http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2006/09/11/dog-humane-society.html?ref=rss

Poor dog

As horrible as it is - it sounds to me like yet another example of where the compensation culture of the US is going. Basically they couldn't risk rehoming it incase it literally came back to bite them on the backside. So really, its down to mroe than just the humans at the shelter who assessed the poor thing.

I thought this article was about a dog in Ottawa! Nobody mentioned US ........

very sad

I can't believe this - wonder how many dogs fail that test! Just because the fake hand looks like a hand to us doesn't mean the dog thinks it's a hand. It won't smell like one - If I poked my dogs in the face with a toy while they're eating they probably would bite the toy :rolleyes:

I went to a day a few years ago in which the trainer from the US showed these kind of tests  - it totally horrified me. The worst test involved how sociable a dog was - if it wasn't deemed sociable enough, it was put to sleep! And NO allowance was made for breed. So under this test, my first 2 Belgians, who were the most wonderful companions, would have been pts!

I believe that a lot of the tests were devised with compensation and this problem in mind for some of the US rescues...

Lindsay
x

I've watched a lot of tests like that on Animal Planet, it's a tricky question. Mine would definitely not bite me if I poked them while eating, but is it really that surprising that a half-starved stray would want to defend its food? Perhaps the test should be more whether you could get rubbish or  food picked up accidentally off the dog, rather than whether you can give it food and then take it away half way through!

I don't like it personally - I think in all the tests I've seen on Animal Planet shows, the only one that made me stop and think "maybe this time they're right" was Atlas, the dane mix (I think) that made a total mess of the hand.  But he did almost starve to death!  But they don't seem to consider the possibility of management - my brother's dog is food-aggressive, although she's much better with me now; but I will be telling brother's OH to make absolutely sure the kids do not go anywhere near her when she has food.  It's a case of being careful - we just have to make sure we don't try to take her food bowl away unless she has a collar on (then we can remove her from the bowl instead of removing the bowl if need be), and she never gets any raw bones (even going near her when she has a bone would get you bitten).

I do agree with not rehoming to homes with kids - when Tia was brought home there were no kids in the equation - but euthanasia is just unnecessary IMO.

I think it's pretty horrific and extreme myself. Maybe it's their way of cutting down on numbers, any excuse to kill them. I know MY dogs would let me take their food off them and poke around them when they are eating, I've done it to them from pups. Whether they'd let a total stranger in a totally strange and scary place do so is a different matter. And they must realise that the dogs know it isn't a real hand! If I poked ANY dog in the face with a stick I would expect it to bite the stick when it may not do so to a hand.

One of the reasons Sue Sternberg gave (she was the trainer I saw) was that whereas those who are interested in training and behaviour (ie the people at the seminar) would be happy working with this kind of dog, most pet owners wouldn't! In a way she was right - and in the US I believe the rescue situation is pretty diabolical sadly :( so they tend to use these tests to weed out many dogs who would not, according to the test, be able to be good pet dogs.

I don't agree with the tests, because i think there are better ways of assessing a dog than the ones suggested by her. I know there are others who would disagree with me though and who would be concerned about the rescue being sued, etc.....

Lindsay
x

Hey Nikita, I just watched that one! I agree he was the most aggressive I've seen. But the ones who stiffen and give a warning growl, I think it's just asking to be bitten to keep messing around with their food bowl. But like others have said, if the rescue situation is really bad over there, I guess they have to weed some out. :-(

I know one dog who certainly wouldn't have left Battersea alive if the hand/food test as described had been performed on him. He'd been found wandering the streets, half-starved and it's left him with no desire to share any of the contents of his food bowl let alone be poked at while he's wolfing the contents down. Had this test been done at Battersea shortly after he'd been rescued I'm sure it would have written his death sentence for him.

