"It's not the breed, it's the owner"

[Insertinspirationalquotehere]

There is a post on my local FB page today by a woman who was walking her dog, when it was attacked by another dog which was off its lead. The attacking dog was a husky cross type.

Cue lots of the above in the comments,people talking about their "big softies" etc

I do agree with this to an extent - an animal is an animal, you can't apply the same morals to it as you can a human, and I've seen plenty of badly trained, spoiled and snappy little dogs.

But AIBU to think that saying it's entirely the fault of the owner and nothing to do with the dog, isn't the whole picture either? A dog is, if you go back far enough, a wolf. Some breeds of dog surely remain more wolf like than others--a husky versus a chihuahua for example. Some dogs are bred specifically to be large and aggressive. Surely if the largest and most aggressive dogs breed, then of course you end up with a dog who is more likely to show these traits in certain situations? Of course with the right training, such dogs may be "big softies" all their life, but the streak in them is still closer to the surface.

I'm no expert, but I live rurally and I've been around dogs all my life, and there was a difference between yard/working dogs and pet dogs for a reason. Nobody would have a poodle herding sheep, so why give your child a husky? They have different traits and different strengths.

I get that it's not the defining factor, but I do think that surely breed has a part to play in dog behaviour?

I agree to an extent - chihuahuas are the most aggressive breed I've encountered, the ones I've met are snappy and vicious, but because they're small people just laugh at it. If they were bigger, they'd do some damage!

A lot of bigger dogs (especially those with pointed ears who look more 'wolfish', e.g. German Shepherds, huskies etc.) may not always be aggressive, but if they have that streak in them then the ultimate damage they could cause to a person or other animal is far worse!

I am someone of the opinion that a dog isn't necessarily born aggressive, but much like people, external factors can greatly affect their behaviour. I don't trust all dogs, or base a personality on their breed, but I generally assume that if a dog is vicious and angry, it's more likely to be how they were brought up than an innate want to attack.

I know a lot of people disagree on this matter, it's quite divisive!

A lot does depend on the owner. Some people like aggression in their dogs, particularly those that use certain breeds as some sort of status symbol. Others, through ignorance or laziness, create bad behaviour. A good example is one I saw on a tv program some years ago; the owner had called in a dog trainer as her small dog (I think it was a chihuahua) was being aggressive towards her partner & nipping him. The dog trainer said immediately that she was rewarding bad behaviour by picking the dog up and cuddling it every time it was aggressive.

Some breeds are more prone to aggression & can do a lot of damage but the owners have a responsibility to understand their behaviour & take steps to correct it if necessary

Husky owner here. Well socialised, well loved and well receptive to my dc's attention. Please don't judge a breed unless you have owned one.
She was bitten around the face last year by a Jack Russell and didn't react at all.
Unlike the owner who punched his ddog in the face. My dc were distraught tbh. I confronted him and was verbally abused... I know who the better owner was that day.
Our ddog is the most loving and well behaved.

I agree to an extent RE the breed, in so far as that a husky / SBT / mastiff will do far more damage if it decides to than a dachshund, for example. It's why in the news the kids killed by dogs are usually killed by bull terriers or other bull-type breeds, as they're the breeds that have the ability to inflict that much damage. You rarely hear of a child being killed by the family Papillon.

But a mentally healthy, well socialised, well trained dog (of any breed) is much less likely to attack than one which is not. So yes I'd say most of it is down to the owner and not the breed.

Obviously larger breeds have larger mouths, larger teeth and potentially stronger muscles, but that excludes the very relevant issues of socialisation, ownership and breed traits (including positive breed traits like biddability).

I agree, though i disagree that wolfish traits are necessarily the worst ones!

Strength and size are beneficial evolutionary features to wolves certainly, but you don't often see outright PROACTIVE aggression (as opposed to reactive aggression or a hunting instinct) in a wild species, because it's a potentially detrimental evolutionary feature.

More likely to get injured, more likely to engage in risky behaviours, less likely to survive and breed, more likely to injure or kill their mate etc.

Humans decided that aggressive animals could be useful to them, so bred them to be more extreme than their wild counterparts. Lots of 'aggressive' behaviour in wild animals is more a form of display than actual encounters, because those encounters get you hurt or killed. They are pack hunters first and foremost.

The guy (kennel/cattery owner) who takes my cat and dog when we're on holiday told me once that the only breed of dog he refuses to take is huskys. I think it can sometimes be the breed and maybe a mix of both?

I do agree that most of it is down to the owner.

But I do wonder if, as in humans, there's a nature/nurture effect. Nurture has the biggest impact, but if the circumstances are right then the nature wins out.

It's hard to judge too, because the amount of idiots who buy large pedigree dogs, keep them in small houses, and never walk them, seems to have increased recently

Most dog bites to children are caused by labradors.

