Thoughts on the inheritance of aggression in Nihonken
I posted this in a thread on the Shiba side, but the discussion didn't go anywhere. I know @shibamistress had some input on it... So lets see if any one else on this side finds it interesting too...
When I was in Japan I noticed most of the dogs I met who were kenneled were pretty dog & human reactive. Even the Kai Ken, who are not typically aggressive dogs.
Most of the breeders I spoke with, once they heard about how we do not kennel our dogs, and therefore have no aggression issues, admitted (without me asking) that NK are better kept in a group to freely interact with each other without the frustration of a kennel or a tether. I thought it was interesting that they understood that concept but couldn't manage their dogs like that due to space and time. I also found it interesting that, due to this limitation in space and time which resulted in a specific type of kennel management, the typical behavior of a frustrated NK has become part of the breed's standard - dogs in shows over there are discounted for not showing that frustration while in the ring.
On that note, another thing that I found very interesting (and kinda sad) is that, whether in NIPPO, one of the Aigokai, or JKC (tho it seemed to be taken a bit further in NIPPO), since the judges over there liked to see some level of reactivness in the dogs they judged while in the ring, it was therefore selected for in the dogs - and even promoted in husbandry/kennel management. One Shikoku breeder I spoke to had it suggested to him by a NIPPO judge that he keep his dogs in smaller kennels in order to bring out more of their "character" (i.e. frustration) while in the ring. So this breeder actually changed his kennel from being a setup where multiple dogs shared one large kennel space to being single dogs in very small kennels (think large crate). For this breeder, he was doing what was recommended to him by a NIPPO judge in the hopes it would improve his dogs, which would improve the breed. When in reality he was really just promoting anxiety and frustration in his dogs... Kinda sad.
I think that mentality and husbandry, and its physiological effects on the dogs, MUST, eventually, become a inherited trait in these breeds, one which may helps to lead them to being "aggressive". Add to that the selection of dogs that do better in the ring, which need to have a certain level of "character" (i. e. frustration & reactiveness) and you can see how "aggression" has become a breed trait in many of the NK breeds.
I'm sure there is a genetic component to aggression in breeds, otherwise why would aggressive breeds consistently reproduce aggressive dogs?
Think about some boar hunting dogs, in some breeds a good boar hunter is said to be "imprinted" with their prey. Meaning, they are naturally aggressive toward the prey they are selected to hunt, in this example that would be wild boar. If you can select dogs to be aggressive toward one specific species, then I think you could certainly select them to be aggressive toward their own species too. Actually, in many breeds canine aggression is part of the breed - its what they were specifically designed/selected for (like the Presa Canario and Wolfhound, for example).
Now think about HD or LP, those traits were never selected for in a breed - no one wanted HD or LP - but some how they have become part of a breed, a trait that is now more common than not common. Somewhere a long the line the selective breeding of that breed lead to unintentionally include the genes that cause HD and LP. Some trait/quality the breed was selected for resulted in the "piggybacking" of this other trait (HD and/or LP in this example).
So, couldn't aggression, or more specifically human/canine aggression, also be carried along in a breed the same way HD and/or LP is? (as a negative trait "piggybacking" along with other desirable traits or as a poorly understood, maybe even exaggerated, part of a standard)
Anyway, point is, I think (and it was reinforced by these Japanese breeder's comments) barrier frustration, misdirected frustration aggression, reactiveness, predatory instinct, and higher-than-average drive are all common NK traits (which are all traits that can be considered "aggression" by an observer). These traits may be passed from generation to generation, perhaps via genetics or stress/stimuli during gestation.
Thoughts?
----
When I was in Japan I noticed most of the dogs I met who were kenneled were pretty dog & human reactive. Even the Kai Ken, who are not typically aggressive dogs.
Most of the breeders I spoke with, once they heard about how we do not kennel our dogs, and therefore have no aggression issues, admitted (without me asking) that NK are better kept in a group to freely interact with each other without the frustration of a kennel or a tether. I thought it was interesting that they understood that concept but couldn't manage their dogs like that due to space and time. I also found it interesting that, due to this limitation in space and time which resulted in a specific type of kennel management, the typical behavior of a frustrated NK has become part of the breed's standard - dogs in shows over there are discounted for not showing that frustration while in the ring.
