What makes one dog breed get a reputation for being more dangerous than others? Should you be more cautious around specific breeds? And does a dog’s breed even matter, or is it always a case of bad training?
Let’s explore some of the world’s most dangerous dogs together. You’ll also learn about what makes us think of certain dog breeds as dangerous. Additionally, we’ll cover the role and history of dog training in building these reputations.
There are a number of reasons people tend to think of certain dog breeds as more dangerous than others. Not all reasons are valid in the same way: Some are hard statistics, others are personal experiences. But they all can play an important role in our understanding of these animals and our discussion about what might make some more dangerous than others.
Here are some of the reasons we tend to consider certain dogs to be the most dangerous dog breeds:
Let’s focus more on that last reason, as I believe it can have the most impact.
Whether it’s right or wrong for us to judge a dog breed based on our limited experiences and the stories we hear about them, it’s something most of us do on some level (myself included). So I’d like to share some personal stories and how they’ve affected me (or not affected me, though you might think it should have).
We saw this in your comments on the original list. For example, we had people saying Pit Bulls aren’t dangerous because their own experiences with the breed have been pleasant. Others shared experiences on the other side of the spectrum.
Personally, I come in somewhere in the middle. I’m not naive enough to think that breed alone makes all pit bulls dangerous or more vicious than other dogs. But I’m also not naive enough to ignore the evidence that this breed has a history of causing more frequent and more serious injuries than most, if not all, others.
Clearly the breed plays some role. Some breeds lean toward different temperaments, or have different loyalties. These might make them great with their own families but naturally suspicious of strangers or other animals or even small children, who have less self-restraint than adults.
Personal experience is also a factor, though. My brother has a small dog. He took the dog outside at his apartment building into the parking lot. Another neighbor was outside with their Pit Bull. It wasn’t on a leash (while this is a requirement, going unleashed isn’t terribly uncommon around here). By all measures the dog would have seemed like a normal, calm family pet.
Until it saw my brother’s dog.
It immediately charged at them and grabbed his dog by the throat. There was no provocation, no unusual noise, and they were across the lot — not close to the pit bull’s owner in any way. My brother was able to rescue his dog by lifting the Pit Bull and literally prying its mouth open (which, by the way, is a stupid thing to do — please don’t ever follow that example). The dog let go and his dog was okay after being treated for its injuries. The Pit Bull then latched onto my brother’s arm though. Again, he was okay after being treated, but the wound wasn’t insignificant. It could have been far worse.
That puts me in that middle ground territory I mentioned before. Personal experience with this breed is terrible. There was no warning sign that the owner trained this dog to attack or fight. In fact, the aggression caught its owner completely off-guard. It just snapped at the sight of a smaller dog. That kind of sudden reaction is far from unheard of with this breed.
But that said, I don’t fault an entire breed (in the case of Pit Bulls, actually three different breeds) for the actions of that single dog. The lack of predictability of some breeds would make them “more dangerous” in my view. But the same goes for poor training and bad behavior by an owner (like allowing any breed with known issues with children or other animals to run free without a leash).
This is far from the only example I could give. Saint Bernards are also sometimes cited as some of the most dangerous dogs. But they’re also known for being calm-tempered and being good with kids. It’s their fierce loyalty that can be an issue.
A family member had one years ago. That dog was a great dog for most of its life. It even helped to stop a burglar in the family’s building. But years later it lunged at another family member who the dog knew for its entire life. They came to visit, and out of the blue the dog lunged and went for her eye. She’s still terrified of the breed to this day (and understandably so after an experience like that).
We can’t explain the unprovoked attack. It might have been a breeding issue. The dog might have been having a bad day in some way. We just don’t know. I understand her fear of the breed. But it’s not one I hold myself as a result — perhaps because I didn’t see it first-hand.
I personally own a mixed breed dog — Border Collie mixed with a Lab. At this stage in her life, I would also consider her to be a dangerous dog, especially around children. She is in no way violent. She’s great with cats and other dogs.
She’s still at that point where she’s young, wants to play all the time, and she doesn’t realize her own size or strength. The hyper aspect is specific to breeds. Both Labs and Border Collies can be very high strung, especially in their first couple of years.
