corvus

I have to say, that is probably crossing the line as well. I had 18 month old twins visiting once and they spent some time calling my corgi "dog", but when my housemate's dark BC cross came trotting around the corner they both pointed and shouted "Bor-a Coh-eeee!" If 18 month old children can figure it out, I don't think adults have any excuse.

Aww, give the non-dog people a break. Not everyone knows every breed or colour variation. It was years before I knew BCs come in a colour other than black and white, and only because a friend had a tricolour. I only discovered Pomeranians come in such a variety of colours quite recently. If you don't ever see one and you have no interest in them, why would you know? Erik the Vallhund regularly gets called a sawn-off German Shepherd or a German Shepherd cross corgi or a mini husky. I do not really see the obsession with GSDs, but given how many people say it there must be something about him that people identify with GSDs. Mostly they know that's not what he is, but they say what he looks like to them. Kivi the Lapphund has had Keeshond, Husky, Malamute and crosses thereof. I wouldn't know what to call him as either if I'd seen one a few years ago. I usually ask "what breed is that?" rather than making a fool of myself by guessing, though. However, someone once asked me if my full-grown, very large Lapphund was related to my undersized tricolour, tailless Pembroke Corgi. That is crossing the line between ignorance and sheer idiocy.

I would be betting on hunting dogs. They tend to be very good at problem solving. My Vallhund is crazy smart, but a Greyhound gave him a run for his money in my auto-shaping operative task.

Who cares? I don't. Whether or not the Dingo was instrumental in the extinction of marsupial carnivores on the mainland is irrelevant, now. I just objected to the Dingo decline being compared to the Thylacine. I don't think it's a fair comparison. End of story. You can argue with that if you like, but I don't know to what end 'cause I'm not gonna change my mind. And who cares if I do or don't? It was a comment on my opinion. It does not represent some underground movement of people that are blaming Dingoes for extinctions and using that as an excuse to leave them to their own devices or something. It's not. I never said we shouldn't protect them. No one has said that. I said I did not see a solution to the problem so there's no point crying about it. I'm not sure which definition you're talking about, there. Naming species is getting pretty messy with cryptic species popping up wherever anyone cares to look and new techniques meaning we can pick up speciation before we see much difference in the actual animals. Species are arbitrary, though. Evolution is dynamic. Naming species is just like taking a photo of a moving object. My point was the genetics of the Dingo will probably shift whether with help from domestic dogs or not as their environment changes. Then I guess the problem isn't as dire as we were all thinking. Good news!

It's just a label. Whether the dog is growling or snapping or whether they are just tensing is likely to be simply a difference in arousal. I wouldn't say Erik was a resource guarder, but I would say he isn't always comfortable sharing. That may be evident with anything from displacement behaviour or tension to driving the other dog off. They are essentially the same to me, just influenced by different levels of arousal. I don't consider behaviours discrete as a rule. It's always one leads into another leads into another.

To me all behaviour exists in probabilities. For example, I think Kivi behaving aggressively at all is highly improbable, compared to Erik behaving aggressively, which is much more likely in certain circumstances. Neither have ever shown food-related aggression, but I would definitely consider Erik more likely to display it. As far as I'm concerned, I judge the likelihood of the behaviour occurring and manage accordingly so that it doesn't. Much like you have. There are a lot of precautions I take with Erik that I don't take with Kivi. That's because he cares about resources a lot more than Kivi does, is more proactive in his behaviour, and seems to perceive competition where Kivi does not. I consider he has a greater propensity for aggression in general than Kivi does, but he rarely behaves aggressively. So I guess I would say both??