On that note, another thing that I found very interesting (and kinda sad) is that, whether in NIPPO, one of the Aigokai, or JKC (tho it seemed to be taken a bit further in NIPPO), since the judges over there liked to see some level of reactivness in the dogs they judged while in the ring, it was therefore selected for in the dogs - and even promoted in husbandry/kennel management. One Shikoku breeder I spoke to had it suggested to him by a NIPPO judge that he keep his dogs in smaller kennels in order to bring out more of their "character" (i.e. frustration) while in the ring. So this breeder actually changed his kennel from being a setup where multiple dogs shared one large kennel space to being single dogs in very small kennels (think large crate). For this breeder, he was doing what was recommended to him by a NIPPO judge in the hopes it would improve his dogs, which would improve the breed. When in reality he was really just promoting anxiety and frustration in his dogs... Kinda sad.
I think that mentality and husbandry, and its physiological effects on the dogs, MUST, eventually, become a inherited trait in these breeds, one which may helps to lead them to being "aggressive". Add to that the selection of dogs that do better in the ring, which need to have a certain level of "character" (i. e. frustration & reactiveness) and you can see how "aggression" has become a breed trait in many of the NK breeds.
I'm sure there is a genetic component to aggression in breeds, otherwise why would aggressive breeds consistently reproduce aggressive dogs?
Think about some boar hunting dogs, in some breeds a good boar hunter is said to be "imprinted" with their prey. Meaning, they are naturally aggressive toward the prey they are selected to hunt, in this example that would be wild boar. If you can select dogs to be aggressive toward one specific species, then I think you could certainly select them to be aggressive toward their own species too. Actually, in many breeds canine aggression is part of the breed - its what they were specifically designed/selected for (like the Presa Canario and Wolfhound, for example).
Now think about HD or LP, those traits were never selected for in a breed - no one wanted HD or LP - but some how they have become part of a breed, a trait that is now more common than not common. Somewhere a long the line the selective breeding of that breed lead to unintentionally include the genes that cause HD and LP. Some trait/quality the breed was selected for resulted in the "piggybacking" of this other trait (HD and/or LP in this example).
So, couldn't aggression, or more specifically human/canine aggression, also be carried along in a breed the same way HD and/or LP is? (as a negative trait "piggybacking" along with other desirable traits or as a poorly understood, maybe even exaggerated, part of a standard)
Anyway, point is, I think (and it was reinforced by these Japanese breeder's comments) barrier frustration, misdirected frustration aggression, reactiveness, predatory instinct, and higher-than-average drive are all common NK traits (which are all traits that can be considered "aggression" by an observer). These traits may be passed from generation to generation, perhaps via genetics or stress/stimuli during gestation.
Thoughts?
----
Comments
Unfortunately, I have seen no proof in genetically passing on characteristic traits such as aggression. I think this is an environmental state that can be changed.
I do believe you when you say that the kennel/tethering environments cause stress and therefor aggressive behavior. May May is an example of that to me. She was tethered for a year outside before she came to me and was dog/slightly human aggressive. I definitely watched out for her mouth at times. Now that she's in a home environment and cared for and loved, her stress has reduced and I no longer worry about her attacking other dogs or biting humans as I once did.
We have had 2 litters of Ovcharka now, Ovcharka are considered an aggressive breed, but I can promise that Masha was not aggressive during the gestation of either litter (I even went as far as to not allow her to guard while pregnant to see if that reduced the level of aggression in her pups). Yet from the first litter, as young as 3 weeks old, there was a clearly defined set of puppies with aggressive traits.
If we reduced Masha's stress and aggression during gestation and while nursing, but yet as early as 3 weeks there were 2 puppies that showed significantly higher levels of aggressive qualities, how could that not be genetic? If it was environmental then all of the puppies would have those aggressive traits at that young of an age as they all shared the same environment... I mean three weeks old is pretty early to see those qualities shape from the environment.
All of the first litter were also raised with our dogs, shared the same amount of supervised exposure to our dogs. We also supervised each meal and monitored competition levels looking to reduce conflict if there was any (which there was none)... and yet, with all that, 3 of the pups grew to be rather dog aggressive BEFORE they were placed in new homes.
So if they were all raised the same, in the same environment, with the same level of exposure, how did 3 end up dog aggressive? How did 2 show more aggression as early as 3 weeks than the other 6?
