could keep up with one.
> Also having researched and found a bloodhound breeder for my mum this year never noticed any significant smell. The breeders animals were all indoor pets. My wrinkly basset has a slight cheesy odour but has very few wrinkles. When mentioning living with a bloodhound scentwork judge an unbearable smell was never mentioned. :laugh:
> In the UK bloodhounds are predominantly indoor pets even when used for drag sports many seem to do this as a hobby.


Not sure really about the Foxhounds,I know most of the ones Jackie gets in are not tattooed.

Craven was found in Manchester dogs home at a few months old,I don't know how he came to be in there,he's not tattooed.

They are certainly not a breed for everyone and I would not recommend them to anyone as a first time dog unless they know exactly what they are getting into.


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2013)

A friend of mine breeds and owns Central Asian Shepherds, a breed similar to a Caucasian Ovcharka. CAS are not pets, and it would not offend her in the least to hear me say that. Hers do live in the house with her, they do live as a pet would, but she will not sell any of hers as pets. They go to homes where they will work as livestock guardians as they also do in her home.

Ive spent some time around cane corsi, and dogos. Two other breeds I do not consider pet breeds. I am not as familiar with filas, but from what I hear from people whos opinion I respect, theyre even more dog than the cane and dogos, so another breed that does not a pet dog make. 

By not a pet, I mean the dog requires tremendous management, super savvy home, and specialized training and handling to be safe and stay mentally sound. These are not dogs you take to a few basic manners classes, socialize through the main developmental stages, and think theyll be okay with normal things like allowing the plumber in to the house to fix a leak. 
These are not dogs you can put in a kennel when you go on vacation and expect the kennel staff to know how to manage them.
These are specialist dogs. Not pets. 
(And before I get 20 posts about the fila that stayed in kennels who was just fine, Im talking about the breed in general, not individual variations within the breed.)

That said, just because they are not pets does not mean I think that people should not own them, or that they need to be banned. Especially not that they need to be banned. Over and over, breed bans have been shown to NOT work. They do not keep the public safe, they do not reduce the number of dog bites and fatalities. They are expensive to implement, nearly impossible to enforce, and its just a big old waste of time, money, resources etc. I am 100% against breed banning. 
I am 100% FOR education. Teach people about breeds, suitability, reading dog body language, effective training approaches. Educate families on dog/kid safety. Educate children on dog body language, how to approach a dog, what to do if they see a dog without an owner. Educate service personnel on dog behavior and body language. Education, education, education.

As for worrying about those dogs" getting in to the wrong hands... Well, there is a reason thugs choose pitbulls not CO. The pitbull will forgive his owner everything, will put up with stupid handling with minimal repercussions. The CO will eat the idiot owner for lunch. If a fad were to develop I expect it would be short lived


----------



## MerlinsMum (Aug 2, 2009)

ouesi said:


> A friend of mine breeds and owns Central Asian Shepherds, a breed similar to a Caucasian Ovcharka. CAS are not pets, and it would not offend her in the least to hear me say that. Hers do live in the house with her, they do live as a "pet" would, but she will not sell any of hers as pets. *They go to homes where they will work as livestock guardians as they also do in her home.*


That, I think, is the crux of the matter.

There are not enough homes of this kind available for "specialist" breeds, and when you add on the universal trend for anyone to breed from anything with four legs just for the fun of it or to make money, then of course they will end up in the hands of non-specialists.

Added to that, the random, ill-thought out mass breeding doesn't take into consideration temperament, and as the breeders wash their hands of the puppies as soon as they're sold, there is no thought for the future or what those puppies will bring to the breed when they are (of course) bred from in turn.

There may be cultural differences between countries as well - the majority of people in the UK live in small houses, often attached to other properties, with no land and in fairly densely populated areas. A significant number also do not own their own homes. We are one of the world's most overcrowded countries.

