Quote:

The point is, most breeders tend to view the spooky trait as recessive but I think that if its in the genetic pool the dog should not be bred.
Just like with hip displaysia... if the grandparents have it, I don't care whether the parents ARE OFA normal...too risky.

Maybe we should treat the "spooky trait" in a similar manner.

Dave Lilley
Michigan State University
College of Social Science

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> Sir, I couldnt agree more!!!

Dave let me get this straight in your hypothesis. You are looking at hip dysplasia as same kind of undesirable trait as your “spooky trait”. I might be wrong, and if I am please correct me. Isn’t hip dysplasia a direct result of bad breeding? While the “spooky trait” is inherent to the animals survival. I know where you are going, but it can never be. There is always going to be some element of fear or else the animal will be extinct.

Milt... I would define "spookiness" or maybe a better term would be "skittishness" as the tendency to percieve ALL or MOST new experiences as dangerous (even when they are NOT dangerous).

In this sense, skittishness would be an extreme form of the fear trait. Of course, fear has a purpose in survival and no one would advocate removing ALL fear.

However, in my opinion spookiness or skittishness is NEVER desirable and should be avoided in breeding.

 Quote:

Originally posted by Jose Luiz:

You never can solve a genetic problem. The problem will be there, like a ghost waiting to come back. I strongly believe that the spooky trait is genetic, and any dog with that problem should be culled off reproduction.

If you have a spooky dog, you can train a lot, but in the worst moment you need, he will fly away. I have learned that in the worst way, wasting time and money.

Thanks Jose, your example is EXACTLY what I was referring to. No matter how nice the other half is, the skittish trait will be passed on.
<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

I would never want a completely fearless dog either, but I also never want to own another dog that is spooky. I hope every breeder considers this undesirable and removes dogs like this from their breeding program. It's not fair to the dogs or the people who love them.

This "spooky trait", as Dave is describing it, is a 100% genetic predisposition in my opinion---it's not learned. I see about 10 dogs a day ( at their home) and it makes me shutter when the owners automatically assume the dog was abused at some point in its life to display this spooky behavior. Not to say there are not learned fears (there obviously are--this is different from a truly spooky dog), but the vast majority of fear behavior that I observe is genetic in origin. I think this is one of the major problems in GSDs today (working and show). I've had some GSDs in the past with excellent drives that were crummy working dogs because they had this spooky tendency and these were out of top working dogs that have produced excellent for
the most part. As far as it being a dominate genetic trait, I don't know. I would venture a guess and say that you would disqualify most breeding GSD's dogs today if your number one criteria was the inability to produce a "spooky dog". If I were a breeder, the elimination if this "spooky trait" would be one of my main objectives.

Spooky is part genetic, but I wouldn't dissmiss the learned component. I think that most of the learned behaviors are not a result of things that happen to the dog, but more lack of socialization. All the spookiest dogs I have ever seen were a result of the dog being put in the backyard and left alone. Many of the dogs that people assume were "abused" were just put in a backyard and not worked with as puppies. In reality I think abuse is less commaon than most people think it is. Lack of socialization and training is much more common.

The good thing about these dogs is that most can be helped with proper training and socialization. They will never work as good protectors, and there is always some residual, but they can be turned in to functioning pets.

I tend to agree John... if we define "skittishness" or spookiness as the tendency to percieve MOST or ALL new stimuli as threatening or dangerous.

The way an animal PERCEIVES new stimuli is nearly all genetic. Yes, Richard is right that socialization helps... but that wouldn't be an issue in a dog that naturally PERCEIVED new situations as safe, friendly or potentially fun.

IMHO, a good portion of socialization is to COVER up for weak nerves and the irrational perceptions of danger.

I don't believe that a genetically sound animal WILL reproduce skittish pups unless it is bred with weakness on the other side.

The problem is that these weak fear related genes are scattered throughout the gene pool so it is difficult to determine where they are originating.

Would disregarding the weaker dogs drastically reduce reproduction?... YES, for a few generations.

Dave,

I guess my point is that it is hard to look at the final product and decide what caused the problem. Even in cases where a puppy seemed to be abnormally fearful I have seen them be strong confident adults. I have seen the opposite also. This is just one of those areas that gets to be so theoretical that anything you say can be supported by something. So in reality what you have to do is work with what you have, and not discount that either portion is able to be dismissed. I have seen too many dogs that people have given up on that were turned around with proper work done by an effective trainer.