moosmum

Really? Do you have a reference for that? There was this fascinating doco on ABC a few months ago following a hyena clan led by a brutal female who would frequently and randomly attack the other clan members. There was something wrong with her. Aside from being a nutcase, she also appeared to be infertile. She was really hurting the group, but I think in the end they just got hungry and fed up and revolted. They didn't kill her or kick her out of the pack, just ganged up on her and drove her away from kills if I remember correctly. She stayed on the periphery. I honestly think they reacted mostly to being starved by her than being relentlessly bullied. Hyena social life can be harrowing. ***I did not read that in a scientific paper,but an article written by a bloke who adopted a wolf into his family in the 70s.He observed a wild wolf family pack to try to get a better understanding of pack dynamics and how a wolf could fit into his own family. In the group he observed there was one pup who was overly aggressive with its littermates,constantly and viciously attacking them. The male was seen to discipline this pup several times before killing it. I have heard similar stories from native americans and people in a position to observe,but nothing I can provide a direct reference to,sorry. My own bitch killed and devoured a pup at 3 days old.In the beginning it was treated as all others.I noticed at 2 days old it moved in a very frienzied manner when ever disturbed and examined it for any physical defects or abnormalities and could find nothing.Eating and defecating normaly,but mum grew more upset at its behaviour till I started to wonder should I remove it.I went back out to look again and mum had already disposed of it. The Hyena who displayed dominant only behaviour WAS removed from her influence within the pack,for one reason or or another. I question if this is significant to dogs, who do not appear to depend on living in groups to survive. *****IMHO it is significant if people are replacing other dogs as a pack,and I believe generaly dogs are a very social animal. Er... kinda? I have to admit I'm a bit confused. They are dominant but accept the leadership of another dog? As long as she's nice to them? And accept other dogs as long as they toe the line? But can't live in harmony with each other? I have problems with the idea of a dominant dog being one that believes in his right to things, for example. Because it doesn't really gel with the definition of dominance being actually getting a contested thing. I whole-heartedly believe that Erik was born believing the world is his oyster and he should have whatever he desires whenever he desires. Thing is, he doesn't always get what he desires. He is the smallest member of the household besides the rabbits, and sometimes no matter how much he wants something he just physically can't get it. To me, he is more outrageously optimistic than dominant. He tries things on just in case. He learns the quickest and easiest way to get what he wants by trying lots of different things. He talks back, he sometimes tries to be controlling, and he is very demanding despite none of it ever really getting him anywhere. He does things that are historically futile just to see if they are still futile. He is enterprising, clever, very aware of his surroundings, and very good at taking advantage of momentary lapses. He is highly motivated for rewards and he's very confident. I don't think that these qualities make him dominant, but they do set him up with advantages in social interactions so that he often wins them despite being small. The other little dog I mentioned before has similar qualities, although he is much lazier and more laid back than Erik, but takes stubborness to dizzying heights. He will keep at something for days before he will give in. I am thinking that just calling a dog dominant because they tend to get what they want is not enough. I am thinking that the reasons why they tend to get what they want are more important. And I think we are talking about a continuum. If we have a dog that has the attitude but not the size or strength to back it up, is it not dominant even if it always wins contests? If we have a dog that has the size and strength and the attitude but not the motivation to do much with it, is that a dominant dog? (*** I would say no***) To me there are no clear answers to those questions. **** Yeah,I guess I by that explanation, to define dominance I would have to say its NOT a personality trait so much as an act of forcing submission. My most dominant dogs are ones who will forcefully and aggressivly fight to maximise and hold their position in the pack,very decisivly and confidently.but they will accept leadership while it brings maximum benefits acheivable? So I guess I am realy describing potentialy successfull alpha behaviour **** I would like to hear more about your dogs and social harmony, lilli. I have to say your description of them physically throwing another dog off a desired resource shocked me. I can't imagine my dogs ever being that violent. My mother's Vallhund who I keep mentioning will force other dogs off food regardless of their size, but he would never just dive in with full contact. He doesn't need to. Just makes some noise and charges and the other dogs scatter, despite them all being bigger than him. If they don't move he bites them, but he doesn't throw them around or hurt them. He's mostly noise, but he is respected because the other dogs know he's not bluffing.