----
The point of the post was to discuss the origin of some of the traits typically found in the NK breeds which are often referred to as "aggressive".
----
brada1878 asks: How do you explain aggressive breeds consistently producing aggressive dogs? So if they were all raised the same, in the same environment, with the same level of exposure, how did 3 end up dog aggressive? How did 2 show more aggression as early as 3 weeks than the other 6?
My thoughts off the cuff, it's the luck of the draw but there is certainly a genetic component for a propensity to produce tenacious animals in some stock. Working with a variety of animals not just dogs, yep, there is a portion of disposition I believe genetically is carried through, and at a very base level that will be prominent individually even when nurturing is replaced with a more stoic animal or through positive human only handling. Temperament individually is what it is within a certain parameter. Now how it is linked on a DNA chain or piggybacked with other characteristics, or how it is carried through I have no idea. I believe a geneticist could answer that best.
This just brought to mind an article on hefting of sheep, learned behavior, and communication. This may or may not be related to what you are asking Brad. Anyway, I believe in the article it was found that mental mapping of grazing areas actually requires an underlying disposition (determined genetically?) that allow particular animals in a flock to better heft and actually ban better together without so much discord and to share/pass on their knowledge to prevent them from getting killed. Unfortunately, I can't find the exact article. When I do I will post it. Anyway, although we may think of sheep as sheep (merely followers) but there are some sheep breeds better at grouping or not grouping as effectively. Actually within the flock there are diverging personalities that actually allow them to succeed in developing optimal cooperative terrain territory without falling off the cliffs. If anyone here has dealt with sheep they can be quite the bullies to other sheep and even people if they have a particular personality to be a pain in the neck. They are particularly tough on certain animals that are not related in matriarchal lineage.
So back to the dogs, when we think of dogs as aggressive I feel we really have to look at what they are intended to do optimally and if the independent thinking is to benefit them and those who were founders of the breed or if cooperation is more the ideal i.e. look at the context of the breed and purpose. If the founding stock is hard wired for certain characteristics that is going to show up regardless of parental niceties.
Snf
And though I ofcourse recognize that different species of animals have different traits, I do not believe that they are so fundamentally different, that disposition, to som point, is not genetic in all.
So even though the topic is actually concerning NK, to me it does not make it irrelevant, when Brad compares to his CO....
You need to not only take in genetics & environment...but the individual's personality as well. These are 3 separate things and all very important when analyizing.
You can do ALL the training in the world and you can set up a puppy in ALL the proper situations but you CANNOT change WHO that puppy is by nature. You can only influence and guide that puppy to the best of his/her capability. Personality is something very unique...it's what sets us apart and makes us all individuals.
This is why temperment selection is very important when selecting a dog for yourself or placing a dog in a home.
I knew exactly how all my current dogs were gonna turn out as adults because I saw how they were as puppies.
Lynxiene now at 5 years of age is the exact SAME dog as she was at 5 weeks.
Shoushuu now at 3 years of age is the exact SAME dog as he was at 8 weeks.
Kotomi now at 2 years of age is the exact SAME dog as she was at 12 weeks.
NOTHING has changed in my dogs in terms of personality...however, I have noticed that the intensity levels in a couple of my dogs has changed from puppyhood to adulthood. Lynx has actually remained consistent from puppy to adult. Shoushuu has calmed down with age. Kotomi seems to have matured with more energy!
Puppies can be born of the same genetics, puppies can be raised in the same environment and yet all the puppies will be different because of their personalities...they will handle things as they see fit. You will see both differences & similarities in pups of the same litter. While working capabilites may change slightly or vastly from puppy to adult...the temperment/nature of the puppy will not change as an adult =].
As many of these studs were/are direct imports and raised in those kinds of kennels in Japan, they are predictably highly dog aggressive/reactive/sharp. Some breeders select away from that in their offspring, and have pups in subsequent generations with outstanding pet temperments, while other breeders want to retain the edge, and breed for that, seeing it consistently in future generations of dogs and bitches NOT reared in cramped quarters or small kennels, but reared and well socialized in private homes. I think "aggression" is highly heritable given what we know and the conistent temperments of the get.
