# Male agressive only towards other males!! Is this bad?



## hotel4dogs

For goldens it is NOT normal behavior. My intact boy does fine with other males, intact or otherwise.
from the golden standard:
*Temperament *-- friendly, reliable and trustworthy. Quarrelsomeness or hostility towards other dogs or people in normal situations, or an unwarranted show of timidity or nervousness, is not in keeping with Golden Retriever character.


----------



## Java

Strange. The thing is he as grown up with my moms Lab and all they do is play play play. Today was the first time this has happened. My moms Lab is 8 yrs. old so he is starting to get a little moody. I'm not trying to make up excuses, but it does odd to come out of nowhere. He has never gotten into a fight before. He did meet one other golden male though about two weeks ago and they both started growling. I had both kids with me so was not sure if it had anything to do with that????


----------



## Java

And I should add he was in puppy classes so it's not like he wasn't around other dogs when younger.....


----------



## HiTideGoldens

I would be a concerned if I were you, since it's definitely NOT a good thing. 

Jack got into it with one dog when he was about a year old and it seriously freaked me out. I watched him very closely for several months and paid particular attention to when he was around other boys. But it hasn't happened since then with any dog, even when another dog growled at him in close quarters at a show. And he's around other intact males frequently at our handlers house now that he's showing more frequently. They all run in the yard and play together and do fine. So I'm treating as a one off with my boy, although I'm still aware that it happened.

If I were you, I would not be making any justification for it. It's unacceptable behavior regardless of the reason it happened. Did you correct him when he growled at the other golden two weeks ago?


----------



## Java

Yes, I did correct him, but if both of them would have been left together I'm not sure what would have happened.

I did introduce my moms lab and my male again after the fight, and the lab was stand offish (like I blame him) and my male was wagging his tail sniffing him???

I do remember that my grandmother had 2 goldens (female) and both of them had gotten into a fight with the same Lab of my moms. To me it sounds like either the Lab has an attitude, or all these goldens were not in the standard temperment


----------



## Pointgold

Java said:


> My one year old intact male golden gets along fine with everyone and everything including chickens and cats, BUT has started showing signs of agression only toward other Male dogs. Today he got into a fight with my mothers male Lab (was not present when it started, so not sure who was to blame). My moms Lab now as 4 puncture holes, but seems to be doing ok. My female was outside with them when this took place, but she is no where near to being in season.
> 
> I am really wanting to show him, but am now a little concerned. Is this normally behavior when two males are together?


NO! All of our intact males run and play together. *If there is a bitch in season, I am vigilant, but even then they do.

Bo's behavior is incorrect temperament for a Golden Retriever.


----------



## Java

But they all live together right?? Can one be territorial?? Bo was at my moms home so I don't know if that would matter or not


----------



## CarolinaCasey

This fact, coupled with the fact that he weighs 92 lbs at one year of age make me think that you should consider getting his thyroid checked. Though he is young for a thyroid condition....

BTW puncture wounds can get terribly nasty because they build up under the skin. Your mother's lab should see a vet to have them properly cleansed and a drain if necessary.


----------



## Java

thanks. yeah, I am taking the poor guy to the vet tomorrow. I feel soooo bad that this happened :no: If I only knew what triggered it?? I am talking about the Lab just so you know.. I don't feel bad for my guy, but do need to get to the bottom of what is going on. Thyroid check it is. I have to start somewhere. We are never going to get rid of him as we love him and he is part of the family so we will just have to see what we can do...


----------



## kwhit

Java said:


> I did introduce my moms lab and my male again after the fight, and the lab was stand offish (like I blame him) and my male was wagging his tail sniffing him???


Just a heads up that a wagging tail doesn't always mean "happy".


----------



## bbuzz

In my opinion the fight may have occurred because of your mums lab, however without witnessing this fight it would not be productive to place blame on either dogs (regardless of the fights the lab has been involved in).

If the fighting/aggression has only occurred on this one occasion then I would take note, but not be to concerned. If this was me I would presume the fight was just a matter of misunderstanding or play that escalated to a fight. In my opinion it is great that you have taken note and are reflecting on what occurred.

If fighting and aggression is a recurring theme then i would be considerably worried, as a few members have noted it's not consistent with a goldens temperament, therefore I would take active steps (vet check, seeing behaviorist, additional training, removal from situation that aggression could occur) to correct the issue before it got out of hand or the behavior became ingrained.

Really the fact that your worried really shows your a great mum and are really willing to step up to the plate and pro-actively ensure your lovely pup has a great life and lives up to the reputation of a true golden!!


----------



## Java

Thank you so much. It's nice to hear a nice comment every once in awhile. I really am trying to look out for my dogs, my family, and other dogs. If he keeps up any form of aggression then "NO" he does not have the Golden Retriever standard temperment and he will be fixed, but still loved by us.


----------



## Ljilly28

I've been trained to think about the puncture wounds, how his bite inhibitions gives information about his safety/ intentions. Deep puncture wounds are more serious than a squabble that sounds terrible, but no one was hurt.


----------



## 2Retrievers222

Java said:


> thanks. yeah, I am taking the poor guy to the vet tomorrow. I feel soooo bad that this happened :no: If I only knew what triggered it?? I am talking about the Lab just so you know.. I don't feel bad for my guy, but do need to get to the bottom of what is going on. Thyroid check it is. I have to start somewhere. We are never going to get rid of him as we love him and he is part of the family so we will just have to see what we can do...


 
Why don,t you get him fixed. Not all unfixed dogs have high levels of testosterone. You probably have a Alpha from litter. There is a smell to a Alpha male, that drives fixed and unfixed males to fight. This behavior is normal. Dogs need to have order. Even Cesar says this. When my Alpha was unfixed growing up, I watched dogs circle pack of dogs at dog park and then zone in on mine.

Pointgold you have a pack of unfixed that live together. That's totally different. Take them all to the dog park on the weekend to meet other unfixed dogs and see how they act. No one should take unfixed dogs over a year to dog park in my opinion


----------



## Java

I didn't want to have him fixed because I plan on showing him in Canada in the next few months. BUT if he keeps up the aggression then forget that....


----------



## Java

So what does it exactly mean when a dog makes puncture wounds? Challenged, threatened, protective, just plain aggresive, etc.?





Ljilly28 said:


> I've been trained to think about the puncture wounds, how his bite inhibitions gives information about his safety/ intentions. Deep puncture wounds are more serious than a squabble that sounds terrible, but no one was hurt.


----------



## Pointgold

bbuzz said:


> In my opinion the fight may have occurred because of your mums lab, however without witnessing this fight it would not be productive to place blame on either dogs (regardless of the fights the lab has been involved in).
> 
> If the fighting/aggression has only occurred on this one occasion then I would take note, but not be to concerned. If this was me I would presume the fight was just a matter of misunderstanding or play that escalated to a fight. In my opinion it is great that you have taken note and are reflecting on what occurred.
> 
> If fighting and aggression is a recurring theme then i would be considerably worried, as a few members have noted it's not consistent with a goldens temperament, therefore I would take active steps (vet check, seeing behaviorist, additional training, removal from situation that aggression could occur) to correct the issue before it got out of hand or the behavior became ingrained.
> 
> Really the fact that your worried really shows your a great mum and are really willing to step up to the plate and pro-actively ensure your lovely pup has a great life and lives up to the reputation of a true golden!!


 
Sorry, but this sort of aggression is not acceptable from EITHER breed.


----------



## Pointgold

Java said:


> So what does it exactly mean when a dog makes puncture wounds? Challenged, threatened, protective, just plain aggresive, etc.?


 
It means that a BITE occurred!


----------



## Pointgold

2Retrievers222 said:


> Why don,t you get him fixed. Not all unfixed dogs have high levels of testosterone. You probably have a Alpha from litter. There is a smell to a Alpha male, that drives fixed and unfixed males to fight. This behavior is normal. Dogs need to have order. Even Cesar says this. When my Alpha was unfixed growing up, I watched dogs circle pack of dogs at dog park and then zone in on mine.
> 
> Pointgold you have a pack of unfixed that live together. That's totally different. Take them all to the dog park on the weekend to meet other unfixed dogs and see how they act. No one should take unfixed dogs over a year to dog park in my opinion


 
I disagree.
I don't go to dog parks because of OTHER dogs, not mine. I cannot trust that other dogs are as well trained and under control as mine are. And mine DO meet other intact dogs - ALL THE TIME. There are no problems. And these are males who have been bred, as well. If another dog postures, or is "aggressive", mine ignore them. One of the mods here saw this occur at a show. Not all males fight. It is NOT normal.


----------



## 2Retrievers222

Pointgold said:


> I disagree.
> I don't go to dog parks because of OTHER dogs, not mine. I cannot trust that other dogs are as well trained and under control as mine are. And mine DO meet other intact dogs - ALL THE TIME. There are no problems. And these are males who have been bred, as well. If another dog postures, or is "aggressive", mine ignore them. One of the mods here saw this occur at a show. Not all males fight. It is NOT normal.


 

If mine posture or other dog, I just yell squirrel. Breaks them out of it.


----------



## Pointgold

2Retrievers222 said:


> If mine posture or other dog, I just yell squirrel. Breaks them out of it.


That's nice.

Mine won't posture to begin with. I show them. They are often in VERY tight quarters ringside, with bait being waved around, and often females in season nearby. I trust mine. They have very sound temperaments. They _have_ to.


----------



## 2Retrievers222

Pointgold said:


> That's nice.
> 
> Mine won't posture to begin with. I show them. They are often in VERY tight quarters ringside, with bait being waved around, and often females in season nearby. I trust mine. They have very sound temperaments. They _have_ to.


 
Show dogs

I guess you could say mine are bush dogs.


----------



## Pointgold

2Retrievers222 said:


> Show dogs
> 
> I guess you could say mine are bush dogs.


I guess you could say mine are both.


----------



## 2Retrievers222

Pointgold said:


> I guess you could say mine are both.


 
Good to see

Dogs not a dog unless it gets dirt,water or burrs on them


----------



## Mirinde

Although it's out of standard for a golden, this sort of behavior is not necessarily suuuuper abnormal from intact dogs in general from what I've heard. I could certainly see my Iorek being especially testy if he had extra testosterone in his system. I feel the puncture marks are the most concerning part of this-- that was not a light play bite but could have been an actual intent to harm. Perhaps your golden is suffering pain of some sort and play with your mother's lab aggravated it enough to really set your golden off? My mom's aussie has arthritis and if play gets rough enough that his legs start hurting, he turns into a much different dog. Going to the vet should definitely be your first step so I'm glad you're doing that. 

(Also, PointGold's dogs are quite truly dogs regardless of their show status)


----------



## Jo Ellen

Good grief, take a perfectly legitimate concern from one of our members here and turn it into a pissing match  

Personally, I'm very interested in Ljilly's post about the bites indicating the dog's intentions. I'd like to hear more about this. Is it important why a dog is biting or just that the dog IS biting?

If my memory serves me right, the standard says dogs should not show aggression in normal situations. And I think the OP said that no one saw how the fight broke out ... so we're really lacking some important information here to make a definitive diagnosis on temperament.


----------



## Megora

Have you had him to classes since puppy classes?

The fact that he has growled at another golden in the past seems to indicate that this might be a growing dog-interaction issue with him that could be fixed with a lot more controlled socialization and consistent training? 

I wouldn't be surprised that the lab started the scuffle and your dog didn't back off like he should have with his elder. 

As far as the standard + behavior - I think all of that goes out the window when you have a dog getting too big for his britches and not learning what behaviors are proper or not. This isn't so much about the fight with the lab, but the meeting with the other golden. Growling and challenging the other dog should be nipped in the bud right away and often. And if you have your dog in classes every week and often, your dog will learn to tune out other dogs. 

The fight with the lab - I think the main thing coming out of that is that he can't be left unmonitored with dogs who might be touchy or moody. 

I hope the lab is OK. Poor old guy.


----------



## Jo Ellen

Megora said:


> I wouldn't be surprised that the lab started the scuffle and your dog didn't back off like he should have with his elder.


See, that's what I'm wondering. How are we to think about a golden retriever's temperament when they respond aggressively to being challenged or attacked by another dog? That's not what I would call a "normal" situation.


----------



## Pointgold

RIght. No one saw what happened, but these dogs have been together since the Golden was a puppy (play play play according to the OP), he's only a year old now, and has been growling at other dogs recently.
Definitely have him checked to rule out a medical reason for it, but it cannot be discounted that a year old male Golden taking on an adult Labrador that he's grown up with is nottemperament that one would find acceptable - for either breed. If there is no medical reason for it, (and is the Lab going to be checked for something to cause him to have changed?) I'd be hiring a good trainer and making sure that he is under control, particularly if you plan to show him (he'll be excused if he growls at or bites another dog) and a seriousl assessment of his temperment made before considering breeding him. A person can have a dog with an unsound temperament trained well enough to be under control, but it doesn't change the temperament - and it could be passed on to progeny.

Was there food or a high value item around?
Why is the Labrador intact? Is he being shown?


----------



## HiTideGoldens

Jo Ellen said:


> Personally, I'm very interested in Ljilly's post about the bites indicating the dog's intentions. I'd like to hear more about this. Is it important why a dog is biting or just that the dog IS biting?



I think she meant that sometimes dogs get into a scuffle that sounds bad, but is just a lot of noise and no one gets hurt. But it's definitely a fight if one of the dogs is bleeding from puncture wounds. Kind of like the difference between an argument and a fist fight where someone ends up in the hospital. In a fist fight, someone took it to the next level by throwing the first punch. In this situation, his dog took it to the next level by biting and injuring the other dog. 

And I strongly disagree with anyone who believes that aggression is normal or acceptable for any golden, regardless of whether or not they are intact.


----------



## KaMu

Pointgold said:


> I guess you could say mine are both.



I really Really want to swim with my pups in that middle water


]
[


----------



## Megora

goldenjackpuppy said:


> And I strongly disagree with anyone who believes that aggression is normal for any golden.


^ I feel the same way. But the main thing I've noticed is that some dogs - regardless of breed - do pick up bad behaviors if allowed. Crate guarding, for example. You have a dog who feels threatened and cornered and he is going to be snarling through the bars. And I've seen this happen with goldens who are perfectly sane and friendly towards all dogs when outside their crates. 

So put a golden in a position where he feels attacked or cornered... that's possibly why a dog might snap or get into a fight like that. 

Because your dog might be dominant, that probably made the fight worse. 

I think that's a seperate issue from the improper meetings with strange goldens. This is something that needs to be addressed by classes and/or a trainer, if only because at a lot of shows your dog is going to be in tight quarters with other dogs. 

A dog being intact is no excuse and neutering him is not going to fix the behavior.


----------



## hotel4dogs

The OP wrote, "BUT has started showing signs of agression only toward other Male dogs...."
Perhaps I read this wrong, but I interpret it to mean that the incident with the lab was NOT the only time the OP has seen signs of aggression toward other males. This means there is no point in trying to analzye the particular situation with one other dog, this means to me that this dog is showing signs of aggression toward other male dogs, not just one dog. Perhaps a growl, perhaps a stiff, raised tail, whatever. It would be of great concern to me.


----------



## Jo Ellen

I disagree. Analyzing a dog's mindset may not be important in terms of determining correct or incorrect temperament but it may go far in how you might approach rehabilitation and training. Would we use the same techniques with a dog that is reactive out of fear as we would with one that is a bully?


----------



## Java

I've been thinking about it and besides when he was in puppy classes (2 other males)..he has been only around other female dogs (1 female Lab, 2 Female Goldens, 1 female Pomeranian, and 1 female Kelpie). The only males he really has ever had interactions with were the male golden he met on the street which the owner brought out of her home so they could meet. They BOTH growled. And then of course my mothers male Lab. Do you think that this could have anything to do with the situation??