Neighbors and family members don’t want her playing with their tiny dogs, and I think that’s understandable. And I wouldn’t take her out to play with small children for fear that she’d accidentally hurt them by jumping up or knocking them over as she tries to play. Being dangerous isn’t always a case of being naturally vicious, and that’s why so much falls onto the owner. It’s our responsibility to make sure our dogs aren’t put into situations where they’re more likely to cause harm.
If you’ve had experiences that have shaped your own views of what makes for a dangerous dog breed, let us know in the comments. Tell us what happened and whether or not you think it’s a fair way to judge a larger group of dogs based on the action (or actions) you’ve seen first-hand, and why.
Now let’s get to our original list of some of the seemingly most dangerous dogs, based on breeds. Now that you know why certain breeds have earned their “most dangerous dogs” reputations, can you think of others that might also have a similar history? Tell us in the comments.
Every person that I know deeply cares about his or her pets. They are their best friends. They tenderly love each other. Sometimes they eat together, sleep together, and go for walks together.
I’m more of a cat person, but I can’t sit still when I see little puppies or big dogs with big soft fur. I want to hug them, play with them, and give them some of my love and tenderness too. I’ve also seen many adult dogs of different breeds worth praise and true admiration. They are clever, sociable, and funny when you want to play; calm and patient with kids.
And they’re something I can’t credit cats with: They are faithful.
Personally, I don’t know any dog that would bite without warning or just snap. It’s my firm belief that behavior of the dog doesn’t depend on its breed so much as it being the right training and the “master” that matter. In my opinion, humans are most often responsible for dangerous dogs. That said, there might be some truth in the idea that some breeds have more unstable temperaments than others. Knowing this, we should never provoke them.
Think for a minute and analyze your own life. Are we always polite? I can think of several situations when I would have gladly slapped a man in the face, but thank God I’m weak enough and I can control myself (at least I think that I can). Now think about animals. They have instincts too, and they may forget about good manners. It’s not as if they understand them in the same ways we do.
It’s also important for dog owners to protect both other people and their dogs from unexpected circumstances and thus the unpleasant situations. For example, when going outside, they could always use a dog-lead and a muzzle. They could be careful and not let the dog play on its own without a leash, especially when there are other people around. When you have a dog, you become forever responsible for the animal you’ve trained and tamed.
In any case, it’s good to know what breeds of dogs might be most dangerous, just to keep yourself safe. Sometimes the danger in a dog isn’t even a nasty personality, but a matter of them not knowing their own strength.
Even though I personally still find it hard to believe that breed alone determines whether a dog is “dangerous,” you never know what a dog’s owner has taught it. Reliable research into the most dangerous dogs included below comes from the American Veterinary Medical Association, the CDC, and the Humane Society of the United States.
We’ll start with least dangerous of the bunch. Sorry, but there won’t be any terrifying photos today.
Read Also: Ready for a Dog? What Breed?
Origin: Croatia, Middle Ages
Weight: 40-70 lbs
Height: 20-24 inches
Dalmatians are active and energetic dogs, and love to be outdoors. They are very playful and love running.
There’s still no definite info about what this breed was originally bred for. What is known is that it is the oldest spotted breed in Europe, Asia and Africa. They were serving as warriors, hunters, and shepherds long before finally becoming the symbol of the US fireman.
Origin: Germany, 1850s
Weight: 50-64 lbs
Height: 20-25 inches
The boxer is a very strong “square” dog. Boxers love to walk, but the owner should never forget the leash. It’s also better to refrain from aggressive games. Still, boxers recognize all members of the family and can play well with the children.
The boxer breed has its origins in feudal Germany and dates back to the line of bulldogs that existed in Europe in the 16th century. These ancestors lived for hunting wild boars and other big wild animals. The first puppy in the new breed received the name “Box”. Boxer’s qualities, such as their strength, were highly valued by farmers and shopkeepers.