Instead of putting him to sleep, his circumstances were carefully explained to the friends of mine who rehomed him and they've always been sensitive in this respect. As it happens, he's got very much more laid back as far as food is concerned (apart from being a terrible thief!) over the couple of years they've had him and it's hoped that his unhappier memories have faded.

I can see exactly why various tests need to be performed but I'd have thought there were more sensible ways to assess genuine aggression as opposed to the probable stress caused by the dog's current circumstances.

The same is true of Tia, from what we know of her history she was a stray from a very young age, and was brought into rescue at about 6 months old, then rehomed to my brother at around 2 1/2-3 years old, and very thin.  If she'd been tested it would've been the end, she was very bad when she first moved in.  But to see her now, you'd never realise how bad she can be - I can put my hand on her head now while she's eating (I do this to slow her down so she doesn't inhale food and choke), she doesn't growl unless I linger, and she'd never bite without warning first.  So much progress, and more reinforcement that euthanasia for resource guarding is IMO not needed.

What really, really annoyed me, and makes me spit to this day about the seminar was that the dogs we were shown (the tour involved Wood Green and Battersea dogs, we saw dogs from Old Windsor) were not candidate for put to sleep although we were told some were according to the tests.

For example - a superb, wonderul GSD cross, called Jess. She had been left for 14 hours a day in a flat whilst owners worked, but she was a nice dog. I really took to her. Hand test was done on her and she didn't react. Previously her food bowl lhad been shown her and we'd been told she was guarding - she really, really was not. All she did was to sit in front of the trainer looking at her expectantly just like any dog. No way was she guarding, yet we were told she was, had a hard eye etc - and that she was "dominant" (spit, spit) because she jumped up to greet her kennel assistant!! :rolleyes:

Lindsay
x

I watched a prog on an american rescue center and they had a lovely great dane fab in everyway a real softy even with all these injections they kept giving him . but because he bit the hand (the fake one ) he was pts :rolleyes: on the same channel I watched how a behavourist delt with the same thing ( food guarding ) these rescue centers have behavourists why not give them a chance to try and sort these dogs if they fail then put them to sleep .

What an interesting thread. How difficult it must be to assess these dogs accurately - and then assess the adopter's actual skill and commitment level. 

My rescue recently rehomed a GSD/Husky X.  I walked him twice and he seemed an affectionate, lively lad and no-one mentioned any problems with his behaviour during his time in rescue.  A (childless) couple reserved him, visited daily for a week and then took him home.  On the second day he was returned with the story that the bloke went to throw something in to a wastepaper basket and the dog leapt on him and pinned him to the floor, snarling in his face and having to be dragged off by small female partner who was terrified.  Couple seemed genuinely distraught at this outcome having built a relationship with the dog but now too fearful to keep him. Dog PTS immediately.

Could this situation have had a more positive outcome? Probably - but how much assessment and of what standard can realistically be achieved in most rescue centres? I'm not trying to be provocative, I genuinely don't know.  What is an acceptable standard of risk in a re-homing situation, apart from fear of litigation?

Playing Devil's Advocate here, whilst I sincerely applaud those who have taken on dogs with problems and turned them around, how many pet homes have the knowledge to do this? 

And while there are so many good tempered, well behaved dogs who genuinely need homes through no fault of their own, some line has to be drawn as to which ones are to be given the chance of a new family home or a kennel for the rest of their lives. :(  Surely no risk should be taken when rehoming a dog?  I would honestly rather see dogs pts than to live the rest of their lives in kennels with staff who are already overstretched and have little time to spend with them.

Having said that, I'm not convinced that the American tests are a reasonable yardstick to judge a dog's potential.

I have to say I agree with Val. We have always had rescue dogs in the past and currently have one who has been with us since he was 10 weeks old - now a year old. We  spent ages looking for a dog that was suited to us and have been lucky  enough to always find the right dog.

One of the big problems we have always found is that there isn't much time to make up your mind about a dog. So many times the dog that seems most suitable is already reserved, and unless you get there as soon as the kennels open there is not much chance of finding a suitable dog who is not already reserved. ( The one we have now actually came in half an hour before we got there).

