Aussies

edited because same message got sent twice

[quote name='gooeydog']Is it acceptable for someone to own a dog aggressive animal, provided they can do so responsibly (ie: dog on leash when in public, enough obedience to get by, etc)? [/quote] I think dog-dog aggression is a complex problem and many times it's a perfectly normal part of canine repetoire. How would you exactly define it? Sometimes it's territorial and, off the dog's territory it poses no problem. Sometimes it's over resource guarding. Sometimes it's misdirected prey drive. Sometimes it's a lot of noise and posturing (looks pretty scary to the public) but little physical contact. Sometimes (and this is my pet peeve) it's the result of someone else's rude dog ignoring the more subtle signals of communication, and getting in the other dog's face. I think it's perfectly acceptable for someone to own a dog aggreessive animal if they take whatever measure's necessary to keep the dog under control. [quote]If you were doing rescue, and you ended up fostering a dog aggressive dog (no other issues), would you place the dog (responsibly), send him to a different rescue, or have him PTS?[/quote] Unfortunately - when it comes to rescue, I have to be a bit stricter. The choices I make depend on a variety of things - the dog's age, his social history, how many dogs I already have in the program, what foster homes are open that might be able to handle that dog and work with it. It also depends on why the dog is dog aggressive. It's very hard - I've adopted out several dog aggressive dogs to responsible owners. At least one of those owners was not so responsible after all and the dog ended up losing his life. I put to sleep a severaly dog aggressive GSD who was also very fearful and unpredictable, and one aussie who had killed another dog, was older and had spent his life tied out (all of which combined to give a poor prognosis for change). [quote]Would you own a dog aggressive dog (assuming your living situation permitted it)?[/quote] Not by choice. [quote]If one of your dogs became dog aggressive, to what lengths would you go to "correct" it, or rid them of the behavior?[/quote] Depends on how severe. If it was bad enough that the other dogs in the household were in real danger - I'd probably euthanize it. If it only affected dogs outside the family I'd try to work through it with training, desensitizing, and management. [quote][b]Edit:[/b] Forgot this one: How much dog aggression will you allow/tolerate in your dog (ie: one who "wants" to fight if challenged, one who "wants" to fight if another dog gets in "their" space, one who "wants" to fight as soon as they see another dog, etc; also/or: one who will calm down when told to, one who is so "fight crazy" they'll do anything to get to another dog, etc[/quote] I don't consider a dog who wants to fight if challenged or if another dog gets in their space to necessarily be dog aggressive. I think that is well within the range of normal dog. I think it becomes "abnormal" when the dog doesn't quit when the other dog submits. I would not tolerate the last two categories though - I could not personally live with a dog that wants to fight as soon as it see's another dog or will do anything to get at another dog. The last would be pretty dangerous and hard to contain. Cool thread!

[quote name='Taurus and Jada']I have a friend who has the exact same problem with his APBT. I can't remember what they used on her, but it was some kind of cream. I will find out though, and pass the info along... :)[/quote] I would be curious what they use - I am using a spray (which she hates) - I spray it on a cotton ball and wipe the area clean. I'm hoping it won't be a chronic problem, but I'm suspecting it is :-(

[quote name='Kat']switch to a ceramic or stainless steel bowl as plastic can harbour bacteria and other sorts of nasties. Fuciderm or dermisol cream are great for clearing this sort of infection up. Also wipe your dogs mouth with a baby wipe after Abby eats.[/quote] I do use metal bowls but I hadn't thought of wiping her mouth after she eats - I will try that! Thanks!

[quote name='sashagirl']What food do you feed? My dog used to get a bad rash all around her mouth as well.. I was feeding Iams at the time... (Before I knew better) Changed her food, haven't had a problem since. If she has always been on the same food I am willing to bet that's what it is... Also, make sure you are using stainless steal food and water bowls, and not plastic![/quote] I've been feeding her Eagle and Prism, both of which are pretty decent foods (I think) - I hadn't thought of changing the food, maybe I ought to try that. We do use stainless steel for food and water. Thanks!!

Hi all, I am wondering if anyone else has encountered this with their dogs. Abby is my 6 yr old probable BC/Sheltie mix. Over the past year, she keeps getting this reaccuring infection on her lips. It occurs on both sides of her mouth, on the lower lip, where the canines come down. The skin gets red and crusty, and it starts to spread and ooze. I've treated it with Cephalexin (sp?) and a spray that is both anti-fungal and antibiotic. It goes away, I stop treating it, and it slowly comes back. I can treat it with just the spray now - and it will go way but it always seems to come back. Has anyone out there had a similar problem? Thanks!