----------



## Java

Megora said:


> Have you had him to classes since puppy classes?
> 
> The fact that he has growled at another golden in the past seems to indicate that this might be a growing dog-interaction issue with him that could be fixed with a lot more controlled socialization and consistent training?
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised that the lab started the scuffle and your dog didn't back off like he should have with his elder.
> 
> As far as the standard + behavior - I think all of that goes out the window when you have a dog getting too big for his britches and not learning what behaviors are proper or not. This isn't so much about the fight with the lab, but the meeting with the other golden. Growling and challenging the other dog should be nipped in the bud right away and often. And if you have your dog in classes every week and often, your dog will learn to tune out other dogs.
> 
> The fight with the lab - I think the main thing coming out of that is that he can't be left unmonitored with dogs who might be touchy or moody.
> 
> I hope the lab is OK. Poor old guy.


He was in puppy classes for about a month.


----------



## hotel4dogs

I believe the OP's question was whether or not the behavior is normal for goldens, not how (or whether) to rehabilitate the dog. Answering only the question that was asked, the answer is no, it is not normal for goldens.



Jo Ellen said:


> I disagree. Analyzing a dog's mindset may not be important in terms of determining correct or incorrect temperament but it may go far in how you might approach rehabilitation and training. Would we use the same techniques with a dog that is reactive out of fear as we would with one that is a bully?


----------



## Ljilly28

Java said:


> So what does it exactly mean when a dog makes puncture wounds? Challenged, threatened, protective, just plain aggresive, etc.?


This mainly show's the dog's natural level of bite inhibition. A dog that will fight, but when the smoke clears has only left a surface scratch is an easier dog with which to take a wait-and-see stance. If the dog has a bite history with deeper puncture wounds, it is unwise to take any risks. Some dogs do not learn to inhibit their bites as little tykes, but some do learn in their litters. Once you have a bite history, you have valuable info. No matter who started the fight, it is concerning to see the punctures as opposed to surface tooth marks around eyes for example. I do think if the lab attacked, even a golden has a right to defend himself BUT you'd rather not see punctures regardless of what happened. Young boys do sometimes go through a period of testing their strength. You're in an awkward spot bc it might be a one time thing, but you will feel horrible if it happens again. It is stressful for you. It is one of those things that might come out in the wash if the bite was quite inhibited, but since it wasnt, you are going to have to be very cautious.


----------



## Sally's Mom

Dog bites are based on the degree of inhibition.. so for example, the Kuvasz that had my forearm in her mouth and only bruised it, showed greater restraint than the GSP who bit my hand thru and thru. My guys if severely unhappy might make a noise that sounds like the other dog will be ripped to shreds, but never a mark is made. My dog trainer friend has a lab that in her day would make that aggressive noise and a mark was always made on the other dog.


----------



## Ranger

Lots of times it's the smell of testosterone and youth that will set other dogs off. I had issues with Ranger when I got him at 9 months. He had just been neutered so the testosterone was still in his system AND he walked like a cocky SOB. Other male dogs hated him. There was a guy in the neighbourhood who walked two belgian malinois shepherds on extendable leashes and whenever the male (who'd always be in the lead) saw Ranger, he'd start growling. Ranger could meet females just fine and it'd turn into play sessions, but not male dogs. I took him over to a friend's house and her male NSDTR went berseker. He was trying to attack Ranger through the glass windows while Ranger played with the female Bernese Mountain Dog in the backyard. 

I had a dog trainer tell me it's because adult dogs feel it's their place to put younger, cocky males in THEIR place when they get feeling cocky which usually happens around a year age (which is referred to bratty teen stage by people). Ranger met a nice male rottweiler and the rottie was a wee bit tense but otherwise the dogs were fine. Ranger tried to get him to play and was a little overenthusiastic and the rottie told him off; lots of snarling and snapping but at the end of it, neither dog had been touched by the other. Ranger tried to engage him again but did a lot more politely the second time; lesson learned. About 6 months later, I noticed a huge decrease in tense encounters with male dogs. Now if Ranger meets a polite male dog, they are completely fine. Of course, Ranger is the one who doesn't like bossy teenage male dogs and he'll try to put them in their place if they don't come up to him properly. Sometimes scuffles break out but Ranger has never left a mark on any dog he's scuffled with.

What is worrying is that your dog responded with teeth to what was possibly an older dog trying to set a younger, cocky dog straight. That sounds like an overreaction on your dog's part and shows no bite inhibition. Like others on the board, I don't think that is a normal dog behaviour (golden retriever or not). I don't expect my dog to like all other dogs but I do expect him to show bite inhibition if he has a disagreement.

So, I guess my answer is while it might be considered 'normal' for your dog to not be doing well with other male dogs at this stage in his life, it's not normal for him to be biting other males to the point of blood being drawn. Sorry.


----------



## Pointgold

Ranger said:


> Lots of times it's the smell of testosterone and youth that will set other dogs off. I had issues with Ranger when I got him at 9 months. He had just been neutered so the testosterone was still in his system AND he walked like a cocky SOB. Other male dogs hated him. There was a guy in the neighbourhood who walked two belgian malinois shepherds on extendable leashes and whenever the male (who'd always be in the lead) saw Ranger, he'd start growling. Ranger could meet females just fine and it'd turn into play sessions, but not male dogs. I took him over to a friend's house and her male NSDTR went berseker. He was trying to attack Ranger through the glass windows while Ranger played with the female Bernese Mountain Dog in the backyard.
> 
> I had a dog trainer tell me it's because adult dogs feel it's their place to put younger, cocky males in THEIR place when they get feeling cocky which usually happens around a year age (which is referred to bratty teen stage by people). Ranger met a nice male rottweiler and the rottie was a wee bit tense but otherwise the dogs were fine. Ranger tried to get him to play and was a little overenthusiastic and the rottie told him off; lots of snarling and snapping but at the end of it, neither dog had been touched by the other. Ranger tried to engage him again but did a lot more politely the second time; lesson learned. About 6 months later, I noticed a huge decrease in tense encounters with male dogs. Now if Ranger meets a polite male dog, they are completely fine. Of course, Ranger is the one who doesn't like bossy teenage male dogs and he'll try to put them in their place if they don't come up to him properly. Sometimes scuffles break out but Ranger has never left a mark on any dog he's scuffled with.
> 
> What is worrying is that your dog responded with teeth to what was possibly an older dog trying to set a younger, cocky dog straight. That sounds like an overreaction on your dog's part and shows no bite inhibition. Like others on the board, I don't think that is a normal dog behaviour (golden retriever or not). I don't expect my dog to like all other dogs but I do expect him to show bite inhibition if he has a disagreement.
> 
> So, I guess my answer is while it might be considered 'normal' for your dog to not be doing well with other male dogs at this stage in his life, it's not normal for him to be biting other males to the point of blood being drawn. Sorry.


 

Having just learned that the Labrador that Bo was fighting with was actually NOT intact, but neutered, this is more of a concern for me. There would not have been the hormone element that everyone has referenced.


----------



## Ranger

I was thinking more along the lines that the lab might have been annoyed at the intact male's antics/(hormones, tried to school him, then intact male bit him. I guess that's the short version of my novel of a post about dogs having a problem with Ranger when his testosterone was still in his system.


----------



## Java

Later this week I am going to reintroduce Bo and the Lab, but Bo will be muzzled and watched closely. These two have to learn how to co-exist because when ever I go on vacations, etc. and can't take Bo he has to stay at my moms. I am determined to get to the bottom of this....


----------



## Java

Ok, so I re-introduced Bo and the Lab today and luckily there was no fighthing. I put Bo on the chain to let my moms lab be free since it is his property. The Lab approached Bo within minutes with raised hair and tail straight with which seemed like an attitude or showing authority. Bo became in the same position, but I corrected him right away. The Lab kept doing that throughout the day. Do you think there is hope?


----------



## Pointgold

Java said:


> Ok, so I re-introduced Bo and the Lab today and luckily there was no fighthing. I put Bo on the chain to let my moms lab be free since it is his property. The Lab approached Bo within minutes with raised hair and tail straight with which seemed like an attitude or showing authority. Bo became in the same position, but I corrected him right away. The Lab kept doing that throughout the day. Do you think there is hope?


 
I would be _extremely _cautious about having one dog on a chain and the other loose. A dog that is chained can feel very threatened. It can become a dangerous situation very quickly if an attack should occur.


----------



## hvgoldens4

Originally Posted by *2Retrievers222*  
_Why don,t you get him fixed. Not all unfixed dogs have high levels of testosterone. You probably have a Alpha from litter. There is a smell to a Alpha male, that drives fixed and unfixed males to fight. This behavior is normal. Dogs need to have order. Even Cesar says this. When my Alpha was unfixed growing up, I watched dogs circle pack of dogs at dog park and then zone in on mine.

Pointgold you have a pack of unfixed that live together. That's totally different. Take them all to the dog park on the weekend to meet other unfixed dogs and see how they act. No one should take unfixed dogs over a year to dog park in my opinion_

I disagree.
I don't go to dog parks because of OTHER dogs, not mine. I cannot trust that other dogs are as well trained and under control as mine are. And mine DO meet other intact dogs - ALL THE TIME. There are no problems. And these are males who have been bred, as well. If another dog postures, or is "aggressive", mine ignore them. One of the mods here saw this occur at a show. Not all males fight. It is NOT normal. 

This has nothing to do with dogs living together as a pack. Another forum member had her young in tact male dog brought to my home by the breeder(she was not even present) and he was perfectly behaved and was playing with our boy, Detour(almost 18 months old and in tact) and a bunch of our other dogs he had never met before. 

Temperament is temperament. Yes, they are still dogs and will ocassionally do something totally out from left field. But, puncture wounds are more than a scuffle and we were playing and you hurt me so I got mad- and the fact that he has displayed aggression(growling at other dogs) before would have me more than a little concerned. There is such a thing as male dominance aggression and your boy is starting to show a history of behavior. Goldens should not behave aggressively.


----------



## mylissyk

hvgoldens4 said:


> Originally Posted by *2Retrievers222*
> _Why don,t you get him fixed. Not all unfixed dogs have high levels of testosterone. You probably have a Alpha from litter. There is a smell to a Alpha male, that drives fixed and unfixed males to fight. This behavior is normal. Dogs need to have order. Even Cesar says this. When my Alpha was unfixed growing up, I watched dogs circle pack of dogs at dog park and then zone in on mine._
> 
> _Pointgold you have a pack of unfixed that live together. That's totally different. Take them all to the dog park on the weekend to meet other unfixed dogs and see how they act. No one should take unfixed dogs over a year to dog park in my opinion_
> 
> I disagree.
> I don't go to dog parks because of OTHER dogs, not mine. I cannot trust that other dogs are as well trained and under control as mine are. And mine DO meet other intact dogs - ALL THE TIME. There are no problems. And these are males who have been bred, as well. If another dog postures, or is "aggressive", mine ignore them. One of the mods here saw this occur at a show. Not all males fight. It is NOT normal.
> 
> This has nothing to do with dogs living together as a pack. Another forum member had her young in tact male dog brought to my home by the breeder(she was not even present) and he was perfectly behaved and was playing with our boy, Detour(almost 18 months old and in tact) and a bunch of our other dogs he had never met before.
> 
> Temperament is temperament. Yes, they are still dogs and will ocassionally do something totally out from left field. But, puncture wounds are more than a scuffle and we were playing and you hurt me so I got mad- and the fact that he has displayed aggression(growling at other dogs) before would have me more than a little concerned. There is such a thing as male dominance aggression and your boy is starting to show a history of behavior. Goldens should not behave aggressively.


Not replying to your post, I just wanted to show you an easy way to quote multiple posts. At the bottom of each posted box there is the "Quote" icon, right next to it is another icon with an open bubble, it's the multi quote icon, click on that in each of the posts you want to respond to, then click "Post Reply", and it will open the new post box for you with all the quoted posts you wanted to reply to. Hope that helps.


----------



## JazzSkye

While I agree that unprovoked aggression is unacceptable and must be corrected, I have to disagree to some extent with the "this is not normal golden behavior" mantra. 

Dogs are dogs. They have their own behavioral instincts and codes. While we teach them what is acceptable and unacceptable in our human world, those canine instincts and forms of communication are still there, regardless of what we humans have decided about "standard behavior".

If we put 50 dogs of all races in an open field and stood back, some races would perhaps be more likely to be trigger-happy regarding aggression. But so would some select individual dogs, regardless of race or breeding. And in any case, they would ALL understand what a raised tail, bared teeth and a menacing look and growl meant if directed at them.

So IMHO, if they're of the canine race, they ALL have the potential for dog-on-dog aggression. My marshmallow Jazz (intact, age 6) has never gotten into a fight, but on rare occasions he has growled when approached too boisterously by an unknown male. 

He has never growled at another human since puppyhood because he knows they're all Alpha to him, and because we taught him that this was so.

But I also acknowledge that dog-on-dog communication sometimes involves growling and can lead to aggression, so regardless of "standard behavior" and my innate trust in him as a softie, I'm always wary when an unknown dog approaches, and always quick to redirect mine in another direction if uncertain of its intentions.

But should Jazz get into a scuffle one day, my reaction would be "not usual behavior, but it IS dog behavior"--regardless of whether or not I fully understand who started it or why it happened.


----------



## Selli-Belle

JazzSkye said:


> He has never growled at another human since puppyhood because he knows they're all Alpha to him, and because we taught him that this was so.


I would be very concerned about a puppy that growled at a human. As far as I am concerned, a Golden with a proper temperament should NEVER growl at a human out of aggression except in the possible scenario when it is protecting its family from a threat. A Golden should not have to "taught" that humans are the Alphas.


----------



## Jo Ellen

Selli-Belle said:


> I would be very concerned about a puppy that growled at a human. As far as I am concerned, a Golden with a proper temperament should NEVER growl at a human out of aggression except in the possible scenario when it is protecting its family from a threat. A Golden should not have to "taught" that humans are the Alphas.


What ?? I don't get this. I think many, most, all of us here have had our puppies growl at us at times ... resource guarding primarily. That's a very common puppy behavior, don't think it indicates aggression at all. Daisy used to growl at me when she knew I wanted to give her a bath, she outgrew that when she learned it didn't work. How many times do we see it come up here where someone's new puppy has growled about a bone or food or a high-value toy and we tell them it's not unusual, we just have to do the proper training? 

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying...


----------



## Megora

There is a big difference between the sassing that puppies do and resource guarding and aggression. 

Sassing is common. This is the "land shark" stuff - like mouthing and growl-yapping. 

But resource guarding and other signs of actual aggression are NOT common with golden retrievers.


----------



## Pointgold

JazzSkye said:


> While I agree that unprovoked aggression is unacceptable and must be corrected, I have to disagree to some extent with the "this is not normal golden behavior" mantra.
> 
> Dogs are dogs. They have their own behavioral instincts and codes. While we teach them what is acceptable and unacceptable in our human world, those canine instincts and forms of communication are still there, regardless of what we humans have decided about "standard behavior".
> 
> If we put 50 dogs of all races in an open field and stood back, some races would perhaps be more likely to be trigger-happy regarding aggression. But so would some select individual dogs, regardless of race or breeding. And in any case, they would ALL understand what a raised tail, bared teeth and a menacing look and growl meant if directed at them.
> 
> So IMHO, if they're of the canine race, they ALL have the potential for dog-on-dog aggression. My marshmallow Jazz (intact, age 6) has never gotten into a fight, but on rare occasions he has growled when approached too boisterously by an unknown male.
> 
> He has never growled at another human since puppyhood because he knows they're all Alpha to him, and because we taught him that this was so.
> 
> But I also acknowledge that dog-on-dog communication sometimes involves growling and can lead to aggression, so regardless of "standard behavior" and my innate trust in him as a softie, I'm always wary when an unknown dog approaches, and always quick to redirect mine in another direction if uncertain of its intentions.
> 
> But should Jazz get into a scuffle one day, my reaction would be "not usual behavior, but it IS dog behavior"--regardless of whether or not I fully understand who started it or why it happened.