Corvus, An antisocial dominance no doubt exsists,but I would consider it more an abnormality that nature would cull. In wolf packs,wolf parents have been known to cull their own ofspring for just such tendencies and I have seen domestic dogs do the same,for abnormal behaviour. I don't think of dominance as rare,but relative to dominance of others the dog has contact with and isn't just brute force and agression.A whole lot of other factors are at work too.confidence being a major one and for lack of a better word,I will use Ego. If the dog is just out right aggressive to all and sundry it surely implies instability.Their survival and that of their pack members depends on them having some sense of when they are out classed. I have 2 bitches I see as very dominant.Both accept an older female as a leader.They were raised by the older dog and both these dominant types tried her dominance before they were physicaly ready to "Win".Both accepted her leader ship after that,but ONLY because she is a good leader who does not ever bully.She does not try to dominate,more mediates.To some degree,they accept her leadership on their own terms if that makes sense? She is not the dominant one,tho' still a leader. 1st sign of bullying and either of these girls would out the older dog from her position. The same 2 dominant bitches were raised apart and I keep them apart(luckily one is here only temporarily tho fairly long term now) left to their own devises,they would fight very seriously untill one or both were badly hurt. Both these dogs will accept strange dogs and can be quite friendly,but only as long as the new dog is no threat to the pack and accepts that these are the dominant ones socialy.Over stepping the boundaries in any way is not on. A pack instinct is part of a balanced whole. In your earlier thread on pack dynamics I believe these are the ones who step up in defense of the pack,and will eventualy lead a split in the pack when number are too great for to sustain pack integrity. Hope this makes sense!

I will be interested to see if lilli see it the same as I do here too,but IMO the dominance is a very social thing,the dominant is just supremely sure of his right to the his place. Gotta cut this short...Genny running out!

From my observtions, dominant dogs dont exhibit leadership they assert their will power and what they want if they want other dogs (and / or humans) to do a cetain thing, they wil push this but that is not leadership. In a dogs mind, imo, power is very much part of dominance or an individuals belief in their abiltiy to assert itself over another - that belief can exist menatlly as well as physically but the dominant dog will always back up the mental with the physical, because it believes in itself and its right of way. fwiw a dog trying it on with its owner is not 'dominant' that can merely be (and often is) a dog taking up the slack. A dominant dog does not make the rules rather it sets them; people are not at ease with the term 'dominant' because of their own human connotations - but 'power' - making another appease ones willpower is part of the psyche of a dominant dog. you only have to watch a dominant dog shoudler down another or stand up to the world around them, or stare down a human with intent to see that power and force are very much at play. (nb why this would then apply to the human-dog relationship I dont know, as I said it seems people go bananas when they see or hear the word dominance). Probably because true dominant dogs are not that common, that owners/trainers/theorists can misunderstand or misuse the word - apply it where it is not really warranted or where the dogs motivation is not understood. But it is no wonder that many pet owners / pet trainers claim they have never seen it or it doesn't exist - because it rarely does, in its true form, in most companion breeds. dominance gone wrong? I dont know what that means a dominant dog has not gone wrong bcz its holds up the couch or what it considers theirs - imo dominance is a unique mindset that needs to be managed. in my breeds a dominant individual will go for a person it does not consider relevant if that person asks them to get off the bed. couch - that wouldn't be out of place or 'gone wrong' that would just be the dog asserting its willpower over another and meaning it because its birthright wired it that way. territorial barking imo has nothing to do with dominance, that's other breed traits / drives at work. actually in one of my breeds I say the more a dog barks, the more warninng it gives, the less nerve a dog has. By definition a dog with no nerve can't be dominant. A dog I would describe as dominant does not give much warning bark at all. Too full of itself and its own ability for that. A dominant dog is a dog with adaptive intelligence, will power and the mental and physical nouse to back that mindset up. dominance imo, is the way a dog sees the world and its place in it. A dominant dog is just more prepared to assert itself over another. And they are born this way. Lilli, Just wanted to say I thought you put that very well,it fits my idea of a dominant dog. I would add I don't believe a dominant dog is one who will always try to assert his will over his leader/owner.His adaptive intelligence (in a sound confident mind) should let him accept leadership from those he can recognise as fit for the task. So many seen to think 'dominance' means hard to train. Sorry if I haven't worded well,newish to the forum and your training levels so not used to all your more professional terminology yet. I'm learning!

Yep,you see a a Dobe puppy,but she is not pure...1/8th is other working breeds.(Rottie and Ridgy) It may have been the experience of these people with GSDs that that brought it home to them that this pup was not suited to them.....I have been stressing that I think this girl is best in a working home,so must at least do obedience and/or other dog sports.She will need an owner experienced with dominant/protective types. Their previous dogs may have been much more suited as pets only and so given them a sense that they could handle this pup too. Her confidence alone may have been a bit of a shock,in her excitment she would have been pretty full on.Though she is quite intelligent and learns very fast,knowing the ways to get her to listen might be another matter.She is also very clearly going to be a very powerful, strong fast dog. IMHO you do need to be a pretty confident and sure of your abilities to take on such a pup,watching to see the what and whys of her behaviour to adapt your training where needed.She is learning from you maybe faster than you think. Once over the suprise of her quick return,its very understandable and these people have my respect,and gratitude for bringing her back so far and fast. I was pleased to see her coming up the drive on lead,being very behaved and when the lead was handed over,she came and sat between my feet.I was proud of her! Glad she is back,but with 4 such dogs already,including 1 temporary visitor who must be separated from my girl at all times on shifts,she won't she wont be staying! Irresistable forces and immovable objects. I need time for each.

