A few club members were discussing breeding goals, what they should and shouldn't be, and it brought up a interesting point.
The breed in question is the Rottweiler and the standard in the AKC's for the breed. The AKC puts the Rottweiler into the working group. The AKC defines working group as follows, " Working Group
Dogs of the Working Group were bred to perform such jobs as guarding property, pulling sleds and performing water rescues. They have been invaluable assets to man throughout the ages,..etc." I would also like to add some of the current day uses of the dog, law enforcement work and search & rescue.
In both the AKC's list of jobs for the dog and the ones i've added the dogs are required to work in groups, or at least in pairs. This means that these dogs cannot be dog fighters or their effectiveness in the task is reduced. In the next paragraph on the explanation of the dogs temperament states," An aggressive or belligerent attitude towards other dogs should not be faulted."
Is the AKC saying in its breed standard that dogs that are dog aggressive towards other dogs AKA dog fighter, are acceptable while their breeding function requires them to be sociable and not aggressive towards other dogs. The question for those who care to comment is do you breed towards the standard or you breed towards dogs that can do the work they were orginally breed to do?

An aggressive or belligerent attitude towards other dogs should not be faulted.

That is a more or less accepted aspect of the Rottweiler's charater. Dominance and a lack of a submissive attitude can lead Rotts to be aggressive and belligerent to other dogs. That is a fact. You get a dominate Rott with another dominate dog, the Rott being larger and stronger will often use that to influence the other dog in a physical way. So the standard isn't really wrong. Neither does it say anything about being a dog-figher or overly dog aggressive. The way to deal with this aspect of the rott's charater is with training and socialization.

So to answer your question, NO you don't ever breed a dog that has dog aggressive tendancies for anything other than dog fighting (Don't even do that you gangbangers and rednecks reading this post). But, you may wish to breed a dog that is dominate in nature and will not be subjugated by another animal, human or dog. I think there is a difference in the two behaviors in most dogs. Pitt bulls are dog aggressive by nature, Rottweilers are not, but they are a more dominate and stubborn breed overall than a lot of other working dogs IMHO. That can lead to aggression and belligerence. The standard reflects that. I don't see a conflict, I think you are putting too much into the wording.

Karl wrote: Is the AKC saying in its breed standard that dogs that are dog aggressive towards other dogs AKA dog fighter, are acceptable while their breeding function requires them to be sociable and not aggressive towards other dogs.

No, the standard is not saying that and neither is the AKC.

A better question is if the AKC, in it's application of the standard, is producing Rottweilers with working ability? No, I don't think so and neither does the ADRK.

That has little though to do with dog aggressive Rotts. I think the only people that like them are dog fighers, and they don't care much about the standard anyway. THEY breed for dog aggression- nobody else does. That hardwired dog aggressive response is not often seen in working line dogs that are bred, raised, and socialized well. Not even in the AKC show lines.

I hate defending the AKC, even just a little. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Karl,

Keep in mind that many of these breeds, including the Rott, are designed for doing protection of stock. As a result their nature is to not let another animal get too close to "their" property. It isn't that the dogs are dog agressive, but they are protecting against the other dog taking thier stuff. Most of the breeds that will have this in the description of the temperament are breeds that worked independantly for doing protection, not working in groups. So for that reason there is a bit of a tendancy to defend from other dogs. In a situation that they have nothing to protect they will establish dominance and then it is over. They are not just looking to fight. A dog that is just looking for the fight is a dog that is truly dog aggressive.

Well said Ricardo.

Amen Ricardo.

Thank you Vancamp and Richard Cannon for responding. Vancamp you're right i'm reading into the wording of the standard to much but I was doing so in order to make a point and you've touched on it when you said,"A better question is if the AKC, in it's application of the standard, is producing Rottweilers..." The AKC sets the standard and breeders of the that breed produce based on the standard. The AKC as an body doesn't produce dogs in the way a breeder does, through breeding. So breeders read the language in the standard and apply it to their breeding program. Does a majority of breeders understand the meaning behind the language the way you do? I would argue not. Infact there will be a differance between your understanding of the wording and mine or anyone elses because the understanding of dog behavior is different for everyone. I would argue that the average breeder could observe their dog in the senario of a person coming to the gate or fence of their home or to greet them in a park and the dog backs away or doesn't come to the fence to investigate whats going on and the owner would say the dogs is just has a belligerent attitude towards people or it's standoffish. Since this language is in the breed standard the person would think this is great behavior. I would argue that this dog has unsound nerves and is frightful. Is the AKC encouraging the breeding of dogs with working drives, no way. They don't have any tests or other means of determining the temparament of the dog, and i don't think they really care as long as the dog can make it around the ring a few times and stand for examination. This encourages breeding of dogs with less drive in my opinion.
I agree with you that you don't breed towards dog aggression. I would say you breed away from dog aggression and address it in your socialization of the dog and in the training of the dog. I feel that dog aggression is mainly a socializtion and training issue that is complimented by breeding. This point is illustrated by your comment,"Pitt bulls are dog aggressive by nature, " I live in Hawaii where we see alot of Pittbulls used for pig hunting. These dogs run in packs of 5-10 ± while hunting wild pigs. There isn't any dog agression issues but yet put a pig in front of them and you will see aggression. I've run into a few hunting dogs that have gotten lost while hunting and showed no signs of aggression towards my dogs while they followed us out of the woods. I would say this was socialization, training and breeding. So can dogs be taught to be non dog aggressive the same way they can be taught to be dog aggressive? Taught to be dog aggressive meaning that by not teaching them your teaching them to be dog aggressive.
In your last two pharagraphs you mention working ablity and dog aggression,"A better question is if the AKC, in it's application of the standard, is producing Rottweilers with working ability? No, I don't think so and neither does the ADRK." No dought the AKC isn't encouraging the breeding of working rotts, in fact with standards that allow for dog aggression they are discouraging working rotts. A dog can't be an effective worker when it is more interested in fighting or proving it's dominance over another dog. You also commented that, "THEY breed for dog aggaression- nobody else does." Why are people breeding rotts for dog aggression or at least allowing it to continue? I've had people tell me they don't discourage it in their breeding because thats not the standard, the standard allow for dog aggression. My argument is that dog aggression shouldn't be allowed by the standard. You will not see any allowance for dog aggression in GSD's or BM's temperament standards. Is the AKC, in it's application of the standard prodcucing working GSD's or BM's? Not really but atleast they aren't making allowances for faults that bring down the working abilities of the dogs.
ok i tried to close this without saying anything about your comment, "That has little though to do with dog aggressive Rotts. I think the only people that like them are dog fighers, and they don't care much about the standard anyway." I don't breed for dog aggressive dogs, i breed for dogs that work and are very social to both people and other animals, and i am a owner, trainer and breeder of rottweilers. Not everyone with a rottweiler is bad.