So then you start looking at dogs that previously would not have been on your compatability list and start to convince yourself that maybe his problems won't be so bad and perhaps you were being too specific in your requirements and it takes a strong mind to stick to your original thoughts. The majority of dogs we have seen given up for rescue have a behaviour problem of some sort and I am sure that a lot of people don't realise just how difficult this can be to sort out and to live with. Previously we have enquired about a dog only to find out it has already been reserved and then a couple of weeks later it is back in the kennels as the new owner couldn't cope with it.

I know rescues are desperate for space but I personally believe that the dogs should be there for a minimum amount of time so they can each be properly evaluated and the prospective owner should have to visit and interact with the dog daily for a week so they are well aware of the nature of the dog and any problems it may have. It can't do the dog any favours to be returned a number of times by people who can't cope.

>So then you start looking at dogs that previously would not have been on your compatability list and start to convince yourself that maybe his problems won't be so bad and perhaps you were being too specific in your requirements and it takes a strong mind to stick to your original thoughts.

I'm sure this is so true, Harley. Only I've got friends who thought they'd never actually rehome a rescue dog since nearly every dog they saw turned out to be reserved. They weren't picky about breed although had a preference for a Staffy or Staffy X so you'd assume they'd have plenty of choice (!) but every failed journey to the rescue left them more and more inclined to make the sort of compromise that can so often end in tears. They are experienced dog owners and know the sort of behavioural problems that are within their sphere of ability but I do know other, more naive but good hearted people who simply haven't realised that there are few dogs in rescue that won't have some sort of "baggage" and have been rather surprised when their rehomed dog hasn't behaved like the previous family dog they raised from puppyhood.

I also think a lot of first time owners choose a rescue as they think it will be easier and cheaper than a puppy and have no idea of the problems they may be inheriting. All done with very good intention by caring people but not the ideal situation for a first time owner with no previous experience of dogs. It is such a difficult situation with so many dogs waiting to be rehomed.

Not sure what the answer is as money is tight for rescue centres and there is always another dog needing a rescue place but perhaps the national rescues should run a pre-adoption class for all prospective rescuers. The class could cover the basic essentials that need to be considered before you take on a dog and might prevent "returns"  if people fully understood what it takes to be a responsible owner. If attendance was compulsory for would-be adopters it would also give the rescues a chance to evaluate the adopter a little more in depth and help to match the right dog with the right owner. The rescue could then suggest a suitable dog for the adopter rather than adopters going on first sight and rushing to reserve a dog that might, in realitiy, not be the one best suited to their lifestyle and prior experience with dogs. Although it would make the adoption process a little longer it might help to ensure that a dog's new forever home remains that way.

Just a thought on a difficult situation :)

Couldn't agree with you more Harley. :D

They seem so keen to rehome these dogs that once the general criteria is fulfilled then the suitability of dog and family seems to fly out of the window.  I knew of one male 12 month old OES who was homed with a young couple who both worked full time.  Surprise, surprise, the dog demolished their home while they were out!  He was returned and I followed him (as his groomer) through 3 more homes in 6 months before he moved up to Scotland.  I could tell of many more as I was near to a national rehoming kennel. :(

I know a GSD x who has been rehomed 4 times and has bitten children every time and been returned.  Her last chance was with a middle aged man with angina who lives on the 2nd floor!  She has been spayed, can't be exercised off the lead because she fights with other dogs and bites children.  She is her owner's only company and he loves her.  So with only lead exercise after dark when there are no children around, climbing up 3 flights of stairs, she's over weight and has had 2 cruciate repairs. :(  I'm not sure if there was a suitable home for this poor confused dog, who has been in and out of kennels and families on a piece of elastic, but this certain wasn't it! :(

Meanwhile, there a sweet tempered run of the mill mutts sitting in kennels - waiting.