The waiting for a puppy thread looks like a good puppy suport group and sounds like it would be a good idea! I think these people were very responsible in the end which is what counts,and I am grateful for that..I think seeing this puppy so full on and realising how big she was going to be must have been a big scarey thought! No one should be ashamed of their meltdown moments,including these people.It just shows they DO take the responsibility seriously. I must addmitt to being pretty blown out at 1st! Eden IS a lovely name,but I don't think it suits Boomer sounds good! I think she will be a force of nature so it kind of fits there too.

Sorry,not real great on the P.C yet and need to learn to use photo bucket or something,so the pics are realy too small. The bundle of trouble ! In all fairness,this is a VERY confident and dominant girl and she is going to be pretty big too.I did warn them in no uncertain terms, the reality was just something else.

Alls well that ends well! Pup home none the worse for wear,had a very exciting 24 hours and is settled as usual.Not a peep! I found it bizare too,but agree with all posts that they did the right thing and I made that clear.I am just glad that the girl,with her mums advise was ready to admitt she had bitten off more than she could chew and did not leave it longer.Had them in for a cuppa and chat and the young girl was very embarassed and upset. I was certainly not going to make it harder for her,and won't condemn them. My fault too for not making sure the mother herself would take a hand in the pups upbringing. Seems mums expertise and assistance,for all her reasurance was never going to extend to responsibility and daughters eyes were to big for her abilities to cope. I will be back to add a pic. and will need to find a name for her that fits.

I sent an 11 week old old pup off to her new home last night.4 hour drive here,4 back. Her new owners were very impressed with her,checked her over for conformation,hips bite etc. and seemed to think they had found a real treasure. Email later that night to say all well,pup home and very happy to be there,playing and checking every thing out.No dramas but a little car sick. There had been lots of contact both ways and I stressed this was a working breed pup who had a very confident and dominant nature and would not be easy and not for a novice handler. Mum and daughter informed me they had 2 GSDs and were welll aware of the work and comittment and prepared to put in the hard yards and take her to obedience from the start as they did every week end for years with the GSDs.Lots of mental sdtimulation provided and pup would be included in the family,indoors as well as out etc. Got a call 6 am.Owners up all night with an excited puppy who just wanted to play and explore her new home. Daughter now says she did not think it would be like this and can they bring her back!!! Another 8 hours journey for them and pup.(this pup should have settled quickly if they had just put her in a safe room,like a laundry etc.She is used to sleeping on her own and rarely makes much fuss over it) So she is returning,all for the best clearly,but I just find the whole thing so ridiculous!

These threads make me so glad we live on acres with lots of bush and variety.We rarely encounter other dogs,and lots of off lead time. I was reduced to throwing rocks at a couple of pittbulls that were attacking my goats once. Walking the roads can be a different matter with lots of dogs on the way running out.The owners,when around,are quick to bring them under controll when they see the size and breed of ours.Then I have to explain that our dogs will NOT harm theirs (or their children) unless we are attacked. The few times owners have not been around getting between and yelling "Go Home" agressivly has mostly worked,when it hasn't the nearest big stick waved at them has.

I think this choosing is where an good understanding of the lines comes in. We have protective breed and I choose for confidence and intelligence 1st of all.So far I have found that pups showing a lot of persistent dominance with their litter mates don't neccesarily display the same dominance to their families/owners.At least it has not been a problem for us,maybe strong pack drives here? It seems to relate more to the willingness to tackle a confrontion with this line. I see strong nerves and confidence as the essential part in chosing a pup.I want to be able to take my dog anywhere with out him being intimidated. I do watch closely tho' how they handle a reprimand,or say being held against their will.I expect them to accept this after the intitial struggle. I would also expect a pup to chase a rag or toy and be willing to participate in games. I like a dog who is very alert to their suroundings and I would say"happy" rather than optimistic and a dog who likes to be with you and thinks you are good fun! I think this is a good thread that could benefit a lot of us for the observations people make.

