Donegal

I believe that it was blackmagic dismissing the topic as pointless not poodlefan ... I personally always find these topics interesting. I was referring to both posts really, probably should have highlighted Poodlefan's too. I think these topics are good to hear so many different views and experiences, I like them ;)

Totally agree with this post. also wanted to add that I think these topics are a bit pointless. Why are these topics a bit pointless, so that newbies can remain totally in the dark???. Who has to consider the owners personality Poodlefan, who is responsible for that consideration, who undertakes that role when a newbie is considering to get a dog???

The first dog of my own was a Golden Retriever, a breed that I wanted because I loved the look of them and thought they were a delux version of the Labrador with their beautiful wavy coat and found one in a petshop as a newbie knowing no better at the time. He was supposed to be a pure breed GR, looked like one except he was a little taller and leaner than the average Golden male???. He was a great dog who taught me heaps, how to train a dog, manage a dog and how to raise a puppy from my own mistakes too. He lived healthily to 15 years old. My next and present dog is pure breed registered Amstaff male, who was better than my Golden as a puppy, but due to raising him more effectively from my previous experience I was able to mould him more easily. My Amstaff presented a new challenge developing dog aggression at 8 or 9 months old which is a behaviour I didn't have to contend with or evern think about with my GR who was friendly towards everyone and everything, so I was very much back in the newbie scene with this dog aggression I had no experience in handling and training better behaviour. What I wouldn't recommend to a newbie is a breed that could have a predisposition for aggression or bloodlines in those breeds that do, like working line German Shepherds from security backgrounds or Bull breed lines that have those tendencies. Now that I have learned a lot of how to deal with and indentify the early onset of aggressive behaviour and how to reshape that before it gets out of hand which happened to me, I could own a working line dog now more effectively I think, but aggression is devistating and really hard to live with having no experience how to shape and manage it. I met up with a few people in my shoes with GSD's, a Rotty and a couple of Staffords that were like my boy who were battling the same situation. But I found being inexpereinced, that no naughtiness and bad behaviour is as hard to cope with as aggression is and I really shudder when newbies say they are looking at a GSD litter for example because their ancestors were police dogs or something like that From my experience, anything remotely bred that could have aggression in their genetics for a newbie is best avoided until they gain some experience.

My mum taught me never to approach, pat or interfere with a strange dog unless the dogs owner was present and you asked them if you could. The girl's mother should be locked in the pound for a few days and taught some basic animal safety. There is no way my mum would have let me do that at any age let alone 12

Yes, EXACTLY how I felt, and are pretty normal feelings for the average person I think.

You don't want to come over as a cocky cow and peeve the trainer/behaviourist off when you are requiring their help. Unless it's something obviously dopy, as the consumer, you don't know. You don't tend to call in a professional and tell them how to do their job kind of thing

I did complain that what we were doing wasn't really helping, but they told me we had to get this bit right and it takes time and blamed the severity of the situation on me for not hiring a behaviourist early enough and allowing my dogs behaviour to escalate. Ok, I don't know and I can't really argue about it, I have hired a behaviourist because I don't know how to deal with the problem and I thought my role is best to shut up and listen and trust that they know what they are talking about, even though they were idiots in the end, I didn't know that either. Nekhbet, I agree with your thoughts on this, but when they bulldust to you, you can't really argue as the inexperienced party against a supposed professional and you take their advice as being correct

Thanks guys for so much input into my thread, there has been some really good perspectives. I do hold a bit of resentment towards the 3 behaviourists I hired to help me with my Amstaffs dog aggression which went for 10 months and $1050 I spent all up for little improvement. Admittedly, 2 were franchise behaviourists and I didn't really know much about them other than websites and what they told me which sounded good at the time, but I also didn't know many people who recommend anyone either. The last one told me that I just had to really keep my boy away from other dogs and avoid them as his brain is now training saturated and that's the best he will be???. My gripe was that I mentioned prong collars and E collars to all 3 after doing my own research and they all spewed over it saying they were cruel training tools and it would agitate his aggression and make him worse, so I am trying what they told me clicker in one hand, treat bag which worked when no dogs were present, but if he saw a dog, he would ignore everything. In the end, a friend told me about this K9 trainer, he wasn't a behaviourist and I booked an appointment and we simply went for a walk. He told me that his leash manners were not that good, he did pull and dart around a bit sniffing etc and he recommended we try him on a prong collar which we did. It was an awful looking thing but he ensured me that the prong won't hurt him and off we went for a walk again. Within minutes, my dog was heaps better on the leash, it was magical, I was wrapped totally, and after a couple of session and the homework he gave me, we ventured to seeing dogs. When my boy focused on another dog, he got a "leave it" command and slight correction which developed as we got closer to other dogs, well to cut a long story short, I use only a martingale collar now and he does not react to other dogs at all. I wouldn't take him to a dog park and let him loose or have dogs jump at him, but I can walk him anywhere, sit and drop him and talk to people with other dogs on leash no problems. Previously, he was a nightmare, and would almost rip my arm out of it's socket and had to avoid other dogs like the plague. What I felt was the cause of the behaviourist problems, is that they refused to even think about aversive tools as they all said that is not the best way to train a dog, but the K9 trainer said it was the only way to train my dog and his methods worked a treat and the others failed. I am not saying that every dog needs a prong collar, but if these behaviourists used all the tools available and were not hung up so much on positive methods only, I am sure they too could have trained my dog properly also. From my perspective now, I would never ever use or recommend a trainer who only does positive reward based training as IMHO, they provide half the tools and knowledge to train selected types of dogs only, not any dog as I think a good trainer should be able to do. Thanks Lisa