Origin: Canary Islands, Africa, 18th century
Weight: 100-125 lbs
Height: 25-26 inches
The Presa Canario hails from the Canary Islands. Dogs of this breed had two jobs: Hunting – and war. During the 18th century, English traders and merchants came to the Canary Islands, bringing with them their working and gladiator dogs, notably the Mastiff of England and the bulldog. Englishmen also brought with them their traditions of pit fighting for which their breeds and the island dogs were inevitably mixed and eventually bred to produce the ultimate fighter. Nowadays the breed finds use in guarding, handling, and driving cattle.
The dogs of this breed can be gentle and noble with their families, showing great affection to their owners, but are highly suspicious of strangers.
Origin: Switzerland, Middle Ages
Weight: 110-180 lbs
Height: 24-29 inches
Saint Bernards are amazingly big and easygoing dogs, but due to their impressive size they can look a bit awkward. They are quiet and peaceful, love children, and are not inclined to active and rapid games. A Saint Bernard will need all of your attention, so if you spend days in the office, this dog is not for you. They are tremendously strong and, of course, they require a good bit of space.
Most likely, the ancestor of the Saint Bernard was the Alpine Mastiff, a pretty aggressive breed. The original Saint Bernards were working dogs and scouts. They were also much calmer than their Mastiff ancestors. For that reason, they make for excellent home companions today.
Origin: Germany, Middle Ages to 19th century
Weight: 90-120 lbs
Height: 27-32 inches
Great Danes are beautiful and majestic animals, with a gentle and loving nature. They love to play with children and participate in all family events and activities, especially in the outdoors. They are happy to go for a walk and don’t mind the company of other dogs. Despite their gigantic size, Great Danes can even feel quite at home in a city.
In the Middle Ages, these dogs earned their living in dog fighting and by hunting big mammals.
Origin: China, Antiquity
Weight: 40-65 lbs
Height: 18-22 inches
The chow chow is an independent dog often focused only on its own needs. Chow chows need constant physical activity and communication, even if they don’t seem to like being disturbed much.
The chow chow’s original purposes were hunting and helping shepherds.
Origin: Germany, 19th century
Weight: 65-90 lbs
Height: 26-28 inches
Doberman Pinschers (often just called Dobermans) are dogs whose traits emphasize protecting and defending instincts. It is important to avoid any type of aggressive play and struggle with these dogs. Instead, use the games to develop the Doberman’s intelligence. Even though they aren’t small dogs, Dobermans can adapt to life in a city and become a perfect companion for an experienced, physically active owner.
This breed has its roots in in Germany. The breeder Louis Doberman decided to combine the qualities of guard dogs and and the terrier. Luis was a policeman, and so saw the need for a dog that would devotedly defend its owner.
Origin: North America, Ancient times
Weight: 80-110 lbs
Height: 23-28 inches
The Malamute is a friendly dog, but it has rather an independent temper. It’s better to keep this dog in a village, far from the city. Sometimes violent and energetic, they constantly need to move or play.
Note that Malamutes are a working dog breed from a colder climate. So, if you don’t live in the deep north, make your Malamute a nice playground. That’s because they are always in need of physical activity.
The name of the breed comes from a local North American tribe. They used the Malamute to transport goods on a sleigh.
Origin: Siberia, Ancient times
Weight: 35-55 lbs
Height: 20-24 inches
Training a Husky is not that easy. For these reasons, breeder don’t recommend this dog for beginning owners. Initially, these dogs transported goods on a sleigh. Not afraid of cold weather, they’re very active and loving dogs. Huskies love to get together with other members of their breed and howl at the moon.
Origin: Germany, 19th century
Weight: 70-85 lbs
Height: 22-26 inches
German Shepherds are very beautiful dogs, distinguished from other breeds by their reliable and obedient temper. They are in need of constant and serious physical activity though, and they seem to prefer long walks and active games.
Originally (as obvious from the name), the dogs guarded grazing sheep. They are great home guards and often participate in programs for the disabled.
Origin: Germany, 1820s
Weight: 85-110 lbs
Height: 23-27 inches
Rottweilers are powerful dogs with strong jaws, primarily meant to protect. Their original breeders selected those traits especially for that purpose. They often don’t like strangers and other dogs — they are guards at heart, and the dog owner should always remember that.