Would be interesting to determine what gene HD and LP piggyback to, since these breeds were developed for function first, or is that just a result of the populatation bottleneck? To also add to what Patrice said, the purpose of the breed is important to consider in inherited aggression, so as Kai are more utilized as pack hunters, it would be suprising to see aggression like Brad saw, but it doesn't mean it isn't in their genes to select for. I'm assuming most people don't want a lot of that in their Kai so they don't select for it. But, if it is inherited in Shibas, and they have the numbers to draw from that the others don't, it can surely be inherited in the other NK as well.
Lynx, for example, is dog aggressive.
The environment in which she was raised will determine just how intense her dog aggression will be.
I did a lot of socialization with her as a pup and because of this she is able to be around other dogs...supervised in the least.
I've noticed the more exposure I gave her to other dogs...the less intense her dog aggression was. I was able to have her off-leash with abunch of strange dogs and she would not attack them unless they got inside her bubble. She would be able to do "doggie intros" properly and then she would walk away and do her own little thing away from all the other dogs.
However, if one of those dogs would re-approach her to "say hi"...she would avoid them by sniffing the grass and walking in another direction...but if that dog started to follow her or heaven forbid should touch her...Lynx would aggress and get into a fight with them (she never bit any dog, mostly a lot of barking, growling, snarling & pinning them to the ground).
To this day, I can still walk Lynx around, through and near other dogs and she will not aggress. However, even though she is non-reactive, she is STILL dog aggression. She just has proper manners when out in public and on-leash around other dogs.
Now, I've also noticed the more I isolated Lynx from other dogs...the MORE intense her dog aggression became. It got to the point in which I could not trust her off leash with other dogs because she would purposely headline towards a dog and attack it.
Had Lynx grown up in a multi-dog house to begin with...she would still be dog aggressive but she would have a better means of managing & "defusing" it. If Lynx had grown up completely isolated from other dogs...her dog aggression I would imagine would be over the top at a dangerous level (I could NOT imagine her growing up in a Kennel & I'm SO glad that I got her). At least now...Lynx is okay around other dogs and can be let off-leash with certain dogs.
So while you cannot change who a dog is...I think Kennel Management plays a BIG role with the influence in intensity levels of a dog and how dogs learn to cope these intensities.
That's why I added this line to the end: which are all traits that can be considered "aggression" by an observer
My post is geared toward qualities that on average are considered "aggressive" by a typical observer. I don't think any of us are typical observers, we are all, at least, well read on the subject of dog behavior. So when we hear the term "aggression" we probably think more a long the lines of how it is defined here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aggression
But to an average dog owner, or a new Shiba/Shikoku/Akita/Kai/Hokka owner, some of the qualities that are rather typical in the NK breeds are would be considered "aggressive". Take reactiveness on leash as an example, you are walking your Shikoku on lead and he/she goes nuts when they see another dog. The majority of the Shikoku owners out there have experienced that behavior and do not see it as aggression.
To us (above-average educated dog owners) that's not aggression, but to the rest of the world it is, and to the cop that shows up to kick you out of a park because your Shikoku growled at a poodle, it's aggression.
----
Then there is this side of the argument, as Patrice kinda pointed out ( thanks @StaticNfuzz ) and Lindsay mentioned, aggression, or the bits that make up what people think of as aggression in our dogs, is important. Some of these breeds need that "aggression" to preform their function.
For me, in our last CO litter, I was stoked to have Karr in the litter. To me, he improves the breed, as he was a very real guardian. Karr was who I would have kept if I was a sheep herder and I was selecting for the puppies who I wanted to protect my herd... but we didn't keep Karr because we (as breeders) weren't sure that America needs a "Karr". That's a lot of dog.
Anyway, I guess I am asking this question - Is it the right thing to do to select our NK for these traits if they are perceived as aggressive to the rest of dogdom?
My typical response to that question would be "yes", breeders should be selecting to maintain the breed's true temperament, and then breeders should be very selective as to who buys their puppies, so that puppies are not placed in uneducated homes.
The problem is, I don't see that happening. Look at the Shiba, how many Shiba owners jump on the Shiba forum asking if their dog is aggressive when their Shiba is simply showing typical breed behavior? Why didn't the breeder that placed a dog with that person do a better job educating or selecting?