Let's just imagine what might happen if someone imported a dog breed from - say - Outer Mongolia, which is 32" high, weighs 14 stone, lives outside and is used as a guard against wolves, bears and bandits. They might be imported by Mongolian ex-pats, who are homesick for "their kind of dog" - or by some individual who's seen them on a website and thinks they look damn mean and that will make them some money for the rarity value and the fact that there are people who want mean dogs (how else did the Pit Bull get over here?).

Bad idea - in a country where most people's neighbours can be less than 1ft away through a party wall***, and the majority have a tiny handkerchief of a garden. If the original importers have a mansion with acres of land, then their carefully screened puppy buyers will have less; the buyers of the puppies bred from those will have less; and so on and so on... And the more that are bred, the more easily they will be bought by idiots.

There won't be any kind of guidance to breed them to be healthy, to breed them to any kind of breed standard. In fact if there WAS a breed standard it would probably value the aggressive guarding bear-munching, burglar-mutilating nature as part of the breed heritage. And there will be some owners/breeders who get a kick from that part of owning the breed; heck, if they are pitted against bears, postmen or other dogs in Mongolia for fun, THAT will be seen as part of the "breed heritage" by some and done illegally.

So where and how, can a line be drawn? 20 years ago when BSL was brought in the authorities decided there were a few breeds that probably wouldn't fit in well in this country. They may have had a point.... there are definitely some breeds which I think do not belong here. Which really puts me in a difficult position, as I am anti BSL (as the law stands now).

Gah.

------------------
***
The property I live in is terraced, with 2ft thick limestone walls, built in 1860. Modern properties don't benefit from that by any means.
The young couple next door must be trying for a third baby, I can hear their bed headboard banging against my wall, despite the thick walls of natural stone, about three times a day.... :eek6:

**** Anyone not in the UK reading this might enjoy this article which goes a long way to explain the cultural disparity between UK and US... Enjoy - I did 
http://www.businessinsider.com/us-expats-in-england-2013-10


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Excellent posts from both Ouesi and Merlins Mum.

How many threads are put here on a daily/weekly basis from owners who cannot let their dogs off the lead, cannot control them jumping up, with visitors, do not have any recall etc?

That is indicative of pet dog owners as a whole.

A very high percentage of pet dog owners have little or no control over their dogs when out.

And I am talking DOMESTIC control, not competition standard.

Many of them are unable to adequately control an overweight, elderly labrador with any degree of consistency.

So, as most dogs are destined for the "average" owner (or lower) one has to maintain a pragmatic outlook regarding the suitability of many breeds as "pets".

I find it fascinating that people who are on one hand always excusing their lack of control due to breed predisposition (high prey drive, scent demon etc etc ) are those who accuse others of "breedism" when we raise concerns about the suitability of some breeds or some "splits" of breeds for the "average pet owner" who make up the majority of dog owners.

If I had a £ for the number of times people complain about the lack of control of other dog owners (let alone themeselves) I would be a very rich person.

These people cannot even train a basic recall which means that every time they let their dog off the lead (if indeed they ever do) they are gambling with the life of their dogs and often those of others. (Not to mention their own finances and future).

As for aggression, well look at the stats. 

UK in 2011 nearly 6,500 people were admitted to hospital for more than a day as a result of a dog bite or strike

Over 1000 needed surgery

This of course does not include the number of people who are bitten and do NOT go to hospital.

Neither does it cover the number of dogs psychologically and physically traumatised by the dogs of these "pet owners".

Now if you think all of the above is perfectly reasonable and acceptable, that is your prerogative.