Origin: US, 19th century
Weight: 30-55 lbs
Height: 18-22 inches
The Pit Bull is named after its original purpose: The questionable amusement of dog fighting in pits. Sad as it is, that bloody tradition has survived in places, and Pit Bulls still have to take their part in it.
Photos source: Flickr
Origin: Southern U.S., 17th century
Weight: 60-120 lbs
Height: 20-28 inches
The American Bulldog is descended from the now-extinct Old English Bulldog, which was bred for farm guarding, livestock herding and bringing down game, and blood sports such as bull-baiting.
Today’s American Bulldog arose from any such dogs brought to America by working-class immigrants, many of them former farmers. In the South, these dogs were an important line of defense against feral hogs.
By the time of World War II, the American Bulldog almost went extinct, but was saved through selective breeding.
These dogs are large, heavy, and have powerful jaws with a typical overbite. They were bred for aggression and protection instincts. While they are suspicious of strangers, they are also very loyal and family-friendly. However, they need lots of space and attention.
Origin: England, 19th century
Weight: 100-130 lbs
Height: 24-27 inches
Bred around 1860 by English gamekeepers, the Bullmastiff’s job was to guard game preserves. They caught poachers, holding them until they could be arrested. They emerged from a cross of the large but non-aggressive Mastiff with the aggressive but smaller, lighter Bulldog.
Starting in the 20th century, they became a distinctive breed.
Today, Bullmastiffs are typical watch and guard dogs. They are fiercely loyal and love their families, but they have an extremely strong territorial instinct, and can be stand-offish towards strangers. When they’re properly trained, Bullmastiffs are also frequently used as gentle therapy dogs.
They are easy to groom, doesn’t shed, but are very prone to drooling. Bullmastiffs generally don’t need too much attention or movement.
Note that this dog was bred to be very quiet, so it won’t audibly warn when it’s startled or otherwise in a bad temper. In combination with their strengths, this makes Bullmastiffs one of the potentially most dangerous dogs.
Note: This post was originally published on April 1, 2009. It has since been updated with a new introduction and further background on the history of dangerous dogs.
View Comments
Hello Amy
Dogs learn intentionally or unintentionally.....with or with out our help........The objective is of course to let them learn what we want them to learn and make it difficult or uncomfortable when they attempt to perform what we do not want them to learn. BIG dogs have a BIG impact, 2 BIG dogs have twice as much impact little dogs have little impacts, 2 little dogs have twice as much impact. When one dogs engages something interesting the second dog will get involved.
Why would anyone care which dog is tougher........to answer the question...would require them to fight. Is that the reason for asking the question? to rationalize the desire to fight them?
The idea is to avoid the opportunity for the dog to have a choice, and if we can not avoid it, then at least we are present to effect an immediately positive affect the circumstances. I do not want my dog to fight another dog for anyreason other than it's survival, in fact I would rather he ran. As long as he is obedient and friendly he is tough enough for me.
you are kiding thay are the nices dog ever
Cat Monkey
There have been many dogs mentioned in this site. To which are you refering when you state: You are kidding, they are the nices doogs ever?
jacj
Oleg stated it perfectly - This is the most ridiculous artcle about dogs i have ever read - obviously your a cat person and my advice is that you may want to stick to cats. I appreciate you paragraph about not being dog breed biased, so maybe you shouldn't try to pigeon hole breeds that certainly don't deserve it.
To a few people who may be confused, Pit bulls first of all are American Staffordshire Terriers - one and the same breed - and they were initially bred as a working dog to help with livestock, and as companions. A long time ago - were' talking like 1800's -horrible people - the same type of person that would injure roosters and attach blades to them for cock fighting - started using them for dog fighting because of their jaw and over all strength and stature. they put them in a pit to fight them which is how people have come to call them pit bulls. i do not personally own one but have known many in fact have one living next door at our very good neighbors house, any everyone of them would have LICKED ME TO DEATH - and that's about as violent as i have ever seen one. I am not saying they can't be aggresive or won't be aggressive - i am saying that ANY DOG FROM ANY BREED can be dangerous - you should always be wary and ask the owner permission to pet etc.- my neighbors coon hound mix is more aggressive than the pit bull next door. They don't socialize fighting dogs so someone out walking their dog or at a park etc will not be a "fighting" dog, a dog mauling is actually quite rare - it just sticks in our minds because it is horrific and viloent - and usually done to a child. Some dogs may be snippy just from temeperament or age (puppy or senior) or from injury or a million other reasons- this should not be considered aggression but normal dog temperament. We have to remember they are animals and have animal instincts- they are not people and do not behave as such - no matter how hard we try to make them.
