April 1, 1999

Dr. & Mrs. Hiroshi Ikuma
3533 Frederick Dr.
Ann Arbor, MI 48105

Dear Seiko and Hiro:

As requested, I will reiterate our consultation of March 20, 1999. Although today is April Fool's Day, this is no joking matter. When you shared with me the circumstances surrounding your dog's biting behavior, I originally thought that your dog was an extreme dominant?aggressive dog. Many owners do not realize that their dogs are aggressive until I prove it to them through behavior testing. At Am the owners are in denial and even blame me; stating that I am making the dog mean. Within a reasonable amount of time (ten to twenty minutes) I am able to demonstrate to the owner that the aggression is in the dog and I am not making the dog mean. Most dogs have some level of dominance (resistance to control), many have aggression (bite at control) and a few are born submissive (would let someone cut their foot off and just wonder why the person is hurting them.). The level of dominance or aggression can be tested and documented at five to seven weeks of age. A dominant or aggressive puppy is not necessarily a bad quality, it only shows that the dog has more character than the submissive dog. The test that counts is the following test: How long does the dog resist or fight and after the dog is told that the behavior is not acceptable; does the dog submit to the owner/handler? There are some breeds that most of the puppies in the litter test to be on the high end of dominant or aggressive. (Examples Chow Chows, Chesapeake Bay Retrievers, Kuvasz)
The only difference in these breeds is that they do need to know that owners are dominant over them and therefore have the right to ask things of them; hold and control or groom them. This is started at the moment of living with the puppy or dog. What happens with many of these dogs is that they are very intelligent and figure out early on, how to get their way without giving up their control. This is why many behaviorist see dogs after the dog has severely bitten a child or owner. The comment I hear most is that the dog never showed any aggression up to this point. Prior to even testing the dog, I share with the owner, behavior traits of a dominant dog and they have to admit that their dog has done all or most of what I shared with them.

Now the real test comes. If the dog has been allowed to dominate, the initial aggression demonstrated is what I call a created aggression and therefore the initial aggression can appear more serious than it really is. After bringing out the initial aggression and getting the dog to back out, we are able to find out what the original (what the dog was born with) aggression is. There is no question, the longer the dog is allowed to dominate increases the difficulty in correcting the problem.

Although this seems to ramble on, it is the only way that I have of explaining why our original phone consultation led me to believe that your dog was an aggressive or conditioned aggressive dog and therefore was probably at fault. I agreed to come and test your dog but believed that the test would not come out with favorable results to
you. We scheduled an appointment for me to work with your Chow Chow, "Ato". As our conversation continued I realized that I was not legally allowed to put my hands on the dog and as a behaviorist, it would be impossible to give an evaluation. When you scheduled an in house consultation with me, I felt that this was probably the best way to initiate if I could be of any assistance to you. During this consultation and reference of all the written correspondence associated with your dilemma, I began to think that a test on your dog could prove to be your dog's benefit.

Everything changed when I read the Temperament evaluation performed on "Ato" o October 5, 1998. The test and observation of the dog's actions were well documented. I was in complete disagreement with the conclusion on most parts of the evaluation. I feel that the dogs actions were misdiagnosed. After twenty years of studying and documenting types of aggression in dogs my interpretation of the test is quite different.
A few examples are as follows:

Test 1

My Conclusion is as follows:

When Mrs. Ikuma was able to push Ato's hindquarters into a sitting position, it told me that the dog was not dominant towards Mrs. Ikuma. When teaching a basic obedience class, I always warned students in advance that as they began to help their dogs into a sitting position, to watch for the dominant dog that would stiffen and resist or the aggressive dog that would look back at your hand or bite at the hand that is pushing on the hindquarters.

The fact the Mrs. Ikuma asked the dog to sit shows that she knows that the dog understands the word and has demonstrated the ability to sit on command. The dog has not been taught to sit on one command during distractions or in unfamiliar environments.
Only one in twenty dogs, that come to my building sit on command. The owners nag their dogs to sit and stay until ask them to quit asking their dog for something they never taught them. Their response is always "My dog knows what sit means." I explain to them that their dog understands sit in their living room but did they ever teach, not command the dog to sit in a new environment or with new distractions?

In reference to the down exercise: If a dog had not been taught to down on command, No one should try to "make" the dog lie down. This is the most improperly taught exercise and goes against the dog's instincts unless presented properly to the dog.

In reference to the come exercise: In regards to checking the area out and urinating showed independence and comfort in the environment and the fact that while interested in the surroundings still came on one command while off leash showed a devoted and somewhat trained dog. Very few untrained dogs will come to their owners when called off leash. I was impressed that Ato came. In regards to the Chow Chow Breed temperament, the note on lack of focus on the owner; the Chow Chow appears to not notice people but through a lot of experience with Chows, I know that the Chow always knows what is going on.