Can someone tell me what a Dog Behaviourist actually is???. The title appears as a higher qualification than a Dog Trainer, but from what I have researched there is no formal qualification for either, so it seems like anyone can open a business and call themselves a trainer/behaviourist, is that correct???.

If you read Steve's post on how to raise a pup, it is not unlike what Susan G says, any good trainer knows this stuff. Good dog trainers are open minded, they put in the hard yards with pups, building motivation and drive, it's not that hard, no matter what breed. It's sad you wont ever get to chat to SG personally, you would be very suprised and inspired. But how is Susan garrett a good open minded trainer when she is involved in action groups condemning prong collars and correction type training. Steve is an open minded trainer, he even sells prong collars, there is a big difference. Susan Garrett peddles her own methods and is anti everything apart from her own techniques, I just googled her and read about her and she is very closed minded in training methods big time!!!!. She even blogs about humane stuff and how she doesn't do correction training and critisizes trainers who do. What Chevy said she was about is true, so what's the big deal??

Technically I am off topic, sorry you are right, but your response to me doesn't answer vickie's question either, so what's the purpose of your post Adian2 other than to try and make me look dumb?? I was dumb listening to motivational trainers and what 55chevy is getting at, if the likes of Susan Garrett had her way, no correction type training would exist, so what happens then to my dog with dog agro, he gets put to sleep then.

I have mentioned this before with my dog that after three motivational trainers who won't do corrections and say how cruel it is couldn't fix my dogs behavior, they were useless and cost me a lot of money and time trying. The last trainer could see straight up my dog needed some corrections and completely sorted out his dog agro in two sessions. How many motivational trainers are you supposed to hire before one can show that their methods work on all dogs. From my experience, I would never hire a trainer again that bagged out prong collars and chokers as the three I had, didn't know what they were talking about and couldn't fix my dog at all. I understand how motivational training has its place and on some dogs and is really good, but on dogs like mine for his problems it didn't work, but they refused to try anything else because corrections etc didn't fit with their image, but too bad about my dog

I agree with what 55chevy says about political correctness. My previous trainer was like that, really got into bagging prong collars and that stuff and all the inhumane methods that she wont use, like to make out she was all for the best interests of the dog. She went on for an hour about her humane methods before she even looked at my dog and I can vouch first hand that there are trainers out there that are more concerned about methods than thay are about training a dog. I was only interested in knowing if she could fix the dog agro he had

Let's imagine that this is an extreme dog (it isn't, or the handler wouldn't have got away with what he was doing), and that this is his last chance to stay on earth. The simple fact is that it isn't working. Repeated punishment that doesn't work is abuse. How do you know "it's not working" when no one really knows what behavior they are trying to fix. The dog didn't attack the handler, so perhaps the next level of arousal previously was attacking the handler then in that case, it may have worked???. Although it looks bad, I would like to think that police dog training was professional enough to use those methods for a reason assuming that the trainers do the job for a living???

