Longcoat

The big difference is that you're not supporting people who breed and keep dogs in appalling conditions. Buy from a rescue, the money goes back into rescue. Buy from a BYB/puppy farm/pet store, the money goes back into those places. It's about the principle for many people. I understand this reasoning, but isn't the rescue a third party outlet in support of the BYB, pet shop and puppy farmed dogs???.

The difference is that as adults the rescue dogs are generally health checked and they have their behaviour assessed, before they are adopted out. The poor little pups from pet shops that developed problems as they grow may never even make it to rescue, their problems may be too great. As pups, well bred and well-raised purebred dogs are always going to have a lot more potential than carelessly bred and badly raised dogs. Once the dog is an adult, no matter what its beginnings, what you see is what you get. So you don't have the risks inherent in buying a pup of mystery genetics. You can see the dog for itself. You can see what its coat is like, you can see if it behaves aggressively, you can see what size it is, how sound its bone structure is and you can see how gentle it is. There is no way you can tell all that if you bought a pup from a pet shop or byb. Also, when you buy a rescue dog, the money you pay has not really covered the true cost of preparing that dog for sale. You are getting a bargain. Rescues are non-profits and charities, they just want to save dogs from dying needlessly. When you buy a pet shop or byb pup, you are getting very poor value for money, and you are encouraging more bad dog breeding. Not everyone wants to buy a pup, and if somebody wants an adult dog they should judge that particular dog on its own merits, and not dismiss a dog because of an unfortunate start to life. From a health and temperament aspect along with the physical shape of the adult dog, the finished product is far more desirable than in puppy form which was essentially then a lucky dip. Thanks for the insight Greytmate

People often mention that they wouldn't buy from a pet shop, BYB or puppy farmer, but would buy from a rescue. I had an impression that the majority of rescues come from the places these people wouldn't buy a puppy from and I am thinking what's the difference other than the rescue dog being more mature???. :D

We had our family poodle on a check chain when we started training her, she completely shut down and to this day is unwilling to do anything. I'd rather have poor timing on a reward than a punishment. I see people jerking their dogs around for no reason all of the time, the dog doesn't understand why they are constantly being punished. Very sad to see :D That's not the fault of the training method, but the fault of the handlers using a method that they don't understand how to use properly.

Corrective action is NOT always necessary and will cause some lower drive dogs to totally shut down. No one method will be successful for all dogs. You need a few tools in your tool box for this and most other training challenges. Do you disagree that the concept Nekhbet suggested won't work in the OP's situation???. Personally I think it will with adjustment to suit the requirements as I mentioned. Naturally the corrective force would be differently applied to the OP's dogs than it would be from the same misbehaviour from a working line GSD or Belgian Malinios which a good trainer will easily determine the necessary level of correction required. Given that I've not met the dogs and don't know the owner, I recommended reward based training rather than correction. It seems to be working. The biggest issue I've seen with a lot of handlers is that their timing is off - they can't get the reward in the right place to show the dog what they want. If the issue is the handler's skill, rather than "disobedience", then why should the dog suffer for that? I've seen "chronic pullers" walking on a loose lead very quickly once they understand that the loose lead profits them. I'm not "anti-aversive" but I don't think it needs to be the first tool you dust off, particularly with some hounds who will mentally pack up and go home if you apply them. Try jerking a Whippet around on a lead - with some dogs, what you'll end up with is a dog that refuses to move at all. Timing is generally the issue be it a correction or reward that people get wrong.........I agree

Yes that's true that it's dependent on the dog, but there are trainers out there who have successfully trained high drive dogs to extreme reliability without full on Kohler style corrections. Ivan Balabanov is a good example of a successful high drive dog trainer who uses minimal corrections, but he will and does use a correction in certain applications and conditions. I am more referring to trainers who general act on a principal law that they will NEVER apply a correction and that everything must be done on purely positive methods. These trainers tend to scoot around the behavioral issue looking for equipment to use, head collars, harnesses etc, not because the equipment is superior or an effective training tool, but to uphold their belief that a correction should never be applied in any circumstances. I don't see that concept being the essence of a good trainer, and in the process of correction avoidance leaves dog owners trying to implement these methods as the OP has experienced, "at their wits end" with a dog that is showing no signs of behaviour improvement. With Koehler though Huski researching his methods, rarely would anyone say that his methods didn't train the dog, infact in competition, the Koehler trained dogs would generally win, but the downfall in excessive use of Koehler methods was the dog's flatness and willingness to comply. The Koehler trained dogs could tend to lack the prancing feet that other methods extracted. The Koehler dogs performed a faultless routine on the basis of avoiding punishment where the other's performed the routine because they enjoyed it, but often with not quite the Koehler precision. Some of the Koehler methods have been blown way out of proportion as to their aversive nature, where in fact some of the Koehler methods in leash control are very good with the same concepts used successfully today.

