Cats or dogs?

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Unless you're specifically breeding for agression, docility, herding, or any other mentality, which are defining traits of many breeds. Not kidding, fighting dog owners will strangle, drown or even use dogs that aren't "tough" or mean enough as fighting "bait". They die horribly. And then when they DO occasionally get busted, the dogs deemed capable of being rehabilitated, often go to animal shelters for adoption- even though they've been specifically bred and raised to fight. There's a dark side that most people never see or hear about, unless you've been involved with organizations that deal with animal abuse. I've seen the worst of what goes on, and I'm sorry, but no amount of blame on owners alone can account for that.

[Electric]

Originally Posted by Netkeeper

Business may be booming, and I won't dispute you there since I don't really know anything about the numbers, but the fact still stands that you're not going to find a pit bull dog [or any other breed for that matter] bred for that purpose unless you go looking.

It really doesn't matter if fighting is "in their genes", fighting other dogs is not an instinctive behaviour like my beagle's prey drive, where she instictively goes after a rabbit despite never being trained to. The fighting dogs are bred for their musculature, not their ability to fight -- you have to TRAIN the dog to fight with it. This is why the owners are the problem, not the dogs themselves. Breeders can only affect the appearance, health, and physical attributes of the dog they are breeding, not hard-wired instinct.

This

Most pets, cats included, have some form of genetic aggression. They WERE bred for fighting, based on their physical features, good sense of determination, etc. but that doesnt make it genetic..

Here:

So many Pit Bulls being aggressive is a myth. According to the 2008 testing of 218 dog breeds by the American Temperament Testing Society, the passing rate for American Pit Bull Terrier 85%, American Staffordshire Terrier 83.9%, Staffordshire Bull Terriers 88.0%. Last years testing also showed that out of the 218 breeds tested 119 breeds scored lower than 83.9% (the Bully low) and only 69 breeds scored better than the Bully’s 88.0%. Mixed breeds came in at 85.4%. Breeds that scored lower than 83.9% include, Beagle, Border Collie, Dalmatian, Greyhound, Caviler King Charles Spaniel, and Toy Poodles.

[pennydreadful]

Originally Posted by MsMarvelDuckie

Unless you're specifically breeding for agression, docility, herding, or any other mentality, which are defining traits of many breeds. Not kidding, fighting dog owners will strangle, drown or even use dogs that aren't "tough" or mean enough as fighting "bait". They die horribly. And then when they DO occasionally get busted, the dogs deemed capable of being rehabilitated, often go to animal shelters for adoption- even though they've been specifically bred and raised to fight. There's a dark side that most people never see or hear about, unless you've been involved with organizations that deal with animal abuse. I've seen the worst of what goes on, and I'm sorry, but no amount of blame on owners alone can account for that.

There's a really ugly side to the greyhound-racing industry as well.

Honestly, at this stage I'm opposed to breeding in general. It's insane to me that people will plop down exorbitant amounts of money for a kitten or a puppy just because it's purebred when thousands upon thousands of animals are homeless and are put down. I think it's immoral to buy rather than adopt when there are so many homeless animals out there, and so many unwanted litters coming into the world every year due to idiots being too cheap or stupid to spay and neuter their pets.

I mean we all have breeds that we think are particularly cute but at the end of the day, a shelter cat or shelter dog isn't going to love you any less than a cat or dog with pedigree papers.

[Zak The Neutrino]

Originally Posted by pennydreadful

There's a really ugly side to the greyhound-racing industry as well.

Honestly, at this stage I'm opposed to breeding in general. It's insane to me that people will plop down exorbitant amounts of money for a kitten or a puppy just because it's purebred when thousands upon thousands of animals are homeless and are put down. I think it's immoral to buy rather than adopt when there are so many homeless animals out there, and so many unwanted litters coming into the world every year due to idiots being too cheap or stupid to spay and neuter their pets.

I mean we all have breeds that we think are particularly cute but at the end of the day, a shelter cat or shelter dog isn't going to love you any less than a cat or dog with pedigree papers.

We had a greyhound when I was a kid. He was a former racer that had been retired. He was a really good dog. That I think is the sad part of that industry is they only race them for the first few years of their life and then they are done. Now you have to find homes for them all which doesn't always happen.

