itsadogslife

You know the first thing that struck about this dog was the value of a 'stay' command. Especially one that worked towards an 'out of sight' stay command. The stay command requires the dog learn responsibility for his own actions without the owner being present. Personally, I would invest in a structured obedience course immediately. As for the vet who proscribed drugs as the first course of action I would seek another vet.

I don't use long lines. Instead get some parachute cord, use whatever length is appropriate for your dog. Tie knots along the cord so that you can stand on the cord to stop him running away. Don't try to pick the cord up unless you have your foot on it, or better yet use a glove to prevent rope burn. He will know he has the cord on him, however what he doesn't know is how long the cord is. When his recall becomes reliable (= !00%) shorten the line about a foot or two each week. Don't shorten the line if he hasn't been 100% reliable that week. Over time you will eventually have no cord left. As I said, he will know the cord is attached - what he doesn't know is how the long the cord is, as you reduce the line he has no way of knowing, hence he will continue to behave as if it is the same length as when you first put it on him. There are other methods as others will no doubt suggest, obviously work on the recall using rewards and whatever floats his boat. good luck

My advice would be to seek the help of a professional dog trainer. Nothing will change you from a novice to a more experienced dog handler quicker than professional help. The dog as you have said is middle aged, this behavior has more than likely been reinforced over a number of years. It is quite possibly why he (or she) ended up in rescue in the first place. Get professional help now and you will be much better placed to handle similar problems in the future.

I agree. So long as your methods (or method) is based on practice and experience rather than 'principle' then I see no problem with having many methods or just one. So long as you are getting good results it should not matter.

Doing the training yourself is the best way (with the help of a professional). If not, your best bet might be to email Steve at K9pro and ask if he has any recommendations.

Some of us have also heard quite a few horror stories of dog problems being exacerbated or new problems being created due to inappropriate advice being given by "qualified behaviorists". As for his qualifications he has stated that he has over 25 years experience training dogs. Now whilst that would not be enough in itself for me to pay for his services it would be enough for me to give him a ring and enquire as to his methods. Personally I would not trust or go near anyone with a degree unless further information was provided as to their experience working dogs.

From 1902: just a reminder that there's nothing really new under the sun -

All of this is good stuff. But I don't see why you can't do all of this and have the dog wearing a long line at the same time. For those of you that are experienced and good at 'reading' your dog the long line will never need to be used. For those less experienced and less skilled at reading their dog, the long line offers security and insures the dog isn't given practice at ignoring commands. By all means encourage the dog to come without having to use the long line, let it drag along the ground, but if not, it is always there as extra insurance to reinforce the come command.

Put a long line on the dog. Call the dog, if it comes reward, if it doesn't come, then use the long line to guide the dog towards you and then reward.

Shouldn't laugh, but I find this hilarious... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dsb5HH8m24Y&feature=player_embedded

I see you are leaving a great deal out of your description of Koehler’s method for treating seperation anxiety. Is that because you one of those dog trainer’s “who only has his own opinions and observations to go by and only shares that which they would want you to know?” I asked you a specific question. I asked whether you “can you also show me the research that shows learned helplessness to be a widespread outcome of dog trainers interventions”. Again, I asked whether you could “direct me to research which shows widespread misdiagnoses amongst dog trainers.” I did not ask whether there is any research showing the typical pet owner to be less than competent. Yet the study does mention similar research which studied more formal training under the supervision of dog training professionals. This research showed in one study no relationship between obedience training and problematic behavior, whilst the other showed a decrease in problematic behavior after training. Both those studies used professional dog trainers – the subject of the question I asked – but which you instead provide a couple of studies pertaining to the average dog owner? I have already read and commented on that article. I find it extremely weak at best. And again, you are referring me to a study of typical pet owners. Yet to my claim that dog trainers had been successfully treating these problems without the use of drugs, you gave a very specific response that it was false. The subject was about the expertise of experienced dog trainers. Directing me to studies done with average pet owners and then suggesting that such studies are relevent to the competence of experienced dog trainers is an extremely long bow to draw.

Okay, for the sake of argument I will accept this for now. Can you please direct me to research which shows widespread misdiagnoses amongst dog trainers. Can you also show me the research that shows learned helplessness to be a widespread outcome of dog trainers interventions.

I have a tenfold increase in the prescribing of drugs. What kind of hands on working experience with dogs is required before someone with a degree in behavioral science opens up a practice treating dog problems? Is any kind of hands on experience required at all? You seem to think that reading a manual on how to ride a bike is the same thing as being able to ride a bike. The fact that these problems have been treated successfully by experience trainers for years without the use of drugs. Or are you suggesting that the ten-fold increase in drug use is the consequence of a ten-fold increase in biological, neurological problems in dogs? Or are suggesting to me that experienced dog trainers were unable to diagnose anxiety until behaviorists enter the picture? Yes, that is correct. Although I will concede that her qualifications are far more meaningful than the requirements expected from certain dog training franchises. I would probably run even faster in the opposite direction from certain dog trainers. Nonetheless, if I should ever need to seek help with a dog problem it is the CV of someone like Mark Singer that impresses me far more than Dr Seksel’s as impressive as her achievements are. It’s just not the kind of experience I am looking for when I have a dog problem. Who says? Scientists? Now of course scientists could never be self-decieved as to nature of what they are doing could they? They could never be biased in the way in which they conduct their research could they? One only has to pursue the research done on ecollars to see how much bias is inherent in the majority of these studies to realise that the science of behaviorism is as much captive to the normal human biases as the rest of us. Science is a human practice conducted by real people in the real world. The idea that scientists are less subject to the kind self-deceptions as the rest of us, is I find, rather naïve.

http://caninetraining.com.au/articles-on-dog-behaviour/marks-say/109-dogs-and-medication-for-behaviour-problems.html Refer to the above. If Mark Singer advised me that my dog need medication I would take his advice. I am not opposed to using drugs to treat problems. I am however entirely skeptical of behaviorists who seem not only comfortable with a ten-fold increase in the use of drugs but appear to me to think their use of drugs recommends their services. I would gladly take my dog to someone like Mark Singer - I wouldn't go near a behaviorist.

