Actually, Earl, I think you bringing up this distinction is worthy of a whole discussion and effort to clarify the issues here, namely the distinction between intelligence and prey drive, as well as the distinction between prey drive and gameness.Originally Posted by Earl Tudor
All, some, or none of these traits may (or may not) be found in individual dogs. You could also complicate this further by distinguishing dogs that naturally like people versus dogs that naturally dislike people.
An example of a dog with no intelligence, no prey drive, and no gameness (but that likes people) may be a lazy old bassett hound ... who just lays there at his master's feet ... and who essentially does nothing is probably safe around children.
An example of a polar opposite dog would be a people-mean, battle-tested bulldog, with a prey drive out of this world, and a devious nature ... would be a highly-volatile, dangerous dog that would be terrible around children.
Honestly, I wouldn't trust these dogs to be alone together either. (Keep in mind that I left Silverback and Jezebel alone, for no more than 5 min, and Jezebel fired-up at another bitch in a crate, and had no outlet but Silverback and so grabbed him (who she normally liked), and he responded by DOAing her before I got back inside. Although Silverback's intelligence is great, and while his basic temperament with people is also great (even with perceived "friendly" dogs), the fact is his prey drive is through the roof, and he won't take being grabbed or growled at, which makes him kind of volatile if he gets geeked-up.How can a dogs like Silverback, Little D, Dirty Hammer, all be together in the house and not crank up, but couldn't be trusted around a child?
Another example was a friend of mine had his two bulldogs together as "friends"---a momma and her own male puppy. Eventually the puppy grew up, and yet they all got along together perfectly for about 18 months. Both dogs were sweet and loving with each other and with people. One day the mama found a rat, and grabbed it ... and then her son tried to grab it ... and (well) you guessed it, suddenly there was World War III in the backyard, with two dogs that had previously loved each other and were mother-and-son.
In the end, they're just dogs, COMBAT dogs, and you never really know what might trigger a "geeked-up" response, which is why I recommend controlled supervision. If that was a child that tried to take away "the kill" ... it could have been ugly.
I don't have children, true, but I do know how dogs "think" ... and, with the unfortunate benefit of a lot of hindsight, I can see where I (and others) made terrible mistakes in judgment in the past, by giving dogs too much benefit of the doubt, and forgetting that (in the end) they ARE "just dogs"--and combat dogs at that. I think that is why we both agree on the "better safe than sorry" model at this point in our careers
I have had bitches that were good mothers, and were highly-intelligent, but that were NOT good with kids ... because their prey drive, when geeked-up, was out of this world (Bandana / Red Sonja). I have had other bitches, that were just as good a bitches in the [], and good mothers also, but who were great with kids because they had lazy, mellow temperaments and never got riled-up (Rosey / Sassy). They were big ol' lazy cows that were calm and stable, rather than the geeked-up type.I have one "game dog" (female, which I think makes a difference, maternal instincts), in the house that I truly trust with my 5, 8, and 15 year old, as well as my nieces, however, she isn't just any ol dog, and is truly one of those "most intelligent dogs" that you speak of.
Therefore, I would be willing to bet that, not only is your bitch sweet and intelligent, but she also has a very mellow, lowkey disposition, with a minimal prey drive (again, not to be confused with gameness).
Jack
Reply With Quote