how does your mutt measure up?

[MOhillbilly]

http://www.atts.org/statistics.html


i thought this was kinda cool.
Found it odd that australian shepherds scored so low when they are so smart.

[jspchief]

79.4%

[Bootlegged]

91%

[pr_capone]

78.1% - Heeler

86.4% - Long Haired Dachshund

[BIG_DADDY]

83.5%

[TrickyNicky]

72.5 - Chihuameranian (Chihuahua + Pomeranian)

Well, my dog is bat$hit neurotic and unstable.

[penguinz]

AMERICAN PIT BULL TERRIER 515 430 85 83.5%
YORKSHIRE TERRIER 37 30 7 81.1%


This can;t be true. Pit Bulls are da debil!

[Stinger]

81.5% Jack Russell Terrier

[ILChief]

WEST HIGHLAND WHITE TERRIER 52 45 7 86.5%

[Brock]

Lab.


Yeah.

Best ****ing dog in the world.

[Warrior5]

Boxer 84.7%

[StcChief]

Lab Pointer ~90
LABRADOR RETRIEVER 676 618 58 91.4%
POINTER 17 15 2 88.2%

[Rooster]

84.7% Boxer

My dog is smarter than me. :banghead:

[JimNasium]

AMERICAN PIT BULL TERRIER 515 430 85 83.5%
YORKSHIRE TERRIER 37 30 7 81.1%


This can;t be true. Pit Bulls are da debil! Pretty big sample size compared to most of the other dogs tested. It still tells me that roughly 1 out of every 5 of this breed might show some aggression. Since I see 5 on my daily walks in downtown Springfield I'm sure I'll get bitten one of these days.

[MOhillbilly]

Pretty big sample size compared to most of the other dogs tested. It still tells me that roughly 1 out of every 5 of this breed might show some aggression. Since I see 5 on my daily walks in downtown Springfield I'm sure I'll get bitten one of these days..


doesnt have to be agression to flunk the test.

[MOhillbilly]

for those of you w/ mixed breeds there is a "mixed breed" testing results.

[Duck Dog]

Gotta love those labs.

[penguinz]

Pretty big sample size compared to most of the other dogs tested. It still tells me that roughly 1 out of every 5 of this breed might show some aggression. Since I see 5 on my daily walks in downtown Springfield I'm sure I'll get bitten one of these days.The point is if the breed was as dangerous as the media would like you to believe it would have shown a lot more in these stats.

[JimNasium]

.


doesnt have to be agression to flunk the test.
It's one of the three dimensions they are measuring. For that matter this is an organization trying to eliminate BSL so I'm assuming they have designed their testing protocols to not focus soley on agression for a reason.

[BIG_DADDY]

Pretty big sample size compared to most of the other dogs tested. It still tells me that roughly 1 out of every 5 of this breed might show some aggression. Since I see 5 on my daily walks in downtown Springfield I'm sure I'll get bitten one of these days.

Maybe you should go through life with body armour and saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaafty helmut on. Don't forget tthe knee pads and make sure you put those little safety suction cups in your bathtub too.

[Hog's Gone Fishin]

Rottweiller 82.5

I didn't see pigs listed. they're a lot smarter than any dog.

[Baby Lee]

SMOOTH FOX TERRIER 52 39 13 75.0%

[JimNasium]

The point is if the breed was as dangerous as the media would like you to believe it would have shown a lot more in these stats.
Agressive behavior does not equal dangerous.

[BIG_DADDY]

It's one of the three dimensions they are measuring. For that matter this is an organization trying to eliminate BSL so I'm assuming they have designed their testing protocols to not focus soley on agression for a reason.

How delusional can you possibly be? Maybe you should remember to take your meds.

[JimNasium]

Maybe you should go through life with body armour and saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaafty helmut on. Don't forget tthe knee pads and make sure you put those little safety suction cups in your bathtub too.
We've been through this conversation. I think it's safe to say that neither of us will change our minds. Now get off of your cell phone before you kill someone. :p

[JimNasium]

How delusional can you possibly be? Maybe you should remember to take your meds.
Please see my above post. :)

[MOhillbilly]

Please see my above post. :)


jim did you read the testing criteria?

[penguinz]

My wife's cousin has a Pit Bull. Is the most gentle dog you would ever see. A few guys have told her that it is a pussy and needs to be taught to be aggressive.

This just helps show that it is the owner that causes a dangerous dog not the breed.

[BIG_DADDY]

We've been through this conversation. I think it's safe to say that neither of us will change our minds. Now get off of your cell phone before you kill someone. :p

This organization was created for one reason, to create a canine good citizenship award so that we all can live in an enviroment with better dogs that are safer for humans. Your paranoid dude, I hear ritlan can do that to you.

[JimNasium]

jim did you read the testing criteria?
Yes, I am curious as to whether they would hold up to scientific scrutiny is all. If the society's goal is to fight BSL it immediately raises a red flag for me. I could be (and very likely am) wrong on this issue though.

If I'm designing a screening tool to measure aggression I'm sure going to build in other dimensions that will make the breeds I'm attempting to protect look good.