There are some breeds that are NOT pets and many more who need more than most people can offer to keep them and others safe (whether that be by biting, knocking others over, running off and causing RTAs etc etc etc)


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

ouesi said:


> A friend of mine breeds and owns Central Asian Shepherds, a breed similar to a Caucasian Ovcharka. CAS are not pets, and it would not offend her in the least to hear me say that. Hers do live in the house with her, they do live as a "pet" would, but she will not sell any of hers as pets. They go to homes where they will work as livestock guardians as they also do in her home.
> 
> I've spent some time around cane corsi, and dogos. Two other breeds I do not consider "pet" breeds. I am not as familiar with filas, but from what I hear from people who's opinion I respect, they're even more dog than the cane and dogos, so another breed that does not a pet dog make.
> 
> ...


A brilliant post and you have said everything I was trying to. You have certainly hit the nail on the head as far as I am concerned.


----------



## springerpete (Jun 24, 2010)

Leanne77 said:


> Cockers immediately spring to mind, as do Labs and collies.


And Golden retrievers.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

smokeybear said:


> As for aggression, well look at the stats.
> 
> UK in 2011 nearly 6,500 people were admitted to hospital for more than a day as a result of a dog bite or strike
> 
> ...


How many of these were from owners of what you would consider "non-pet breeds" like the Caucasian Ovcharka?

This is where your statistics argument falls flat.

After all if using statistics we'll ban Dachshunds, Jack Russell Terriers and Chihuahuas first.

Instead of saying Breed X isn't suitable as being a pet, we need society to accept "no dog is suitable as a pet unless..." or state "no dog is suitable as a pet as there are always idiots" and ban them.

Encouraging fear and assigning labels also causes tragedy. Anyone remember the rottie owner who was bitten by her rottie and wouldn't seek medical care and subsequently died of infection. All because she was afraid that her dog would be killed.

What about those people and dogs who feel stressed when walking their dogs as the breed has been "labelled". We all know dogs pick up on their owners stress causing them to be more defensive. Could this lead to more aggression?

Let me ask a simple question. What purpose is served by saying Breed X is not suitable as a pet?


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2013)

I would not say the following make ideal pets but they are 

Rottie
Staffie
Husky
Wolfdogs 


Why is a rottie or a staffie an accepted family pet but not a Pittball or Doggo Argentino??

I would not say a collie is a pet but they are.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Prowl said:


> I would not say the following make ideal pets but they are
> 
> Rottie
> Staffie
> ...


How can you say staffy is not an acceptable pet. Even the kennel club describe this breed as an affectionate dog especially with children.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Prowl said:


> I would not say the following make ideal pets but they are
> 
> Rottie
> Staffie
> ...


So do explain the reasoning behind this, I really can wait to hear you insight in to why these dogs don't make good pets?


----------



## sharloid (Apr 15, 2012)

Prowl said:


> I would not say the following make ideal pets but they are
> 
> Rottie
> Staffie
> ...


I'd be interested to know your reasons for not thinking rotties, staffies and huskies make good pets?

I understand 'wolf dogs' if they actually have a sizable wolf content.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Does a spider make a good pet? For some no, for others yes. Sure you can't let it run around the house, you can't stroke it like most of us can our dogs, you can't take it for a walk outside. It's still a pet. Just because it doesn't match our possible definition of "pet" doesn't mean we can say it can't be a good pet for some as it's all in the definition of "pet".

Also what is a breed, where's the line drawn? You could say "breeds true" but it's not as simple as that. If you say breed X isn't a good pet, what about a cross between breed X and Y? How many of our commonly defined "breeds" actually are used for what they were "designed" for? Purpose and traits can change, ridgebacks in the UK don't hunt lions after all. The UK Dangerous Dogs Act tried to allow for this by defining "type". Tell Lennox in Ireland that that works.. oh you can't, he's dead, killed for being "of type".

Saying breed X does not make a good pet is pointless. It serves no constructive purpose other than cause prejudice and fear.


----------



## Sparkle22 (Oct 26, 2013)

Prowl said:


> I would not say the following make ideal pets but they are
> 
> Rottie
> Staffie
> ...


Staffy?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
You mean one of the only breeds that the kennel club explicitly states as being excellent with children 
A breed known as the nanny dog for its affinity with kids?