So, if breeders aren't going to do their job on the selecting/placement side, maybe those qualities shouldn't continue to exist in such a potent form in the NK breeds?
I'm picking on the Shiba here, but honestly it's just right around the corner for the Shikoku too. If breeders could meet the demand for the Shikoku we would have the same situation as in the Shiba - owners who maybe shouldn't own a Shikoku would own a Shikoku and in my opinion Shikoku have more aggressive traits than a Shiba.
----
Ok, one more thought, sorry for the long post...
Lets go back to the term "aggression", and look at it more generally in dogs not just NK. I purpose to you this conundrum, the "Blue Conundrum"...
Blue is our Cane Corso, he is BOMB PROOF with our dogs. He loves puppies, he never fights with our dogs, he rarely even argues with them, he is respectful and polite with all of them. Our dogs love him. He greets news dogs that we introduce to him in our home or on our property with excitement and politeness. He's basically perfect with dogs at home and on our property. However, off our property, he is intolerant of strange dogs. If I am hiking Blue, on or off lead, if another dogs comes along, I a certain Blue would kill him/her. He's that aggressive. He's dog-killer aggressive toward strange, unannounced, dogs.
So is Blue dog aggressive?
Side note -- Can you think of another canine who acts similarly? A wolf, maybe? They are aggressive toward wolves who are not in their "pack", right? So is Blue more primitive than, say, Kona, who is friendly toward other (strange, unannounced) dogs???
----
I'm just going with the Blue topic then...
I have decided that it is acceptable and very normal for many dogs to enjoy their own group, and be suspicious to whatever point is natural for them (personality and training) toward strangers. (canine or human) I think of the number of dogs Rei and Sage have met in the world, vs the number my free-roaming childhood dog Fred met in her life. Fred probably knew no more than 20 dogs. Most of them were neighborhood dogs she had actual relationships with and saw repeatedly day to day in her wanderings. Rei and Sage have met hundreds of dogs, Most of them they never saw again. About 40 they interacted with repeatedly over time. Relationships come and go for all of us. I think it is natural for a dog to have relationships with a core of others, but it is understandable for them to not be socialites.
Additonally, Sage made it clear that he had had enough of new fly by night dogs, but Rei always negotiated the social dog world without rancor or stress. She could walk in groups with dogs that veyr few could- or wanted to- walk with, due to those dogs' aggression. For 5 years we went to the Field, then less and less b/c of Sage. Now she lives where there are very few strange dogs - I took her to a dog festival recently and she was fine but not joyful per se. She did it for me, there were about a thousand things shed rather be doing. I think it is fine and normal for even normal dogs to not really NEED to meet strange dogs, too. esp as adults.
Its all context and I think we lose sight of normal dog choice and life ( what Fred had) when we feel there is anything wrong with dogs having enough of gladhanding and cocktail parties. If Blue and Sage are happy in their families, in their contexts, then call them whatever you want. We can all be "aggressive" in the right (wrong?) contexts.
Basically...any dog who isn't consistently super social, friendly & safe with EVERY other dog he or she meets reguardless of location would be considered as dog aggressive.
I'm thinking you're kennel management has helped out Blue alot...to be able to grow up with many other dogs around. I would assume had Blue been your only dog and isolated from other dogs. He would not be so friendly and polite of newly introduced dogs. I wished that I could have raised Lynx in a mutli-dog environment to begin with, I think it would have done her a lot of good. She is pack-oriented I can see and so is Blue. I think they're temperments are vastly different. Lynx is a brat & a "bully" but Blue sounds very sweet & laided back. Even so...I've noticed dogs are comfortable with dogs they know. At least with Lynx, she doesn't like strange dogs but she can tolerant them because of past exposure & training.
I tease a lot about Lynx not caring about Kotomi because even though they live together...they don't have the best relationship and often fight. However, should a strange dog approach Kotomi to hurt her, I'm willing to bet that Lynx would actually protect Kotomi because even though they don't get along, Kotomi is a "familar/known dog" & STILL apart of Lynx's pack BECAUSE they live together.
------------
"Aggression" to me is a describer of actions. So I don't see it as a carried trait. However, I can see "Sharpness" being a carried trait. Which I suppose...yes, to the average human population "Sharpness" is seen the same as "Aggression". Dogs who possess "Sharpness" are hell a lot of dog for sure which the average human pet population cannot handle. It takes a special kind of home and an understanding of the dog.
