Salukifan

It's not a suggestion I'd follow before seeking professional advice. Sadly, you don't "cure" resource guarding by increasing a dog's anxiety about keeping what it values. Interfering with food while the dog is eating can do that. There's also the possiblity that by extinguishing the growling, you've removed the dog's first warning that it's not comfortable with what's going on. What that can mean is that the dog goes straight to aggression when provoked without warning. Where potential aggression is involved, it is always best to seek qualified professional guidance. My personal recommendation while awaiting professional advice is to leave the dog alone while eating and crate it for meals if at all possible. Just because a dog might relax enough to allow owners to handle its food doesn't mean it will feel the same way about others. Visitors in a home during a dog's meal times are possible and its best for both dog and visitor safety to prevent issues over resources. Ditto goes for crating the dog while meals or snacks are served people in the home. It goes without saying that any dog that resource guards needs double the level of care around children.

Ok, so what are the confidence builders?? My addiction to show suits is one of mine. I certainly prepare the dog to look his best and I think its makes you look more 'professional' to be well turned out. I feel better in a nice outfit and I'm starting to favour skirt suits, at least in decent weather. The old "dress for success" principle in action. Dress to show pride in your dog and respect for the judge or the occasion. Having the right show "posse" I think also makes a difference. Being with people prepared to offer constructive criticism and who don't spend the day under little dark clouds of self pity for losses, jealousy or acrimony towards their fellow competitors helps. Negativity is contagious.

Glad to see you in here Trisven! I think there are definite advantages to cutting your teeth on competition before you are old and plagued by self doubt :laugh: There is no question that some handlers have a natural affinity for dogs. Natural talent however, only gets you so far. There are lots of competitors with talent (and money for that matter) that never reach the pinnacle of success. Hard work and practice gets you further up the ladder but your mind state does seem to make a huge difference too. I've got a book on the psychology of winning and one specifically about show handling. I"m about to get another. It seems a bit funny sometimes that you can put so much time and effort into showing and yet not really get your mind into the game too. I have a feeling that its what keeps some folk who've been showing for years without much success out of the winners circle. It's something I plan to remedy. I think its possible to be confident without being an @rsehole.

I am blessed with a dog that enjoys the ring and is very focussed on me - that makes him a pleasure to show. :) What I ask for, he gives. the talk was more about my attitude to my dogs, I think I was being a bit soft :D So what is your attitude to winning? That's what I'd really like to focus on. How do you get into that space and stay there?

I am blessed with a dog that enjoys the ring and is very focussed on me - that makes him a pleasure to show. :) What I ask for, he gives.

A comment by Sky Soaring Magpie on the weekend has got me pondering this. She noted (not in as many words) that I'm prone to negative self- talk and that I have a great dog and should aim higher. She's right. So I'm on a mission to improve my mental approach to show handling while continuing to work on my practical handling skills. I thought I'd start this thread to discuss what makes a successful show handler . One thing that's become readily apparent to me over the last few years is that it's as much about the psychology of how successful handlers approach their showing as it is about the quality of the dog on the lead. You can say that about any dog related pursuit I reckon. That doesn't necessarily equate to judges judging the wrong end of the lead but, a good show handler does radiate both competence and confidence. I know we have some absolutely gun handlers on this forum so hopefully they will contribute some insights into how they approach showing. It might also be useful for people to share their observations on the approach by the really successful handlers they've observe and to say what works for them. How do people prepare mentally for the ring? What are they thinking in the ring? I'm reading a sports psychology book recommended to be me by SSM and one of the first observations it makes is that you have to set a success goal and walk in there and absolutely go after it. That doesn't necessarily mean you set out every weekend thinking "I'm going to win best in show" but you do need to set a goal and work towards it. It could be as simple as "I'm going to absolutely nail stacking my dog today and have perfectly straight lines on my out and back". Another observation from the book as noted by SSM is that really successful people don't engage in negative talk about themselves OR THEIR COMPETITORS. That's a practice very common around the ring from my observation and one that I will admit to having indulged in from time to time. Personally I think it's one of the most negative aspects of the sport. For me it stops now. Any hoo.. hopefully this will generate some discussion on the subject.