I have a working bred collie, she is excellent with kids too.
In fact, I would go so far as to say she is better with children than any other dog I have yet to meet.
She is also far better behaved than some smaller dogs I know although not perfect.

A dog is a dog, it's sad when people judge breeds like this when given the right upbringing they would probably be loyal, loving pets


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Prowl said:


> I would not say the following make ideal pets but they are
> 
> Rottie
> Staffie
> ...


Huh???
why does a staffy not make a pet?
why does a collie not make a pet?

In fact the only one I agree with is the wolfdog (especially in this country), but it looks like I'm stuffed with your logic having a Bully x collie (working lines no less )

When will people get it isn't the breed of dog, it is the owner of said dog...lets ban all dogs, the risk of idiots getting hold of them is too high....
:frown2:


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

labradrk said:


> I agree.
> 
> Personally I don't see the point in what I call penis extension dogs. They only attract a certain type of owner.


A little stereotypical. I own DDB, maybe you can tell me why I'm a certain type of owner and need a penis extension


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

paddyjulie said:


> Call yourself a dog lover huh
> 
> Shame on me because i let me bull breeds snuggle up with my daughter


There's a big difference between dog lovers and dog owners. It's a very nice pic


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

simplysardonic said:


> I think the question in the title should really be 'Do all people make good owners?'


Best comment so far and I'm only up to page ten.


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

Goblin said:


> That's the problem with this kind of thread. It's ignoring the problem and trying to place responsibility on breeds. It's up to the owners being responsible and educating themselves on their dogs and requirements, doing research before they get the dog etc.


Well said.


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

snoopydo said:


> No I wouldn't .heaven help us imagine one of these breeds in the hands of the Chavs who think a staffy makes them "look hard"


Plenty of larger more powerful legal breeds already in the UK.


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

Trawled through 19 pages of posts only to find a list of comments, still haven't found out why I'm a certain type of owner though.


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2013)

Goblin said:


> Let me ask a simple question. What purpose is served by saying Breed X is not suitable as a pet?


What purpose? Same purpose that is served by saying Breed X is not a couch potato dog. Same purpose that is served by saying Breed X is not a good dog to get if you want to do herding trials or IPO. Same purpose that is served by telling someone looking at a pug or boston terrier as a long distance running partner that that breed is not suitable, and perhaps they should look at a viszla or other high energy breed. 
Its being realistic about the dog and their suitability for the future owners needs.
Its not a put down or an insult, its being honest and realistic.



Prowl said:


> Why is a rottie or a staffie an accepted family pet but not a Pittball or Doggo Argentino??


Oh dear... What kind of experience do you have with any of these breeds? Rotties, staffies, pitbulls (one word, one t, no ball) are all very handler oriented, very biddable dogs. Rotties do have a guarding instinct, but with training it is very manageable. Staffies and pitbulls are not really guardian breeds, their issue is prey drive, again something very easily managed with the right training and handling. 
All 3 also happen to have rather high pain thresholds and high tolerance for handling which makes them actually a very good choice in a responsible home with young children. A toddler toddling about who trips and falls on to the family rottie will generally fare better than the same toddler who accidentally steps on the family dachshund. Yes, gross generalization, but trying to explain breed traits and suitability as pets. 
Dogo Argentino is a wonderful breed, but much more of a specialist breed IME. They are much sharper than say a rottie - even a working line one. They tend to have a much lower threshold, much shorter fuse. That said, here in the US as they gain popularity, breeders are tempering their temperament and breeding more moderate dogs. (Which becomes a whole other massive debate about watering down breeds LOL!) These dogs absolutely can and do make perfectly good pets in the same way an equally powerful dog like a rottie does.