I agree with most of the above,our dogs are protection breeds (but a strange mix of)and though I have had a collie who was great in his way,his reliability purely as a P.P dog would not have been sufficient.Also he had no where near the strength or substance he would have needed to do the job.As simply a family pet with protective instincts he was a great mate to have. He reacted with great determination and courage,going straight for the throat the 1 one time he was faced with a threat to a buch of genuinly screaming and panicking kids,but thats about what what it took to get him to react. If you had tried to train him for the job anyway,he would likely have lost his nerve tho' I did used to "play attacks" with him and he was very agile at avoiding hands and feet because of that. If you have a dog purely as a companion dog,it should not be expected to step up,its just nice when it does. A dog needs the confidence,nerve and the substance to back it all up.That combination would be very hard to find in breeds other than protection breeds. Aussielover, No,you don't want to put your dogs in danger.I would avoid trouble too.I have been in situations though where running is not an option,and have come to value a dog that will stand along side and fight with and for you,and that can be a constant companion.NOT locked away. I think theres some interesting discussion here tho',maybe a new thread in the training section would be an idea,on what makes a good Personal Protection or security dog.The selection and raising, family oriented versus professional? Is independence seen as a good thing? Questions and observations could help any one in this field surely.

While I do agree no one should rely on an untrained dog for protection,I have found it is possible to breed for a protective instinct and that aggression in normal situations does not need to be a part of of that.So far I have not heard of one of these dogs who has not shown this instinct to some degree when required. One of our least aggressive girls went to a teen who takes her every where.She loves children where ever she can find then and wins over nervous mums at the park where the children play with her for hours,tryingf to call her up on the slippery dip.This dog hid from a beagle pup at puppy pre school. Her owner has told me on a recent holliday where they were staying with family the owner of this dog started screaming when her uncle tried to throw her into the pool.This dog grabbed the uncle by the ankle and refused to let go untill he released her owner,who came away with just a few minor scratches.This is one of our smallest and least aggressive dogs. I agree she would likely not step up where the going was serious,and her reactions should never be relied on.But I believe it shows that aggression and a protective instinct do not have to be part of the same make up. Our bigger,more confident and dominant types show a obvious and increased willingness to take on a threat and are placed accordingly.None have so far gone to security or been trained in P.P.work. but we have lots of stories of the dogs natural instincts kicking in.Those chosen for the task have only got angrier if the threat escalates and shown great confidence at those times.This is not to say untrained dogs should be relied on,OR deliberatly put into dangerous situations, but I believe natural abilities and instincts are underestimated and dismissed too readily.

Thanks loads guys,Glad I checked!! Looks like the old garbage guts chooks get it.

I have been given some soy milk that we won't use,but the dogs certainly will. Just want to be sure its o.k for them 1st if any one can tell me?

I would be very interested to hear your training methods, as I have very high roo/rabbit driven dogs!! You can P.M me if you like,I haven't worked out how to do that yet! but this method is only suitable for use when there is some one around and a lot depends on the the yard not having beautiful ground level gardens!

I agree some accreditation would go a long way to protecting every one involved in the industry. It would hopfully help to educate people better in what to look for in the 1st place, and most definitely be good for those working hard to produce genuine working dogs. I hope this changes I'm happy to say after reading your post that my sons dog would not ever be found peering from behind his legs! She is a very confident and relaxed,placid type generaly,but will react instantly to any sudden movement towards any of us.She will also react if we get angry or anoyed at some one,or they get angry or anoyed at us, and has never reacted towards the wrong person or children. she has never been known to show agression away from us unless its an intruder to our property. We have a lot of confidence in her,but still want an expert opinion and believe that more job specific training should be needed. Its sad to know that young man and his dog are realy very vulnerable and likely LESS safe working as security than just going for their walks for fun. My sons ambition is to have his own security company and this area seems to be one where he could improve on the accepted levels. I took it for granted there would be a lot more to it!

Longcoat,you would hope so wouldn't you? Sounds like a lot of room for improvement right there. we will be making sure they are both well equipt for the job but i reckon there must be a lot of young people starting out with little support who feel they are trained and ready as can be after the basic courses and who knows what sort of dogs they may be using.

Was going to post our method for training even a high prey driven dog to stay in the yard when surrounded by things like 'roos and rabbits,but deleated it since it could be open to abuse if its not done with proper supervision.

Yes,If my son takes himself and his dog off to K9 force for a good assessment and any advise re; training for both of them we will feel much more confident.If its felt either of them need more work we can figure out where they go from there according to advise. The training provided seems pretty inadequet to me,but sounds pretty standard.