Corvus: A fit Whippet would be able to maintain a brisk trot for hours. It's the sprinting that really knocks them up quickly - like a cheetah. I suppose humans aren't really built for bi-pedal endurance at higher paces. Most people can walk for hours without sustaining stress injury though. My road work pace for the younger dogs is a brisk walk for me and a working trot for the dogs. Darcy the poodle has no problem keeping up. The crumblies get more of a meander - I use it as my cooling down phase. :)

You have two possible reasons for this behaviour - physiological and psychological. I agree with those who suggest you have some bloodwork done to eliminate a thyroid issue as a possible cause. Your vet may have other suggestions for the cause, possibly from a nutritional perspective. If that doesn't turn up anything, then I'd see a qualified veterinary behaviourist to see what they might offer in the way of a solution. These conditions can be harmful to the dog. Ingesting non-food related objects is never good. Good luck getting to the bottom of it. It must be quite worrying.

You could say that about any small dog, purebred or not. It's not that difficult to find out about what health issues affect a particular breed. Google the breed name and health and up it comes. One website would be good though.

Maybe, but dog standards and pedigrees as we know them today really stem from 19th century thinking. This was a time when documenting history and scientific knowledge became really important. The pointer standard that this thread is about is interesting, because of the way it tries to rationally and objectively describe the dog and give it a score, unlike the old proverbial dog standards from an earlier era. When you think about who used dogs and what they were used for, it is likely that before this era most breed information was passed down verbally through the generations. Genetics was not understood well. There are examples of where modern historians have been able to construct some old pedigrees from their research, but I'm not sure that people actually kept records of their dog's lineage before the 19th century. Are there any primary sources of older pedigrees being kept for dogs? My guess is that for most breeds outside of companion dogs performance dictated which dogs were bred and which were not.

Sounds like a rather Eurocentric view of the world. Methinks the Saluki holds the honour of the first pedigree dog and those better versed in the breed can probably point to written accounts of the dogs that predate Christ. Then, of course, there is the well known description of the Greyhound, dating from the 15th Century ETA: Snap Greytmate!

On a hot day? Never. Dogs fry even with windows cracked. In winter? Personally I don't see the problem unless your dog cracks your packet of Clinkers, tries them all and spits your favourite pink ones all over the driver's seat. : Try driving for hours, stopping to go the loo and leaving your dogs anywhere else.

Tarope: Pardon me? I referred to research that links desexing to an increased incidence of Hemangiosarcoma. You joked about having a good laugh with your vet, suggesting I had said "desexing causes Hemangiosarcoma". In other words you both misintepreted what I'd said and rubbished the research. I have never suggested was an authority on the subject. I just pointed out the link. I appreciate that your experience with Hemangiosarcoma is both personal and painful so I'll stay out of this from here on in.

Well, your vet can read the veterinary research published in veterinary journals that has discusses an increased incidence of Hemangiosarcoma in desexed animals and conclude that hormones have a role in preventing its occurence. That's not the same as "desexing causes Hemangiosarcoma". Laugh it up but the science is out there for those who care to look for it.

Word of caution. I would not leave a cool coat on an unsupervised dog.

You know I wonder if anyone ever considers that some health issues are LESS common in some breeds than in the canine population generally. I'd love to see more stats collected about disease and health issue incidence generally. Vasectomy or tubal ligation would still be viable options for GSDs where breeding was not desired.

You sound like you did your research & found that there's 'a cancer common in GSDS'. Seems you weighed up element of risk in getting a GSD? Did you ask the breeder if it occurred in the depth & breadth of your pup's background? I expect there's no genetic test for the cancer you're talking about? There's no magic bullet genetic tests for most human conditions either. There's also a complex interaction between a certain mutation.... what other mutations exist... & the environment. So someone can carry a mutation but the condition never arises. Dog breeders can't be held to a different standard of disease prevention than that which is possible for humans. You ask any GSD owner have you heard of Hemangiosarcoma and the answer would be no and I'd never heard of it either until my poor girl died of it, but breeders know about it and are not going to tell puppy buyers that this Cancer is common in GSD's that there are no tests or symptoms until it's too late and it's always fatal and can get it as young as 5 years of age are they. And yet a quick Google links the risk of Hemangiosarcoma to the breed, notes that its not an uncommon cancer in dogs generally and links desexing to an increased risk of the cancer. So what would you have GSD breeders do other than to recommend buyers don't desex their pups? Why is it when a purebred dog has a health issue its generally blamed on breed when a crossbred dog has the same issue, its just bad luck? Yes, there are absolutely breeds that are more prone to some issues but it's not a guarantee of issues occuring anymore than being crossbred guarantees health. Until statistics are gathered on randomly bred dogs, no one knows how common health issues are for them.