Really? So, a Rottweiller is a Golden is a Pomeranian is a Pitbull is a Collie?


----------



## Selli-Belle

Jo Ellen said:


> What ?? I don't get this. I think many, most, all of us here have had our puppies growl at us at times ... resource guarding primarily. That's a very common puppy behavior, don't think it indicates aggression at all. Daisy used to growl at me when she knew I wanted to give her a bath, she outgrew that when she learned it didn't work. How many times do we see it come up here where someone's new puppy has growled about a bone or food or a high-value toy and we tell them it's not unusual, we just have to do the proper training?
> 
> Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying...





Megora said:


> There is a big difference between the sassing that puppies do and resource guarding and aggression.
> 
> Sassing is common. This is the "land shark" stuff - like mouthing and growl-yapping.
> 
> But resource guarding and other signs of actual aggression are NOT common with golden retrievers.





Selli-Belle said:


> I would be very concerned about a puppy that growled at a human. As far as I am concerned, a Golden with a proper temperament should NEVER growl at a human out of aggression except in the possible scenario when it is protecting its family from a threat. A Golden should not have to "taught" that humans are the Alphas.


I stand by my statement. A Golden with a proper temperament, one that should be considered for breeding should NOT growl aggressively at a human. Goldens with a proper temperament, one that should be considered for breeding, should not resource guard. It is not something that needs to be taught. As I have mentioned before, I have owned or been instrumental in raising seven Golden pups, only ONE, the least well bred one, ever growled in aggression as a puppy. Yes, puppies growl in play and when they sass (a play thing), but aggressive growling is not "normal" or should not be in a Golden puppy. I have spoken to breeders of different breeds that are harder dogs than Goldens (Malamutes, ACDs) and they have said resource guarding puppies (from humans) in their breeds is something that is not normal and raises major questions about their potential suitability for breeding.


----------



## Sally's Mom

AS I have said on numerous threads, a growl is a warning. It says,"I am uncomfortable." It is not necessarily an aggressive posture... it might be fear based, it might be a surprised reaction... Through the years, I have seen numerous dogs in practice (goldens, chessies, GSD) who growl when I enter the room, yet I can do anything to them. To me a growl is not always a gesture that biting me is next.


----------



## Sally's Mom

And lest I get taught another lesson on my interpretation of behavior on this forum, I am here to say that with my 6 goldens in this house, none of us is alpha. We all live harmoniously side by side with each other in this house. As an example, when 3 older dogs I bred (1-4 years) came back to visit today, no one was an idiot. Even with young pups in the house....


----------



## Jo Ellen

Sally's Mom said:


> AS I have said on numerous threads, a growl is a warning. It says,"I am uncomfortable." It is not necessarily an aggressive posture... it might be fear based, it might be a surprised reaction... Through the years, I have seen numerous dogs in practice (goldens, chessies, GSD) who growl when I enter the room, yet I can do anything to them. To me a growl is not always a gesture that biting me is next.


Daisy's growled at me a few times in her life, primarily when she was a puppy. She has never bitten me or even tried to. I trust her completely with humans. 

Dogs growl sometimes, it doesn't mean they're aggressive. It's how dogs communicate. Do we seriously think we can breed that out of a dog? 

I don't.


----------



## Selli-Belle

I hope I made it clear that first of all I was speaking of an aggressive growl and second that I was speaking of dog who should or should not be considered for breeding. 

My Goldens NEVER growled threateningly at me. The one who did belonged to my sister. It wasn't that I trained them not to growl at me over objects, they just never did it. When I was watching my Dad's new pup this past winter she was trying to put her high value objects IN my mouth to share (or since she is related to my Selli, it was probably that she just wanted me to hold it for her to chew on). 

A dog who has the tendency/desire to resource guard would not make good retriever. The main purpose of a retriever was to willingly return and give up a high value object. It seems logical that breeders who were breeding for a good hunting retriever would select FOR a dog who never guarded resources and AGAINST one that they had to train out of resource guarding. That trait, the desire to give up (or at least share) high value objects, is one of the hallmarks of the Golden temperament and something that makes them fabulous companions.


----------



## Pointgold

Selli-Belle said:


> I hope I made it clear that first of all I was speaking of an aggressive growl and second that I was speaking of dog who should or should not be considered for breeding.
> 
> My Goldens NEVER growled threateningly at me. The one who did belonged to my sister. It wasn't that I trained them not to growl at me over objects, they just never did it. When I was watching my Dad's new pup this past winter she was trying to put her high value objects IN my mouth to share (or since she is related to my Selli, it was probably that she just wanted me to hold it for her to chew on).
> 
> A dog who has the tendency/desire to resource guard would not make good retriever. The main purpose of a retriever was to willingly return and give up a high value object. It seems logical that breeders who were breeding for a good hunting retriever would select FOR a dog who never guarded resources and AGAINST one that they had to train out of resource guarding. That trait, the desire to give up (or at least share) high value objects, is one of the hallmarks of the Golden temperament and something that makes them fabulous companions.


The standard states:

*Temperament: *Friendly, reliable, and trustworthy. Quarrelsomeness or hostility toward other dogs or people in normal situations, or an unwarranted show of timidity or nervousness, is not in keeping with Golden Retriever character. Such actions should be penalized according to their significance.​ 

I have _never _had one of my dogs growl at me, nor have I ever heard any of them growl at _any_one. And frankly, I'd be mortified if they did.

When I hear people saying the XXX wasn't a "normal" situation, I usually am surprised. Properly socialized dogs with sound temperaments should be able to display friendliness, reliability, and trustworthiness in pretty nearly all the circumstances that we as their humans would have them in.


----------



## mybuddy

Pointgold said:


> The standard states:
> 
> *Temperament: *Friendly, reliable, and trustworthy. Quarrelsomeness or hostility toward other dogs or people in normal situations, or an unwarranted show of timidity or nervousness, is not in keeping with Golden Retriever character. Such actions should be penalized according to their significance.​
> 
> I have _never _had one of my dogs growl at me, nor have I ever heard any of them growl at _any_one. And frankly, I'd be mortified if they did.
> 
> When I hear people saying the XXX wasn't a "normal" situation, I usually am surprised. Properly socialized dogs with sound temperaments should be able to display friendliness, reliability, and trustworthiness in pretty nearly all the circumstances that we as their humans would have them in.


Would this also include a situation where you might be in danger? Would they go into protective mode and growl and or bite someone who might want to do you harm?


----------



## Sally's Mom

My dogs have never growled at me either... but I can remember a chessie bitch (well) who would growl at me the entire time she was on the table while I examined her. i was never bitten nor did I ever think she would bite me. She was never muzzled and no one held her... mine get along with everyone and everything...


----------



## Pointgold

Sally's Mom said:


> My dogs have never growled at me either... but I can remember a chessie bitch (well) who would growl at me the entire time she was on the table while I examined her. i was never bitten nor did I ever think she would bite me. She was never muzzled and no one held her... mine get along with everyone and everything...


 
And I have to believe that you know that Chessie temperaments are in fact very different from Goldens. Every time I read their standard re:temperament I feel like I need to look again to make sure I am reading the CHESSIE standard. They are tough, stubborn, independent and often sharp. They are quite territorial. I finished 4 Chessies for a woman from Texas. Her male was considered an outstanding dog, even AFTER he beat the crap out of one of her puppies. I don't get that...


----------



## Pointgold

mybuddy said:


> Would this also include a situation where you might be in danger? Would they go into protective mode and growl and or bite someone who might want to do you harm?


Do you consider that a "normal" situation??? I don't.


----------



## mybuddy

Pointgold said:


> Do you consider that a "normal" situation??? I don't.


I didnt really pick on the normal part of the discussion. I guess I wasnt reading carefully enough. (my bad). So, I will just assume the answer to my question is a yes?


----------



## mybuddy

Buddy doesnt growl at people or other dogs but he growls at platic bags and umbrellas. Is this considered aggressive?


----------



## Pointgold

mybuddy said:


> I didnt really pick on the normal part of the discussion. I guess I wasnt reading carefully enough. (my bad). So, I will just assume the answer to my question is a yes?


My answer would be a "perhaps, bordering on probably." 
On 2 occasions, 2 of my dogs (Lyric, and her son, Michael) put themselves between my kids (Lyric) and a friend (Michael) when they were not happy with people approaching. There was no overt aggression shown, but they were definitely on their toes. I don't know what would have happened if things escalated, but I have never had a hard time imagining that either of them would do what they needed to to protect. I've never been in a similar situation since then, and have different dogs now, so I really cannot say more than that. I think Zoom might, but couldn't really say for sure about any of the rest.
The joke that a Golden Retriever would help a burglar carry stuff out of your house is only sorta a joke.


----------



## Megora

_



Would this also include a situation where you might be in danger? Would they go into protective mode and growl and or bite someone who might want to do you harm?

Click to expand...

__I'm not answering for Laura, but while I had temperamental redheads who did have resource guarding issues until we figured out the whole training thing, and then add to that the fact that even our blondies did or do the "warning" growl when they see something spooky (looming garbage cans, bobbling buoys in the lake, etc) and/or are feeding off of our own anxiety (as in approaching people who do not smell or look right and the owner is tensing up), and then add to that the fact that except for Charmy - every single one of our goldens had to deal with some dog going after them at one point in their life... _

_I can very firmly say that I never felt concerned about my past goldens attacking a person or another dog. Same thing with our current guy. Even if attacked. Even if I were attacked or hurt. _

_None of our dogs ever exhibited true aggression towards any people or dogs. I would be very embarrassed and horrified if any of my dogs did, as knowing how goldens "should be", it would mean there is something wrong with my dogs._

_Jacks has been charged at by big dogs and he was attacked by a neighbors dog. He stood like the house by the side of the road and looked to me for help._

_Every single one of our past goldens reacted the same way. If attacked or of I were attacked while out walking, I can imagine my dog running away scared or jumping all over the person and me in non-aggressive anxiety that could get him hurt. If I wanted a dog to protect me, I would get a different breed._


----------



## mybuddy

Pointgold said:


> My answer would be a "perhaps, bordering on probably."
> On 2 occasions, 2 of my dogs (Lyric, and her son, Michael) put themselves between my kids (Lyric) and a friend (Michael) when they were not happy with people approaching. There was no overt aggression shown, but they were definitely on their toes. I don't know what would have happened if things escalated, but I have never had a hard time imagining that either of them would do what they needed to to protect. I've never been in a similar situation since then, and have different dogs now, so I really cannot say more than that. I think Zoom might, but couldn't really say for sure about any of the rest.
> The joke that a Golden Retriever would help a burglar carry stuff out of your house is only sorta a joke.


 
I am really confused by the whole thing. I mean, in a dog's mind ( we dont really know how they really think)..might interpret danger in different ways. Some dogs just might feel other dogs pose danger and growl at them to keep them away. I mean, how is that really different from a person posing danger to another dog? In a dog's mind, they might feel that a certain dog is going to hurt him or his owner and might growl.


----------



## Pointgold

mybuddy said:


> I am really confused by the whole thing. I mean, in a dog's mind ( we dont really know how they really think)..might interpret danger in different ways. Some dogs just might feel other dogs pose danger and growl at them to keep them away. I mean, how is that really different from a person posing danger to another dog? In a dog's mind, they might feel that a certain dog is going to hurt him or his owner and might growl.


Dogs are extremely astute at reading and interpreting body language, as well as having a highly developed sense of smell. And it has been well documented that when under stress, humans secret substances that a dog can smell. Combine the body language and the odor, and the dog will interpret the person/situation as dangerous. 
A dog of sound temperament, confident, and well socialized, will handle such situations more appropriately than one who is not.


----------



## mybuddy

If my golden retriever puppy growled at me, I would not be alarmed. I would consider this normal behavior that has to be corrected.

Totally normal in my opinion


----------



## gold4me

Pointgold said:


> Dogs are extremely astute at reading and interpreting body language, as well as having a highly developed sense of smell. And it has been well documented that when under stress, humans secret substances that a dog can smell. Combine the body language and the odor, and the dog will interpret the person/situation as dangerous.
> A dog of sound temperament, confident, and well socialized, will handle such situations more appropriately than one who is not.


So how would a confident well socialized dog handle a situation where his/her owner is in danger and they are giving off signs of fear???


----------



## mybuddy

When Buddy was a puppy ( before 6 months ) he would growl at me in certain situations. Now, I am not sure if there are "growl types" or not but I certainly had to teach him how not be become food protective. That was a process. Now I can put my face in his bowl while he is eating but not when he was a puppy


----------



## Lobster Dog

I would be extremely concerned if a golden puppy growled at me. I can understand growling at littermates, but not at me. I know there are certain temperament traits that are ingrained in dogs, but aggression is not one ingrained in well bred goldens. 

As far as puncture wounds, I don't agree with the statement about intent. I have seen the most docile male produce a puncture wound in another male whom attached him. Fear can definitely cause a golden to inflict wounds it would never attempt in normal situations. We should know this from looking at ourselves, when fear is involved fight or flight takes over and control goes out the window


----------



## mybuddy

Lobster Dog said:


> I would be extremely concerned if a golden puppy growled at me. I can understand growling at littermates, but not at me. I know there are certain temperament traits that are ingrained in dogs, but aggression is not one ingrained in well bred goldens.
> 
> As far as puncture wounds, I don't agree with the statement about intent. I have seen the most docile male produce a puncture wound in another male whom attached him. Fear can definitely cause a golden to inflict wounds it would never attempt in normal situations. We should know this from looking at ourselves, when fear is involved fight or flight takes over and control goes out the window


 
I guess in lobster land, things are differnt. But I disagree


----------



## Jo Ellen

So let me make sure I understand what is being said here.

Puppies who show resource guarding behaviors are considered aggressive dogs? Even when they are trained appropriately and don't continue these behaviors into adulthood?


----------



## mybuddy

I dont know why I am finding this so funny. I mean a puppy growls at you and you should be very concerned???? Since when? I dont get it.


----------



## mybuddy

Jo Ellen said:


> So let me make sure I understand what is being said here.
> 
> Puppies who show resource guarding behaviors are considered aggressive dogs? Even when they are trained appropriately and don't continue these behaviors into adulthood?


 
That is exactly what I am saying Jo Ellen. What are we missing?


----------



## Jo Ellen

I'm going to start a poll to see how many of us on this forum have aggressive dogs, defined by dogs that showed resource guarding behaviors in puppyhood.

I'm not sure what we've missed, Vic ... this is news to me too.


----------



## mybuddy

Hmmm....I dont know. Puppies are puppies and I do believe that there are some things that have to be taught. I certainly do not believe that you can breed this natural instinct out of a puppy. You can teach them yes...this is just my opinion. I am not claiming to be right as I really dont know but I stand my my opinion.


----------



## Jo Ellen

Does this mean that well-bred goldens can be left in the same room with a toddler or infant, unattended, while the dog is chewing on a bone?


----------



## mybuddy

Jo Ellen said:


> Does this mean that well-bred goldens can be left in the same room with a toddler or infant, unattended, while the dog is chewing on a bone?


That is a really good question!