------------
And yes, I do believe as breeders we should select for this trait even if it's perceived as "aggression" to the rest of the average human world. However, because of any sharpness & reactivity levels...the dog in question needs to be placed in an understanding and management-capable home. And also, because of today's human society...as a breeder, I would not select for this trait with every breeding. Just would select for enough of it to continually be retained within the breed. So, should a "task" later on call for this trait...breeding pairs would be available to produce this trait.
Rather then select away from it, just so the dog is "watered down" and easier for human management. That's B.S. cause if this is done, I believe that once the trait is lost, it is gone forever and there is no way of reviving it even in later generations. Also, I believe that the breed will slowly begin to change completely in one aspect or another by breeding out a "breed type" trait. However, if the trait still exists within a breed, one can always select for this trait later on and "bring it out" in future generations.
I hope that was clear.
Anyhow...this is WHY we have many, many, many dog breeds to choose from. So that humans can select the most appropriate breed for their household. Then also why there are many personalities within a breed to also choose the temperment of said breed that will be suitable to live with.
As breeders, yes...we need to be well-aware of the potiental available homes for our pups. However, I don't agree that we should have to "water down" and change our breed just to fit our puppies into every household. No, we need to select for particular households that will fit our puppies =].
If someone can't handle/manage our breed, then clearly it isn't the correct breed for that person. There are literally thousands of other dog breeds (& mixes) out there in the world. I believe that there IS a dog out there for everyone...people just gotta go look!
Ok, I'm very interested in the discussion of "sharpness." What does that mean exactly?
I was also fascinated by Lindsay's point about Shibas, and about so many Shibas having aggression/sharpness which is possibly inherited from the certain very popular import studs. I suspect I have one of these Shibas. Toby's sire is Tenkuu Go Etchuu Wakasugisou, an import who I believe was quite a popular stud. I got Toby at 7 weeks of age, and what was striking about him (and this supports the "personality" idea too) is that he immediately behaved in ways that could be though of as dog aggressive. Even at 7 weeks of age, he was pushy and likely to growl and posture with other dogs (even dogs many, many times his size). While I am very aware I did him no favors by not understanding how important working on that reactivity was, I do have to say Toby has not really changed much in his basic temperament. He still behaves now, at nearly 7 years old, in the way he did at 7 weeks. I've had to manage his behavior as you all know--he now is not allowed with the other dogs. I believe I could have helped him learn to be politer with strange dogs (and we're working on that), but I don't believe early management would have made much of a difference with him. He was never an only dog, and has only be segregated from the other dogs in the last two years (and only because I want to keep my dogs alive, thank you very much!
So this does make me think, hmm..., maybe there is something to the genetic aspect?
It's also interesting,though, that some pack management (as with Blue) produces a dog that works well within the pack. But what about inter-pack fighting, as I and others have certainly had to deal with? The multi-dog family has not produced less reactive dogs for me (but for all I know Toby would be WORSE if he had been an only dog. Probably would be, though I think he would prefer it!)
I'm ambivalent about the idea of breeding away from some of the "aggression" (if indeed it is genetic and therefore possible to breed away from). Certainly I'm impatient with people freaking out about what is simply a Shiba being a Shiba. That said, I don't want another Toby. He's simply to hard to manage with other dogs. And I don't think that a less reactive dog would be any less a Shiba. This is, however, probably a fine line.
When I got an American Akita, I spent a lot of time asking questions about temperament. I particularly wanted a soft dog that would be responsive to me, but also be (relatively) easy to get along with other dogs--ie. a dog that would tend not be as reactive as some (American) Akitas are. There are breeders that are working towards that, and I looked for them in particular. I eliminated some breeders after seeing what I thought was a high degree of reactivity in the show ring. To me, a dog lunging at others in a 'work" environment (ie a show) was problematic. I don't feel I got a watered down Akita at all--instead I have a calm young dog who is interested in other dogs--excited by them--but is not immediately reactive (though it's clear he is still an Akita--he's not going to back down from other dogs either). And I don't mean to suggest, ShikokuSpirit, that you would call Oskar "watered down" (or maybe you would!
eta: oh, I reread S.Spirit's post and saw the part about not wanting to breed for "sharpness" in each breeding, but not wanting to lose it entirely either. Sorry I missed that earlier...it does make sense.