----------



## JulieNoob (Oct 22, 2008)

Meezey said:


> So flip that and say most owners are not right for Malamutes or Huskies because again with the right owner they are amazing pets  Nothing wrong with the breed something wrong with some of the people the breeders are placing them with


It doesn't need to be flipped - it stands correctly as I said it. They do not make good pets for many people.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

ouesi said:


> What purpose? Same purpose that is served by saying Breed X is not a couch potato dog. Same purpose that is served by saying Breed X is not a good dog to get if you want to do herding trials or IPO. Same purpose that is served by telling someone looking at a pug or boston terrier as a long distance running partner that that breed is not suitable, and perhaps they should look at a viszla or other high energy breed.
> It's being realistic about the dog and their suitability for the future owner's needs.
> It's not a put down or an insult, it's being honest and realistic.


I would agree certain dogs are not suitable in certain environments, with certain owners. That's not the question being asked. Can't remember where but I once saw a video of dogs bred to guard their livestock, growing up within the "herd", probably in the States. The dogs lived with the herd outside, yet the family still called the dogs their "pets". Are you saying these dogs aren't suitable for their environment and for these owners?

This thread is about pigeonholing breeds into "good" and "bad" when in reality we need to be pushing the fact *no dog is suitable as a "pet" without recognizing it's needs and requirements regardless of breed*. It's a subtle but vital difference. That's the message we need to be pushing. By saying X breed does not make a good pet you are saying Y breeds are, skipping the idea that Y breed is, only when we also recognize it's needs and requirements. It's pushing the mentality that directly leads to the argument that BSL is the solution. How can you justify saying you don't agree with BSL when you are saying certain breeds don't make good pets? That's what BSL is at it's core, legal rules that X breed is not a good "pet".


----------



## AlexArt (Apr 25, 2010)

I think it is totally down to the circumstances of the owners, the experience they have, they time they put into their pet, and wether the breed they are choosing is the right type for what they want. So many people buy a dog purely on its looks and it usually ends in disaster although some dogs are saints and will adapt to even the most basic of input and will get along their whole life with nothing major going amiss - and that can be greatly influenced by breed a lab for example with little socialising/exercise etc is going to be easier to handle than an ovcharka in the same circumstances. 
There is thankfully more info available now on the net so people can research the breeds they like so they can make an informed choice, and more people do now look into things before they buy. But you will always get the idiots who it doesn't matter what breed they buy be it a chi or a rottie, they'll end up with an antisocial, untrained biter. So to answer your question do all breeds make good pets - I think yes in the right home with the right owners.

I have an ovcharka and i live in the UK but I live on a farm in the middle of nowhere, it's just 3 women on our own and as we also have a ex-family member who is a psychopath and the police wouldn't do anything unless he shoots us, so we needed a good loyal guard dog that could live out and would have access to 12 acres to roam over, the ovcharka fitted what we wanted!! 
So we got Bear who has fitted in really well, but he is very different to any other breed of dog I've come across - i agree totally with MrsZee, they are very independent, he's very sweet with anyone we introduce him to - the down side to that is everyone who visits wants one as they think he's a big goofy furball!, he watches from a distance any delivery people, and he has finally got the whole walking on a lead business, but he's not food, toy or praise motivated, he does his own thing and only listens if he wants to! 

They would make a terrible house dog, from 12weeks old onwards mine sat outside our bedroom doors all night and has been guarding us ever since, but if anyone did come to our farm he'd smash the windows to bark at them! He also got too hot indoors even though we don't have heating and have stone floors, so indoors I don't think is an option for them at all, he happily sits out even in the worst of weathers watching the farm despite having a nice straw barn to go into!! 
They are not a breed for everyone though at all and I would imagine the number of suitable homes and owners in the UK is very small, they do need lots of input when little as I can imagine if Bear was not socialised or was aggressive to everyone it would be a nightmare as he weighs around 8 stone or more and is a very powerful animal so in the wrong hands it would be a very frightening dog! I was almost on the end of one of his roars one night as it was stormy and I had forgotten to shut the chook house so went out in the dark round the back of our barns and heard this enormous roar from in the pig sty and this blur of fur fly towards me - I had a hood up and he must not have heard me but I nearly needed a change of undies, he instantly recognised me when he got to a couple of feet and when I spoke though, he did look rather sheepish, but I'd hate to be a burglar!!! But would I get another - yes - the breed fits what I want and need from my pet.
So I think as others have said it's the owners not the breeds that are the problem.