----------



## mybuddy

This is a very interesting debate for sure. I just hope that a new puppy owner wouldnt freak out and return a puppy that growled. YIKES...I really do think that is a normal behavior.


----------



## Megora

Jo Ellen said:


> Does this mean that well-bred goldens can be left in the same room with a toddler or infant, unattended, while the dog is chewing on a bone?


I would not leave a baby alone in a room unattended - period. Not because my dog would exhibit agression over a bone, but because you are leaving the baby open to any kind of accident. Like being knocked over or stepped by a young dog licking the baby to pieces. It's sweet and I'd trust my dogs tonever purposefully attack a child for any reason. But a small helpless child with a soft skull and a floppy body could get hurt nevertheless.


----------



## mybuddy

Megora said:


> I would not leave a baby alone in a room unattended - period. Not because my dog would exhibit agression over a bone, but because you are leaving the baby open to any kind of accident. Like being knocked over or stepped by a young dog licking the baby to pieces. It's sweet and I'd trust my dogs tonever purposefully attack a child for any reason. But a small helpless child with a soft skull and a floppy body could get hurt nevertheless.


 
I dont she would either ...I think she was just trying to make a point (in the context of the debate).

Even if I were present in the room, I would not allow a toddler to get near a puppy with a bone.


----------



## Mirinde

mybuddy said:


> That is a really good question!


I agree-- I'm really confused at some of the things being said in this thread. They seem very much the opposite of what usually gets said in most resource guarding/puppy started growling at x,y, or z/etc. type threads. Some of those threads do include well bred goldens!


----------



## mybuddy

Mirinde said:


> I agree-- I'm really confused at some of the things being said in this thread. They seem very much the opposite of what usually gets said in most resource guarding/puppy started growling at x,y, or z/etc. type threads. Some of those threads do include well bred goldens!


 
Yeah, right? I hear ya!

I really dont want to come across as sounding like a know it all here. There is nothing worse so I just want to make it clear that this is only an opinion. I could never claim to know for sure, how could I?

I do find this incredibly interesting that there is a claim that a golden retriever puppy showing resource guarding is abnormal.

so, if my puppy, a little puppy growls over his bone even once...this is abnormal?

Really?


----------



## Jersey's Mom

Mirinde said:


> I agree-- I'm really confused at some of the things being said in this thread. They seem very much the opposite of what usually gets said in most resource guarding/puppy started growling at x,y, or z/etc. type threads. Some of those threads do include well bred goldens!


I think the difference is that this is a dog that the OP bought with the intention/hope of breeding him. We're not talking about just the behavior of one dog but about whether this is an acceptable trait to perpetuate in the breed. Just what I got from reading... I could be wrong.


----------



## mybuddy

Pointgold said:


> Dogs are extremely astute at reading and interpreting body language, as well as having a highly developed sense of smell. And it has been well documented that when under stress, humans secret substances that a dog can smell. Combine the body language and the odor, and the dog will interpret the person/situation as dangerous.
> A dog of sound temperament, confident, and well socialized, will handle such situations more appropriately than one who is not.


I dont think it is always just about senses and smells. I do believe dogs are moved by much more than just that and yes, I do believe they think 

Buddy will always bark at a husky...always and only a husky. He is afraid of them so yes, in "his" mind, they are posing danger..or at least I believe that is what he is thinking. I dont think it has anything to do with body language or smell.

Just my opinion


----------



## Selli-Belle

Mirinde said:


> I agree-- I'm really confused at some of the things being said in this thread. They seem very much the opposite of what usually gets said in most resource guarding/puppy started growling at x,y, or z/etc. type threads. Some of those threads do include well bred goldens!


1) A puppy who resource guards is NOT displaying a proper Golden Temperament and should not be considered for breeding.

2) Point 1 concerns questions of whether a dog should be bred or not, not what to do if you have a puppy who is resource guarding.

3) The proof of if a puppy is "well bred" or not is in the pudding so to speak. There are puppies that come from show lines that may display resource guarding and these should not be considered as potential breeding dogs.

I purchased Selli with the possibility of breeding her. One of the reasons I didn't was because I think at times she is to "bitchy" with other dogs, i.e., she takes her corrections to far. She has never hurt another dog or even bitten another dog and the other dogs have always tried to approach her immediately after she has corrected them. I know other Golden people who breed who have told me it is not a problem, but as far as I am concerned it is not something I would consider within standard. We should ONLY breed the best Goldens, ones that have the greatest chance of producing pups that meet the standard.

I think we have normalized the idea that dogs naturally resource guard and made it a universal when it should not be. Goldens got their reputation as a great family dog because they didn't resource guard, historically you could leave a Golden (who had not been trained not to resource guard), a toddler, and a bone together in a room and not worry. 

About fifteen years ago now, I was at a party at my sister's house (actually yard) in a small town in Iowa. There were dozens of people and four dogs roaming around. At one point I looked over and saw my Dexy, who had never been trained not to resource guard (and had never been treated that all humans are alpha to him), laying on the gound with a ball in his mouth. Also holding onto the ball (with her hand in Dexy's mouth) was an 18 month old little girl. The girl was trying to pull the ball out of Dexy's mouth (like that was going to happen, adult men couldn't pull a ball out of Dexy's mouth) and Dexy was loving it. I thought that the parents of the child were crazy to let their kid play this way with a dog they had never met before, but I had NO concerns about what Dexy would do. The parents assumed since Dexy was a Golden it would be fine.

As I said before, historically, resource guarding was bred away from as a functional decision and the result was a breed where children could attempt to take a high value object away from any Golden without a problem. That breeding practice needs to continue.

The normalization of resource guarding, or the problem of the increase of puppy who resource guard and show other behavior issues is the topic of Dr. Patricia McConnell's latest blog post, check it out!


----------



## Jo Ellen

Deleted, pending review of above post


----------



## Pointgold

Selli-Belle said:


> 1) A puppy who resource guards is NOT displaying a proper Golden Temperament and should not be considered for breeding.
> 
> 2) Point 1 concerns questions of whether a dog should be bred or not, not what to do if you have a puppy who is resource guarding.
> 
> 3) The proof of if a puppy is "well bred" or not is in the pudding so to speak. There are puppies that come from show lines that may display resource guarding and these should not be considered as potential breeding dogs.
> 
> I purchased Selli with the possibility of breeding her. One of the reasons I didn't was because I think at times she is to "bitchy" with other dogs, i.e., she takes her corrections to far. She has never hurt another dog or even bitten another dog and the other dogs have always tried to approach her immediately after she has corrected them. I know other Golden people who breed who have told me it is not a problem, but as far as I am concerned it is not something I would consider within standard. We should ONLY breed the best Goldens, ones that have the greatest chance of producing pups that meet the standard.
> 
> I think we have normalized the idea that dogs naturally resource guard and made it a universal when it should not be. Goldens got their reputation as a great family dog because they didn't resource guard, historically you could leave a Golden (who had not been trained not to resource guard), a toddler, and a bone together in a room and not worry.
> 
> About fifteen years ago now, I was at a party at my sister's house (actually yard) in a small town in Iowa. There were dozens of people and four dogs roaming around. At one point I looked over and saw my Dexy, who had never been trained not to resource guard (and had never been treated that all humans are alpha to him), laying on the gound with a ball in his mouth. Also holding onto the ball (with her hand in Dexy's mouth) was an 18 month old little girl. The girl was trying to pull the ball out of Dexy's mouth (like that was going to happen, adult men couldn't pull a ball out of Dexy's mouth) and Dexy was loving it. I thought that the parents of the child were crazy to let their kid play this way with a dog they had never met before, but I had NO concerns about what Dexy would do. The parents assumed since Dexy was a Golden it would be fine.
> 
> As I said before, historically, resource guarding was bred away from as a functional decision and the result was a breed where children could attempt to take a high value object away from any Golden without a problem. That breeding practice needs to continue.
> 
> The normalization of resource guarding, or the problem of the increase of puppy who resource guard and show other behavior issues is the topic of Dr. Patricia McConnell's latest blog post, check it out!


THANK you. 
I have never experienced one of our dogs "resource guarding". It seems to have become a catch phrase to excuse pretty nearly everything, and I don't accept it. Of course, then I am accused by the Montessori Puppy School folks of being too harsh and not "positive". I am positive. I am positive that I won't accept any aggressive behavior and I will correct it immediately, and I certainly won't breed it.
My son Paul pulled a hamburger out of Lyric's mouth when she took it from him. He was 3 or 4. No problem. 
I've told the story of her son Michael having a little girl stick her finger up his nose and he remained on his sit stay and waited for me to "take care of it."
I've told the story of Crew having been snapped at ringside by another male and he simply stepped back and sat closer to me. The other dog's handler made the excuse that he "doesn't like other dogs in his space." One of our forum mods was there to witness it.

Yes. Dogs are dogs. But there ARE differences in temperaments between the breeds, and how a dog is bred and raised is critical. I also think that too many attempt to make it too complicated, mainly by assigning far more human characteristics to dogs than is realistic.

Again, just me. But I am very happy with my dogs, and trust them implicitely in situations that I consider "normal", which include situations more "extreme" than most people have their dogs in.


**Adding that we are referring go Golden Retrievers here. But our Pointers and the Smooth Collie are included for me here, as well.


----------



## Jo Ellen

I can take a fish out of Daisy's mouth without her showing the slightest protest. I can take a bone away from her, a ball, a treat, a dead animal, anything.

But she did resource guard as a puppy, she did growl at me on occasion. She has never bitten a human, or showed any indication that she might. 

Would I allow a child, toddler or infant to approach her while she's chewing on a bone? NEVER. 

Would you?


----------



## mybuddy

Jo Ellen said:


> I can take a fish out of Daisy's mouth without her showing the slightest protest. I can take a bone away from her, a ball, a treat, a dead animal, anything.
> 
> But she did resource guard as a puppy, she did growl at me on occasion. She has never bitten a human, or showed any indication that she might.
> 
> Would I allow a child, toddler or infant to approach her while she's chewing on a bone? NEVER.
> 
> Would you?


No...I wouldnt. Buddy is a kitten but I would'nt.


----------



## Jo Ellen

I realize this thread has taken a left turn from the original topic, but it's a great discussion and I have another question.

A well-bred golden retriever puppy .... what would happen if this puppy was placed in a horrible environenment growing up? Would good genes win out? Likely not. Theoretically, you could still breed this dog because the genes are ideal, even though the behavior is not. Genes don't change in a single generation, do they? 

My point is that nurture has much to do with good temperament and it's really quite impossible to distinguish sometimes where nature leaves off and nurture begins.

Personally I think it's ridiculous to say that a puppy that shows resource-guarding behavior but outgrows it with proper training is not a well-bred golden and shouldn't be bred. Now, a puppy that shows resource-guarding behavior and DOESN'T outgrow it with proper training ... that might be a different scenario altogether.

Thank goodness we don't apply these same stringent rules to human propagation. If we did not allow anyone who ever raised their voice to have children, we wouldn't have a human race


----------



## mybuddy

Jo Ellen said:


> I realize this thread has taken a left turn from the original topic, but it's a great discussion and I have another question.
> 
> A well-bred golden retriever puppy .... what would happen if this puppy was placed in a horrible environenment growing up? Would good genes win out? Likely not. Theoretically, you could still breed this dog because the genes are ideal, even though the behavior is not. Genes don't change in a single generation, do they?
> 
> My point is that nurture has much to do with good temperament and it's really quite impossible to distinguish sometimes where nature leaves off and nurture begins.
> 
> Personally I think it's ridiculous to say that a puppy that shows resource-guarding behavior but outgrows it with proper training is not a well-bred golden and shouldn't be bred. Now, a puppy that shows resource-guarding behavior and DOESN'T outgrow it with proper training ... that might be a different scenario altogether.
> 
> Thank goodness we don't apply these same stringent rules to human propagation. If we did not allow anyone who ever raised their voice to have children, we wouldn't have a human race


 
WOW...you ask the BEST questions! They were all in my mind but couldnt seem to get them from da bwane too da keeborde!

I am so glad you asked this.


----------



## solinvictus

"Puppies who show resource guarding behaviors are considered aggressive dogs?"

A golden retriever puppy who shows resource guarding would not have a rock solid temperment. 
Since breeders are to breed the best of the breed this should be taken into consideration and in most circumstances take this dog out of their breeding program.


----------



## Loisiana

Behaviors that are there before training tell a lot about the dog and his natural tendencies. Behaviors after training tell a lot about the owner. When getting information about a dog's temperament, I am much more interested in what he did before he was trained not to do that, than I am in how effective a trainer the owner is.

I agree that a puppy showing aggressive resource guarding is not correct temperament. Yes the dog can be trained to behave correctly, but it is much preferred that the dog have that inclination naturally rather than having to be taught that it isn't correct.


----------



## Jo Ellen

How trainable a puppy or dog is says a lot about that puppy or dog also.


----------



## hotel4dogs

Just to put a different idea out there...
Goldens were bred to hunt. 
Hunting is not a solitary activity; there are humans around, as well as other dogs. Often lots of other dogs. 
There is NOTHING my dog values more than a bird. It is an extremely high value resource to him. He will reject food, attention, everything (except maybe a girl in season, haven't tried that one) if there's a bird around.
Of what value would a retriever be if he/she resource guarded the birds, even though it is the most high value resource he has ever seen!!! NONE. My dog had better let me, or anyone else, take that bird out of his mouth, and gently and willingly give it up. IF two dogs head for the same bird, which happens more often than it should, there had better NOT be a dog fight over the bird.
Resource guarding is NOT proper behavior in a golden retriever, and any dog who exhibits that behavior should NOT be bred, it should not be passed on in the breed.
"....primarily a hunting dog...." (breed standard)


----------



## Jersey's Mom

Jo Ellen: I do get what you're saying to an extent, but try to see this from another point of view. 

A puppy who growls once or twice when given her first marrow bone, gets trained and desensitized and becomes a wonderful dog who will give up any high value object at any time under any circumstances. That dog is then bred (by your argument) and produces 8 puppies - 4 of which go to their new homes and growl at their owners over marrow bones and bully sticks. One of these dogs is trained and desensitized and becomes a wonderful dog who will give up any high value item at any time under any circumstances. 

That dog is then bred and produces 10 more puppies, 8 of which go home at 8 weeks and growl at their owners when they approach the food bowl, won't give up tennis balls and are not allowed to have any high value items of an sort. One of these dogs is trained and desensitized and becomes a wonderful dog who will give up any high value item at any time under any circumstances (except marrow bones... she's never allowed to have those). She is bred and so on and so forth. 

Here's the problem: We are now producing litter after litter after litter of puppies from dogs who carry this tendency and it becomes a more and more ingrained part of the golden temperament over time. Think of the way goldens have changed in looks over the years due to breeding... the same is absolutely possible for temperament. At what point does the temperament stop being "Golden?"  At what point does this tendency for resource guarding become so ingrained that we can no longer select away from it? At what point does this tendency become so strong that it can no longer be "trained" out of the dogs? And at that point, what exactly have we done to the breed we love?

No doubt that a puppy who growls at their owner over an item at 8 weeks can make a wonderful pet with the proper training. But as others have said: when we're talking about a young pup who has not been mistreated, deprived of necessary resources or injured in some way.... what we are really seeing is the natural tendencies of the dog, their natural temperament. It is vitally important to the breed that we select only for the most classically golden features... and resource guarding is not classically golden. 

I hope that made some sense... it does in my head anyway.

Julie, Jersey and Oz


----------



## Jo Ellen

I'm not questioning the behavior of trained dogs, I'm questioning how we evaluate or judge the behavior of untrained puppies.