Test 2

When auto approached and sniffed the trainer, Ato demonstrated himself to be a social/dominant chow. Most Chows circle, bump and then sniff due to lack of trust for unknown people. When Ato put his feet up on the trainer, this was clearly dominating the trainer. I believe that the trainers handling and misinterpretation of this situation encouraged the bite that followed in the later test.

Test 3

I disagree with a statement in the conclusion. Aggressiveness does not indicate that the dog bites purely out of pleasure. Viciousness means to bite without cause. Fear aggressive dogs only bite when cornered and can not get away. Dominant Aggressive dogs only bite when being controlled in some manner. Motion Aggressive dogs get caught up in the excitement of motion and bite at movement. A Guard dog will only aggress or bite when their space/property is challenged. When aggression is understood most bites can be prevented with knowledge of dog instincts. All of the above aggressions are completely controllable with respect and direction from an owner/trainer. A vicious dog should be put to sleep as should an aggressive dog that an owner refuses to take the necessary steps to teach prevention of the natural instincts.

Test 4

Demonstrated that Ato is not Motion Aggressive or Motion Excitable.

Test 5

I believe that this test was performed at an inappropriate time. The dog was completely familiar with the appearance and scent of the attacker and therefore had no need to feel threatened by this person and the dog had previously let this person know that he did not fear her. This conclusion is based on Test 2 and on Test 7. In Test 7, Ato clearly let the trainer know that she was not going to hurt him or his owner. Test 7 will be covered in more depth below.

Test 6

Chows are not retrievers! A young puppy may pick up the toy and even return it with encouragement but it is not in the natural behavior of the breed. If any of the retriever breeds choose to not chase, pick up or return an object, there natural instinct is not as good as the others in the litter or their dominance interferes with the return of the object. This trainer is clearly comparing apples to oranges! I train all breeds and all can be taught to perform but the manner in ease of results is totally dependent on the nature of the breed and born in instincts. I can teach a Chow to go and retrieve a shot bird and deliver to hand but I can not teach this dog to find and follow the scent of a wild bird and flush or point it for me.

Test 7

My specialty is working with dogs that bite. These dogs are referred to me by numerous Veterinarians from Southwest Michigan. My job is to find out what caused the bite and can it be prevented in the future.
I do not start this test by bringing the aggression out in the dog although I do intend to bring it out in the second half of the test. There are times that the aggression shows up before it is brought out but this initial aggression is usually the "conditioned aggression".
I mentioned earlier. I can usually back the dog out of this initial aggression with proper handling. As soon as the dog backs out I begin build the dogs trust. When the dog demonstrates trust and respect for me I can safely bring out the aggression and be able to back the dog off with out actually getting bit. Dogs will accept, what they
consider to be an appropriate correction, but will not tolerate abuse from a human any more than they would from another dog. I clearly believe that the trainer instigated the bite that she received through many unclear communications with this dog. She said when she pretended to attack at dog and owner that the dog did not respond. I believe at that moment the dog quit trusting the trainer. It was no longer a trainer removing the dog
from the owner, it was a person that just threatened the family.

The trainer also stated that the dog attacked without warning but clearly stated that the dog began to control her (most dogs go behind us at the start of training when they don't want to give up control). As soon as the dog began to control her by getting behind her, she most likely could have stopped the attack with proper handling. As a specialist in working with aggressive dogs, I know that what I am doing is going to bring out the worst in the dog so it is our job to be careful and know how to prevent the bite or attack after we bring it on. People are amazed to see the amount of aggression that is underlying in their dogs. This aggression is natural and not a bad quality as long as we are able to teach the dog that they can not use this aggression to get their way. "I'll bite you if you try to cut my toenails." Dogs that viciously go after a Veterinarian when blood is being drawn from the leg or having it nails cut are dominant dogs that can be taught to allow this. Many times the dog is either muzzled and held down to accomplish these tasks. This reinforces a stronger fight and encourages the dog to believe that this is a terrible experience. In my area, the Veterinarians have seen my results and now send any dog displaying the dominant behavior to me. It takes one to two sessions and the dog will comfortably let me, the owner or the veterinarian handle the legs and cut toenails or give shots. The younger the problem is found, the easier my job is but old dogs can learn new tricks it just takes a little more patience and caution because the behavior has been reinforced and encouraged longer.