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2013)

Goblin said:


> By saying X breed does not make a good pet you are saying Y breeds are, skipping the idea that Y breed is, only when we also recognize it's needs and requirements. *It's pushing the mentality that directly leads to the argument that BSL is the solution.* How can you justify saying you don't agree with BSL when you are saying certain breeds don't make good pets? That's what BSL is at it's core, legal rules that X breed is not a good "pet".


No I dont think youre right. BSL is born of ignorance and fear. Fear is born of lack of knowledge and understanding. As Marie Curie said, nothing is to be feared, only understood. By being open and forward, and educating the public about what breeds are and are not suited for - including pet status, we create more understanding and knowledge, and thus less fear.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

ouesi said:


> No I don't think you're right. BSL is born of ignorance and fear. Fear is born of lack of knowledge and understanding. As Marie Curie said, "nothing is to be feared, only understood." By being open and forward, and educating the public about what breeds are and are not suited for - including pet status, we create more understanding and knowledge, and thus less fear.


BSL was born by the media saying X,Y,Z breeds are dangerous and are not suitable "pets".

So we'll have to agree to disagree. You say breeds such as the Ovcharka can't be pets yet we have someone actually state they have one in the UK as a pet. They actually use the term "pet" even though circumstances mean it's not what many people would associate with the word. "pet" doesn't always mean snuggling in a small flat, even in the UK. Should people like this be stigmatized as having a dangerous dog? All you are doing by saying X isn't a suitable pet is doing that.

Once again, the message should be all dogs are dangerous in the wrong hands and in the wrong environment. Not label specific breeds. Doing so is only enhancing fear, not educating.


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

I think some breeds would be happier or at least most members of that breed as working animals rather than just pets. Someone on another forum had pyrenean mountain dogs, knew the breed really well had done their research, ended up with a small goat farm, their dogs have never been happier with most living with the flock rather than as pets.

That's not to say the breed is unsuited to being pets and plenty of flock guardians do live as happy pets. But that they would be happier same as many collies would probably be happier herding sheep or terriers as working ratters.

Wolfdogs are the exception they're not pets no matter what their breeders claim.


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2013)

Goblin said:


> BSL was born by the media saying X,Y,Z breeds are dangerous and are not suitable "pets".


Yes, BSL was born of media fear mongering, not off of accurate facts and unbiased information. 
Its just as unhelpful to spread inaccurate positive information about a breed as it is to spread inaccurate negative information. Do you really want people thinking a fila with proper ojeriza is a good choice for your average pet home? I sure dont.



Goblin said:


> So we'll have to agree to disagree. You say breeds such as the Ovcharka can't be pets yet we have someone actually state they have one in the UK as a pet. They actually use the term "pet" even though circumstances mean it's not what many people would associate with the word. "pet" doesn't always mean snuggling in a small flat, even in the UK. Should people like this be stigmatized as having a dangerous dog? All you are doing by saying X isn't a suitable pet is doing that.
> 
> Once again, the message should be all dogs are dangerous in the wrong hands and in the wrong environment. Not label specific breeds. Doing so is only enhancing fear, not educating.


You are taking a very absolutist, unbending stance, which by itself tends to alienate people to your POV, but also fails to acknowledge some real realities about certain breeds. Of course there are individuals within the breed that are exceptions to the rule, but they should not be held up as representative of what to expect should you chose to get this breed for yourself.