----------



## Jersey's Mom

Jo Ellen said:


> I'm not questioning the behavior of trained dogs, I'm questioning how we evaluate or judge the behavior of untrained puppies.


Many (if not most) reputable breeders have the puppies temperament tested prior to sending them to homes. It is part of how they determine who the "picks" are and part of how they determine which dogs would be best suited to which homes.


----------



## Jersey's Mom

Jo Ellen said:


> I'm not questioning the behavior of trained dogs, I'm questioning how we evaluate or judge the behavior of untrained puppies.





Jersey's Mom said:


> Many (if not most) reputable breeders have the puppies temperament tested prior to sending them to homes. It is part of how they determine who the "picks" are and part of how they determine which dogs would be best suited to which homes.


Actually, it occurs to me I have a great story to illustrate exactly this... Jersey and his brother Presto. I was supposed to get the second pick male, with an accomplished trainer and I think breeder of another breed to get first. She was present for the temperament testing of the litter. She chose Presto, who was shown to be a slightly "harder" dog than Jersey. Not quite sure how to explain it and could only tell you what Jersey's assessment said, not Presto's... but essentially Jersey was expected to be a bit more easy going and biddable. The other woman liked something about that slightly harder temperament (I think it was more similar to what she was used to with her other breed) and was hoping it would grow/display itself in a certain way that would make the dog actually superior as an obedience prospect (but again, I'm not 100% sure exactly what her thought process was on it... this is just my understanding of it). My father immediately called me on the phone and convinced me that Jersey would be the absolute best pick for me (he wasn't my first choice :uhoh... and quite possibly top pick of the litter... and he was absolutely right.

Unfortunately, this particular trait in Presto chose to manifest itself as resource guarding (perhaps in addition to the other thing she was hoping for? I don't know, but he has done very well with obedience). She immediately neutered him. Jersey on the other hand has never ever ever... even as an 8 week old puppy... ever considered growling at me over an object/item/resource. He is exactly as the testing predicted he would be. I'm sure it's not always that picture perfect... but definitely a clear example of how that selection process can go. 

Julie, Jersey and Oz


----------



## Jo Ellen

Thank you, Julie.

Let's go back to where my hackles were first raised in this thread ... where we started to label resource guarding type growls in puppies as aggressive.

Again, I want to emphasize that I am not talking about trained puppies or dogs, I'm talking about the untrained young puppy that is still learning its way in the human world. By your post, I would imagine that Presto did not exhibit the behavior I'm questioning initially but that it developed later on, say 5-6-7 months? Did the breeder make the determination that Presto was of incorrect temperament and not worthy of breeding the very first time he exhibited the behavior? Or was it not manageable, a clear propensity perhaps that continued despite her efforts and then she made her determination? 

What about the puppies who show resource guarding behaviors very early on (though rarely at 8 weeks, maybe more likely like I said, 5-6-7 months), but they are trained appropriately and don't continue on to incorporate this behavior in their later months and years?

I will stand by my opinion that even though Daisy showed resource guarding behaviors in her early adolescence, she is not an aggressive dog, she has never bitten anyone. She will sometimes growl, and I respect that ... but she is not aggressive.


----------



## Pointgold

Jersey's Mom said:


> Many (if not most) reputable breeders have the puppies temperament tested prior to sending them to homes. It is part of how they determine who the "picks" are and part of how they determine which dogs would be best suited to which homes.


We temperament/aptitude test every litter. And I have tested dozens of litters of various breeds for their breeders. I see the differences in the breed temperaments from the get go. 

We cannot make excuses for dogs who have the potential to impact our breed's hallmark - the temperament - for generations.


----------



## Jo Ellen

So we're defining puppies growling at humans as aggressive dogs which some are excusing as resource guarding when it occurs in that context?


----------



## Jo Ellen

And if we can temperament test at a very early age for this quality, while defining as aggression, why would we even place that puppy? Wouldn't that be considered a potentially dangerous dog?


----------



## Jersey's Mom

Jo Ellen said:


> Thank you, Julie.
> 
> Let's go back to where my hackles were first raised in this thread ... where we started to label resource guarding type growls in puppies as aggressive.
> 
> Again, I want to emphasize that I am not talking about trained puppies or dogs, I'm talking about the untrained young puppy that is still learning its way in the human world. By your post, I would imagine that Presto did not exhibit the behavior I'm questioning initially but that it developed later on, say 5-6-7 months? Did the breeder make the determination that Presto was of incorrect temperament and not worthy of breeding the very first time he exhibited the behavior? Or was it not manageable, a clear propensity perhaps that continued despite her efforts and then she made her determination?
> 
> What about the puppies who show resource guarding behaviors very early on (though rarely at 8 weeks, maybe more likely like I said, 5-6-7 months), but they are trained appropriately and don't continue on to incorporate this behavior in their later months and years?
> 
> I will stand by my opinion that even though Daisy showed resource guarding behaviors in her early adolescence, she is not an aggressive dog, she has never bitten anyone. She will sometimes growl, and I respect that ... but she is not aggressive.


To be honest upfront: I do not know when Presto started displaying this behavior. You are likely right that it wasn't at 8 weeks and isn't that early in most dogs. I also cannot say for certain exactly when she made the decision but will give you the impression I have from the information I was given: I believe that Presto's owner decided not to breed him the moment he showed this tendency for resource guarding. She is an accomplished trainer and I have no doubt that she was able to manage the situation and mold the behavior as she saw fit. It was the very fact that resource guarding was a natural part of Presto's temperament that disqualified him as a breeding prospect in her eyes. Was it the first time he growled? The second? Was it a snap rather than a growl? I really don't know... but the bottom line was that this was a dog with no _reason_ to resource guard, but who did so anyway as a result of his natural tendencies.

To have this discussion, I think we need to agree that we're discussing reputable breeders. There is no accounting for the actions/decisions when we talk about millers, HVBs, and some BYBs (although it has been reasonably argued before that temperamant is likely the paramount influence in this setting). So a reputable breeder will undoubtedly obtain a dog from another reputable breeder. This means the puppy has received appropriate handling and socialization during the early weeks of his or her life, was well taken care of, was provided with an appropriate amount of resources (food/drink), etc. This reputable breeder would then continue to socialize the dog and treat him or her well. The dog would have no _reason_ to protect resources. By this I mean, we do not have a malnourished dog protecting its food or something along that line. Resource guarding as a genetic trait exists in canids (dogs, wolves, foxes, etc) because historically they _had_ to protect their resources to insure their ability to live and reproduce. A golden in a reputable breeder's home (and/or a responsible pet owner's home) does not have to do this. For many many years, breeders have selected away from this trait in goldens. It may be impossible to fully eradicate due to how deeply ingrained it is in the genetics of all canids... however, it only stands to reason that given the written standard and intended function of a golden retriever that we continue to minimize that trait to the greatest extent possible. So in the eyes of a reputable breeder, a puppy who at 5-7 months who exhibits this tendency should not be given the opportunity to pass along this trait through breeding. Select for the best. There are many otherwise wonderful dogs who may be eliminated from the breeding pool... but many more who are every bit as good and who do not carry this tendency. Those are the dogs who should be bred. If we find ourselves in a position where the only structurally appropriate breeding dogs also carry the tendency for resource guarding, we have done something seriously seriously wrong. So long as that is not the case, there is always a _better_ choice for a breeding prospect than the dog who displayed a natural tendency toward resource guarding.

Julie, Jersey and Oz


----------



## Megora

Jo Ellen said:


> I will stand by my opinion that even though Daisy showed resource guarding behaviors in her early adolescence, she is not an aggressive dog, she has never bitten anyone. She will sometimes growl, and I respect that ... but she is not aggressive.


I was trying to figure out how to answer this clearly. My feeling is that resource guarding is a problem. But it is something that can be prevented with the right training and handling from the breeder and the new owner.

So while I definitely agree that a dog who shows any signs of clamping down or jealous behaviors over his food, toys, or people probably should not be bred, I don't know if you can say for sure that a dog who from puppyhood never showed any signs of guarding in the least bit was bred to be that way... unless the breeder and owner did absolutely no handling or training and gave that puppy every opportunity to "fail" and he didn't? 

My Jacks and Danny before him NEVER exhibited any signs of resource guarding or "clamping down" or anything like that. But as for Jacks, I know his breeder handled him a lot. And I handled him a lot right from the beginning to make sure I could take anything out of his mouth. And Danny was about the same.

And I know that other people here - while they do not handle their dogs while they are eating or chewing - do take measures to ensure their dogs never become anxious while they are eating or chewing, this to prevent them from developing guarding behaviors. 

-> in my mind - resource guarding can be as subtle as a dog tensing up and clamping down on something. I do not allow my dog to do this and I use "trade" to ensure this never happens. So YES my dog is trained and proofed enough for kids to be around him while he's chewing on bones. But again, since his breeder handled him and I did the same - I have no idea whether he was born this way or if the handling prevented any problems from developing. 

When you are talking about dogs who despite a lot of socialization and handling still develop aggression issues towards dogs and people, or get turfy over their "belongings" - definitely, I would wager that is due to breeding. 

Your dog should allow anyone to take things out of his mouth and he should not exhibit any shyness or threatening posturing towards anyone. And with goldens, or at least my guy, people assume that he is a friendly dog. 

I was at a trial and while my back was turned somebody snuck up behind us to pet and huggle over my dog. I had no idea there was somebody back there until I felt Jacks bopping me with his tail. That could have been disasterous if my dog had any behavioral issues. Instead, I can trust my dog to welcome and enjoy anyone walking up and touching him, hugging him - right down to them taking his leash and walking off with him. <- That's the sort of behavior that I hope golden retriever breeders are breeding for.


----------



## Jersey's Mom

Jo Ellen said:


> So we're defining puppies growling at humans as aggressive dogs which some are excusing as resource guarding when it occurs in that context?


I may have misread, but my understanding was not that the posters were referring to all growling as aggressive behavior. Essentially what I got is they were acknowledging that there are many reasons for a puppy to growl and making clear that they were intending to address only the ones who were doing so out of aggression. Again, just what I got from the posts...


----------



## Selli-Belle

Jo Ellen said:


> I realize this thread has taken a left turn from the original topic, but it's a great discussion and I have another question.
> 
> A well-bred golden retriever puppy .... what would happen if this puppy was placed in a horrible environenment growing up? Would good genes win out? Likely not. Theoretically, you could still breed this dog because the genes are ideal, even though the behavior is not. Genes don't change in a single generation, do they?
> 
> My point is that nurture has much to do with good temperament and it's really quite impossible to distinguish sometimes where nature leaves off and nurture begins.
> 
> Personally I think it's ridiculous to say that a puppy that shows resource-guarding behavior but outgrows it with proper training is not a well-bred golden and shouldn't be bred. Now, a puppy that shows resource-guarding behavior and DOESN'T outgrow it with proper training ... that might be a different scenario altogether.
> 
> Thank goodness we don't apply these same stringent rules to human propagation. If we did not allow anyone who ever raised their voice to have children, we wouldn't have a human race


With the theoretical pup who grew up in a bad situation, it should not be bred since there is no way to know if the resource guarding or other issues were genetic or due to their environment. It is the same situation as when a promising dog gets hit by a car or otherwise damages its hips or elbows and cannot get its clearances. 

In addition, I never labeled dogs who resource guarded as pups as aggressive and neither did anyone else (I don't think), we just made the point they were displaying an incorrect temperament and should not be bred.

Dogs are not humans and what ever the moral and ethical issues are, we do control their reproduction. There are many people who have considered their own "temperament" and psychological condition and decided NOT to have children. My SO did not believe having children was a good idea based on his family history and since I much prefer dogs to children we chose not to have human puppies. I know many other people who have made the same decision and the human race is in no danger of dying off.


----------



## Jo Ellen

Julie, are we defining a single incident of resource guarding manifested by growling in a puppy a natural tendency? That feels intuitively premature to me. By those standards, and forgive me for transferring over to humans ... we could define a child who steals candy from a grocery store as a thief, for life. We don't do that. Why do we do this with puppies and dogs? Maybe a poor analogy but I think it helps to clarify why I'm struggling with the information we're getting in this thread. 

Megora, thank you for your thoughtful post, and you also, Julie.

I agree than resource guarding as an ongoing behavior that cannot be trained out is a problem. I agree completely with that. Where I'm falling short in understanding the arguments here is how we can define a dog as aggressive in nature based on a single or even a few incidences of growling at humans, specifically in the context of resource guarding -- when novice owners like myself are easily successful in changing the behavior in the long term and throughout the life of the dog.


----------



## Jersey's Mom

Jo Ellen said:


> Julie, are we defining a single incident of resource guarding manifested by growling in a puppy a natural tendency? That feels intuitively premature to me. By those standards, and forgive me for transferring over to humans ... we could define a child who steals candy from a grocery store as a thief, for life. We don't do that. Why do we do this with puppies and dogs? Maybe a poor analogy but I think it helps to clarify why I'm struggling with the information we're getting in this thread.
> 
> Megora, thank you for your thoughtful post, and you also, Julie.
> 
> I agree than resource guarding as an ongoing behavior that cannot be trained out is a problem. I agree completely with that. Where I'm falling short in understanding the arguments here is how we can define a dog as aggressive in nature based on a single or even a few incidences of growling at humans, specifically in the context of resource guarding -- when novice owners like myself are easily successful in changing the behavior in the long term and throughout the life of the dog.


Actually, what I meant to get across (and probably did a poor job at it) is that I don't know exactly how much resource guarding it took to convince Presto's owner to neuter him. For all I know it was a single growl... for all I know it was multiple incidences culminating in a bite (to go to both extremes).... I just don't know. Bottom line is, I never had to consider how much is too much... and I really don't know the answer to that question. What I do know is I have a dog who _may_ be a breeding prospect who has never for any reason growled at any human. He is typically golden in temperament. And for that, he is a better breeding prospect than his brother. Whether he is a good enough prospect in other arenas I'm still debating within myself... but in temperament he is as good as it gets (in my less than humble and very biased opinion... lmbo). 

Also, I think we've had a bit of a telephone effect going on in this thread. The OP is about aggressive behavior. The debate about aggression and temperament morphed into a discussion of aggression OR resource guarding as part of temperament... which morphed into aggression AND resource guarding as part of temperament... and which somehow morphed into aggression AS resource guarding. Again, my reading of earlier posts in this thread left me with the impression that people were trying to specify that they were referring to growls that are offered as part of aggressive behavior and not an attempt to equate all growls with aggression. It's one of the downfalls of this type of communication that we cannot always get the words out exactly as we intend them.

Thanks to you too Jo. I always enjoy a good conversation that makes me really think about the issues and examine where I stand and why... and this has been exactly that. :wavey:

Julie, Jersey and Oz


----------



## kwhit

What happened with Chance a few days after we had him, to me, exemplifies what I believe to be the true Golden temperament.

Chance was given away because he had severe ED and couldn't be bred. He was in pain and couldn't walk without limping. My daughter, who was 9 at the time, was dancing around the living room. Chance was lying in the area she was dancing in, on his left side which meant that his right elbow, the one with ED, was totally exposed.

Caitlyn was twirling around and lost her balance. She fell right on Chance's bad elbow. He cried out opened his eyes and saw that it was my daughter. He jumped to his feet and quickly limped away. This happened in a matter of seconds. My daughter started crying saying, "Chance, I'm so sorry!" Chance immediately came back over to her and licked her tears.

Now if Chance had bitten or nipped Caitlyn, many would have said he was startled and in pain and excused it. But he didn't. He realized it was Caitlyn, a human he knew for only a day or two, and made a decision _not_ to bite or growl. To me, that is one example of a solid temperament. When Chance saw it was a human, he didn't act out by biting, nipping or even a growl. 

