Horrible situation - same sex aggression rehoming problem

stangs said:
Tbf I don't think you can call a dog of a breed known for same sex aggression unreliable for having acted on that same sex aggression. And not having redirected onto people trying to separate the fight, and being okay with strangers, makes her pretty good for a Presa of dodgy genetics.
Click to expand...
I agree there are worse dogs out there, the poor dog has failed in predictable ways. But really if she’s good for a presa, how low is the bar!?
 
Exasperated said:
You mean the larger dog had lost it’s teeth but still raked your spaniel?
Interesting, because I know Juno continued rough and tumble with the other dogs; witnessed it; and she was always quite ‘forward’ with visitors, too, but nothing got wounded.
My cousins were just delighted her life was spared, and how it worked out. It might even have been the vet’s suggestion, rather than destroy their dog, can’t remember.
Click to expand...
No the dog had all its teeth but that's not how it injured her. It pinned her down and then managed to cause a nasty wound on her stomach with it's claws. She required stitches and was never the same about other dogs. The dog would have been about twice her weight/size
 
Clodagh said:
I agree there are worse dogs out there, the poor dog has failed in predictable ways. But really if she’s good for a presa, how low is the bar!?
Click to expand...
The expectation is that a Presa is a lot of dog, even for a mastiff, with a real tendency towards dog aggression and a very low tolerance for strangers. At best, if from good genetics and very well-socialised, they'll ignore the rest of the world and focus on their owner. At worst - which is getting more common with them becoming more popular and more idiots breeding them - they'll walk all over their owners and go for anything that looks at them wrong, human or animal.

But they're also not really supposed to be pets, so what might be a low bar for a pet dog is going to be the bare minimum for a breed that was bred to guard and deal with cattle.
 
lozzles said:
No the dog had all its teeth but that's not how it injured her. It pinned her down and then managed to cause a nasty wound on her stomach with it's claws. She required stitches and was never the same about other dogs. The dog would have been about twice her weight/size
Click to expand...
Very nasty, and shows how dangerous big-build dogs can be.
When such dogs act aggressively towards humans - should be permanently prevented, not psychoanalysed or re homed.
 
rara007 said:
I’d be impressed if a backyard butcher managed to remove a mastiffs head of healthy teeth…!
Click to expand...
No, definitely not a backyard butcher, the dog was taken to a veterinary hospital in the city for clinical extraction.
It may have been their vet’s suggestion, but was certainly not an unknown solution for dog aggression, whoever first thought of it.
 
@scruffyponies I hope you’re okay. Whatever outcome is going to be so difficult for you, wishing you all the very best.

We have friends who had an American bulldog x, had her from a puppy, from a dogs home. They already had two males, different types and there was never an issue between the dogs but once the puppy got to about a year old she started becoming aggressive to other dogs and as she aged she became aggressive to any animal, never a human though. They had to micromanage and she had lots of different therapies but unfortunately at four years old she got lucky, escaping through a door and attacking a random small dog on a lead, and they had no option other than to put her down after that.

Personally, I found her terrifying, it was as if she had a split personality.
 
Exasperated said:
No, definitely not a backyard butcher, the dog was taken to a veterinary hospital in the city for clinical extraction.
It may have been their vet’s suggestion, but was certainly not an unknown solution for dog aggression, whoever first thought of it.
Click to expand...
Yes but you won’t find a UK vet doing this. Or ear cropping. Or declawing.
 
Exasperated said:
Would have come next? - after the delivery person was mauled, was due to be shot (which is what I would have done if mine).
At the time, J. was a young bitch, apparently usually very ‘nice’, and the family distraught. De-toothing was to preserve her life (which life proved healthy and fairly lengthy for a big dog). Should they have saved her for that life? Ethics of human animal / interaction? Should any of these dogs ever be bred in the first place?
This is Latin America, no idea how often vets do this; no, I wouldn’t have it done myself; yes, it worked well for them; is it worse than euthanasia for a healthy, young animal? - evidently some international vets think not; my personal view is that unreliable and dangerous dogs (particularly large ones) should not be rehomed, but should be destroyed before they do any more damage - full stop.
Sorry if that upsets the OP, who’s in a very upsetting situation (as J’s owners were).
Click to expand...
Yes you see I think it is worse than euthanasia, lots if not all unpredictable dogs are not happy dogs and if the time to try and work out why is not taken but the dogs teeth pulled out for the convenience of the humans around it euthanasia would have been a better option in my opinion.
 
twiggy2 said:
Yes you see I think it is worse than euthanasia, lots if not all unpredictable dogs are not happy dogs and if the time to try and work out why is not taken but the dogs teeth pulled out for the convenience of the humans around it euthanasia would have been a better option in my opinion.
Click to expand...
euthanasia would be my choice, too. I don’t believe there is safe leeway for psychoanalysing / re training / re homing any large, proven-vicious, dog.
But hard to describe Juno’s subsequent life as ‘unhappy’: considerable space, exercise, companions, a permanent, loving home in a ranchhouse? Hopefully it was a ‘happy life’, because it was quite long. All their dogs seem to live longer than UK ones, same family had a xbred terrier nearly 19, they’re fed differently, outside a lot more.
By many standards, they’d be good owners, certainly doted on J.
 
The poor old Canarians, first we messed up their islands and now we're messing up their dogs. I'm guessing that the op has collected more dogs than the family were on board with in the first place. It sounds as though this bitch gave three clear signals of intent which nobody picked up or acted upon. Now she's a lifetimes work for someone and even then circumstances change. Don't send her on to an uncertain future would be my advice.

How do dogs with no incisors deal with fleas and ticks in hard to reach places? It must be hell for them, not to mention the psychological impact of a lousy temperament and reduced means of protection.
 
Exasperated said:
There is another, excellent solution, altho I don’t know whether UK vets will cooperate - they ought, if the alternative is destruction.
Relatives in Chile: with a very large, mastiff-y type of dog (among others) that was 99% ‘lovely’, but also killed a neighbour’s spaniel, and badly bit a delivery person. So, was not really that ‘lovely’ after all.
They had all her teeth drawn, rather than have her shot.
The vet was in full agreement, and worth remembering plenty of unaggressive dogs loose their teeth or have them removed for gum disease, anyway.
Juno lived to be 13 or 14, she was always loud and a bit pushy, but no more trouble other than a lot of slaver.
Might be worth enquiring?
Click to expand...

What the actual...

No, this is not another excellent solution. Destruction would be an excellent solution.

I absolutely love my mastiff to bits, but if she demonstrated aggressive behaviors or (God forbid) bit anyone (human or animal), she'd be euthanized. Removing her teeth would not even enter my mind.

I get that plenty of dogs that aren't aggressive can lose their teeth or have them removed for a variety of reasons, but there's a difference between a well behaved dog having a tooth or teeth extracted for medical reasons vs removing teeth from an aggressive dog.

And no, the vet should not "ought" to remove teeth vs euthanasia. Not all vets are created equal though.



I'm just absolutely floored that someone would extract their aggressive dogs teeth vs euthanize.
 
Last edited:
scruffyponies said:
Please keep your guesses to yourself. If you aim to be hurtful, shame on you.
For the record, the newest 2 were added by adult children against my wishes and advice.
Click to expand...
Why would I want to be hurtful? I don't even know you. It's an open forum and you asked a question. I answered based on experience of multiple-dog households. Am I allowed to say that by your own admission you've got more dogs than you wanted, which was kind of my point. Hope it all works out for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top