If you read my post without defensiveness, youd see that I did not say they can NOT be pets, I said they dont make good pets in the sense that this is not a dog you drop off at the kennels when you go on vacation and expect the staff to know how to properly manage the dog. To me that is not a pet dog, its a specialist dog.



ouesi said:


> A friend of mine breeds and owns Central Asian Shepherds, a breed similar to a Caucasian Ovcharka. CAS are not pets, and it would not offend her in the least to hear me say that. *Hers do live in the house with her, they do live as a pet would, but she will not sell any of hers as pets. * They go to homes where they will work as livestock guardians as they also do in her home.
> 
> Ive spent some time around cane corsi, and dogos. Two other breeds I do not consider pet breeds. I am not as familiar with filas, but from what I hear from people whos opinion I respect, theyre even more dog than the cane and dogos, so another breed that does not a pet dog make.
> 
> ...


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

JulieNoob said:


> It doesn't need to be flipped - it stands correctly as I said it. They do not make good pets for many people.


Yet we have owners in here who have them as pets and think they are wonderful? No plenty of owner of said breeds who work them also as a hobby, yet still consider them pets, so great pets in the right hands which can be said for most breeds.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

ouesi said:


> It's just as unhelpful to spread inaccurate positive information about a breed as it is to spread inaccurate negative information.


I agree.. you need to set a baseline though. By saying X breed is bad you are saying Y breed is safe by default which I would hope you agree, is inaccurate. You are polarizing the views. I'm all for having the correct information available so people can make informed decisions but we need to push for people to look for that information. Out of interest, where have I stated inaccurate information? I'm happy to admit:



Goblin said:


> I would agree certain dogs are not suitable in certain environments, with certain owners. That's not the question being asked.


We need to work from a common baseline and get the mentality of doing so. All dogs need to be researched. You notice I don't say all breeds need to be researched. We need to get away from breed, after all what about crosses and mongrels? Every dog's requirements and needs need to be researched by potential owners to see if they will fit the circumstances.



> If you read my post without defensiveness, you'd see that I did not say they can NOT be pets, I said they don't make good pets in the sense that this is not a dog you drop off at the kennels when you go on vacation and expect the staff to know how to properly manage the dog. To me that is not a pet dog, it's a specialist dog.


As stated:



Goblin said:


> They actually use the term "pet" even though circumstances mean it's not what many people would associate with the word. "pet" doesn't always mean snuggling in a small flat, even in the UK.


Pet means different things to different people as I've made clear several times using horses and spiders as other examples. You have your own definition of "pet" and specialist dog. Other people are different, does that mean they are incorrect?

The common theme we need to agree and push for is potential owners need to research and make sure any dog suits the environment. It's not a matter of breed, breed doesn't matter. To focus on breed is perpetuating the myth that some dogs are safe and others are dangerous.


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2013)

Goblin said:


> The common theme we need to agree and push for is potential owners need to research and make sure any dog suits the environment. It's not a matter of breed, *breed doesn't matter*. To focus on breed is perpetuating the myth that some dogs are safe and others are dangerous.


I think were mostly arguing for the same thing, except for the bolded. 
If breed doesnt matter, why do we even have breeds? Like my friend says theres a reason cowboys dont herd cattle with bloodhounds while riding Clydesdales. Breed absolutely does matter. Certain breeds are simply not suitable for certain jobs. You wouldnt get a pug as a running buddy. You wouldnt get a whippet as a livestock guardian. You wouldnt get a chihuahua as a mobility assistance dog. You wouldnt get a bloodhound to help you bring cattle in. 
Being a pet who is pretty mellow, low maintenance, and tolerant of the typical human environment is just as important a job as any other job, and some dogs just arent suited to that. That is not a judgement call, its simply being realistic.