[quote name='courtnek'] the tests themselves are ok. In a pinch, a plastic hand is better than being bitten to test for food aggression. In most cases, one or two tries will tell you if the dog is going to react badly. even then, alot of those dogs can be "weaned" from food aggression over time, once they no longer fear they will starve. and once they accept their new owner as alpha. but as with any fear training, it takes time. SHE would have put Laurel down. MY foxhound!! because she barks/bays/growls at men. this is fear, not aggression, and she runs for it most of the time. scrabbles out of the way in fact, when she's scared. I have her toned down to better levels, but its taken a year. SUE wouldnt have given her that long. she would be dead now if in Sue's hands.[/quote] But fear aggression can be just as dangerous as other forms of aggression - and, just as hard to work through. A fearfull dog is more likely to bite I think, then a confident dog - and it's hard to read them sometimes and know what will push it to the point of resorting to a bite. It does take a long time to work through and with some dogs that are severaly unsocialized - it can never be worked through but must be managed. I know probably 3 of my 6 dogs would not pass Sue's temperment test - but, they are my private dogs and they have a home for life. IF they were in a shelter, overcroweded, trying to make a determination on what to keep and what not to keep - then I couldn't fault them for euthanizing. One of them for sure should not be adopted to a non-dog saavy person. You sound like a very dog-saavy person, and it's taken you a year to work your dog through her issues, and even then - she still sounds iffy. None of our shelters have that amount of time to give an animal much less the necessary expertise (shelter workers do not get paid well). I know with Aussie rescue, we probably approve 2/3 of the apps we recieve and out of those 2/3 most of them really want a Golden type dog in a blue merle suit. Most of them are pet homes, not performance homes and are looking for a family companion, not a dog with issues. People who can handle a dog with issues usually already have a dog with issues. I would imagine that adopters going to shelters would get even less screening and are even less prepared to deal with serious issues. I was at a herding lesson last weekend, and talking to a woman their who worked for a county shelter. She said that under the old director, who used Sue's temperment test, they had zero returns on adoptions. Now they have a new director who won't temperment test, and they've had a large increase in returns. It's just my opinion... :-(

[quote name='courtnek']The big problem for the shelters IS lack of money. Most of them rely on private donations from the public. and they use the money from the adoption fees to help keep the shelters running. That is why I donate old clothes, sheets, blankets, foam bedding, pillows, etc to them. Old sweaters make good bedding, and old t-shirts make great shop rags. They exist on these things. Most honestly do the best they can. There are NO government funded shelters in my area, and few, if any, that I know about in the US. Maybe some of the Humane Societies get some funding, but I'm not sure about that at all. They are in a tough spot, doing a tough job.[/quote] I really really agree with this. But, in my state - most shelters are funded by the County Commissions. Do you want to take a guess at how important animal control and adoption is to them in the budget process? Not very. People can donate money but - more often then not cash donations must be funneled through the county. Seldom, if ever, does it end up at the shelter :-(

[quote name='"Lokipups"'][quote]Lokipups wrote: Aussies, I too work in rescue (Siberian Huskies) and have been involved with shelters for a long time. What I take exception to is not the fact that temperament testing is done (because we must determine if there are any behavior issues before adopting out any dog), but using it as a means to an end with shelters that call themselves "no-kill". Did you know that any shelter can call themselves "no-kill" and still PTS dogs? If any dog fails the Assess-a-Pet, they are automatically discounted in the yearly euthanasia totals, as if they never existed. And if they're a "no-kill" shelter they can qualify for grants and funding? That is where I find it to be a farce, to use Assess-a-Pet to qualify as a "no-kill" shelter, and still kill thousands of animals. I have far more respect for the shelters who euthanize because of overcrowding and are honest about it, particularly because their choices are made so difficult. Temperament testing has it's place, but abusing it to fail dogs and to be eligible for funding is abhorent.[/quote] I agree with you about the no-kill shelters falsly claiming to be no-kill - that would definately be mis-using a temperment tests. We have few no kill shelters and those that are, are that way because they are very selective about what they take in; or they are hoarders; or, they q uietly dump the "problem" animals in the county pounds. The other thing that bothers me though, is why get upset at using the fake hand to test for resource guarding? We've done that with some dogs (I'd rather not get bit if I have any doubts). I think it's important to know how far a dog can be pushed (and how much warning, if any) he will give of his intentions. I'm always extremely uncomfortable placing adult dogs with unknown backgrounds in homes with small children because accidents can happen, people get careless - it doesn't mattter what, but in our litigous society, the dog will lose it's life. I think the resource guarding test can reveal a lot about the dog and help us make a responsible placement (if indeed we choose to place it). I would rather know prior to adoption how far a particular dog can be pushed before engaging so I can make sure that dog will be placed in a home that can deal with that. But, to be honest - if a dog showed extreme resource guarding, or no bite inhibition, I do not think I would adopt it out.

[quote name='Lokipups'] Bottom line, ASSess-A-Pet is just a program for overcrowded shelters to take the easy way out and assuage their guilt for PTS so many good animals. [/quote] I kind of take offense at this - what do you suggest these shelters do? If they don't temperment test - how should they choose? What's to be done about the overcrowding? I'm involved with rescue with the breed of my choice in an area where there are many overcrowded, impoverished rural shelters and where the education, and quality of pet-ownership, and responsibility is so low as to be non-exhistant. People who critisize selection by temperment testing seem to stop short of being able to suggest reasonable alternatives. There is no magical supply of foster homes ready and waiting to spring forward and take all these dogs, much less foster homes with the expertise to work with problem dogs. This isn't my imagination, it's the sad reality of rescue. Sue Sternburg may not be perfect but, I have yet to see any better alternatives. :(