How different? Both are slowly being eradicated by people, interesting to note that even though they are thought to be a driving force behind the 'tigers' and devils disappearance from mainlaind, that the thylacine was in fact a much larger, more adapted and more well suited to mainland Australia (at the time) then the Dingo. Then why are there Dingoes but no Thylacines? Just because a species evolved for a particular environment doesn't mean it is automatically more competetive in that environment than introduced species. The eradication of the Thylacine was a political move. There was a bounty due to pressure from sheep farmers, even though there was no evidence they were actually killing sheep. They were not "slowly eradicated by people". They were systematically and quickly wiped out. The Dingo is not being eradicated. It's being genetically diluted. Not directly by people, just by the human love of dogs. It's fairly typical for cats and dogs to outcompete other predators. They tend to be very efficient hunters. They don't have to actually fight with the local predators, just eat well. Thylacines were thought to be quite specialised, which always makes a species vulnerable, especially when a generalist like dogs (and humans) come along. Oh really? I'm not sure anyone knows enough about Thylacine reproduction to make that claim. If they were anything like Devils, they had one litter a year like Dingoes, both reached sexual maturity at about 2 years, but Dingoes live longer and are likely to have more young. That gives the advantage to Dingoes. Plus, they have a broader ecological niche so the population can be larger if the environment is at holding capacity for both species. Well, we do know that disease was implicated in the Thylacine's extinction, but given the population had already crashed due to hunting, it's a side issue. By the time they were protected it was already too late. You can resent it all you like, but Dingoes are not a scapegoat. They are adaptable invaders, just like people. It is still widely accepted that they were instrumental in the extinction of Thylacines and Tasmanian Devils on the mainland. Like it or lump it. I don't think it's right to compare them to Thylacines is all. Thylacines were for starters in their own genus. Dingoes are a subspecies. There are several pariah dogs around the world that are very similar to them. Thylacines were systematically eradicated whereas Dingoes are suffering from genetic dilution. IMO there is nothing that can be done about this state of affairs, so we may as well move on. The dingo will continue to exist in some form even if that form is more like a domestic dog than the dingoes we know today. It's just evolution. Species are not static. If the "pure" dingo is indeed the evolutionary pinnacle of wild dogs in Australia, then even with the genetic dilution the population will eventually drift back to look and behave much like current dingoes. If the dingo is not the evolutionary pinnacle, then a new type will dominate. As much as I'd like to preserve pure dingoes, the only way to do it is through captivity, which is already being done.

You don't think it's cruel to hit a frightened dog? I usually say something along the lines of "Aww, are you scared little fella?" If I'm not talking directly to the owners they can ignore it or respond as they see fit. Mostly they ignore or sometimes they say "He doesn't like other dogs." Incidentally, a dog that is walking stiff with tail up and ears forward and staring may be communicating aggressive threat (or just readyness to act), but that doesn't mean aggression is a forgone conclusion. I've had my dogs meet dogs with that body language countless times and nothing ever came of it. My dogs are good at staying out of trouble. If there's any doubt in my mind that it's a situation they won't be able to turn aside on their own, I head the dog off before it gets the chance to do anything.

Comfortis rescued us from drowning in fleas. It took three months to knock them down completely. Last winter I stopped giving it to the dogs because we didn't have a single flea on the property, but started again in spring just to be on the safe side (and because my mum's dogs gave fleas to mine!) I have rabbits as well and didn't treat them at all. I didn't see the point given every spot on treatment on the market had failed to have much of an impact and the flea bombing only gave us about 5 days of respite. One of my boys was a bit sick the first few times after taking Comfortis, but then he was fine and fine again after the winter break. My mum started using it this season after encountering the same resistance problems we had the season before. She has three dogs and none showed any side effects.

Like grasshoppers? Or mice and rats? ;) You know, the kind of critters cats eat? I kind of resent the notion of them going "the way of the Thylacine". The thylacine was a whole different deal all together. There are still purebred dingoes in captivity and likely will be for some time yet. They are in fact thought to be instrumental in the extinction of the thylacine on the mainland. ETA If they are young 'uns it's likely they are dispersing and won't be around for long.

There is a huge captive population of purebred dingoes. There are so many that most wildlife parks desex them.