Some breeds are more all-rounders than others. Pitbulls happen to be an incredibly versatile dog who can excel in many areas, including being a great pet. Some breeds are not nearly as versatile and will not adapt well to an unsuitable environment. In some cases you just end up with a neurotic, stressy dog who barks a lot and chases shadows, in other cases you end up a dog who makes headlines. I have no problem telling someone thinking theyre getting X breed as a pet that they will likely end up with a headline dog. Thats not breed bashing, thats breed knowledge.


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2013)

simplysardonic said:


> Thankyou for sharing this with us  I have 2 Romanian ex street mongrels who are believed to have Carpatin (another breed of LGD) in them.
> 
> Rogue definitely has traits of the breed, despite intensive socialisation she can be challenging with dogs & people she doesn't know.
> 
> I recognise the 'independent thinking' as well, though I often call it 'stubborn'  I love the bones of her, but I can see that she isn't for everyone, so many people ask what she is & where we got her, but I always tell them she's a rescue mutt so one of a kind


I´m happy Rogue found a good home. "Independent" usually means for us that our dogs are happy learning a trick, but repeating it means bribery. :biggrin:

I agree with you totally about how vital it is to understand the dog´s natural instincts and respecting that. I know e.g. a dog trainer in Finland, who managed to make her Sarplaninac an obedience champion. Yet, despite her first class abilities as a trainer, she still emphasized that in certain situations her dog would guard and she just had to adapt to that. E.g. receiving visitors had to be done in a certain way. So, no matter how good you are as a trainer, you never overcome the main instinct.


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

But breed does matter sure you can train a poodle as a protection dog but would it do as well as a specifically bred german shepherd? Or while I've seen photos of german shepherds as working gundogs would they do as well as a lab or a springer? You want a dog that's going to do well with small furries don't get a terrier or a hound, you want a dog that's going to live happily with other dogs don't get a pitbull or at least get an adult that's been assessed. You want a dog that's going to love everyone don't get a komondor. 

But there is a difference between stating that a dog may not be suitable for this kind of home because of the traits we've bred into them for hundreds of years and saying they're dangerous and will eat you alive because they're a specific breed.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

ouesi said:


> I think we're mostly arguing for the same thing, except for the bolded.
> If breed doesn't matter, why do we even have breeds? Like my friend says "there's a reason cowboys don't herd cattle with bloodhounds while riding Clydesdales." Breed absolutely does matter.


You could argue, if all you want is a "pet", depending once again on the "pet" definition you don't need breeds at all. How many breeds actually fulfill their original purpose in modern society?

Breed shouldn't matter when looking at the larger picture in society. At the basic level dogs are dogs, chihuahua to kangal. All need to be researched, their needs met and to be placed in an appropriate environment.

The unfortunate feeling now is X breed is not a suitable pet, it's only a penis extention, which means Y is safe. We're excusing bad ownership and placing the blame on dogs, most often due to breed. We don't blame the owners for lack of research/training etc. That's a major problem. As dog owners ourselves we need to adapt our mentality to get a clear message across. We can't confuse the issue with X breed is not a good pet unless it's in Y environment. A single, simple message of research before owning and match requirements and needs. This is especially the case after tragedies like that which recently occurred in the UK.

It's often said.. deed not breed. This thread is pushing for the opposite.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Goblin said:


> How many of these were from owners of what you would consider "non-pet breeds" like the Caucasian Ovcharka?
> 
> This is where your statistics argument falls flat.
> 
> ...


My argument does not fall flat at all.

A because this thread is not about a PARTICULAR breed
B because the numerically low number of that PARTICULAR breed render any events associated with them statistically irrelevant.

I have not "encouraged" fear nor have I assigned any "labels" to any breeds, non breed or individuals of that breed.

I have reported well documented statistical FACTS. 

I walk a GSD and people cross the road because this breed has been "labelled" by some as "aggressive" etc.

Why on EARTH would it STRESS someone if others actively AVOIDED my dogs and me?

I am THRILLED when people actively control themselves, their children and their dogs and steer clear of me.

It is one LESS numpty I have to worry about.


----------