There are plenty of trainers who train high drive dogs and do so without Kohler style leash corrections. As there are plenty of trainers who avoid Koehler type training methods on dogs that need it and never achieve reliable obedience from all the dog's they train either???. A good trainer should be able to determine the methods best suited to that particular dog's requirements.

Corrective action is NOT always necessary and will cause some lower drive dogs to totally shut down. No one method will be successful for all dogs. You need a few tools in your tool box for this and most other training challenges. Do you disagree that the concept Nekhbet suggested won't work in the OP's situation???. Personally I think it will with adjustment to suit the requirements as I mentioned. Naturally the corrective force would be differently applied to the OP's dogs than it would be from the same misbehaviour from a working line GSD or Belgian Malinios which a good trainer will easily determine the necessary level of correction required.

I have always found that training methods offered by trainers experienced in high drive physically powerful breeds will have learned the best methods of loose leash walking and leash behaviour simply as the window to train and control these dog types effectively is extremely narrow. Get it wrong with powerful leash pullers of high drive, the handler ends up flat on their face, where smaller less powerful breeds can be more easily managed and for the handler be far less physically challenging. IMHO, if a training method works with a high drive powerful breed, it will work even better when adjusted to suit a smaller less driven breed using the same concept. Head halters, harnesses may work with some dogs to better manage the behavior, but to train the dog, some corrective action is needed and I totally support the advice that Nekhbet has provided above

Both ours chew up Sentinal Spectrum with no problems???

The Lab including the Golden Retriever and others were originally cross breeds to achieve a working purpose. They were not created in the same concept as the puppy farmers Oodle we have today???.

APBTS are a restricted breed which must be muzzled in public. Add insurance/liability issues and you might have more sympathy for their position. APBTs and ASTs are NOT the same breed in the eyes of the law. Of course if you have no papers to prove your dog is an AST, you're in a world of hurt. I'd suggest these people talk to their council and arrange a temperament test. If you need a piece of paper to tell the difference, that says it all. If everything hinges on a piece of paper, it's not difficult to arrange an adequate piece of paper. We are only dealing with box tickers anyway

Bans or No bans, the APBT will always be around and those who love them will always own them. That sort of comment does your cause no favours either. Those with influence and those who make the decisions care very little for talk like that. Once again i here what your saying, But its just reality, do you really think the APBT will become extinct because there is a ban on them? I think that in time, the only bull breeds that you will be able to own without restriction, will be those with ANKC papers. That is what the APBT supporters should be working on IMO. If the authorities want papers, it's not hard to organise papered breedings to satisfy the requirement.

Off leash reliability other than trial type obedience is not tested on a daily basis as it used to be years ago before the multitude of dog laws were put into place. People used to walk to the shops more etc, as transport and cars were not that plentiful and the family pet would regularly accompany people in their daily routines tagging along without leashes. Koehler methods were adopted by many trainers and clubs in those days which worked towards unleashed obedience and the reliablity of the trained dogs was fantastic. Things are far different now and the training methods are not tested the way they used to be in general daily unleashed obedience to base a comparison really. I will never forget a black Labrador that used to be sent to the primary school a few streets away to pick up the kids in the afternoon 20 years ago dogs involved in motor vehicle accidents were a common thing. My boss has been a Vet for 30 years and 20 years ago dogs HBC were his bread and butter money, they were brought in every single day. Pinning and plating fractured legs were done every week. There were many dogs off lead for sure, in the past, but their obedience was tested by their ability to stay off the road and I dare say a large percentage of them did not pass the test. That's the reason some people trained their dogs in the no leash era's of the past and voice control was the ultimate back then and is what the good trainers worked at.

Off leash reliability other than trial type obedience is not tested on a daily basis as it used to be years ago before the multitude of dog laws were put into place. People used to walk to the shops more etc, as transport and cars were not that plentiful and the family pet would regularly accompany people in their daily routines tagging along without leashes. Koehler methods were adopted by many trainers and clubs in those days which worked towards unleashed obedience and the reliablity of the trained dogs was fantastic. Things are far different now and the training methods are not tested the way they used to be in general daily unleashed obedience to base a comparison really. I will never forget a black Labrador that used to be sent to the primary school a few streets away to pick up the kids in the afternoon

We have a family up the street from us with two Golden Retriever cross Standard Poodles that they call Groodles and paid a lot of money for, which are "papered pedigree" dogs they told us :D The most annoying thing is these people actually believe the "Groodle" is a breed and when trying to correct their belief with some education and facts..........geez, that get defensive and narky about it She is going to show me the "papers" from the breeder...........I can't wait to see them and see exactly what these cross bred breeders are passing off as pedigree papers What I distinctively dislike about these "Groodles" especially, is that none I have seen look the same. Some have a distinctive Retriever head, some look like a Standard Poodle but in a Retriever body shape and size.......their looks are all over the place with exaggerated differences way beyond that of any pure bred consistancy. A Standard Poodle and Golden Retriever look the same as do most pure breeds with minor differences in coat, colour etc, but cannot be mistaken as to what breed they are. IMHO, the massive variations in appearance tells me that the "Groodle" is no way near consistant enough to even think about creating it's own breed. I think to acknowledge these designer breeds as anything other than a cross bred mut which is exactly what they are, is an absolute joke