Andrew - You say that we are "willing to give just one example of a family pet that has never attacked anyone and claiming that is evidence of the safety of that breed – without understanding the basics of proof using large sample sizes. " but certain breeds have aquired a bad reputation because of small "sample sizes" as you say-
- STATISTICALLY
1.) •Mixed breeds and not pure bred dogs are the type of dog most often involved in inflicting bites to people. (TRANSLATION: AGGRESSIVENESS IS NOT BREED SPECIFIC)
2.)•There are approximately 4.5 million reported dog bites annually in the United States (nearly 2% of the American population). The majority of dog bites are never reported to local authorities. (TRANSLATION: (2 % BITTEN - and how many of the 2% are actually pit bulls or rottweilers?) sounds like a SMALL SAMPLE TO ME)
3.)•According to the American Medical Association, dog bites are the second leading cause of childhood injury, surpassing playground accidents.(TRANSLATION: TEACH YOUR CHILDREN ABOUT SAFETY AROUND DOGS)
and interstingly enough ...•The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention document that a chained dog is 2.8 times more likely to bite than an unchained dog.
and lso very interesting "
Does breed specific legislation effectively protect people from dog attacks? The consensus of most animal behavior experts is that it does not. For example, a recent published study shows that German shepherds, chows, and Jack Russell terriers {{oh jack russells are not on your list}} are overall the most aggressive breeds, and therefore the breed most likely to bite people. In England, there was no substantial change in the frequency of dog bites by pit bull type dogs after the Dangerous Dog Act was initiated. And recently reported results from Spain yielded similar results."
The first most dangerous dog on the "list" for FATAL BITES (what percentage of the 2% of the population are actuallt fatal bites from a pit bull?) would be staffordshire terrier (Pitt bull) and the second is rottweiller - which is HALF the % of the pit bulls. This information this however is for their sheer strength not aggressiveness - if you were bit by a smaller weaker but more aggressive dog you may not suffer as much as from a bite from a larger stronger dog - but perhaps the larger stronger dog attatcked the man that was trying to climb his owners fence, or felt that his master or child of the family was in danger.
My point overall is this - FIRST - PEOPLE need to be smart about owning a dog (any pet really) then the knowledgeable people need to properly TRAIN their dogs - no matter what breed - and third you must teach your children DOG SAFETY.
In my house we have adopted from the animal control - 2 mixed breeds - lab mixes - one with aussie shepard (3 years old - had him from 8 weeks) and one with rotty (1 year old - just got her a month ago ) - my 6 year old son has been with our oldest dog- for 3 years ~obviously. My son can lay on him, stick his face in the dogs face - take a toy or a bone away from him, stick his hands in his food while he's eating - whatever. That's from training - he growled a bit as a puppy about food or toys being touched or taken away - but we worked with him - took an obedience course and we taught him not to put his mouth on people - and he doesn't. although i have no worries that he would protect us if needed. If we (parents and kids) are playing around with each other and someone says "ow!" - his reaction - not ferocious at all but just behaviorally - tells me that if one of us were attacked by a stranger, or if he by another dog- he would definately use his teeth to fight.
NOW - I have also taught my son that while you may be able to do this with our dog - it is only because it is our dog - other dogs will not tolerate this treatment - especially from a strange kid - all other dogs you must be wary - NOT AFRAID, BUT WARY of - you must ask to pet a dog - you cannot just start hugging on a strange dog and you ALWAYS gently put your hand out for them to smell first and then pet after given permission. Alot of people and children just go to pat a dog on the head without properly introducing themselves first - and going right for the head feels aggressive to a dog that does not know you. let them sniff you and then if they relax to let you know that it's okay to pet them - start buy rubbing their chest or neck a little. People need to educate them selves - WITH CORRECT INFORMATION - and THEN educate and train their dogs and friends and family.
our new puppy - although already 1 - is going through all the same training our first dog went through...and continues to go through because training never really stops - my dog is not food aggressive but every so often i bend down while he's eating and take a handful of his food - and he doesn't care - and i will continue to do it until we lose him. LEARNING SHOULD NEVER STOP AND NEITHER SHOULD TRAINING.
