Wednesday, June 27, 2012

the canine good citizen test

oh pit nutter, you have so much to learn about the world.

you don't realize that the same problems with the ATTS exist with the CGC. the test is only good as the tester and there is tester and testee bias. and as sharon pointed out, a lot people can successfully get their dogs through the 5-10 minute exercise.

here's a perfect example. this is simba the mastiff going through the CGC. the tester is an APBT owner. he uses his own dog, MONTAUK, for the test number 8, reaction to another dog.

the really critical part of this test is from roughly 3:00 - 4:00. at 3 minutes, notice the tester giving commands in what sounds like french and look to the far right of the screen at his dog.



youtube link

so, what do we know about this tester?

ROBERT BOUDREAU has a dog training business. he is or was the president of the LONE STAR STATE APBT CLUB. he testified against dangerous dog HB1982 in 2009, a texas bill that would increase penalties against people when their dogs bite. the details of HB1982 can be found here. he is a tester for the CGC and the ATTS and is an agitator/tester for the Fila assoc. he clearly has a vested interest in seeing grippers and other dangerous dogs passing these tests.

and here's what we know about the pit bull that's "supposed to be trained".



montauk has more medals than stubby!

22 comments:

Jim Reeve said...

I'm sure if a pit was properly trained, then they could be a good dog. But I'd always have that fear in my head about the pit losing control. And then the pit would likely sense my fear and act accordingly. I mean, even police dogs bite sometimes.

snarky said...

i see these smug pit owners all the time, noses up in the air , walking their fighting dogs off-leash and no muzzle . they seem to think they have everything under control and nothing will ever happen. i guess if and when mutant genes kick in, the owners wont be prepared at all except for all the lame excuses.

Animal Uncontrol said...

I wonder what each of those trophies actually represents... Most Mail Carriers bit? Most cats killed? I suppose if you are going to have a PIT BULL competition, those would be expected categories.

What about the owners. Do they give the owners a medal for lamest excuse ever given? Most Dine 'N Dashes in a year? Is there a trophy for the most irresponsible?

Maybe we should give Greg whatshisname a trophy for "Precious": It'll be a figure of a dog biting a jogger in the leg. I'd chip in for something like that.

I think we have a SNL skit idea in the works...

DubV said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=p514CHm5eXA

Pit nutter in the vid and comments. Have I said yet today how much I hate pit nutters?

And just look at that fucking pit bull. Why can't people get that the reason they look dangerous and like weapons is because that is what they often are?

This happened in NYC where you can't own a folding knife that locks open but you can own a 90 lbs game bred pit bull.

DubV said...

Jim said...

"I'm sure if a pit was properly trained, then they could be a good dog."

Of course almost anything is possible, but what is probable?

Not to nitpick you, Jim, but this is something that pit nutters do that gets my dandruff up ;) [ignoring probabilities]

snack sized dog said...

Sharon has brought this up several times, I think, and it is something I've come across other times- training does not change temperament. If the dog is well-trained and is aggressive, the owner/trainer can keep the dog in check if the owner is paying attention and never becomes lax in continuing training.

I read one trainer say it this way: Training can mask temperament. He went on to say that people - even the owner who trained the dog - can get complacent around a well-trained dog.

I just recently came across the fila temperament testing that show competitors do. The fila is expected to attack, and there is a correct manner of attack prescribed too - straight out and up - to go for the face and neck. These dogs are not supposed be trained to do this. They are trying to test innate temperament - aggression and ability to attack.

Fila's scare the hell out of me. I just found this description of proper fila aggressive temperament and this person also says its genetic, innate, and that the temperament can't be trained in or out - it can be controlled.

http://www.sombraultrajantefilas.com/documents/dowdyarticle.pdf

DubV said...

Interesting pdf Snack, thanks.

Why would anyone who isn't guarding something want a Fila? It's bizarre to me. Dogs bred to want to viciously attack strangers should surely be regulated tightly.

Animal Uncontrol said...

RE: Customization of Pit Bulls.

Lets say for the sake of argument you COULD train the inbred viciousness out of a pit bull. I would imagine that would be a very time consuming, difficult, and expensive process. WHY BOTHER? To seriously consider that implies that the life of an individual pit bull is of extremely high value. Why is that?

OK, you could spend thousands of dollars to MAYBE train the in-bred behaviors out of your pit bull OR you could simply adopt a dog with a better in-bred temperament.

Here is an IT allegory: You get the source code of MS Windows: you hire 10 programmers for 6 months to rewrite it in such a way that it mimics Linux EXACTLY. Yeah, you CAN do that or you could simply buy a Linux install off the shelf for $20.00.

Unless dogfighting is re-legalized, the pit bull serves NO purpose whatsoever. To invest valuable time, money and materials in attempting to "train out" the vicious tendencies of a dog bred to be vicious is a complete waste of resources. The whole idea implies that the life of a pit bull has infinite value and it clearly does not.

snarky said...

it obvious that pitters really are ok with what their dogs do. they may talk about owner responsibility and how harmless their dogs are but in reality its just pure denial and deception. they are attracted to the breed cuz they like the bad-ass rep and when something happens they are full of excuses and denials but its really what they wanted all along.