We are in the central west atm,but will be relocating,possibly just north of Newcastle.Hopefully with in a year. The dog he hopes to use is terrific,but has only been a family dog and we would want her well prepared and assessed for such a role before she ever goes out into that situation.If she will have problems there is another he can raise and train specificaly for the job.

A lot of great sugestions here for my son too.I have recomended he look around here on dol and read this thread and other training threads himself. It seems finding a reputable trainer and assessor for his dog may be a problem? Can any one recommend a good one in N.S.W working specificaly in this field? I certainly don't want him going into this with a badly trained dog and he was told his dog itself needs no sort of accreditation?! He is doing his training in Q.L.D atm.but will be back. Tho' his employer would likely check out the dog.

My son has just done his security course and soon to start his K9 unit. He will be using our own dogs as he has been raised with them,knows and has great faith in them. Unfortunatly they have not yet proven themselves proffesionaly. We believe they will.

Yes, I think for a family thats the best option. We chose dogs for a strong protective instinct but have not trained any to bite or attack.They are strong nerved dogs,very affectionate,dominant types but with a strong pack drive and eager to please their owners.None are trained for protection work,though my son is just getting his K9 security licence and we will train one up for him when his current dog is ready to retire. The strong likely hood that they will protect is all we ask in a home environment or near children. They have learned through play (Get the kids,find the kids) and never a child bitten. We have had a child bite the dog,and the dog protect a visiting child from his angry father.We have not been let down yet and there have been several incidents where the dogs have stepped up beautifuly,tho' they have not yet bitten nor been asked to.I believe a word of encouragement at those times would see the dogs very willing to go that step further.,but it has not been tested.Being knocked over and a dog standing over you snarling in your face makes most people pull their heads in quick! Looking after an extra bitch lately (,my sons dog while he trains) we need to keep her and her daughter separated at all times as they are both willing to accept other bitches only if THEY are the boss! Two times now we have had accidents where there were fights and both times we have been able to wade in to grab collars with no fear of being bitten ourselves. The dogs are raised with cats,free range chooks and even tiny Yorkies. I loved watching my kids grow up with the dogs,seeing the dog sit patiently through puppet shows for her benefit and play chasings.My old girl knows she is not to be on the furniture.She has broken that rule only twice.Both times when chasing one of the kids who ran into a corner,pulling the lounge chair in front of them.The dog has stopped untill the child taunted them"nyah nyah,you cant get me!" She did!

This is perhaps a valid point, though I ask you, how relevant? How likely are you to be robbed by a 'dog savvy person'? In like 99% of cases, dog barks, person shows fear, dog escalates and chases person off the property. I have had people tell my dog to be quiet, we even had one guy calmly try confront him, they took a step forward, and the dog did too. My dog has always stood between me and anyone suss, and I actually believe you would have to kill him to get him to move. He is completely fearless in those situations. He barks when he first hears a noise on our property, but if he finds someone there, that changes to a low growl and they can go backwards (off the property) but they can't come any closer. No-one has ever tested it. People have thrown him food though, which he completely ignores. In the same way that a dog can be bred to herd, hunt etc I believe they can be bred to protect, because that's certainly what I've seen in my case. I've had other dogs, terriers and what not, that were kind of protective in that they barked and put on a good show, but when someone moved towards them they always moved back and eventually would sort of hide behind us. This dog however has been remaining between me and whatever I don't like since he was about 4-5 months old, but he came from a breeder specifically working to achieve that. I also dissagree that a dog you can rely on to protect is going to be a serious handful for an experienced security handler only. Very strong nerves are quite possible in a family pet,along with great determination. O.K,So we can't count on them carrying through if an attacker is willing to keep coming,without P.P training.Maybe not,(maybe yes too) but We don't have to worry they will bite just because they have been trained to be aggressive either.They have the most important quality.The willingness to defend. The dogs mentioned here are doing their jobs beautifully,not many are uncontrollable menaces. If they don't go as far as a profesional trainer would like,at least they have been able able to be there when needed.These dogs all did what was required. That to me is a lot more useful than a trained P.P dog who has to be locked away for the safety of every one.Thats not the type of companion most responsible dog owners want. Reliability for any task is going to be stonger if that is specificaly what the line is bred for.Very few pure breeds are bred specificaly and solely for family suitable protection in Australia at least.If those that are are going to be such a handful,they are no good to me or the average family. If the dogs professional P.P trainers are working with are generaly unsafe in companion situations,and its claimed repeatedly they are the only ones you can rely on,what does the ordinary person do if thats important to them? We are proud of what our dogs have done.What is unlikely to be tested doesn't matter.If I ever expect to need more than that,its time for a gun! Keep the stories coming folks,they are great!