You can bring in a voice cue or tap to the left leg to signal to her that she has the green light to "heel". The behaviour is maintained by rewarding it. Once you have the cue you aim to have it under stimulus control, which means she does it when you cue it. And not when you don't cue it. You do this just by rewarding her when she does it on cue but not rewarding it any other time.

The cue can also be a hand signal or an object or a movement, or anything, really. It's like a green light to tell the dog that if they perform the behaviour now they will get rewarded for it. This is different to a command where they are expected to respond in a particular way.

Little Austinmer just north of Wollongong is our favourite as well. There are some nice rock pools doggies can swim in, and at high tide a nice spot to swim with the doggies if you like. We also like going down to the Hacking River at Gray's Point. There's a spot off the North Arm Rd where you can walk down onto a sand/mud flat. Watch the oysters, though. It's not technically an off leash dog area, but I think council knows what is going on. They have put one of those bins specifically designed for dog poo there. Lots of locals take their dogs down there in high tide in the summer for a swim. The water is lovely and you only have to contend with boat wake. At low tide it takes a while to find enough water to swim in, though. Unless you're a short little Vallhund.

One time I had my old little Pembroke Corgi and my Finnish Lapphund with me and someone asked if they were the same breed. Errr.... Is this a trick question? I checked my dogs to make sure there wasn't a third dog that had somehow snuck in and could be considered similar to one of the other two. No... Then they asked me if I was going to breed them. When I said no they asked why not. I didn't know where to start! After a moment of stunned silence I said "Well, for starters they are both desexed."

My mum has a dog who witnessed me walk off into the bush one day and come back with a wild bird (it was injured). I carried it home in a bag over my shoulder. He became convinced that I could produce a bird out of thin air. Periodically he would suddenly have the need to check my clothes, under my shoes, and any bag or bundled item of clothing I was carrying for wildlife. Out of the blue he would suddenly prance over to me and excitedly search my person. I was always wondering what set him off. Did he just all of a sudden remember that once I had a bird? Did he smell something and assume somewhat optimistically that I had it on my person somewhere? Cracked me up. Sorry, that wasn't quite the answer you were looking for! My dogs think I went hunting whenever I come home with groceries. They check all the bags and find the good ones with the dead animals in them.

Kivi does, too. But I think in Kivi's case it is largely habit. He likes to go and lie in the cool grass on a normal day. So if he's feeling a little hot he thinks he should go and lie in the grass outside, not realising that it's even hotter out there. So then he tries the deck, which is even hotter than the grass, and no, there are no cool breezes for him to catch. It's often hard to convince him to come back inside. He'll stay out there until his coat feels hot and then suddenly he barks to be let in again. I have taken to just insisting that he not even settle outside. If you're that hot, Kivi, I will put the air con on for you back inside. I'm not fond of air conditioners and try to live without it, but generally if Kivi is hot I am sweating all over and sometimes I need him to tell me that it's time to put the air con on.

My question is always "Why?" Usually there's a good reason why instructors want to teach the way they want to teach, and if I know what those reasons are I am generally happy to do it their way. Sometimes I just don't understand where we're heading and I find that very difficult to work with. My brain likes to know the end point and work backwards. It's been explained to me that most people don't really want to know why or what comes next and wouldn't understand it if they were told anyway. So I'm welcome and encouraged to ask by email during the week and the instructors are happy to answer in more depth. But they are also flexible and tweak the method for different dogs. It's a good club.

Well, I think it depends on the dog (and maybe the kid??). One of my dogs is more dependent than the other. He gets lots of structure and rules and he flourishes under it, but my other dog just does not need that structure in his life. He does whatever has been particularly rewarding or habitual in the past. He only needs my guidance when he's unsure of himself, and that is hardly ever. I just don't factor largely into his behaviour except as a shaping force. I wish my other dog was as self-contained as he is!