I believe that Ato could have used a few of these sessions when the dog had trouble accepting the Heart Worm Test performed by Dr. Butman. Since veterinarians see the dominance and/or aggression in the young dogs first, I believe it is their responsibility to bring to the owner's attention that some type of education is needed to change this behavior. Many common dog owner believes that when their dog demonstrated dominance (resistance to the control needed to give necessary veterinarian care) that the dog was afraid or just did not like the vet. This is not true. The vet or the clinic have nothing to do with the behavior and as soon as the underlying problem is fixed the dogs normally go back to the same vet and clinic as happy and willing participants. This has been documented many times. However there are some Veterinarians that just have bad bedside manner and will never get along with the more "family orientated breeds". They will tell you that they like mutts and Golden Retrievers that are happy go lucky animals and only care about who will pet them next.

I demonstrate and teach daily, that our actions dictate our dog's actions. Our body gestures can make or prevent the following:

A submissive dog from urinating when we approach. An excitable dog from urinating when we approach. A fearful dog from biting. A dominant dog from biting. A motion aggressive dog from biting. A puppy from mouthing or chewing on our hands. A dog from jumping up on us. When my clients schedule dog lessons with me, they walk out of my building with a totally different dog in one session and all that I do is teach the owner what not to do. Everyone's comments are the same: I guess we (the family) needed training not the dog.

I was also allowed the opportunity to read all of the history of the occurrences that led up to this dog being put into captivity. Again, this was well documented to the controversy in regards to the incident. This dog has demonstrated himself to be a dominant dog that is under complete control of his family. Ato demonstrated aggression (Bites) only three times in his life and each time the dog was clearly provoked beyond normal living circumstances. He allows his family to perform all necessary care which includes handling and controlling both verbally and manually (on a leash). He disliked and fought one test performed by a Veterinarian and this test and toenails are the number one aggression producing tests done at a vet. Marry dogs challenge this test. When Ato went to his follow?up vet appointment, he was under control and although he was not thrilled with the second shot there was no unusual display of aggression or dominance. This alone demonstrated that the dog gets better with repetition of an unwanted act not worse. If Ato would not have allowed the Vet near him at the second visit, this would have shown that the dog believed that he had controlled the first session and therefore
could make his own decisions as to what his owner could or could not ask of him. He clearly trusted his owner and per her request, he allowed a stranger to approach him (this is not in the nature of the chow) and allowed him to cause discomfort without getting aggressive. The Veterinarians records clearly show that the first visit was not a pleasant experience for the vet or the dog and just a few months later the dog was treated and given two needles and there was no notation of any behavior problems noted.

In a final note, for personal reasons, I would like to be kept informed on the outcome of  this case. I am also, a Breeder of Golden Retrievers and Chesapeake Bay Retrievers. I began breeding the Chesapeake Bay Retriever after having the opportunity to professionally handle the breed at dog shows. I began to appreciate the breed because they had the goofy, happy go lucky attitude of my Golden Retrievers but also demonstrated property protection that is not necessarily there with a Golden Retriever.
When I interview potential puppy buyers about my breed, my first question is why do they want a Golden? Many times there responses come under the Golden qualities such as great with kids and happy loving dogs. Other times, it is said to me: I like the looks and happiness of the Golden and I want a big dog for protection. I immediately tell them that a golden is most likely not going to show protection qualities and maybe they should
look into the Chesapeake Bay Retriever. Breed Qualities ? They are happy go lucky dogs, love kids and they have a tendency to stay with their owners (do not always have to be leashed). The biggest selling point is this comment I make to all potential puppy buyers.
You can park your car in downtown Chicago, leave a Hundred Dollar Bill on the seat, roll the window half way down and have your Chesapeake in the car and I guarantee your money will still be there when you get back. Someone would have to shoot the dog to get the money back. This dog that would not let anyone near your car, can be let out by you and will jump all over (if untrained) and kiss the person that they viciously fended off.

My interest in this case is: If this wonderful breed of dog is going to be put to sleep for going what it was bred to do (guard property) then I will no longer breed the dog because that is an unfair destiny for something that I brought into this world.

When I talk to police officers in Chicago (I do a lot of business in Chicago and therefore have many clients and acquaintances in that region), they tell me over and again that a dog  is the absolute best defense against crime. Are we or are we not allowed to own a dog that does proper protection. (Challenges an unknown person from entering our home or car)?

I would welcome the opportunity to personally test Ato on video, as I have done many others. Per the previous documentation, I believe he is a typical chow, acting exactly how he should per the breed. I could show a video or live presentation of thirty different chows, reacting viciously when provoked but extremely well adjusted and happy loving pets with their families and known outsiders. This could be done with many breeds, not just the chow. If Ato is put to sleep then there should be a law against breeding the chow and at least 80% of the wonderful chows, I personally know, should also be put to sleep because they will react exactly as Ato did, if put in the same situation.