The GSD was greatly demonised. In country areas it was banned because of the fear of matings with dingoes (which did in fact happen) creating super sheep killers, but also because it was feared that the GSD itself would kill sheep. The ban on GSD was a ban on importation, and a shire by shire ban on ownership of the dogs. I don't believe there was any restrictions on owning them in metropolitan areas, but no, they were not treated as badly as APBT was. GSD were believed by the public to be very savage. Banning schutzhund in Aust may seem like a very nearsighted decision to devotees, but in fact, it does help keep the breeds traditionally involved from charges of "dangerous, savage". Any dog which attacks may be labelled a pit bull, and usually is. I notice not as often now the bans are securely in place. Whilst the bans were being enacted, every dog which bit anyone or anything, was labelled a "pitbull", even if it was 10cm tall and black. It seems to me the reason why more and different breeds are being named in dog attacks, is so that further bans can be enacted in the future When Mrs Stringer was attacked and killed in Toowoomba Q, the headline should have read 'LABRADOR CROSS KILLS WOMAN' - NOT 'pitbull' etc. sandgrubber The pitbull was chosen for intial breed specific bans because it is not supported by FCI, ANKC, or AKC. It was numerically small, and it had a history which leant towards demonising by the media. Because it was numberically smaller than the rottweiler, there would not be the protests from the public, owners, etc. there would have been if the rottweiler had been chosen Jed, Schutzhund isn't banned in Australia at all, only in Victoria which in time will be hopefully overturned. In fact it's not Schutzhund titled GSD's that bite people, it's the non titled non tested breeding practices creating faulty temperament GSD's that appear on the bite statistics. Fear biting nerve bag GSD's who can't determine the difference between friend and foe are the GSD's who attack and bite people, not GSD's of sound temperament and nerve that Schutzhund testing confirms. I can't recall how many kids, there has been so many that have referred to my GSD as a "police dog", and most people are fully aware that GSD's are working dogs of a guardian breed and can be trained in protection. You could hardly say that banning Schutzhund removes the stigma of visciousness from the breed when every police K9 unit has them along with every second K9 security officer seen on the street??? Only the best of temperaments with the highest proven and tested obedience levels in Schutzhund get near a bite sleeve. You can't roll up to a Schutzhund club with any mouldy old GSD to do bite work for using to attack people, and the public including you Jed who know nothing about Schutzhund should learn about the sport before passing silly judgements :cool:

Apart from Koehler's behavioral correction processes which were blatently stupid, I have always thought his leash training methods were not too bad when following his system from the beginning. I have seen the result of many dogs trained in Koehler methods with magical off leash obedience :D Straight out of Koehlers book Longcoat :cool: I remember back in the 70's Jeff, leashing a dog was a statement that said "I am not a good dog trainer". Being able to throw your leash away was an admirable mark of competence in those days before laws made leashing compulsory. It would be interesting to see today going back to the no leash competency perception of yesterday, how modern training methods measure up against the Koehler methods for ultimate off leash reliability???. We can train some super off leash routines, but can we still park our dog outside the pub in the main street of town on a Friday night for a couple of hours without a leash, and the dog still be sitting in the same place when we come out after commanding a stay???.

Apart from Koehler's behavioral correction processes which were blatently stupid, I have always thought his leash training methods were not too bad when following his system from the beginning. I have seen the result of many dogs trained in Koehler methods with magical off leash obedience

Shouldn't the person who told the parents that be responsible, not the dog's owner who wasn't on the premises or in control of the dog at the time of the incident???. I would think the owner of the business is still responsible for what goes on there, even if they are not on the premises at the time. The person who said the dog was safe was an employee. I may be wrong but aren't employers/business owners responsible for their employees? If the dog goes with the premises, who ever is responsible for the premises/business in the owners absence should be responsible for the dog. Someone must have been incharge or in a better position than the owner to have changed the outcome???.

Go for it . . . or zinc, which will make him/her look worse. But don't try for Crufts Zinc on the nose should be ok for an Aussie entry on the slip,slop,slap concept :D

What are your council laws regarding dogs and trespassers???. In SA, dogs are exempt from prosecution for reacting against intruders and trespassers on your property???.

My Golden Retriever needs some nose paint

Done also

Does anyone know of any groups in Victoria fighting the legislation against Schutzhund???