I don't want my puppies/dogs growling at me..._ever_. I can do _anything_ with Chance and never fear being bit or even growled at, (and I'm not saying that those of you that had puppies that were resource guarders can't do anything with their dogs, also). Even in pain, Chance made the "right" decision. Do I think dogs are aggressive because they growl/resource guard as puppies? No I don't...but I feel they definitely have a different _type_ of temperament than Chance has. That's why it was very interesting to me to read that the temperament tests that some breeders use actually do work...I had heard that they usually don't. I'm sure it depends on the knowledge of the tester and their different interpretation of the test. 

Waaaay OT, but back in the day when old timers fought their Pit Bulls, they were able to reach into the middle of a fight and grab their dogs. These dogs were totally hyped up from fighting and I bet all were in some degree of pain. Immediately, these dogs would realize it was a human touching them and shut off. If they bit their handlers they were put down, no matter how good of a fighter they were or how much money they earned, they were put down, no exceptions. Their owners _would not_ tolerate any human aggression in whatever form at all. I'll bet if the puppies growled at whatever age at a human they wouldn't be around long. So what happened to the the breed? Pits used to be one of the most stable breeds with humans there ever was. Not with other dogs, obviously, but always kind and loving to humans. They used to be called the "Nannies" of the dog world. What happened?!? Breeding dogs with _less than the temperament they were known for _. This can happen in any breed. 

Why bring this up? Because I don't think that the dogs that show resource guarding as puppies should be bred. IDK, but if there was a choice for me between breeding Chance, (yes his body's a train wreck, so I'm speaking about temperament only ), vs. breeding a dog that growled as a puppy, I would choose Chance. 

There was a very well known Harlequin GD CH. that was stunning. Threw gorgeous puppies. He also almost took my sister's friend's 6 yr. old daughter's face off. He's in a huge percentage of Harli pedigrees. His handler knew how to show him to alleviate his aggressive tendencies in the ring. It's pretty well known, but people didn't care. He wasn't always like that, but his temperament had the tendency to be aggressive. 

I'm rambling, but I think the botton line for me is that if I bred, (I will never do that, BTW), I would never breed a dog that growled and showed resource guarding as a puppy. Do I think they're aggressive, no but it's not the temperament that I would want. JMO...


----------



## Jo Ellen

So can we all agree that a puppy that growls because of resource guarding is not necessarily considered an aggressive dog? I think I can see how a puppy growl towards humans for any reason could be considered an aggressive behavior (in the lenienest of interpretation) but I'm failing to see how that would define the entire dog as aggressive. Kind of like if a child does a bad thing, we don't say the child is bad, we say what they did is bad.

"Human puppies" LOL 

I apologize if I've gone out in left field. I think the issue for me was that puppy/aggressive/aggression/resource guarding started to be mentioned in the same posts and often in the same sentence, and I might have miscontrued.

I do have to say though that the way breeders here talk sometimes, I come away feeling just awful about Daisy. I know she's not perfect, I know she's not breeding material, but she's definitely plenty good enough to be


----------



## kwhit

Jo Ellen said:


> I know she's not perfect, I know she's not breeding material, but she's definitely plenty good enough to be


Of course she is! Just like Chance is, too. I wouldn't wish Chance's physical issues on any Golden, but I love him and he's still perfect _for me_. Just like Daisy is for you.


----------



## Jersey's Mom

Jo Ellen said:


> So can we all agree that a puppy that growls because of resource guarding is not necessarily considered an aggressive dog? I think I can see how a puppy growl towards humans for any reason could be considered an aggressive behavior (in the lenienest of interpretation) but I'm failing to see how that would define the entire dog as aggressive. Kind of like if a child does a bad thing, we don't say the child is bad, we say what they did is bad.
> 
> "Human puppies" LOL
> 
> I apologize if I've gone out in left field. I think the issue for me was that puppy/aggressive/aggression/resource guarding started to be mentioned in the same posts and often in the same sentence, and I might have miscontrued.
> 
> I do have to say though that the way breeders here talk sometimes, I come away feeling just awful about Daisy. I know she's not perfect, I know she's not breeding material, but she's definitely plenty good enough to be


Of course she is!! We love Daisy! But just as all dogs bred from champions will not be perfectly to standard as far as looks... so it goes with temperament. There is a range of what we see within the breed and it is up to the responsible breeders of the world to select for the best of the best. Those who may not quite measure up as breeding dogs can still make truly wonderful pets, whether that shortcoming is physical or temperamental (within reason). 

The most important thing to remember in this thread (in my opinion) is that we are not discussing a pet dog with a pet owner. The OP purchased a male and a female with the intent/hope of breeding them should they prove to develop (structurally and temperamentally) well and get all of their clearances... although it's my understanding these plans have been put on hold for multiple reasons. She is someone who is striving to get into breeding the right way but ( again, from what I understand, sorry if I'm wrong) is relatively new to all of it. For this person and this dog, this issue is more than just a training consideration... it's about whether or not the dog is suitable to be bred. And that is why, to my mind, the answers are perhaps a little more blunt and definitive (as concerns judgement of temperament)... and arguably should be... than what you would see in the general behavior section of this forum.

Julie, Jersey and Oz


----------



## Loisiana

I do view resource guarding as a form of aggression. It doesn't mean the dog is aggressive in all circumstances, just in the situation that it is protecting something it wants. Wouldn't most people who saw a dog growling at person because they were too close to something see that as a form of aggression?

Flip has never ever growled or made snarly face or anything at me (other than in play), but when he was young and I would get too close to him while he was chewing on something he would immediately scoop up his prize and scurry to get away from me. I did not like that attitude from him of "I want this, I don't want to share" even though the only way he expressed that is by moving away from me. That in itself was not enough for me to determine that he was best off not being bred, but it was one thing I added to my long list of possible considerations for not breeding that eventually led to me getting him neutered. But if had actually growled at me that decision would have been made a whole lot sooner. I could appreciate the fact that he attempted to get what he wanted through avoidance rather than through a show of aggression.


----------



## Jersey's Mom

Loisiana said:


> I do view resource guarding as a form of aggression. It doesn't mean the dog is aggressive in all circumstances, just in the situation that it is protecting something it wants. Wouldn't most people who saw a dog growling at person because they were too close to something see that as a form of aggression?


I know I've seen some research that appears to link resource guarding to anxiety rather than to aggression. But, of course, fear can lead dogs to act in aggressive ways (hence the term fear aggression). But is "fear aggression" truly aggression, or rather the defense mechanism of an insecure dog? What I mean is... is the "aggressive behavior" (growl, snap, whatever) of a terrified dog truly "aggression? And back to your question: Is resource guarding technically "aggression?" The answer to both: I haven't the slightest idea. I think the battle between scientific definitions and common terminology will have a major influence on how people react to the word aggression (just like we see in training debates that include the word punishment )... and frankly, in this case I'm not sure where one ends and the other begins. 

When we consider that a growl is a form of communication that can mean different things in different contexts, I'm hesitant to say a dog who growls while resource guarding is definitely exhibiting an aggressive growl. Clearly, Flip's demonstration of avoidance wasn't aggressive... yet it could be interpreted as a degree of resource guarding... which to me lends credence to the possibility that resource guarding as a whole is not necessarily about "aggression." Greater degree of outward behavior may indicate more anxiety, not necessarily more aggression, even though the behavior itself could be described as aggressive. And that sentence just really made my head hurt, lol. But I guess that gets to my point that in many ways it all comes down to semantics and connotation unless we decide on a clear cut set of definitions.


----------



## Jo Ellen

Personally, I think the growl is a fundamental form of dog communication, even to humans. My sense tells me that to correlate it so quickly with aggression could ultimately be very short sighted. Especially since, as Julie has pointed out, we really haven't come to a clear understanding of what true aggression really is.


----------



## mybuddy

I think I am understanding this all much more clearly now (thanks to Julie  ). At least, the way you explained it makes more sense to me.

So, basically what you are saying is that a puppy the growls is not necessarily an agressive puppy *but* not acceptable in terms of temperament (in breeding standards). So that particualr puppy would not be chosen to be bred as it might compromise the breed but could very well grow up to be a wonderful, sweet, loving companion...yes?

I am still confused because if puppies are coming from "well bred" lines, this shouldnt be happening at all right? I am not talking about puppy mills etc...

Is it possible for a breeder to be breeding for years and years and never have this issue? If so, what are they doing that others are not?


----------



## Jo Ellen

mybuddy said:


> Is it possible for a breeder to be breeding for years and years and never have this issue? If so, what are they doing that others are not?


I hope some breeders step in to address this question, I wonder about this too.


----------



## Pointgold

mybuddy said:


> I think I am understanding this all much more clearly now (thanks to Julie  ). At least, the way you explained it makes more sense to me.
> 
> So, basically what you are saying is that a puppy the growls is not necessarily an agressive puppy *but* not acceptable in terms of temperament (in breeding standards). So that particualr puppy would not be chosen to be bred as it might compromise the breed but could very well grow up to be a wonderful, sweet, loving companion...yes?
> 
> I am still confused because if puppies are coming from "well bred" lines, this shouldnt be happening at all right? I am not talking about puppy mills etc...
> 
> Is it possible for a breeder to be breeding for years and years and never have this issue? If so, what are they doing that others are not?


When you have been breeding for years and years, and active in the communities of those who compete and breed, you become aware of the dogs who have issues, and learn to avoid them when breeding. 
I've not produced hundreds of litters, but I can honestly say that I've not had any temperament issues. 
I won't breed any of my bitches to a dog with an unsound temperament, or who has produced it. If someone wants to send a bitch to us for breeding to any of our boys, I don't care if she is the most beautiful thing on four legs, if she doesn't have an exemplary temperament, she's not being bred here.

So, yes. There are breeders who are consistently producing correct temperaments, and not making excuses for dogs who aren't.


----------



## mybuddy

Why bother doing temperament testing then? If a breeder is consistently producing ideal tempered puppies ,then they should just assume they are all going to be of sound temperament yes?


----------



## Pointgold

mybuddy said:


> Why bother doing temperament testing then? If a breeder is consistently producing ideal tempered puppies ,then they should just assume they are all going to be of sound temperament yes?


 
Because the testing also helps with the best placements by helping to determine if a particular puppy is better suited for ___________ than another. 
Just like children with the same mother and father, they have different "personalities" and one child may grow up to be a great attorney, and the other a carpenter. Puppies are the same. One puppy may show more of traits desireable for a person intending to do agility, for example, than another.
And, BTW, one doesn't assume anything. I don't assume that because my dog's great-grandparent's had clearances that my dog is just fine to go ahead and breed without. I don't assume that because there are champions several generations back that my dog would finish a championship without showing him and simply call him a champion. We need to have proof and records of these things. For ourselves and for potential buyers.


----------



## Jo Ellen

Do breeders really keep up with the behaviors of their puppies once they are placed? Like resource guarding, this doesn't typically start until adolescence. I can see how breeders that produce very few puppies might be able to keep up, but breeders who produce puppies regularly? I don't see how that is possible.


----------



## mybuddy

I think Jo Ellen brought this up earlier and I am dying to hear what some breeders have to say.

Is it possible for a mild tempered puppy to learn ( for lack of a better term ) undesired behavior....say...should the puppy by placed in a bad environment.

I know, breeders would never willingly choose to place their puppies in such an environment but hypothetically speaking....can this behavior come out later on due to environment?


----------



## mybuddy

Jo Ellen said:


> Do breeders really keep up with the behaviors of their puppies once they are placed? Like resource guarding, this doesn't typically start until adolescence. I can see how breeders that produce very few puppies might be able to keep up, but breeders who produce puppies regularly? I don't see how that is possible.


 
Yeah, I was kind of wondering that too.


----------



## Pointgold

Yes. They do. Email groups are pretty much the norm, now, for each litter and have been a boon for breeders who produce a fair number of litters. And good breeders develop lasting relationships with their puppy buyers. Buyers know that they can, and should, contact the breeder about a_ny _concerns they may be having. Additionally, many of these puppies are sold to other breeders and exhibitors, so contact is maintained that way.


----------



## mybuddy

That is pretty impressive. What *if* a buyer were to contact a breeder and said that the dog was displaying these traits? What would be the course of action? Would they stop breeding that mother and father of that particular pup?


----------



## Jo Ellen

I'm skeptical, truthfully. The daily demands of busy lives take people in different directions. I can see how breeders will hear from their puppy homes from time to time, but regularly? I'm skeptical. I can see how it might be easy to miss something.

Honestly, I'm just not convinced. Regular close contact sounds good in theory, but it just doesn't seem realistic to me. And you're counting on people being honest and open with you, too ... that doesn't always happen, for a number of reasons.

I think my point is that ethical breeders like yourself can strive to produce only well-tempered puppies but really, how do you know with certainty that you have 100% achieved that?


----------



## Pointgold

mybuddy said:


> I think Jo Ellen brought this up earlier and I am dying to hear what some breeders have to say.
> 
> Is it possible for a mild tempered puppy to learn ( for lack of a better term ) undesired behavior....say...should the puppy by placed in a bad environment.
> 
> I know, breeders would never willingly choose to place their puppies in such an environment but hypothetically speaking....can this behavior come out later on due to environment?


 
Of course, poor owners can certainly foster undesireable behaviors in dogs. Not training is the biggest reason. But even still, I wouldn't expect that a dog with a sound temperament would ever bite or exhibit truly aggressive behavior. People who evaluate rescue dogs for placements understand this. They see dogs coming from the most horrific environments who cannot be induced to show aggression. Dogs who have every reason to never allow a human close to them, but do.


----------



## Pointgold

Jo Ellen said:


> I'm skeptical, truthfully. The daily demands of busy lives take people in different directions. I can see how breeders will hear from their puppy homes from time to time, but regularly? I'm skeptical. I can see how it might be easy to miss something.
> 
> Honestly, I'm just not convinced. Regular close contact sounds good in theory, but it just doesn't seem realistic to me. And you're counting on people being honest and open with you, too ... that doesn't always happen, for a number of reasons.
> 
> I think my point is that ethical breeders like yourself can strive to produce only well-tempered puppies but really, how do you know with certainty that you have 100% achieved that?


Yeah. I do. On all counts. Hopefully, when you get that well bred German Shepherd it will be from a breeder that will eliminate your skepticism.


----------



## mybuddy

Of course we can go in a completely different direction here and say that all dogs have souls and perhaps they behave the way they do as part of their soul journey 

I am just kidding :bowl: ( kidding about wanting to turn it into a discussion ). Personally, that is what I believe 

I was once told by a psychic that Buddy and I were soul mates and we travel lives together. In my last life, he was my husband and I didnt treat him very well. In this life, it is my karmic debt to do him right. So far, I think I have repaid him!!! Perhaps a few more cans of tuna.

Thanks everyone for enlightening me. I learned a lot.

Peace :wavey:


----------



## Jo Ellen

mybuddy said:


> Of course we can go in a completely different direction here and say that all dogs have souls and perhaps they behave the way they do as part of their soul journey
> 
> I am just kidding :bowl: ( kidding about wanting to turn it into a discussion ). Personally, that is what I believe
> 
> I was once told by a psychic that Buddy and I were soul mates and we travel lives together. In my last life, he was my husband and I didnt treat him very well. In this life, it is my karmic debt to do him right. So far, I think I have repaid him!!! Perhaps a few more cans of tuna.
> 
> Thanks everyone for enlightening me. I learned a lot.
> 
> Peace :wavey:


I enjoyed this so much I had to come back and read it twice


----------



## leias mommy

is he around female dogs most of the time. we had two intact males and the one was aggressive to the other at my mothers kennel


----------



## JazzSkye

Pointgold said:


> We temperament/aptitude test every litter. And I have tested dozens of litters of various breeds for their breeders. I see the differences in the breed temperaments from the get go.
> 
> We cannot make excuses for dogs who have the potential to impact our breed's hallmark - the temperament - for generations.