The problem is some people don't want to adopt because they have had bad experiences. You don't know what you are getting or what that animal has been through. I've known several people who have adopted a dog and then come to find out it has a mean streak where it is dangerous because it was beaten in it's life. I've had family members that have had this issue so for me I will only adopt young animals that haven't had time to be through much. Our dog was about 10 months old when we adopted her. Her only issue is she scrounges for food. That I can live with.

[BubblyShell22]

I know Yorkshire terriers are known ratters, and there were times where my mom was playing with Toby and he'd stalk her before he'd start playing. He even stalked a bird once. He was still the most awesome dog in the world though.

As for cats, I'd rather have an outside cat, which is what we've had here at home since we live in the country. If I were to get a dog, I'd definitely get a Yorkie since they don't shed.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Originally Posted by Electric

This

Most pets, cats included, have some form of genetic aggression. They WERE bred for fighting, based on their physical features, good sense of determination, etc. but that doesnt make it genetic..

Here:

So many Pit Bulls being aggressive is a myth. According to the 2008 testing of 218 dog breeds by the American Temperament Testing Society, the passing rate for American Pit Bull Terrier 85%, American Staffordshire Terrier 83.9%, Staffordshire Bull Terriers 88.0%. Last years testing also showed that out of the 218 breeds tested 119 breeds scored lower than 83.9% (the Bully low) and only 69 breeds scored better than the Bully’s 88.0%. Mixed breeds came in at 85.4%. Breeds that scored lower than 83.9% include, Beagle, Border Collie, Dalmatian, Greyhound, Caviler King Charles Spaniel, and Toy Poodles.

There have ben actual studies on how animals can be bred for docility specifically. In fact there is a research project in Russia involving foxes, where the "cuter" animals also are the most affectionate and sociable- showing that some physical and psychological traits go hand in hand. It's not fully understood yet, but breeding for things like size, "cuteness" (ie, bigger eyes, fluffy coats, etc) produces animals that bond more easily to humans. conversely, breeding for a larger and stronger animal might also lead to more aggressive animals.

Originally Posted by pennydreadful

There's a really ugly side to the greyhound-racing industry as well.

Honestly, at this stage I'm opposed to breeding in general. It's insane to me that people will plop down exorbitant amounts of money for a kitten or a puppy just because it's purebred when thousands upon thousands of animals are homeless and are put down. I think it's immoral to buy rather than adopt when there are so many homeless animals out there, and so many unwanted litters coming into the world every year due to idiots being too cheap or stupid to spay and neuter their pets.

I mean we all have breeds that we think are particularly cute but at the end of the day, a shelter cat or shelter dog isn't going to love you any less than a cat or dog with pedigree papers.

Agreed. Almost all of my pets have been rescues or adoptees from homes that could no longer keep them. Only one was from a breeder(the Sheltie) and he was very timid at first. Our Dalmatian was purebred, but had come from a previous owner who trained him quite well. He was one of the best dogs we ever had. I used to rid him around like a horse when I was little, LOL! (And he was huge....)

[PangolinFeets]

Originally Posted by MsMarvelDuckie

There have ben actual studies on how animals can be bred for docility specifically. In fact there is a research project in Russia involving foxes, where the "cuter" animals also are the most affectionate and sociable- showing that some physical and psychological traits go hand in hand. It's not fully understood yet, but breeding for things like size, "cuteness" (ie, bigger eyes, fluffy coats, etc) produces animals that bond more easily to humans. conversely, breeding for a larger and stronger animal might also lead to more aggressive animals.

Its because when you breed for 'cute' traits (large eyes, smallness, docile personality, etc.) You are, in fact, breeding for infantility. That's how we got dogs from wolves in the first place. We want cute, subserviant, non-aggressive animals. The process of domestication is the process of choosing traits that we assign to babies, but in a full-grown animal.
And you can buy those foxes, if you can shell out the 4k for one.

Agreed. Almost all of my pets have been rescues or adoptees from homes that could no longer keep them. Only one was from a breeder(the Sheltie) and he was very timid at first. Our Dalmatian was purebred, but had come from a previous owner who trained him quite well. He was one of the best dogs we ever had. I used to rid him around like a horse when I was little, LOL! (And he was huge....)