Interpretation, interpretation, interpretation...

The problem with standards is there is too much room for interpretation. Look at how people can twist up the standard of the GSD to end up with a dog that can't walk and wouldn't protect a gerbil. (thanks Mike, that was a good laugh)

Every breeder has his/her own idea of what that ideal dog is. You breed for what you like and try to fit that into the standard, or in the case of AKC, what the judge will put up. Hopefully along the way you have put some thought into what the dog's intended purpose was and hope to place the dog in suitable homes.

I know this same attitude is OK with the judges in the AKC Giant Schnauzer ring. You will often see two dogs pass each other and spar a bit coming in or out of the ring. Can these dogs work? Not many of them, and that is being nice. Which is too bad considering they were bred to work to begin with.

I don't think anyone is saying that rottenwhiler <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> breeders are bad. Be passionate about your breed and do no harm.

The AKC has never written a standard for any breed. PERIOD. The standards are written by the National breed club. In other words it is written by Breeders of the breed. The only thing that AKC does is:

1) Maintain a regestry of pure bred dogs.
2) Keep records of points aquired through AKC sanctioned events towards various Champioships.

That is all they do. The AKC neither encourages nor dicourages the working temperament, the breeders do that. The AKC has never bred a dog. Now they don't sponsor any protection trials, so you could say that they don't encourage it that way, but they don't exclude working dogs either. Many of the people in the fancy do not want working dogs, and they do participate and show their dogs. So that is all the judges have to choose from.

The breed clubs also sponser the seminars that judges attend to identify how the club interprets the standard. If you don't like what they are judging on, participate in the National Club and make your voice heard for what the proper judging should be. At this point in time there is a fairly fertile field for the re-application and of the working standard and the increase of the working capabilities of the working breeds.If you want properly bred, working dogs put up in the Conformation ring, show them. Don't sit and complain that the judges don't put up the types of dogs that you like if there aren't any in the ring.

The Rott as a breed has always been a dominant dog. The same way that the Giant, GSD and many other breeds have been dominant dogs. It is a function of the type of work they were bred to do. That level of dominance can be worked with, but good working dogs will probably never be pack dogs. They are just to dominant to function that way and still maintain the proper working temperament. They can interact together properly, they can be controlled not to fight, but they will always be dominant dogs and will always have some dominance issues.

Thanks Richard, you've made some good points. I read through the American Rottweiler Club's standards and compared them to the FCI's standards for the breed and they read somewhat differently when comparing temperament descriptions. I guess it all comes down to,As Schnauzergirl stated, interpretation. Each person will interpret the standard in a way that it fits there standards.

You stated that you don't feel that good working dogs can live together in a pack and still remain good working dogs. This was the beginning of the discussion that lead to this topic. One club member felt that puppies should be separated at some point so that they couldn't be dominated by the other puppies in the litter. The other club member felt that puppies should be left together and taught to get along with each other and that this would result in correctly dog socialized puppies. This would keep dogs from being dog aggressive as they aged. By keeping them together the puppies with weeker nearves would benefit by having the security of the pack. What are your thoughts?
Karl

Hey Karl, how about breaking up those huge ass posts with some paragraphs in the future so that they are easier to read. When talking to me you gotta remember that I have a short attention span.

I browsed through that one so here is a brief reply.

The standard doesn't allow for dog aggression, it allows for the dominate nature of the Rotty.

And that comment you made at the end? Let me try that again. I didn't say all rotty owners are bad. Here is a revised version. This is what I was saying.

"That has little, though, to do with dog aggressive Rotts. I think the only people that like them (DOG AGGRESSIVE ROTTWEILERS) are dog fighers (NOT ALL ROTTWEILER OWNERS/BREEDERS), and they (DOG FIGHTERS) don't care much about the standard anyway. THEY breed for dog aggression- nobody else does. That hardwired dog aggressive response is not often seen in working line dogs that are bred, raised, and socialized well. Not even in the AKC show lines." Make sense now?

One other point, I don't think you are hearing me on this. Dog aggression and dominance are two different things. Dominance can lead to aggression and a belligerent attitude, but that is not real dog aggression. It is pack rank behavior. Hard wired dog aggression is something that can be bred for and it can be seen in dogs that are not dominate by nature. It is not a pack rank behavior in my opinion.

Anyone that thinks the same way as I do, help me out here. Richard?

One more thing. I know that all Pitt Bulls are not dog aggressive.