Wow, this thread has really taken off in 2 days and I admit I've skimmed over some of the replies but I get the gist.

I support puppy testing wholeheartedly, and have used the tests which the New Skete breeding program created in order to determine sociability, dominance, level of fearfulness, and trainability in young puppies in order to place them with appropriate families.

But I have to again draw a careful line and respectfully disagree. "We can't make excuses for dogs who have the potential to impact our breed's hallmark" is an incredibly strong statement. Purist even. What do you consider "potential"? 

And should we not just euthanize those pups who possess this "potential" at 8 weeks, or as soon as it manifests itself? Why bother to educate and train them? Why put them into families for 10 to 15 years if they're "not up to golden standard?" They're ok to be our companions, but not to breed? Seems illogical, even dangerous.

Aggression and dominance are not the same thing, and the replies in this thread seem to mix the two.

Puppies are more than "a breed"; they are individuals with variations in personality. Dominance is established through play with littermates. This includes goldens; it's natural dog behavior. It involves growling. A dominant puppy is not automatically a "bad" puppy, but he or she will seek to move up in the pack--including human--if not taught his or her place and the acceptable behavior for this position (we've all seen bratty dogs). Especially with kids--they have higher voices and can remind dogs of their littermates. That's why it's essential to teach children to put their dogs in "sit", "stay", "down-stay" using low voices.

Aggression is different. It involves the constant challenging of both man and beast and a resistance to training which makes living with the animal dangerous. 

Personally, I've seen that only once in a golden retriever, at a show (no less) where when walking by his holding pen, the animal surged at me and snarled through the bars. I gave the breeder hell for showing him and for reproducing him (which made me really popular in those circles).

I have a marshmallow, I've said it before. But he was one of the dominant males of the litter, and at three months he tried to dominate every one of my kids as well as his playmates at puppy school. Growling was a part of it. So was hard mouthing. He very quickly learned his place and at age 6 is what he is: totally golden. 

He's won Obedience and Beauty competitions and has bred two fine litters of well-balanced pups. I set my own personal golden standards by him, and I am no pushover. 

*He wasn't born perfectly trained, but he was highly trainable. And that too, is the "golden standard", if I may point it out.
*
But he remains a dog, with innate canine codes common to all races of canines. I walk off-leash with him without fear, but also with the caution imposed in knowing that as a canine, they all have the potential for dog-on-dog aggression. I accept it and as the human Alpha, I keep an eye out.

The only place you can be sure of 100 % docility is if it's stuffed or on Nintendogs. A dominant-natured golden puppy isn't a genetic mutation of breed nature; you just need to use his exceptional trainability to mold him according to your expectations. If this doesn't work, THEN we can say there's a problem, one potentially making him less than desirable by breed standards.


----------



## Pointgold

JazzSkye said:


> Wow, this thread has really taken off in 2 days and I admit I've skimmed over some of the replies but I get the gist.
> 
> I support puppy testing wholeheartedly, and have used the tests which the New Skete breeding program created in order to determine sociability, dominance, level of fearfulness, and trainability in young puppies in order to place them with appropriate families.
> 
> But I have to again draw a careful line and respectfully disagree. "We can't make excuses for dogs who have the potential to impact our breed's hallmark" is an incredibly strong statement. Purist even. What do you consider "potential"?
> 
> And should we not just euthanize those pups who possess this "potential" at 8 weeks, or as soon as it manifests itself? Why bother to educate and train them? Why put them into families for 10 to 15 years if they're "not up to golden standard?" They're ok to be our companions, but not to breed? Seems illogical, even dangerous.
> 
> Aggression and dominance are not the same thing, and the replies in this thread seem to mix the two.
> 
> Puppies are more than "a breed"; they are individuals with variations in personality. Dominance is established through play with littermates. This includes goldens; it's natural dog behavior. It involves growling. A dominant puppy is not automatically a "bad" puppy, but he or she will seek to move up in the pack--including human--if not taught his or her place and the acceptable behavior for this position (we've all seen bratty dogs). Especially with kids--they have higher voices and can remind dogs of their littermates. That's why it's essential to teach children to put their dogs in "sit", "stay", "down-stay" using low voices.
> 
> Aggression is different. It involves the constant challenging of both man and beast and a resistance to training which makes living with the animal dangerous.
> 
> Personally, I've seen that only once in a golden retriever, at a show (no less) where when walking by his holding pen, the animal surged at me and snarled through the bars. I gave the breeder hell for showing him and for reproducing him (which made me really popular in those circles).
> 
> I have a marshmallow, I've said it before. But he was one of the dominant males of the litter, and at three months he tried to dominate every one of my kids as well as his playmates at puppy school. Growling was a part of it. So was hard mouthing. He very quickly learned his place and at age 6 is what he is: totally golden.
> 
> He's won Obedience and Beauty competitions and has bred two fine litters of well-balanced pups. I set my own personal golden standards by him, and I am no pushover.
> 
> *He wasn't born perfectly trained, but he was highly trainable. And that too, is the "golden standard", if I may point it out.*
> 
> But he remains a dog, with innate canine codes common to all races of canines. I walk off-leash with him without fear, but also with the caution imposed in knowing that as a canine, they all have the potential for dog-on-dog aggression. I accept it and as the human Alpha, I keep an eye out.
> 
> The only place you can be sure of 100 % docility is if it's stuffed or on Nintendogs. A dominant-natured golden puppy isn't a genetic mutation of breed nature; you just need to use his exceptional trainability to mold him according to your expectations. If this doesn't work, THEN we can say there's a problem, one potentially making him less than desirable by breed standards.


 
I am well aware of the difference between dominance and aggression and have made the distinction on this forum many times. And I am also very well aware of what the results of testing mean and how to use them. (And you refer specifically to the Monks. I did not.) And as a person who has taught PK classes for 25 years, I am also more than familiar with scenarios such as yours, particularly when children are part of the equation. We aren't talking about puppy dominance, which of course is normal. Perhaps because you have only skimmed the posts, you have not actually gotten the gist.

I stand by my statement that we cannot make excuses for dogs without exemplary temperaments as far as breeding them. A dog that growls and is dominant as a baby is not the same as an adult dog that growls and fights, as in the OP. If you wish to label me as a "purist", so be it. I don't understand at all not breeding only the best that you possibly can. And making excuses for issues like temperament is something that I will never condone. Training a dog with an unsound temperament can be done, and he can be lived with. It doesn't mean he should be bred. It's no different, really, than cosmetically repairing a fault - it still exists and can still be reproduced. 
Additionally, I would never place a dog with an unsound temperament in a family home. And thankfully, because I have never produced such a dog, I haven't had to. I have, however, on more than one occassion, very sadly, worked with people who have had to deal with such dogs precisely because excuses were made and such dogs were bred.


----------



## JazzSkye

Pointgold said:


> We aren't talking about puppy dominance, which of course is normal...
> 
> ...I stand by my statement that we cannot make excuses for dogs without exemplary temperaments as far as breeding them. A dog that growls and is dominant as a baby is not the same as an adult dog that growls and fights, as in the OP. If you wish to label me as a "purist", so be it.


I try to avoid labeling (both humans and dogs) as that'd be pretty narrow-minded and unfair. Nothing's absolute in this world, but I'd be concerned with anyone seeking to breed perfection, as individuality and all its quirks are what makes our pets as dear as they are to us. 

I also agree 1000% with what you say regarding the responsibility of breeders to breed only the best lines and temperaments. Yet I do believe that even so, you'll get varying temperaments within a litter that aren't necessarily worrysome and yes, degenerative throwbacks will happen.

As I said, there's a lot of interchanging between dominance and aggression going on in this thread, and a back-and -forth between puppyhood and adulthood, and it gets blurry distinguishing between them at times: 



Selli-Belle said:


> I would be very concerned about a puppy that growled at a human. As far as I am concerned, a Golden with a proper temperament should NEVER growl at a human out of aggression except in the possible scenario when it is protecting its family from a threat. A Golden should not have to "taught" that humans are the Alphas.


I disagree totally. Dogs are not born with the instinctive knowledge that humans are Alpha. Growling is a form of canine communication inherent to all dogs regardless of what we feel about it; it is up to us to teach our pups the pecking order, and this includes Goldens. Some accept our unquestionable leadership rapidly, others need to be taught. Those who need to be honed, yet who turn into sound adults are completely breedable and well within standard.

A dog's sum total is a combination of breeding, and what you do with it as its leader and example. Some canine behaviors are not conducive to living with humans and we redirect these ( ex: teaching to soil outside the house, teaching a dog not to jump up and lick the face of visitors...). 

But acknowledging the innate, purely "canine" communication of our companions is one of the best ways to understand and communicate with them (ex, using a growling tone to signal our displeasure), and extending that comprehension to a certain acceptance of dog-on-dog posturing can only enhance human-dog communication.

Of course I draw the line at recurring aggression, and particularly aggression directed at humans.


----------



## Pointgold

JazzSkye said:


> I try to avoid labeling (both humans and dogs) as that'd be pretty narrow-minded and unfair. Nothing's absolute in this world, but I'd be concerned with anyone seeking to breed perfection, as individuality and all its quirks are what makes our pets as dear as they are to us.
> 
> I also agree 1000% with what you say regarding the responsibility of breeders to breed only the best lines and temperaments. Yet I do believe that even so, you'll get varying temperaments within a litter that aren't necessarily worrysome and yes, degenerative throwbacks will happen.
> 
> As I said, there's a lot of interchanging between dominance and aggression going on in this thread, and a back-and -forth between puppyhood and adulthood, and it gets blurry distinguishing between them at times:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree totally. Dogs are not born with the instinctive knowledge that humans are Alpha. Growling is a form of canine communication inherent to all dogs regardless of what we feel about it; it is up to us to teach our pups the pecking order, and this includes Goldens. Some accept our unquestionable leadership rapidly, others need to be taught. Those who need to be honed, yet who turn into sound adults are completely breedable and well within standard.
> 
> A dog's sum total is a combination of breeding, and what you do with it as its leader and example. Some canine behaviors are not conducive to living with humans and we redirect these ( ex: teaching to soil outside the house, teaching a dog not to jump up and lick the face of visitors...).
> 
> But acknowledging the innate, purely "canine" communication of our companions is one of the best ways to understand and communicate with them (ex, using a growling tone to signal our displeasure), and extending that comprehension to a certain acceptance of dog-on-dog posturing can only enhance human-dog communication.
> 
> Of course I draw the line at recurring aggression, and particularly aggression directed at humans.


 
You are nitpicking several of the points that I have made, which I _think _we agree on. Much of the rest, however, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

It's really a shame that any breeder would ever have to defend breeding only the best that they can, particularly when it comes to temperament.


----------



## Selli-Belle

JazzSkye said:


> But I have to again draw a careful line and respectfully disagree. "We can't make excuses for dogs who have the potential to impact our breed's hallmark" is an incredibly strong statement. Purist even. What do you consider "potential"?


Point Gold is more than capable of speaking for herself , but I don't think she would consider being considered a "purist" as an insult and I completely agree with her position.



JazzSkye said:


> And should we not just euthanize those pups who possess this "potential" at 8 weeks, or as soon as it manifests itself? Why bother to educate and train them? Why put them into families for 10 to 15 years if they're "not up to golden standard?" They're ok to be our companions, but not to breed? Seems illogical, even dangerous.


No one is suggesting these pups be euthanized. We all know that they can be trained and live very happy lives and be so loved. No one suggests that a dog with say hip dysplasia should be euthanized, and with proper treatment that dog can live a long and happy life, but no reputable breeder would breed that dog.



JazzSkye said:


> Aggression and dominance are not the same thing, and the replies in this thread seem to mix the two.
> 
> Puppies are more than "a breed"; they are individuals with variations in personality. Dominance is established through play with littermates. This includes goldens; it's natural dog behavior. It involves growling. A dominant puppy is not automatically a "bad" puppy, but he or she will seek to move up in the pack--including human--if not taught his or her place and the acceptable behavior for this position (we've all seen bratty dogs). Especially with kids--they have higher voices and can remind dogs of their littermates. That's why it's essential to teach children to put their dogs in "sit", "stay", "down-stay" using low voices.
> 
> Aggression is different. It involves the constant challenging of both man and beast and a resistance to training which makes living with the animal dangerous.


Aggression is when a dog issues a threat and is willing to back it up with a bite regardless of the motivation, whether it is fear, anxiety, dominance, or a neurological problem. In addition, dogs who need to work to move up in the pack is not a "dominant" pup are what Patricia McConnell calls "Alpha-want-to-bes," insecure dogs who are often times bullies.

Goldens with a proper temperament should not be threatening children by growling at them. Bratty Golden puppies are those who don't come when they are called or like to get people to play with them by nipping and jumping, not those who resource guard or try to intimidate children by growling at them.



JazzSkye said:


> I have a marshmallow, I've said it before. But he was one of the dominant males of the litter, and at three months he tried to dominate every one of my kids as well as his playmates at puppy school. Growling was a part of it. So was hard mouthing. He very quickly learned his place and at age 6 is what he is: totally golden.
> 
> He's won Obedience and Beauty competitions and has bred two fine litters of well-balanced pups. I set my own personal golden standards by him, and I am no pushover.
> 
> *He wasn't born perfectly trained, but he was highly trainable. And that too, is the "golden standard", if I may point it out.
> *
> The only place you can be sure of 100 % docility is if it's stuffed or on Nintendogs. A dominant-natured golden puppy isn't a genetic mutation of breed nature; you just need to use his exceptional trainability to mold him according to your expectations. If this doesn't work, THEN we can say there's a problem, one potentially making him less than desirable by breed standards.


My Selli was the "alpha" of her litter, she was the one to start the adventures and her littermates followed her. After we had her for a week, she met a male Golden pup who was born on the same day and they played for awhile. Selli was on top the whole time, but she never threatened or tried to intimidate the other puppy. And she NEVER tried to intimidate or threatened a human.


----------



## JazzSkye

PointGold, I just don't want puppy owners to freak out and think they've got a degenerate on their hands simply because he needs to be educated...nor do I want adult dog owners to be complacent about what even the best-tempered dogs could potentially get themselves into with a fellow canine. 

No hard feelings on this end. We do agree on a lot and for the rest: if we each have the Goldens of our dreams, then maybe the rest doesn't figure all that much into the equation.


----------



## Pointgold

JazzSkye said:


> PointGold, I just don't want puppy owners to freak out and think they've got a degenerate on their hands simply because he needs to be educated...nor do I want adult dog owners to be complacent about what even the best-tempered dogs could potentially get themselves into with a fellow canine.
> 
> No hard feelings on this end. We do agree on a lot and for the rest: if we each have the Goldens of our dreams, then maybe the rest doesn't figure all that much into the equation.


 
Puppy owners who "freak out and think they've got a degenerate on their hands" are not likely people who intend to breed - at least I would hope not. I don't believe that anything I've EVER written on this forum would give people the impression that they have such a dog.

As for having "the Golden of our dreams", it is important that people get a Golden that fits the standard, which means that it is a Golden. NOT to eschew that standard and say "Well, he's perfect for me, so the standard doesn't really matter." As a breeder, and a person who has spent many years committed to the breed, I can't accept that the rest doesn't fit into the equation.

For all of that, I have no hard feelings, either. Just a sense of disappointment that the standard means so little to so many.