I have mixed feelings on this. I used to be 110% against purchasing pets and only advocated for adopting cats and dogs. But then I got a few bad eggs, and so did some of my friends. These were pets that probably should not have been available for adoption (or were grabbed off the street). Then when we rescued an oriental short hair cat, we fell in love with the thing. So as a happy compromise, I've adopted a Bali/oriental mix and a pure bred oriental, both adults, from breeders who couldn't sell them for specific reasons.
I am 100% behind spaying/neutering your pet though. I had neighbors that have a colony of stray cats living at their house and they just breed like crazy. Then we would find dead ones under our deck because they would starve over winter. I'm also against getting rid of an animal after you take responsibility for it. So I did a lot of research when finding, and before taking in, any of my pets.

[Electric]

Originally Posted by MsMarvelDuckie

There have ben actual studies on how animals can be bred for docility specifically. In fact there is a research project in Russia involving foxes, where the "cuter" animals also are the most affectionate and sociable- showing that some physical and psychological traits go hand in hand. It's not fully understood yet, but breeding for things like size, "cuteness" (ie, bigger eyes, fluffy coats, etc) produces animals that bond more easily to humans. conversely, breeding for a larger and stronger animal might also lead to more aggressive animals.

If you're saying that cuter animals are more docile, you're going to need some heavy proof for that because "might" won't cut it. Rats are considered ugly by most, yet are easily the most social and tame pet rodent you can own, as opposed to the hamster, which more than likely will bite a lot, despite its fluff and eyes.

That study I posted is an actual study on exactly what we are discussing, by a reputable company focused on this research, and it proves there is nothin statistically significant to show pits of any type are more aggressive and less sociable than ther breeds, in fact, they are one of the better ones.

Cute does NOT equal friendly. I'm sorry but that is absolute garbage. Sure physical may relate in part to psychological. A dog with long legs may like to run. Etc. but there is absolutely nothing in a pits dna that says "you have strong muscles and good determination, you are going to be aggressive" it's a proven study, not some opinion or belief. They are stereotypes reinforced by media focus on the instances where the dog is purchased to be trained to fight; then is poorly cared for so an incident occurs. The Pits are not naturally aggressive dogs, they are TAUGHT by terrible people.

Another fun fact: before the 1980s, pits were considered good nanny dogs, meaning good with children. They became one of the most popular breeds then, and even better, showed no statistical evidence of aggression towards people in any record.

[PangolinFeets]

Originally Posted by Electric

If you're saying that cuter animals are more docile, you're going to need some heavy proof for that because "might" won't cut it. Rats are considered ugly by most, yet are easily the most social and tame pet rodent you can own, as opposed to the hamster, which more than likely will bite a lot, despite its fluff and eyes.

That study I posted is an actual study on exactly what we are discussing, by a reputable company focused on this research, and it proves there is nothin statistically significant to show pits of any type are more aggressive and less sociable than ther breeds, in fact, they are one of the better ones.

Cute does NOT equal friendly. I'm sorry but that is absolute garbage. Sure physical may relate in part to psychological. A dog with long legs may like to run. Etc. but there is absolutely nothing in a pits dna that says "you have strong muscles and good determination, you are going to be aggressive" it's a proven study, not some opinion or belief. They are stereotypes reinforced by media focus on the instances where the dog is purchased to be trained to fight; then is poorly cared for so an incident occurs. The Pits are not naturally aggressive dogs, they are TAUGHT by terrible people.

Another fun fact: before the 1980s, pits were considered good nanny dogs, meaning good with children. They became one of the most popular breeds then, and even better, showed no statistical evidence of aggression towards people in any record.

Duckie is right, in a sense. I'm not a geneticist, but I did learn a lot in college as part of my major. Cuteness doesn't equal less aggressive, but traits associated with infantility, in that species, typically are. It's called Neoteny.
She's referring to the insanely-famous study by Belyaev. I don't have the link for it off my proquest site (you'd need a log-in to read it), but I have a study that discusses it here. It's really interesting. Basically, by selecting only 'tameness' as a trait to be passed on, they created bizarre dog-like foxes in all sorts of weird colors due to pleiotropy (because those traits just happened to be linked with 'tameness' (E.I. neoteny, domestication, baby stuff).) This is all what domestication is so the proof is in the cows, dogs, cats, ferrets, etc., that we see everyday.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2763232/


Here's another good read on genetic traits link with neoteny are also linked to defects in the neural crest. Pretty cool stuff.

http://www.genetics.org/content/197/3/795.full

[MsMarvelDuckie]

That was indeed the very study I was discussing. National Geographic even did an article on it. They have been selectively breeding for more tame animals, in part to determine how domestication began in the first place. They used foxes because they are similar in many ways to dogs. What they have found is that breeding for a more tame animal seems to lead to animals that are also "cuter". This indicates a link in the genes for the two traits, so breeding for cuteness in canines would most likely yield more docile pets. So the reverse probably hold true as well. Cuteness is a subjective term, but the infantile appearance triggers a Nurturing reaction in humans.