Tenkuu Go Etchuu Wakasugisou is an import, but we call him Taro. I hadn't realized Taro had become a senior until you mentioned Toby was 7 years old. He is the top producing male in the breed for a good reason and has consistently produced outstanding temperments in pet, show and multiple offspring with performance titles in agility and obedience. I have met him many times, and met many of his get, and I can say he is quite a docile, low key dog, at least since I have come to casually know him, and is enjoying his well earned retirement peacefully in a multiple shiba household.
I will not say there are get from him that are not very sharp or challenging to live with, because that just isn't true. The vast majority I have met however are pleasant enough dogs, but that doesn't mean all of them are "easy keepers", and it sounds like your Toby is one of them. The dam contributes to that just like the sire, which I believe is often the case with him since Taro is so gentle, but the spectra of sharpness genes are certainly there and may or may not be expressed depending on the combination of parents.
I personally desire an edgey, drivey Shiba to work with, so I looked to other studs when selecting my next Shiba, whom I know to produce that. Yes, that can be difficult to live with and I realize most don't want that as a pet, but that is invaluable to me for what I do with my dogs. It's certainly something to consider when screening pet homes anyways. I do see a lot of breeders selecting away from that sharpness so they can keep a more harmonious pack without kenneling them. I commend the care they take to ensure their dogs can have the most freedom as possible. I do realize kenneling and seperating as a routine is a solution for some, but I have found, for the amount of dogs I have (5), baby gates work well enough in a pinch. It also helps that I have a very laid back intact male that gets along with everybody, taking cat naps in the show ring, quite similar in temperment to his grandpappy Taro
I'm interested in knowing more about what the edgy, drivey shiba is like and what the benefits are? (And that's curiosity--just wonder what is useful about that? I can imagine why people would want it in hunting dogs, but obviously there are other reasons I hadn't thought of, so I'm curious).
I don't kennel mine, though I have thought it might be useful (more with Bel, my little crazy girl, than with Toby, because she goes outside and refuses to come in, and then we can't even get out of the yard as everything, including our garage, is within the fenced area). I keep them separate with Toby having his own room (the sunroom) and with baby gates and crating. That worked fine until we got the Akita, who is so big he just plows through baby gates (he's a pretty quick learner and wants to please, though, he's starting to understand the gate means "don't go through there")
eta: just went and looked at your blog site, btw! Nice! And I should add that both my Shibas are hypothyroid, but Toby was reactive from the time he was a pup, so while it contributes (and while he's way better now that he's treated) I doubt it's just that. He is very sweet and mellow as can be with people, though!
What I've noticed at the Jindo shows in the US is that the age group that's most reactive/noisy are the adolescent males. By the time they are adult males, they're quieter. Some have become quieter because they've obtained a disdain in the vein of "I'd rather pee on your face." Others have become quieter because by this age they've had a little more training or life experience. It takes more to get a rise out of some of them, or their reactiveness had decreased in distance. ie. a male dog 6 ft away no longer gets a reaction out of them, but a male dog 3 ft away would. There are exceptions to this generalization, of course, like the dog that all the dogs “hates” and will react to, or sequestered adult dogs that didn’t gain any additional training/life experience. The advice Brad heard 2nd hand reminds me of the latter situation.
Judges want to be able to pick out the alpha dog/leader dog/dog with greater presence/ etc. when they’re stuck on similar conformation merits, but sometimes in the context of the show where dogs are widely spaced apart as a precaution against fights, the only signs of life might be from the dogs that do react from a greater distance. I would hope that judges that have been around the breed would account for this but maybe not?
In the instances where dogs are faced off within each other's personal spaces, I sometimes wonder if people are reading the dogs right. When dogs give each other stares, the dog that turns away is acknowledged as the lesser dog. No disagreement about that. But I sometimes wonder if judges are rewarding the dog that breaks into insecure barking/growling. I think that mis-intepretation could be more damaging than reactivity from a distance.
These are just my wonderings based on the Jindo shows in the US. My exposure to Kai shows is zero.
I'll have to carefully re-read the thoughts about HD and LP being piggy-backed unintentionally. I'm not following that very well right now.