That would depend on numerous factors, Donegal. How the dog was trained in the first place (too much too fast ???); what and how much the dog receives by way of drive satisfaction and so on. If the historical training can be faulted, then IMO that needs to be re-addressed first, before addressing the actual mouthing which does seem to be re-direction out of frustration. There is so much assumption in the watching of that video footage, but I saw a dog that was not balanced and I do strongly suspect that to be the result of training fault. So rather than singling out the mouthing, I'd be inclined to back up with the training a bit. Making sure the dog received drive satisfaction and making sure the dog knew the rules of the game to achieve drive satisfaction would be one of the things I'd like to investigate. If all checked out and/or was re-addressed and fixed, but the re-direction continued, I'd probably use any one of "correct" and/or "quit the dog". This would depend on the dog and how it responded to one or the other. Don't know if Jeff would agree with me and he does have far more experience than I in the training of protection work (of which my experience is fairly close to nothing other than observation and a smidge of practical), so my apologies to him for stepping in here as I see your question, Donegal, was addressed to him. Great post Erny. I have no problem with you stepping in. I would do exactly as you have said. Redirected aggression occurs because a dog is over stimulated, you need to take the training process back to step one and slowly build the dogs confidence in working around the trigger. The handler should not be attempting to undertake training with the dog in such an aroused state. I would have ended the training session with the dog after it first mouthed my arm. ETA: The problem is the handler lacks the experience, knowledge and competence in completing an effective correction / alpha roll to the dog. The trainer who is instructing the handler has put him in a dangerous situation with a dog that is known to redirect its aggression. This is not a smart training choice and not one I would use on a dog in such a high state of arousal. Thanks Jeff and Erny. So basically when a dog is behaving in that manner it could be the result of training errors along the way and the correct way to deal with it is not correcting the symptom (mouthing) but retraining earlier stages that have not been done effectively. So really, the dog in the video is not trained properly up to the right level for the work that the guys need from him???

You can see the dog mouth the handlers arm in the first 4 seconds of the video. It is something that can be fixed quite easily and by using a lot less effort than what the handler is using / being told to use. Saying perhaps that dog is prone to turning back on the handler and biting him when the dog gets ramped up, the other guy in the video instructing says "hold him down, don't let him win", so it looks like an alpha roll type thing to teach the dog that attacking the handler will result in the dog being overpowered and will loose the battle. So in those circumstances as everyone is saying what's happening in the video is wrong, then how do you fix it "easily" Jeff, can you give us some insight how the situation should be handled correctly???

I don't know why the police would need a dog to be overly violent considering they have a gun on their hips to protect themselves, It's not that the dog should be their ultimate weapon of defence.

I can't imagine why in any circumstance it would be desirable to have a working dog that feared the handler. It may be desirable if the dog has a record of attacking the handler perhaps. What was explained to me once, is that attack trained dogs are taught to fear nothing and react aggressively to physical challenge, but it's not desirable obviously if the dog can go into a full on handler attack for some reason??? I was told that sometimes when a dog doesn't mind having a go at the handler, teaching the dog that if attacking the handler it comes off second best is necessary in some circumstances. I don't know what the accepted practice is to treat handler aggression, but teaching the dog it can't beat the handler in a fight makes sense I guess???

It does look pretty extreme training, but perhaps it's a pretty extreme dog that requires heavy correction and domination by the handler. It's obviously attacked trained being a police dog I would imagine, maybe it has been attacking the handler getting certain commands wrong or something like that, and the individual dog needs that type of training to straighten it out???. I don't think all dogs are the same or have identical traits in all cases to say that because other like police dogs have been trained successfully without harsh treatment, that the dog in the video can be trained without it too. A KNPV trainer who specialises in working Malinois and Dutch Shepherds told me once that some temperaments and the level of attack training, the dog unless fearing the handler is not a safe working prospect and some will apparantly attack the handler when ramped up in aggression in some circumstances and perhaps the dog in the video is one of them???. I don't think any of us unless knowing the circumstances with that dog and what is trying to be achieved by the training could totally say that the training is wrong, could we, I don't know???

I think dog registration applies to keeping dogs within a council area, so I don't think if you haven't got a fixed address that an unregistered dog passing through places breaches any laws as such unless perhaps some regions require all dogs to be registered somewhere. As a last resort, I guess if questioned about your dog's registration somewhere, you could say you have just got the dog and in the process of sorting it out to be within the couple of weeks grace period for registering a new dog???

Seems that every time someone mentions anything remotely aversive in training methods from Cesar Milan to E collars, people come on here with critical comments about how dogs shouldn't be put through these type of training measures and tools. There are plenty of people with theories and not using any aversive methods to train dogs is just another theory, but the thing that concerns me with theories, some people get too wrapped up with theories and certain training methods that when a dog doesn't respond to their theories and methods, the dog is the one that suffers in the long term. I have been caught on the receiving end with trainers who stuck with and swear by one method to treat dog aggression that didn't work on my dog and blind Freddy could see it's not working but the trainers I had couldn't or didn't want to. I mentioned things like prong collars and that type of stuff as a suggestion and got a shpiel about cruelty to the dog and all that mumbo, but when I hired which in my opinion was a good trainer in the end who could assess my dog's behaviour properly and wasn't hooked up on using only particular methods, we had some huge immediate progress. My dog is great now and has no adverse reactions from having corrections to train out his dog agro, he's is calm around other dogs and behaves exactly as I need from him. Yes, he did cop a few corrections in the process, but really who cares when now he is not dog agro anymore and is a safe reliable pet. I commend my trainer who did what he had to do to fix MY dog's behaviour and in comparison to the treat and clicker training we had done previously to fix his behaviour that didn't work, he no doubt needed another approach the way I see it. I don't see either that all dogs are created equal in their ability to be trained. A friend of mine has a working line German Shepherd that has just got natural focus which he had from a puppy and makes my Amstaff look like a dumb bum in comparison. I don't think every GSD is as focused as my friend's dog is, but this particular dog is just easy to train with minimal effort at least compared with mine. What I am saying is that dogs all have different needs and qualities and their own individuality and I don't think any particular methods work on every dog and people and trainers who think so for my liking have a too narrow vison to train all types of dogs.