As for purebred vs mixed, many purebred animals do tend toward a variety of health issues, depending on the breed, many of which are directly related to the qualities being bred for.

[Lethal Lullaby]

I like dogs with those 'wrinkles' like the Shar Pei. >//u//< omg i could sit for hours pulling/pushing those wrinkles and that dog would get so much hugs from me.



*dies*

[Mayhem]

Originally Posted by Lethal Lullaby

I like dogs with those 'wrinkles' like the Shar Pei. >//u//< omg i could sit for hours pulling/pushing those wrinkles and that dog would get so much hugs from me.

The family of one of the girls in my year at junior school bred Shar Pei. They were like one of the only, or THE only breeders of them in the UK at the time, and they were a rare breed apparently in the 80s. The parents were even on TV a couple of times because of it. Lovely dogs, having been to their house to see them, but the "wrinkled" skin can cause health issues so I believe.

[Lethal Lullaby]

Originally Posted by Mayhem

The family of one of the girls in my year at junior school bred Shar Pei. They were like one of the only, or THE only breeders of them in the UK at the time, and they were a rare breed apparently in the 80s. The parents were even on TV a couple of times because of it. Lovely dogs, having been to their house to see them, but the "wrinkled" skin can cause health issues so I believe.

Ah yeah probably. Also gotta clean between the folds.Maybe a mixed breed of Shar Pei and some other dog. Like the Akita or Chiba Inu? Don't a lot of pure bred dogs have some sort of health issue(s) anyways?

[pennydreadful]

Yeah, if memory serves there was a doco made a ways back that did a bit of an expose on the American Kennel Club and how many health problems some of their award-winning showdogs have. I'm paraphrasing at best, but I do remember it was an interesting watch.

[PangolinFeets]

Unfortunately, the process of keeping a pure bred line also is, to a lesser extent, inbreeding. So any genetic concerns associated with a breed will usually perpetuate through most lines. A good breeder knows of the health concerns associated with their breed and is careful about selecting partners with distant, healthy lines. For example, with my aunt and her Sphynx breeding program, Sphynx are at risk for a heart defect. You can tell if its in a line through genetic testing. So she has each of her cats tested in order to guarantee best health.

[BubblyShell22]

I don't care what anyone says about Pit Bulls. I don't trust them and will always be wary around them. Same goes for Dobermans and Rottweilers. Sure, some may be sweet dogs, but I've heard too many stories about attacks and how the owners always say that the dog was always gentle at first and then turned aggressive.

[Electric]

And i will always be wary of cats, of any breed. Had too many bad experiences with them. They always seem so lovable and sweet, but they jump at any second, deciding to claw or bite at you.

[Lethal Lullaby]

I don't think I've ever had/experienced any problems with dogs or cats.
I mean I do have a small scar near my right eye, that is hardly noticeable, from when a cat had scratched me.

What I wish is that we could've kept many of the dogs we used to have throughout my life. Had an Akita names Akira when i was really young, but since my stepmom's dog and him didn't get along Dad got rid of him. Even though my mom said she'd take him... Gma bought my brother and I an American Eskimo Dog that we also named Akira. Then my aunt and cousins had moved in, which included the garage being changed into a big room, and Akira was taken to the humane society. THEN since he didn't want to go near anyone else he had to be put down.. Had an Akita/Pitbull mix, who was a big sweetheart, but unfortunately scared of almost everyone and everything, then he had died of a heart attack. Used to have a pitbull puppy named Zues, until he got really ill and passed away, which was really sad.

[PangolinFeets]

I've had more experiences with aggressive cats than dogs (honestly, I don't think aggressive dogs get much of a chance. In most cases, its a death sentence), but I've also had more positive experiences with cats than dogs. And I've had a lot of exposure to both, but I think most people don't get the opportunities to interact with specialized cats breeds as opposed to dog breeds and, generally, dogs are easier to habituate to a more pleasing demeanor than cats. I have no empirical evidence behind that statement, but that's my experience.

[Slade]

Woof mother f*cker!!!