Hello jen
Your writings for the most part are on point. We differ when say BSL is not needed. Communities have the right to demand any legislation which they feel refects the marjirity of the community. Ohterwise people would have tigers and lions and other dangerous animals in hteir back yard, as in fact they do and have done. This is the only fare way to legislate if majority of intellegent peopl are not permitted to vote their opinion and it not be respected then what good is legislation. I do not feel legislation should be left to the representives on some matters, in others it is acceptable. dogs are not dangerous, until people get involved and stuipid inexperience people create circumstane for injury and mathem.
I own two pitbulls and they are very well behaved and good with children and other dogs. But they are high strung with alot of energy! I won't leave my dogs alone with my four year old brother-in-law, not because I think he will be attacked, but because I think it would be irresponsible! No dog should be left alone with a child! Dogs will treat human babies the same as the would their own young. They disciple with their mouths! I believe that animals are just being animals when they bite. There is no premditated motives when they attack. I believe that most animal bites are because HUMANS did something wrong.
My second complaint about dangerous dog statistics and pulls is that alot of them are 10-15 years out dated! With all the shows on the animal planet, and national geographic I have to believe that the general public is more informed about dog behavior then they were in then the nineties!
Even the links that the author gave to site her sources had graphs from the 70" to the 90's. That doesn't seem right. There are so many dog laws and more education out there so I am sure those statistics are not acurate anymore!
Hannah
it is as you say irresponsable and stupid to leave children alone with dogs, people have done it with out consequence and with fatal consequence. It goes back to people lacking knowledge, expereience and understanding behavior of animals; do stupid things, and stupid people are not able to learn from the mistakes of others....so stupid people do stupid things. That is why we keep having bad things happen with peop;e and dogs. After 5000 years we are still doing the same bad thing to each other.
However if you look up the word, premeditated you will see it is applicable to dogs, during in their stalking, positioning, hunting, chase, and the kill, in addition, they plan where to have their litter.
Dogs are stimulted by sounds and action when hungry or.......when seeking play. either of these conducts would be fatal where children are concerned, or adults for that matter.
All that is needed would be to have one of your Pitt Bulls want to play with an item your son in law is playing with or wearing, such as dogs do when playing in tug of war. During the play. the dog misses the item and instead takes hold of a body part. Then incorporate the whinning or crying of the child which the dog may consider that noise to be that of a wounded animal, then incorporate your second Pit bull wanting to take part , and You have the makings of a mauling. Once the mauling starts it takes seconds to be fatal and you have an eternity to remember not to mention the destructive aspect on your family. Your not fearing or thinking the Pit Bulls "will not harm" is foolish. However your statement "No dog should be left alone with a child" reflects good, sound reasoning, but does not support other parts of your statement.
well jack - first of all i don't know what you mean by BSL is that basic life support , british sign language ? if you are referring to your legislation argument - i never said it was or was not needed so i'm not sure why you brought it up after my comment. I think their should be legislation on how we care for our animals and that they cannot be used for fighting, cannot abuse them etc etc - i think there is already that type of legislation in place however that doesn't stop some people. as far as legislation that says "if you live in this town you cannot have a pit bull" i think that is pure garbage. last i checked it was a free country - maybe we should pass legislation on people haveing common sense - perhaps they should pass a test before they are allowed a pet - but i don't think it's fair that someone tell me you can't have that breed in this town, or state. also the last time i checked lions and tigers were considered wild animals and are against the law to have - but as you said that doesn't stop some - at any rate i think i was just stating that people basically should be mor responsible with their animals and family as well as other animals.
and i am pretty sure when hannah mentioned the word premeditated what she meant was the dog does not look at the child and say "i'm gonna eat this kid as soon as the adult leaves the room !' of some of their actions are premeditated - what a ridiculous argument.