An dog with papers has his "passport". Not everyone wants a purebred dog. A lot of people buy x bred dogs not intending to buy a pitbull, and probably not buying a pitbull. The dog grows up, is seen by an ACO and despite never having done anything wrong, and despite not being a pitbull, is mislabelled by the ACO and euthanised. Yep, there are still people breeding and people buying pitbulls - as there as people avoiding every law ever made about everything. However, a lot of people are caused grief when there should be no grief. Fact is, there is no way to identify a pitbull, and laws which targetted bad dogs instead of breeds would be more effective, and easier to police. I know the situation isn't a good one and is based upon complete stupidity I think, but regardless, if it's law we need to be careful. I have a friend who recently purchased an APBT in our council and has registered her as a Staffy X and although I tried hard to convince her to buy a registered Amstaff, she thinks that having a Staffy X council reg will protect the dog from being declared. We can keep APBT's under our council regs, but they must be declared as dangerous dogs with restrictions in place which to me isn't worth the drama of owning, hiding and lying about what what your dog is to avoid prosecution. My friend actually wanted a Pitbull and wasn't a situation where she bought a puppy of unknown heritage that grew up to have Pitbull resemblence as happened to some like in QLD. I am talking about what my friend has done which in the circumstances as I told her, I think she's mad to do what she did???.

Don't people have the right to own whatever breed they choose? it's the law that causes all the dramas and mainly to law obiding citizens and family pets. I don't agree with the legislation but it's like saying that the stretch of road I am on should be 80kmph not 60kmph so it's my right to do 80 and shouldn't get booked. I love Pitbulls but I would never own one whilst these laws exist where I could be subject to loosing my dog or my dog being subject to harsh living conditions which led me to buying an Amstaff which most people think is a Pitbull anyway, but it's a legal one. To me, it doesn't make sense to put yourself and your dog in a vulnerable position owning restricted breeds and knowing they are legislated against when you can buy an Amstaff and not have to worry about it or whinge about it when getting caught with a restricted breed. I don't see that owning restricted breeds or cross breeds that bare similarities to restricted breeds that can't be indentified properly on the basis that we should have the right to own them does anything positive to fix the legislation for the better and just leaves yourself and dog open to potential heartache. It was such a huge relief to me when my dog was suspected as an undeclared Pitbull to produce his papers which dtermines his breed as an Amstaff and the ranger walked away. I can so imagine the devistation I would feel if the ranger had of wanted to seize my dog.

Our council legislation requires Pitbull's to be registered as dangerous dogs, wear a muzzle in public places and have a specific enclosure to keep them in at home. I had a visit from the rangers once, as someone dobbed me in for not having my dog muzzled at a park, but when showing my pedigree papers indentifying my dog as an Amstaff, the ranger apologised for the inconvenience and left with no dramas. Had I not been able to identify my dog's breed, if he was a Pitbull or cross breed of Pitbull resemblence, I would have suffered some problems, but what I don't understand considering Pitbull type dogs as the legislation calls them fall under restricted and dangerous dog categories in most legislation, why people continue to buy dogs of Pitbull type that they can't identify when doing so can cause so many dramas for the owner and the dog

Welcome to the forum, Donegal. Nice first post. Your sentiments echo exactly those of at least one other current member. And from SA too! Funny. There are a lot of people who use corrections without using them like Cesar does. There's more option in training than using a clicker (or food and cuddles) and applying corrections like Cesar does. So what does it matter if it's done in Cesar style or not when the dog is behaving the way you want it to?????. All I am saying is that I had three different trainers use clicker and treats on my dog to cure his dog agro and the 4th trainer looked to be using a Cesar like approach and issued corrections when the dog focused on another dog. We trained with the other methods for 14 months and my dog was heaps better in general obedience, but it didn't stop the dog agro where my last trainer did stop it and got him pretty good in 3 weeks, like 6 sessions later he is awesomly improved over what had happened over 14 months. There maybe other options, but I didn't have that opportunity and really I didn't care as long as someone could provide me with a solution.