Sharon Yildiz said...

Hi guys, Wow--thanks for citing me in the blog and comments. Cool! :-)

Training can definitely mask poor temperament. However, I still wouldn't keep (or allow to live) a dog with a poor temperament AND no bite inhibition, no matter how well trained.

My 10 year old Border Collie (30 titles in 7 sports) has the worst temperament of any dog I've owned (counting back to 1966). However, virtually nobody has a clue about it, as he is friendly 99% of the time and is completely safe for people to pet in many circumstances. I know exactly what his triggers are and what might upset him, and keep him out of those situations.

He has made contact three times in his life, all before the age of 3. Two times, he grabbed men's pants legs, gave a quick tug, then backed off. One time, he lightly grabbed an elderly neighbor's arm, giving her a slight bruise (it wouldn't have bruised a younger person) but no scratch or impression.

Because I know he has bite inhibition, I changed my mind about euthanizing him, which I was considering when he was 3. For the past 7 years, he has had zero bites or attempted bites. He is controlled by use of training, good gear (Gentle Leader, etc.), management (keeping him away from triggering situations, blocking people from petting him on the streets).

However, if I had a dog > 25 lb. with a bite history that involved penetrating bites, I would definitely euthanize. And I'd keep a firm control on a smaller dog that bit.

Rumpelstiltskin said...

Animal Uncontrol,

Exactly, why bother with a breed who's been proven to be such a liability. It's such a high risk breed.

Sharon Y,

I agree. My first GSD, some would claim was vicious but for the most part, she was a little over aggressive. If she didn't like someone, she'd always put out a warning, not simply lunge out. She passed her CGC on the first try at 1 1/2 yrs old with only a basic obedience class from Pet Smart. The dog was extremely obedient and responded to all my commands.

In her 13 1/2 years of life, she bit 1 human and a few dogs. Got into 2 fights, both loose pit bulls.

The human bite could be forgiven, she was drugged up and put on a plane to Florida to my mother's home. When my stepfather got too close she nipped him. A band-aide and some consoling fixed the situation.

Miss Margo said...

DubV: Wow, what a video, and the comments make me SICK!!!

Check out the owner, with his tats and the leather studded harness on his dog. NICE. He hit his dog so hard that his hand hurts very badly--you can tell by the way he keeps looking at it and shaking it.

My impression is that the mauler-owner is homeless--he's got a sleeping roll, a backpack, the folded-up cardboard that is probably a sign, and tats and piercings. There're a lot of gutterpunks in the East Village where I live. The presence of homeless or transient people doesn't bother me at all, but if they've got dogs with them--guess what breed they are?

Sounds like a cheap shot, but I assure you, it's not--in the last year or so, since I started paying attention after having to forcibly eject, via AC and legal advice, an antisocial gutterpunk fucktard and his unlicensed unregistered pit bull from our COMMUNITY MEETING where the rules say NO PETS ALLOWED, I've been observing the dogs they keep.

I've never seen one with a dog that's not a pit bull.

Also--why would anyone keep a pet if their lives were so troubled that they were panhandling on the street? I love my animals, but I'd rehome them before I'd make them live with me outside.

Ravi G. said...

is a Dogo Argentino safer than a pitbull?

Packhorse said...

Margo,
We have a high homeless population where I live, and I have noticed the exact same thing.

Friends Administrator said...

Better hope that your town, Packhorse, doesn't adopt this. http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/animal-rights/san-francisco-pet-program-give-puppies-pan-handlers

Rhea said...

I am not kidding, one homeless guy out here does actually own a chihuahua. He's a panhandler and every time I see him and his dog I think
"Why not rehome the little thing?"

Miss Margo said...

Oh, I believe you, Rhea. A girl I see by the park has a cat that sits on her shoulders.

I don't think it's right to keep pets on the street, either--but I imagine that they do provide comfort to their owners (or the illusion of protection).

Pets also provoke concern and sympathy in passersby. Actually, that would be a good research question...does the presence of a pet increase the amount of $$$ given to the panhandler?

snarky said...

most dogs love the street lifestyle of travel and outdoor life . the reality of most street pets is that they are undervalued and mistreated and eventually come to some sad accidental end . not sure that the dogs would choose to live longer on a chain in someones backyard or even in a comfortable apartment . where there are still hunter gatherers in the world , their dogs are probable the happiest canines alive.

DubV said...

"I am not kidding, one homeless guy out here does actually own a chihuahua. He's a panhandler and every time I see him and his dog I think
"Why not rehome the little thing?""

This comment reminds of the darker side of the Sgt. Stubby story. Stubby's owner smuggled him into a war zone. The pit nutters probably think it was due to the owner knowing Stubby would be an invaluable soldier for our country, but really it was just a horrible and inhumane decision.

snarky said...

these idiots harking back to stubby and petey , as though this means something or proves something . it's simple-minded nonsense ...childish stuff.

Miss Margo said...

A person would have to be profoundly stupid or a child to believe that a dog could fight in a war. Not SERVE in a war-dog capacity, but really fight.

dawn james said...

profoundly stupid. i like that.