HER POINT IS THAT NO MATTER HOW WELL BEHAVED HER DAGS ARE SHE STILL DOES NOT ASSUME THAT NOTHING WILL HAPPEN. and my point is more dog owners should be like her.
are you breed racist? do you not like pitt bull just because they are pitt bulls? are you the one trying to get the legislation passed in your neck of the woods? is that why you feel the need to keep bringing it up? is this your blog or did your wife write the article? i guess i am just wondering why you are feeling the need to comment on everybody's entry - seemingly to try to set eveyone straight...
just saying...
Good Morning Jen
This posting is the best way to answer you posting, Hannah is correct about dogs and children being alone. I am not associate with this site other than posting. I am not married, I am a practicing trainer. I am Nomadic in that I travel the United States and canada learning about animals and people. I start horses under saddle and train them for riding and driving, single or multi hitch, draft or light horses. I also train dogs for obedience. I look at our dometic animals as a blank canvas....we are the artist, what that dog/animal reflects is our training or lack of training. I comment because it stimulates a response which allow me to learn.
“Training horses/dogs/animals is about Communication”
Training” horses is an intentional act to modify their behavior.
Communication’ is an intentional or unintentional act which conveys information. Clear’ intentional communication is the essence of any enduring relationship.
Whether human or animal there are three innate mediums of communication: visual, sound and tactile. When it comes to training animals…, communication …..When understood, leads to predictability.
The sound’ medium of communication (For the most part the spoken word) of humans is complex and very often perplexing to learn; as we have so many tongues and dialects spoken through out the world. As humans we are able to develop sounds that mimic those of animals. Animals, however (for the most part) cannot verbally mimic us. At the same time both humans and animals seem to learn quickly the superficial aspects of each others visual and tactile mediums of communication.
Horses communicate in the same ways, no matter where in the world they are located. I do not think it is possible for a horse to misinterpret the communications of another normal horse. In addition, horses are not able to euphemize or lie. On the other hand, we humans are not only able, but apt at euphemizing and lying, misleading or deceiving each other and, we are able to do so using all three innate forms of communication.
Training is an intentional endeavor to modify behavior. However learning can be an intentional or unintentional process.
For example: If take swimming lessons I am intentionally trying to learn to swim. However, if I fell off a bridge into the water and didn’t know how to swim; I would probably frantically begin flailing my arms and legs about trying to stay afloat. If I did stay afloat and made it to shore I would have unintentionally learned to swim.
As a trainer, I learned early on; in order to develop a mutually respectfully relationship with a positive, residual affect; the animal and I must experience each other face to face.
As a trainer, I want to communicate to the horse, my true intention; that being, I mean him no harm. I’ in turn will interpret his conduct looking for any behavior modification and determine if it is positive or negative. During the initial stages of our encounter, I consider tolerance a positive affect on his behavior.
During training; both the horse and I are learning. However only one of us is teaching, In short we are both learning to trust each other. With mutual trust established; I enhance my efforts of training him for performance; in riding or driving as well as work in- hand or at liberty.
My nomadic life style, has allowed me to experience… and learn from many people, horses and dogs. This opportunity led me to create an aphorism "CUP of Blended T's."
The letters C. U. P. are an acronym for communication, understanding, and predictability. The Blended T’s, segment of the aphorism is defined below. I found keeping this in the forefront of my thinking, aids me in discovering new pathways of learning from the people and animals.
The letter C = Communication’ through the mediums of Visual, Sound & Tactile, which ironically are also three of the horses’ five senses
The mediums of communication listed below are not prioritized
The first medium of communication is: visual
I call it visual because one must use their eyes to understand the communication being conveyed to them by the body movement of the source of origin, as with those of the deaf community when signing.
Horses’ when communicating use their eyes, ears, baring of their teeth, rapid opening and closing of the mouth, lip licking, movement of the head, feet, tail, and over all demeanor of their body. The signals may be presented individually or in correlation. This visual medium of communication is also similar to the hand signals a traffic cop uses when directing traffic.
Using our entire body or using our extremities individually or in correlation; we can develop signals which we display to cause the horse to perform a certain action or movement. When presented consistently the horse learns to respond appropriately. Although one could use visual signals while on the horses’ back to train him to perform; normally visual communication is transmitted during in-hand or liberty work.