[JimNasium]

This organization was created for one reason, to create a canine good citizenship award so that we all can live in an enviroment with better dogs that are safer for humans. Your paranoid dude, I hear ritlan can do that to you.
Jesus, I guess if we don't all agree with you we must be suffering from mental instability. Please, for the love of Lassie, calm down.

[Chiefnj]

Brilliant business idea. Completely dumb and subjective test. Dogs can behave in the exact same manner but yet one fail and one pass.

[jspchief]

I'd like to see breakdown of what subtests the failures came under.

IMO, there are clear differences between some of those tests. One dog could be afraid of walking on a wire path, another could jump at the sound of a gunshot, while another dog could lunge unprovoked at a stranger, and in the end all 3 show up as failures in the stat lines. I would consider those three things pretty different personality traits.

[Always a Chief fan]

German Shepherd 83.1, Beagle 79.1, Puggle (Beagle/Pug cross),not listed,Pug 90.0.

[Calcountry]

They pissed on my bitch and didn't include her in the survey: Although this is not a picture of my bitch, it looks a lot like her.

[ChiTown]

Please, for the love of Lassie, calm down.

ROFL ROFL

[MOhillbilly]

I'd like to see breakdown of what subtests the failures came under.

IMO, there are clear differences between some of those tests. One dog could be afraid of walking on a wire path, another could jump at the sound of a gunshot, while another dog could lunge unprovoked at a stranger, and in the end all 3 show up as failures in the stat lines. I would consider those three things pretty different personality traits.
i would think that to be anywhere near subjective on all breeds the failing canines would have to be in an extreme category.

Id doubt if mild stimulation of the fear aggressive traits in a canine is enough to consider an individual a failure.

The panic w/ out recovery is very telling.

[Ultra Peanut]

Maybe you should go through life with body armour and saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaafty helmut on. Don't forget tthe knee pads and make sure you put those little safety suction cups in your bathtub too.ROFL

[HemiEd]

That was a lot of dog walking.

[Chiefnj]

"A weirdly-dressed stranger crosses the path 38 feet in front of the team. "

What is a wierdly-dressed stranger? Someone wearing a San Diego Chicken costume? How do we know the dog thinks he's weirdly dressed? Maybe Fido thinks the guy is fashionable? And who the hell picked 38 feet? Why not 40 feet? What's the big deal about 38 feet?



"The weird stranger advances to within 18 feet of the stationary handler in an aggressive manner.
The purpose of this subtest is to evaluate the dog's protective instincts.

The stranger is never closer than 10 feet from the dog. The handler's 2 foot arm and the 6' lead is added in for a total of 18 feet. Aggression here is checked against the breed standard and the dog's training. A schutzhund trained dog lunging at the stranger is allowed, but if an untrained Siberian husky does the same, it may fail."

I think it is unfair that the same canine reaction can result in a different final test result. Plus, I don't know about you, but if some weirdly dressed, chicken soup wielding aggressive person is within 10 feet of my dog and 18 feet of me, I sure as hell want my dog to be gnarling and lunging at the psycho's throat.

[MOhillbilly]

It's one of the three dimensions they are measuring. For that matter this is an organization trying to eliminate BSL so I'm assuming they have designed their testing protocols to not focus soley on agression for a reason.

wasnt alot of BSL going around in 77'.

read the 'about'.

[MOhillbilly]

I think it is unfair that the same canine reaction can result in a different final test result. Plus, I don't know about you, but if some weirdly dressed, chicken soup wielding aggressive person is within 10 feet of my dog and 18 feet of me, I sure as hell want my dog to be gnarling and lunging at the psycho's throat.


what type and what did the breed test?

your dog that is

[jspchief]

i would think that to be anywhere near subjective on all breed the failing canines would have to be in an extreme category.

Id doubt if mild stimulation of the fear aggressive traits in a canine is enough to consider an individual a failure.

The panic w/ out recovery is very telling.

Even so, each subset of tests is likely to trigger a different failure response. A gunshot is unlikely to provoke aggression, while more likely to provoke panic. The noisy bucket is more likely provoke strong avoidance. The threatening stranger more likely to provoke aggression.

But in the end, the stat line doesn't differentiate. For example (and this is just an example for the sake of the BSL discussion) the Skye Terrier fails 73% of the time, but all those failures could come from being gunshy. Meanwhile, the American Pit Bull only fails 17% of the time, but what if all of those failures come in the form of unprovoked aggression?

In other words, there's a difference between a dog that's scared of a noisy bucket, and a dog that lunges at strangers. This test doesn't show us how that breaks down.

I think it's interesting, but the data is incomplete, and as someone else mentioned, there's a fair amount of subjectivity. Beyond that, I question how they can keep the stimulus constant. And then there's the matter of the demographic they are testing.

[MOhillbilly]

since there is a set dog language that we as humans can use as LAW id say they use the diffrent tests to provoke canines.


having never administered the test but knowing the types and translations of canine body language any of the bottom 4 starting on the right are unacceptable for any 'joe blow' pet type dogs in a akward or strange enviroment w/ an odd handler and taking into consideration that the canine has no real 'conditioning'(esp the bottom 3)

http://www.lifestyleblock.co.nz/images/dogbook/dogbehaviour.jpg


but youre correct the test is not w/out faults.

I didnt even look at the breeds tested w/ less than 100 tests.