Yep, the frequency of new human disorders are on about par with the frequency of psychologists. The more psychologists you have the more human disorders are discovered. Some of us are a more than a little skeptical of the increasing medicalization of human life.

Or to the environment? Ruling out biology would entail me saying something like, any and all behavioral problems can be solved by training. As I don't say that, I haven't ruled out the role biology plays. Nor do I rule out the benefits of medication where necessary. I don't know what you mean by this question. Trainers have been rehabilitating problem dogs for years, everything from anxiety to severe aggression without the use of drugs. I would have a lot more confidence in behaviorists if part of their training involved extensive experience working with dog trainers specializing in rehabilitation of problem dogs. But of course, this will never happen. Not the least for the reason that behaviorists such Dr O'Shea don't even recognize the work done by trainers as pertaining to the mental health of dogs. Or perhaps behaviorists might ponder the work of trainers who have rehabilitated thousands of dogs without ever using drugs. Perhaps if there was a genuine meeting of minds on this, between behaviorists and trainers I would be far more confident in the ability of behaviorists.

I am sure that is true. But as I never claimed that all and any problems can be solved by training I am uncertain of your point. After all, even highly experienced trainers have on the rare occasions recommended dogs be pts. But if said trainers were telling me that in the last ten years they had been finding a ten-fold increase in dogs that they couldn't rehabilitate without drugs or being pts, I would certainly seek another trainer.

On the contrary Aidan, as her CV clearly demonstrates she has devoted her life to gaining academic degrees, writing academic papers and giving papers at academic conferences all over the world. Her reputation as a veterninary behaviorist is based on her academic achievements. No doubt, she has ‘treated’ many dogs. No doubt she has an abiding interest and concern for dogs. But if as you suggest, her reputation is based on her success with working with dogs, one might expect that dog trainers with vast experience in rehabilitating difficult dogs would likewise be feted amongst behavorists for their work. Instead, according to Dr Andrew O'Shea, incoming president of the behavioural group of the Australian Veterinary Association - “Twenty years ago there was not a single person in Australia who treated mental health in animals”. Of course, dog trainers don’t call it ‘treating mental health problems’, they simply call it training. The deep disconnect between what behaviorist do and what they think dog trainers do is astounding. It’s like a behaviourist thinking that the failure to educate a child has nothing to do with the social and psychological problems the child is now experiencing. No, it isn’t a different argument. The lack of leadership, training and exercise is a cultural problem. And yes, it has existed long before behaviorists came on the scene. The cultural problem is not medication. Medication is simply the means in which we use to treat the symptom rather than the underlying cause. From the original article: If a dog trainer said to me that in the last ten years her prescribing drugs had increased ten-fold in treating problem behaviors in dogs I would start running in the opposite direction. You seem to be comfortable with this development, I am not.

I don't know, but having read her biography http://www.sabs.com.au/staff_profiles.htm I can't see what I would call considerable hands on working experience with dogs. The amount of dogs abandoned to shelters and pounds suggests that lack of proper leadership, training and exercise happens far too often. I have heard too many stories of dogs who have not responded to drugs or the treatment of behaviorists and whom have subsequently been fortunate enough to find a decent trainer who has solved the problem without recourse to drugs to have much faith in behaviorists. Mind you, there are plenty of poor trainers out there as well.

A large body of research also informs the medical profession, but as I live with a doctor I know that drugs are too often not prescribed in what you might call an informed manner. With doctors it is often simply easier to proscribe than having to deal with highly unpleasant, aggressive patients etc. The high (and increasing) rate of drugs prescribed to dogs is a cultural problem, not a medical problem. I would have much more faith in veterinary behaviorists ability to properly diagnose behavioral problems if said vets also had considerable training experience. But then I suspect many dog owners have neither the time or inclination to train. Drugs provide a very easy option. And of course, provide no harm to the pockets of behaviorists.

mmm, article reminds me why I would never take my dog to a behaviorist.

I'll take your word for it. Yea, I think it's madness too.

Yes, but it may take away some of the reasons why neighbors kill other people's dog, it may take away some of reasons why people abandon their dogs to pounds and so forth. All this is true, but we don't live in a perfect world. I don't believe that we should take away or remove tools and/or methods that can help the dog keep its home and family. These things may not be ideal, but they are still far better than being poisoned by the neighbors, abandoned to the pound or pts.

Well, for one they're illegal to use in NSW (Which drives me insane but that's the way it is). K9Pro sells bark collars. K9Pro is in NSW. There maybe restrictions on its use in NSW but I think those restrictions can be got around. If you need one I would ask K9Pro, you can find him here: http://www.k9pro.com.au/

Don't know if this is any help to you, but I have heard trainers say that teaching a dog to bark on command is often effective in stopping unwanted barking. I have also heard it said that teaching a dog to jump on command is often likewise effective in stopping dogs from jumping fences.