I agree entirely its the owner; it’s like saying a child is born evil - no one is born bad, animals included, they learn to be that way.

Of course some breeds are more vicious than others-
people dont have poodles as guard dogs, they have dobermans and german shepherds for a reason!

It's the owners.
Small and cute dogs often lack ANY training, because "He/She is just so cuuuuuute and doesn't need like a proper training"
People are idiots when it comes to this.
I had various breeds from husky mix, German shepherd, mountain dogs, all were trained and none ever attacked a person. Unless I said so

But I was bitten. Twice. Once tiny terrier and second time dachshund.

Animals have characters, just like we do. Some are lovely and some are bit of a dick, but it's up to the owner to control the behaviour, train and take precautions according to the character of their dog.

So 100% owners fault.

But I was bitten. Twice. Once tiny terrier and second time dachshund
How much damage did they do, did you need skin grafts?

What people need to remember is dogs are animals and if an animal feels threatened or wants to prove its dominance then there a chance it will attack or act in a threatening manner because its instinct and that can be a difficult thing to train out of an animal.
My dog is a complete softie (not a big dog) he is around children, other dogs, cats and doesn't bat an eyelid, however there is one dog (same breed) in our town and if my dog comes across him he turns into a snarling beast! He never attacks and bit he is very aggressive towards this one dog.
A lot of it comes down to nurture but I'm affraid nature sometimes takes over.

I agree about small dogs though, a lot of people don't think they need to be trained because they are small and can't do as much damage as a big dog.

@OnlyFoolsnMothers obviously not🙄
But even a small dog can do massive damage on a baby.

InspectorClouseauMNdivision They can but not AS MUCH damage as more vicious dogs. ( to note, I would never ever leave any child alone with any dog). Yes of course a bad owner will not train a dog but there are breeds that are more prone to attack due to their DNA.

I think I read somewhere that Pekingese and shi tzu are among the closest related to wolves.

@OnlyFoolsnMothers and that's why a training exists.
So it goes again back to the owner. They get a dog, they must train it adequately.

As @Isitweekendyet correctly pointed out, most dog bites requiring medical attention are from labradors. That cute and apparently ever so friendly labradors.

I do think some breeds are bred to defend/be aggressive. You need also to look at the breeding co-efficient (basically inbreeding/close bloodlines being used) especially in popular bull breeds. Some people will use certain dogs to try to re-create certain traits, be it aggression or field trial potential.

Having a dog aggressive dog myself, I can say it has nothing to do with me but him being attacked as a youngster. A ton of money and socialization did zero to help. I have his brother, different dog entirely. The aggressive one is extremely clever, over thinks and sulks for days and is incredibly affectionate, just distrusts other dogs.

Ultimately, the individual dog needs to be looked at before the breed/owner is blamed. In the case of the OP, huskies are known for having erratic recall and have a penchant for chasing/harming small fluffies. Their popularity exponentially increased after GoT, just like other TV programmes/trends have done with other breeds. People buy without thought to checking temperament or without having the knowledge of how to cope with certain breeds. Huskies are not what I'd call a first choice family dog.

Huskies were bred to pull dog sledges for hours on end not as fighting dogs. I just wish people would do some research before they spout nonsense on the internet

You talking to me, @Stressedout10? Cos at no point have I said huskies were bred for fighting. I'm more than awareof their purpose having grown up with a spitz type. Was I unclear? I was not referring to huskies in my first paragraph.

I do and I don't agree...

I think a lot of breeds have a tendancy to be more aggressive and threatening (for example, German Shepherds used as police dogs), but I also think it's largely down to how they are allowed to behave, how they're treated by their owners etc.

Any dog can last out completely out of nature.

Off topic slightly but I remember a case a few years ago of a woman with a very aggressive dog, any man that came near the woman (ie tried to walk on same side of the road as her when she was walking her dog) and the dog would go crazy, barking and snarling and pulling to get to the man. It turns out the woman had the dog since he was a small puppy and the dog had watched her suffer years of domestic violence, so he was just super protective of her. It became a huge problem and she couldn't control the dog's behaviour and was scared to take him out in case he would to attack someone, so she had to give him up. It breaks my heart to think that after years of suffering, she then had to give up her darling dog, just because he was so scarred from years of emotional distress at seeing his beloved owner being repeatedly beaten to a pulp. Makes me almost cry just thinking about it. God knows what happened to that dog, I imagine it was beyond being rehomed! It doesnt bear thining about.

I believe dog breeds were created in the Victorian era and hardly any modern dogs are close to being wolves or closely related to wolves.

Sorry cherry it was the OP who put Huskies in the same category as sbts

Definitely agree about the small dog thing.Get incensed at people thinking they don't have to put the effort in.
My dog is 18 months old and is on his 5th bite from other dogs.
The last one was a Jack Russell literally hanging on to his face with his jaws, I wanted to kill the little shit.