Usual statement from me: there's their side of the story and the RSPCA side... and somewhere in the middle is the truth. I'd avoid leaping to conclusions. "Rescue" isn't a cast iron guarantee of good animal welfare practices anymore than "RSPCA" means that there's definite cruelty.

Cash unless its a speciality = then a trophy!

Colour me skeptical. How would a dog know a gun is lethal?

Oh trust me, once puppy grows up and becomes reliable, any experience you have is forgotten..... until the next puppy reminds you! :laugh:

Want my honest advice? Take the leash off and teach the pup to walk by side in your yard. This can be done by luring the pup into the desired position. Then when the pup can reliably do it, add a leash (chain ones are pretty much useless so get strong leather or round nylon one) attach it to the collar and continue on. In the meantime, buy a cheap leash, chop it off to about 30cm long, attach it to a flat collar and let the pup drag it around when you're at home. The novelty of leash will wear off fast enough. Your post suggest you think this is a dominance issue. It isn't at this age but the pup clearly has no idea of what you're wanting him to do. Personally I don't care if the pup wants the leash in its mouth - if its coming along, I just let that happen.

Why do simple posts always have to turn into pure vs cross breeds? I find the above statement to be a wild generalisation,and unfair for the reasons Corvus brought up.It may well be mostly true when dogs are bred only to supply "popular markets" and for profit. A lot less true when dogs are bred for a specific role in which case dogs are still selected for specific traits and more often than not,evaluated in just the way you mention above,for success at "work" and in the situation in which they are usually kept. Its pretty much how most breeds came into being and still does happen today. You're right up to a point. The issue with any crossbred and selection for certain characterisitcs is that crossbred dogs, due to their wider genetic range, have a wider range of potential characteristics, both physically and temperamentally. So if you're "selecting" a crossbred dog for a certain set of characteristics, statistically the more specific your selection criteria, the less likely you are to get what you want. Any breed development program involved and continues to involve a lot of "culling". That doesn't necessarily mean knocking dogs on the head but it does mean eliminating any individual that doesn't meet the breeding program requirements from the gene pool and only breeding on from those who have the characteristics you want. Once you've improved the reliability of getting what you want and you cement those characteristics, you close the books and only breed on from the existing gene pool. That's the same for any species. There's a lot of hooha around the idea that purebred folk think their dogs are "better". You have to break it down beyond that. Sure there are some snobs but the bottom line of why I chose purebred dogs is that the odds of the pup I chose ending up to be the adult dog I want to live with are far better with a purebred. Last time I checked the number one reason that sees dogs unwanted is that they "failed to live up to the owners expectations". Now some of that is buyer ignorance and also failure to socialise and train. But some of it with crossbreds is that the dog simply didn't grow up into what was expected. Issues like size, coat type, temperament, activity level etc are all characteristics specifically bred for in purebred dogs. If those things matter to you, and you want the best chance of getting a reliable outcome then you go with the statistics. How many crossbreds are currently bred for specific roles?

Sarg

They cross the dogs chest and shoulders, but as Aidan said, they are loose unless the dog pulls. I've been watching them and wondering about the restricted movement. They kind of have to walk slow anyway, which I expect also alters their gait and may not be entirely natural. As long as they are walking by your side or on a loose leash their movement seems free to me. They're actually using thermal imaging to test the impact of service dog and race dog harnesses in the USA now. If there's any impediment to movement, it shows up as muscle heat. This is an interesting article on the subject