Please advise if I can be of further assistance.

Respectfully,.

Sherry Thomas-Linker

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS 9th DAY OF APRIL 1999
LINDA J McKINNEY
NOTARY PUBLIC?CALM" COUNTY, MI

                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 FROM:
        Linda F. Morin
        2312 Henry Rd.
        Jackson, Mi. 49201
 TO:
        Dr. and Mrs. Hiroshi Ikuma
        3533 Frederick Dr.
        Ann Arbor, Mi. 48105
 Re:
        A temperament evaluation performed on "Ato", a 5 1/2 yr. old fully intact male Chow.
 

On October, 3, 1998, at Dexter Animal Clinic, Ato was presented to me for a R evaluation because he had been involved in a bite incident. The dog was evaluated in the following areas:

Handler Attachment

Socialization (both with humans and other dogs)

Amuletic Behavior

The four basic drives; Play, Prey, Fear, and Defense

The findings of this evaluation are enclosed in the following pages.

HANDLER ATTACHMENT

PURPOSE:

To determine the degree to which the dog in question looks to its owner / handler for guidance and direction.

OBSERVATION:

Ato was taken on lead outside to relieve himself and to stretch his legs, by his owner Mrs. Ikuma.

During this time, Ato appeared uninterested in his handler, constantly walking at the end of the lead; never looking at his handler even when she spoke to him. Ato was observed for approximately 15 minutes, and at no time did he ask for any attention. When Mrs. Ikuma petted Ato he did not respond. Ato kept a distance of approximately 3 1/2 feet between himself and his handler at all times.

TEST:

Mrs. Ikuma was instructed to put her dog in a sitting position. She told Ato to sit and he refused, appearing indifferent to her verbal commands. Mrs. Ikuma pushed on Ato's hindquarters and told him to sit again. At this time Ato complied. This behavior was consistent every time Ato was asked to sit throughout the test.

Mrs. Ikuma was instructed to put her dog in a down position. She told Ato to down and he refused. Mrs. Ikuma knelt down beside the dog and asked him five times to down. Ato refused. At this point Mrs. Ikuma was asked if she could make Ato lay down, she stated " no."

Later, Ato was placed out of Mrs. Ikuma's sight so she could call him to see if he would come straight to her on command. It was observed that when turned loose, the dog did not look for his owner. When called Ato causally sniffed the surrounding area, urinated, then came to Mrs. Ikuma.

CONCLUSION: 

Ato has not properly bonded to his handler. His refusal of verbal commands indicates a lack of obedience and respect. His total disinterest in his owners whereabouts indicates a serious lack of focus. The above listed behaviors are key elements in keeping a dog safely under control.

SOCIALIZATION PURPOSE:

To determine whether or not a dog will respond in a non?aggressive manner when placed in social situations with strange humans.

OBSERVATION:

Mrs. Ikuma was advised that she and her dog were going to be approached in a friendly manner to test Ato's reaction to strangers.

Upon approach Ato confidently started walking towards me, sniffed my legs. Then he jumped up putting his front feet on my thighs sniffing my arms, jumped down and continued sniffing my legs.

I walked away to give Ato a chance to think about something else. After approximately 5 minutes, I approached Mrs. Ikuma walking directly into her personal space without speaking. I knelt down within 6 inches of Ato's face and tied my shoe. Ato sat quietly next to his owner. At this point, I stood up, introduced myself, shook Mrs. Ikuma's hand, reached down and petted Ato on his head. Ato remained perfectly at ease. No
aggression was noted.

CONCLUSION:

Ato had developed proper socialization skills pertaining to humans. He is a dominate mature male, therefore, he tends to be somewhat curious when first encountering strangers. This, and a lack of obedience, explains why he first jumped up on me. Other than his jumping up, Ato was very tolerant with my presence.
No aggression was noted.

SOCIALIZATION

PURPOSE:

To determine if a dog is going to react aggressively when placed in social situations with other dogs.

OBSERVATION / TEST:

A 7 year old, very dominant German Shepherd was introduced to Ato. Both dogs exhibited normal greeting behaviors. There was no aggression noted.

Later, the Shepherd was placed on a down stay approximately 25 feet from Ato and his handler. Mrs. Ikuma was instructed to walk her dog past the downed Shepherd so his responses could be noted. Again, Ato showed no signs of aggression: However, Ato exhibited definite signs of dominance. He sniffed the downed dog's entire body; starting at her face sniffing and licking until his handler was instructed to walk him away.