----------



## JazzSkye

Selli-Belle said:


> Goldens with a proper temperament should not be threatening children by growling at them...
> 
> My Selli was the "alpha" of her litter, she was the one to start the adventures and her littermates followed her. After we had her for a week, she met a male Golden pup who was born on the same day and they played for awhile. Selli was on top the whole time, but she never threatened or tried to intimidate the other puppy. And she NEVER tried to intimidate or threatened a human.


With all due respect, mine did at 3 months and so what? We dealt with it and he quickly got the message and did a complete turn around. His behavior since is exemplary and totally in keeping with "breed standard". To insinuate cases like this shouldn't be bred is both pretentious and laughable, and worries puppy owners for nothing. 

We will never breed the canine out of the dog. We need to be vigilant, but not paranoid.


----------



## JazzSkye

Pointgold said:


> For all of that, I have no hard feelings, either. Just a sense of disappointment that the standard means so little to so many.


Hang on, I never said the standard wasn't important. It's what drew most of us to the breed to begin with. What I'm against is human obsession with human expectations, and pulling the chair out from under a pup still in training.


----------



## mylissyk

Just curious, hypothetical situation. Say you have a puppy from an exemplary pedigree, beautiful conformation, with the potential to be a champion, but that puppy growls at you over a bone when they are 12 weeks old. Do you automatically mark them in your mind as a non-breeding dog? What if you corrected that puppy that one time and he never again in his entire life showed any signs of rescource guarding or any other aggression? Is he still not breeding quality?


----------



## Pointgold

JazzSkye said:


> With all due respect, mine did at 3 months and so what? We dealt with it and he quickly got the message and did a complete turn around. His behavior since is exemplary and totally in keeping with "breed standard". To insinuate cases like this shouldn't be bred is both pretentious and laughable, and worries puppy owners for nothing.
> 
> We will never breed the canine out of the dog. We need to be vigilant, but not paranoid.


 
No one said that puppy dominance is aggression, I certainly did not, nor did I ever say that a dominant dog should not be bred. In fact, I ALWAYS select the MOST dominant dog for myself. 
We are talking about unsound temperaments in adult dogs, being considered for breeding.


----------



## Pointgold

JazzSkye said:


> Hang on, I never said the standard wasn't important. It's what drew most of us to the breed to begin with. What I'm against is human obsession with human expectations, and pulling the chair out from under a pup still in training.


 
And I did not say that YOU said the standard wasn't important, however, people saying that "my dog is perfect for me, so the rest doesn't matter" seems to occur more frequently, and does offer room for people to say "hey - people don't care so I'll breed it."

I'm the last person to pull a chair out from under a pup in training - 25 years of teaching proves that. And I am also the last person to put unrealistic expectations on a dog. I don't agree with assigning them human qualities which they don't possess, for example. I think that I am far more realistic than many.

At this juncture, rather then continuing to engage in a futile round and round defending high standards of breeding, I'll leave it at that.


----------



## Jo Ellen

Pointgold said:


> As for having "the Golden of our dreams", it is important that people get a Golden that fits the standard, which means that it is a Golden. NOT to eschew that standard and say "Well, he's perfect for me, so the standard doesn't really matter."


Sounds to me like golden retriever ownership, according to you and maybe others too, is an elitist club. By what you're saying here, Daisy should *not* be. And if we followed your standards, there would be very few golden retrievers available for placement. Elitist. Purist ... whatever word works here ... it's just selfish and very arrogant. 

I am completely and utterly disheartened by this statement, and disgusted.


----------



## Pointgold

Jo Ellen said:


> Sounds to me like golden retriever ownership, according to you and maybe others too, is an elitist club. By what you're saying here, Daisy should *not* be. And if we followed your standards, there would be very few golden retrievers available for placement. Elitist. Purist ... whatever word works here ... it's just selfish and very arrogant.
> 
> I am completely and utterly disheartened by this statement, and disgusted.


 
Jo Ellen, my posts are NOT directed at you, and this is just a ridiculous statement. 

There are standards for a reason. And there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with wanting them to be followed, because they are what makes a breed. And yes, there are always going to be those who breed indiscriminately, sadly, and that doesn't mean that the dogs produced do not deserve wonderful, loving homes. But to say that because there are wonderful homes for these dogs means that the standards are irrelevant, and that the breeders who are devoted to producing the best dogs that they can are "elitist", "purist", "selfish" and "arrogant" is disheartening and disgusting.


----------



## JazzSkye

Pointgold said:


> And I did not say that YOU said the standard wasn't important, however, people saying that "my dog is perfect for me, so the rest doesn't matter" seems to occur more frequently, and does offer room for people to say "hey - people don't care so I'll breed it."
> 
> I'm the last person to pull a chair out from under a pup in training - 25 years of teaching proves that. And I am also the last person to put unrealistic expectations on a dog. I don't agree with assigning them human qualities which they don't possess, for example. I think that I am far more realistic than many.
> 
> At this juncture, rather then continuing to engage in a futile round and round defending high standards of breeding, I'll leave it at that.


PointGold, I respect your dedication to the breed and agree with your position on breeding. I wasn't referring to your comments on adult dogs, but to those who jump the gun on puppies, and those who believe that true Goldens have somehow risen above canine behavior and are incapable of showing their teeth to another dog.

I'll leave it at that too...night shift, need some shut-eye. Thanks for the exchange.


----------



## Jo Ellen

Your post is a direct spinoff from this:



> I wouldn't wish Chance's physical issues on any Golden, but I love him and he's still perfect _for me_. Just like Daisy is for you.


I'm not stupid. And I am completely offended and disgusted.

I'm through with this threasd. How dare you.


----------



## Pointgold

Jo Ellen said:


> Your post is a direct spinoff from this:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not stupid. And I am completely offended and disgusted.
> 
> I'm through with this threasd. How dare you.


 
*You could not be more wrong*. I was addressing this sentence made by JazzSkye:
"No hard feelings on this end. We do agree on a lot and for the rest: if we each have the Goldens of our dreams, then maybe the rest doesn't figure all that much into the equation."

Get over it.


----------



## Jo Ellen

Not buying it. I think it's terrible. TERRIBLE. 

Y'all carry on with this discussion. I'm going to return to the parts of our forum that are more in keeping with the golden spirit we all know and love so dearly. A few of us should seek to emulate that spirit more in our daily lives and in our interactions with each other. And that applies to me too ... I'm just going to stay with the crowd that doesn't test me quite so severely. 

Nature is necessary, _nuture is everything_.


----------



## Pointgold

Jo Ellen said:


> Not buying it. I think it's terrible. TERRIBLE.
> 
> Y'all carry on with this discussion. I'm going to return to the parts of our forum that are more in keeping with the golden spirit we all know and love so dearly. A few of us should seek to emulate that spirit more in our daily lives and in our interactions with each other. And that applies to me too ... I'm just going to stay with the crowd that doesn't test me quite so severely.
> 
> Nature is necessary, _nuture is everything_.


This is really unbelieveable. 
You LOOK for reasons to say I'm terrible, and I absolutely WAS NOT REFERRING TO YOU AND DAISY. We were talking about _breeding._ 
Sheesh.


----------



## hotel4dogs

The breeders are the keepers of the kingdom, the future of the breed. We need to have them hold their breeding stock to the VERY highest standards in all ways. 
Not that the rest of the puppies aren't wonderful and loved, but the breeding stock has to be the best of the best.
What's so hard to understand about that????


----------



## mist

closing post whilst i have time to read and discover where it went out of control and to discuss with the other mods


----------



## Rob's GRs

There been some requests to re-open this post. We will do so only to have it continue with only civil discussions. If this does not happen we will have to permanently close it the next time around.

Thanks


----------



## mylissyk

I'm not sure there is any point in opening it again, the point has been discussed ad naseum, and I think we all get the breeders view point.


----------



## Pointgold

JazzSkye said:


> PointGold, I respect your dedication to the breed and agree with your position on breeding. I wasn't referring to your comments on adult dogs, but to those who jump the gun on puppies, and those who believe that true Goldens have somehow risen above canine behavior and are incapable of showing their teeth to another dog.
> 
> I'll leave it at that too...night shift, need some shut-eye. Thanks for the exchange.


 
I sure don't believe that Goldens have risen above canine behavior - I've said plenty of times here that they are dogs. BUT, a Golden with a sound temperament should have a very high tolerance and should never show teeth unless really pushed. Unprovoked displays should not be tolerated, and some of the problem that I have is when people make excuses for such behavior.


----------



## Megora

> that I have is when people make excuses for such behavior.


I absolutely agree with this... the important thing is if your dog is grumbly, temperamental, is obviously challenging you, or shows other 'non-golden' behaviors, including fearfulness, timidity, shyness, anxiety - these are things to work through and fix through training and handling. Please don't accept any of these things as a 'norm' for the breed. 

I don't think anyone was explicitly defending breeders who use nonconforming goldens in their breeding programs, but some of the statements in this thread could have been taken that way. 

@Laura - I love the painting of your Pointers. Pretty.


----------



## Pointgold

Megora said:


> @Laura - I love the painting of your Pointers. Pretty.


 Thanks so much! I love it, too. And it was done with every intention of it being The Dogfather's Christmas present. Uh... the best intentions and all that? Yeah right. He's seen the picture of it and can't wait for it to arrive (Thursday!!)
THE coolest guy in Miami is the artist. He actually is a Bulldog person, but he did Bueller and Emilie and he really captured them. Check him out:

https://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Bulldog-paintings-by-drago/148597685191352


----------



## Sally's Mom

I missed a lot while my power was out. I have always understood that in some situations, a growl sometimes indicates uncertainty and is not necessarily aggression.
I do see a golden here in practice who always greets me with a growl and backs up under a chair when I enter. Fortunately, she is spayed... but I can do anything to her (heartworm check, vax, exam) without a muzzle or anyone holding her. IMO, not golden temperament, but she has never offered any behavior worse than a growl....
And as my former boss always used to say,"All dogs bite, it's a question of when." Every dog has its' threshold, we just expect our goldens to have the highest threshold.


----------



## Sally's Mom

PS PG, I love that painting, too.


----------



## Pointgold

Sally's Mom said:


> PS PG, I love that painting, too.


We have friends with bulldogs (French and English) and when I saw Drago's printings I wanted a Bulldog so I could have a painting! :
Thankfully, he was thrilled to do the Pointers, (I dunno if I coulda brought a Bulldog homw just to get a painting...) and now he wants to do the Goldens. The guy is a gem. SO nice and so easy to work with.


----------



## Pointgold

Sally's Mom said:


> I missed a lot while my power was out. I have always understood that in some situations, a growl sometimes indicates uncertainty and is not necessarily aggression.
> I do see a golden here in practice who always greets me with a growl and backs up under a chair when I enter. Fortunately, she is spayed... but I can do anything to her (heartworm check, vax, exam) without a muzzle or anyone holding her. IMO, not golden temperament, but she has never offered any behavior worse than a growl....
> And as my former boss always used to say,"All dogs bite, it's a question of when." Every dog has its' threshold, we just expect our goldens to have the highest threshold.


Exactly - Goldens should have a high threshold.


----------



## GoldenSail

In reading this thread I think it is important to note that resource guarding between human-dog vs. dog-dog are really two entirely different things. It is possible to have one and not the other. In regards to the human-dog relationship it is really not in keeping with the golden retriever temperament standard to show any degree of resource guarding. Now would that mean I would leave a toddler alone with my golden and a bone? Not intentionally, but my three year old nephew has taken many things from my little girl in return for golden kisses 

However in regards to dog-dog interactions I would not consider it abnormal depending on the degree. A dog who growls at another dog if they try to take a toy from them is not serious (not desirable, but not serious or abnormal). But if it goes so far as full blown attacks where the dogs are hurting each other and fighting with intent to hurt--this is abnormal and a serious problem. So in the case of the OP as much as it sucks to hear it your dog may not be meant as a stud dog. I think you have the feeling, seeing as you posted here. Do the right thing.


----------



## iansgran

I guess I am not sure what "growling" means in all these situations. Jaro, 16 months, has never growled and showed his teeth in an aggressive way, however, he does like to greet people with a grumbly growly sound and with a toy in his mouth. It is very clear he is happy, the but is going and the tail wiggling like mad. He lets me take things out of his mouth, even bones, and he has a really wonderful temperament. I don't know what else to call this sound he makes ruhr ruhr ruhr.


----------



## Pointgold

Ian'sgran said:


> I guess I am not sure what "growling" means in all these situations. Jaro, 16 months, has never growled and showed his teeth in an aggressive way, however, he does like to greet people with a grumbly growly sound and with a toy in his mouth. It is very clear he is happy, the butt is going and the tail wiggling like mad. He lets me take things out of his mouth, even bones, and he has a really wonderful temperament. I don't know what else to call this sound he makes ruhr ruhr ruhr.


Tawkin'.  I have tawkers, too. But, there is a distinct difference in the entire body language when a dog is doing this than when growling "threateningly." The ears are lowered and the but is somewhat "tucked" and the body sort of forming an "s" while the tail is going a mile a minute. Not exactly "submissive", but definitely not challenging. In fact, it IS dangerous... (if you get close to that tail!)


----------



## Dreammom

Pointgold said:


> Tawkin'.  I have tawkers, too. But, there is a distinct difference in the entire body language when a dog is doing this than when growling "threateningly." The ears are lowered and the but is somewhat "tucked" and the body sort of forming an "s" while the tail is going a mile a minute. Not exactly "submissive", but definitely not challenging. In fact, it IS dangerous... (if you get close to that tail!)


Yep LOL... Layla sounds like a Wookie!


----------



## Pointgold

I've had Goldens do it in the ring when the judge approached for the examination. Thankfully they all were astute enough to recognize it for what it really is... I've judged Sweeps in a couple of Sporting breeds and puppies have done it. It's obvious what they are doing.
Now, I've shown Akitas, for example (long time ago, when we used to put towels over the males heads so they didn't make eye contact with each other - the fight would be ON... now, they are much softer in temperament) and judges would step back, if not excuse you, if your dog did that - and they also had the handlers show the bites...)


----------



## Megora

Ian'sgran said:


> I guess I am not sure what "growling" means in all these situations. Jaro, 16 months, has never growled and showed his teeth in an aggressive way, however, he does like to greet people with a grumbly growly sound and with a toy in his mouth. It is very clear he is happy, the but is going and the tail wiggling like mad. He lets me take things out of his mouth, even bones, and he has a really wonderful temperament. I don't know what else to call this sound he makes ruhr ruhr ruhr.


I just wanted to say this made me smile...

My Danny used to do the same thing. He was our Grrr-dog. The hilarious thing was he _had_ to have something in his mouth in order for his Grrr to work.

Otherwise it was like he lost control of his lips and they would curl up and crinkle his nose and he would just be snotting everywhere. <- Our trainer called it 'smiling'. 

I miss that.  Our Jacks is a nonvocal dog and will just snot for joy or do very soft grunts if that while greeting.

@GoldenSail -



> However in regards to dog-dog interactions I would not consider it abnormal depending on the degree.


Very good point and it reminded me of something that I've always wondered about a little. 

Our collie resource guards... sort of. It is absolutely not aggression. This means if you give him a biscuit he will vanish to the farthest room to eat it. We think it had something to do with growing up with a bossy terrier in his previous home, or maybe part of the chaos that was in his foster home (herd of bossy collies). So he learned to go running when he has a treat rather than have it taken away by another dog? Or maybe he was trained to eat his treats in a seperate room from other dogs? 

If we give both dogs treats at the same time, both dogs will scatter to seperate rooms. The best we can figure is Jacks learned the behavior from the collie or he does it because the collie's taking off running. It's just over their milkbones or other special treats. Both dogs eat their kibble and chew rawhide together.


----------