The second medium of communication is: Sound
Horses use various noises made with their breath flowing from the lungs, through the nose and mouth.
The sound might be a slight “mmmmm” like that of a mare nickering a message to her foal to stay close or the scream of a mare that lost track of her foal, or the screams of warning…from a stallion telling another stallion to stay away or to give alarm to his herd as to the presence of a threat.
During riding or driving we use sounds (Whoa) to direct our horses to stop or encourage them to stand still when In-hand. Our horses can just as easily be trained to stop’ when they hear other sounds, such as a whistle; if we consistently associate that sound with the act of stopping/standing. The old teamsters trained their work horses/mules to turn left by sounds of Haw’ to turn right and Gee to turn left.
The third medium of communication is: Tactile
Tactile communication between horses would be when a foal rubs against his mother for comfort or bumps her in the flank to demand she let him nurse, still another tactile communication is when the stallion nips, nuzzle or rubs against a mare during the mating ritual to determine her receptiveness.
Another tactile communication is a “seeing eye” dog leading a blind person who is holding the harness handle. The dog’s movement is communicating a message to the person as to what the dog wants the person to do. For example; If the dog refuses to walk upon command; the dog could be telling the person there are dangerous or undesirable conditions ahead.
Brail’ is another form of tactile communication; where in the reader must use their sense of touch with their finger tips upon an array of dots on a brail board. The arrangement of the dots, convey the message.
Another application of tactile communication is when a man and woman holding each other while dancing; both are communicating in tactile. We rely upon tactile communication when we touch the horse using pressure and release of our personal aids in an effort to direct its’ movement when riding, driving or in hand work.
U = Understanding: When we recognize, learn and understand the signals horses uses to communicate; we know the message they convey.
P = Predictability: This means when we observe a horse communicating, we can forecast the outcome of various circumstances.
Blended T's = Training & Trust: The sequence is definitely training first, and if done humanely, kindly, consistently one will earn a certain amount of trust. Trust between an animal and a person is simply: willing participation in degrees, without concern or fear. Trust between animals and people come only from good training.
I must mention the absence of fear, does not necessarily reflect the presence of trust. The Lion in the wild or a wild certainly does not fear me.
The bottom line in training is; do not ask for more trust than you have earned. In addition, remember both fear and trust are learned and earned.
Training is an intentional effort to modify a behavior. Training can be accomplished two ways. One way is face to face, where we train the animal to trust us. This training begins at the first encounter when both parties are present and aware of each other. With a psychologically sound horse; humane, good training will produce trust. With this trust I will train him for performance in riding, driving, in-hand or at liberty.
The more I train him the more trust he will extend.
The other way to train a horse is through Pavlov’s involuntary response to a stimulus. Where in I may train a horse with use of grain or other desired substance; to open a gate or load into a trailer; and not let him associate me with the circumstance. In either case he will develop trust for the environment……, but he will not develop trust for me; I wasn’t in the equation, so how could he.
In closing, may I suggest; while incorporating a "Cup of Blended T's" will not make one a trainer, it certainly is a fundamental aspect of good training. Perhaps we should start every day with a "Cup of Blended T'S"
Footnote: Oder
Communication conveys information; therefore Oder’ is a medium of communication. However with humans, as with the use of perfumes, it can be intentional or unintentional, as the use or intent may be for self fulfillment. With animal it is only unintentional. With horses Odor’ is a non-cognitive, biological, involuntary function that communicates status or presences, therefore it is unintentional communication, much like the message a lame horse would convey to a predator, or a mare in heat conveys to a stallion. The sense of smell is one of the horse’s five senses for processing information. The sense of smell which detects Oder; if the Oder was previously experienced it would convey a message to the horse. If not previously experienced; and the horse did not find the Oder offensive I would think it would incite the horse to investigate, if he perceived the environment safe.
Jack
Please keep in mind that studies show that when a dog attack happens there is often no offical verification of the dog's breed. It is normally left up to the responding officer to record the breed of the dog. Therefore, unless said poilce officer is a dog expert, there is a very high margin for error.