CONCLUSION:

Ato appears to be acceptably socialized around other dogs. He is a dominant male, but no aggression was displayed.

It is very common for fully intact males of Ato's age to have dominant personalities.

Dominance in this evaluation indicates a very self assured, confident attitude, not a vicious or aggressive one. Aggressiveness indicates that the dog bite purley for the pleasure of biting. This particular behavior has not been identified in this dog. Ato's responses during the socialization part of this evaluation were well within the normal
range.

AMULETIC BEHAVIOR

PURPOSE:

To see if the dog in question will copy another dog's behavior.

OBSERVATION / TEST:

Mrs. Ikuma was instructed to stand quietly with her dog on lead next to the German Shepherd who was also on lead. At this time, the German Shepherd was set up for protection work. ( This exercise includes lots of barking, biting, and growling.) Ato was totally uninterested. He showed absolutely no aggression whatsoever towards myself ( the agitator ) or my dog being handled by my assistant.

CONCLUSION:

It is extremely common for "aggressive" dogs to become aggressive when these types of exercises are being displayed in front of them. Ato was just the opposite. No aggression was noted.

DEFENSE PURPOSE:

To determine whether a dog will become aggressive if the dog views himself, his handler, or his territory to be threatened.

OBSERVATION / TEST:

While the amuletic behavior was being tested, I approached Mrs. Ikuma in an aggressive burley. Ato did not respond, he was totally uninterested.

Later, Ato was placed inside of Mrs. Ikuma's car and left for approximately 5 minutes so he could get comfortable. Once comfortable, I approached the car in a very aggressive burley. ( As if I were going to try to 'break?in. ) Ato reacted appropriately. He did growl and bark, however, he was not lunging at the car windows to get me.

CONCLUSION:

Ato's reaction regarding my approaching his handler in an aggressive regarding indicates that he does not necessarily feel threatened if his handler is threatened. However, when confined to a small area, such as a car, Ato exhibits definite defensive behavior. This is called Territorial Defensivness.

It is common for adult dogs to exhibit this behavior when confined to a small space such as a car or a house. Ato's reaction was well within normal ranges.

PLAY / PREY PURPOSE:

To test if the dog in question exhibits normal play behavior.

OBSERVATION / TEST:

Ato was placed outside on lead with his handler and a ball was tossed for him. Ato was very interested (getting up to chase it.) as long as the ball was moving. As soon as the ball stopped moving, Ato became uninterested.

CONCLUSION:

Ato's reactions indicate that he really has not had much play time in his life. During this exercise most dogs pick the ball up and bring it back to the handler so the game can continue. Only going after the ball if it is moving indicates that Ato plays in prey drive.

When a dog is in prey drive, it will only be interested in something if it is moving, i.e.; Ato would be more interested in a squirrel running across the street than one sitting quietly the same distance away. This behavior is common inmost dogs, irregardless of breed. Ato's reactions were within normal ranges.

The last section of this evaluation has been designed to test the dogs trainability and to see if this particular dog will be safe with strangers. ( Dogs. on occasion do get away from their owners. )

Since the owners immediate presence tends to influence test results; this exercise is to be executed by the trainer alone with the dog in question.

TEST:

Mrs. Ikuma was instructed to hand her dog's lead to me and not to interfere once the test began.

Mrs. Ikuma handed the lead over as requested and remained standing quietly as I began to lead the dog away. I had put a distance of approximately 20 feet between the dog and his owner before he realized that she was not coming with us. At this point Ato started to look back at his owner. I saw this behavior, took a step in the direction that I had been heading, and told Ato to "come on." Immediately after the verbal correction, Ato began trying to get behind my back. Without warning Ato jumped up biting at my left shoulder and neck area. When he hit the ground, again Ato jumped up and bit me in the left forearm. At this point, I handed the dog off to Mr. Ikuma, who interrupted the exercise by walking up to the dog and myself.

CONCLUSION:

Having been removed from his owner's presence by the hand of the trainer, Ato felt threatened by my insistence to go forward. Once Ato realized we were not going to go where he wanted to go, he became extremely defensive. Ato did not feel that I had the right to take him away from his owner.

During this section of the evaluation a defensive reaction is fairly typical in most dogs; However, most dogs do not react quite this violently.

Through repeated incidents, Ato has been taught that he can end any situation he deems as threatening by attacking.

Ato is an extremely dominant mature male. who works primarily out of the defensive drive; This explains why he attacked from behind without warning.

Ato's tendency is going to be one of defense when placed in situations he views as threatening to himself or his territory.

The lack of obedience and respect towards his owner, Mrs, Ikuma, combined with such a high defense drive, make Ato's behavior seriously unpredictable.