Oh, I think you're right. Certainly they aren't always seeking the same thing. But I think the important bit is the anticipation, which is switched on FOR something in particular. As I understand it, the SEEKING system is what drives the behaviour, but other things switch on the SEEKING system. For example, say I always followed a click with a piece of steak. If I pick up the clicker, my dog would probably go straight into SEEKING mode, but if I clicked and offered a lick of peanut butter instead of a piece of steak, there's a good chance my dog will go "Whaaaat?" and not want a bar of it. What switched him into SEEKING mode was the anticipation for steak. Hypothetically. In a predatory animal, just stimulating the SEEKING circuit can be enough to send them into predatory aggression. In rats, who are opportunistically predatory, stimulating the circuit may prompt them to hunt, but only if they are the hunting type in the first place. Apparently not all rats are keen hunters. The lack of motivational specificity refers to brain circuits. The theory was each reward should have its own circuit that dictates how the animal will behave in pursuit of that reward. The reality appears to be that there is just one circuit that controls this for all rewards. That doesn't mean the behaviour will always be the same regardless of what is being sought by the animal. As I understand it, the behaviour expressed varies among individuals. There is a spot in the brain you can stimulate to make a cat go kill a rat, so it is hard-wired behaviour, and it's all tied up with reward centres in the brain and so we know it's intrinsically rewarding, but it won't start on its own without the SEEKING system is how I understand it. No one knows if what gets stimulated when a dog plays tug, for example, is the same bit that gets stimulated when a dog is hunting. Although Panksepp says there is a whole circuit for rough and tumble play. I'm not sure if that's all play in general. RAT play is a bit special. Anyway, I could go on about it all day and it's pretty complex. There are so many interesting things about this circuit that to me explain lots of odd little things that occur in training. If you can get your hands on Panksepp's book "Affective Neuroscience", I heartily recommend it. It's extremely interesting and explains a lot of the funny little quirks of the SEEKING system.

Panksepp would agree! So would I. True. Frustration is not confined to territoriality by any means, and is known to be a potential cause of aggressive behaviour. For all we know the GSD so badly wanted to play with the BC that the barrier of the fence drove it to scary heights of frustrated arousal. We see this sort of thing sometimes with dogs on leash. I've seen dogs that are very excited in a positive way (I assume, judging by body language) about other dogs, but because they are on leash and can't meet and greet they get so worked up. I've seen owners let dogs like that off. Some of them go back to normal when they are off leash, but not all of them do.

Are you sure? Another rhetorical question. I guess a lot of things were once thought to be something you can't train for. I never quite know where that line is. Maybe somewhere different for every dog.

I would look for other signs of danger, first.

I'll remember that one.

Well, I think it is reasonably clear. One of the reasons why Panksepp calls it SEEKING is because it is a general system. There is no such thing as motivational specificity in this system. That means we are talking about exactly the same chemicals and pathways whether we're talking about seeking food rewards or predatory behaviour. The consummatory phase, which is where the dog actually has the reward, is something else. The SEEKING system turns off at that point. More or less. It's not quite that simple, of course. The reason why Panksepp doesn't list a prey drive is because it falls under SEEKING, exactly the same as foraging behaviour in rats, and clicker training, as it happens. There have been some really cool studies that blew the whole motivational specificity idea out of the water, but it wasn't widly accepted. People liked the motivational specificity model. By "people" I mean "neuroscientists". Assuming that there is no motivational specificity, how do you know that what you are satisfying is prey drive? It's a rhetorical science nerd kind of question. I think it's funny, but my sense of humour can get a bit on the esoteric side, too. IMO the behaviour all creatures described with the GSD could just as easily be a mixture of territorial aggression and barrier frustration, thus having nothing to do with prey drive or predatory drift. When I was a kid we had a dog that lived next door who would fly at my dog at every opportunity. There are so many potential conditioning factors involved in that behaviour I would hesitate to label it and I saw it for myself. Without knowing a history it's hard to know what was driving the dog's behaviour when they move that fast. Arousal comes into play and will be reflected in the body language.