Willem

wrt my comments: I don't get the twist from these comments to 'cotton wool kids'...I actually treat our dog pretty 'tough', or better: I treat her like a dog...and that's the reason why I only feed her food that is meant to be for dogs. She doesn't get scraps from the table, no ice cream and the like. If I need a special treat, I use chicken liver...it is cheap and I can mix it with normal kibble so the kibble absorbs the moisture and makes it less messy...I never saw the need to feed her something made for humans that might or might not create some long term health issues.

not necessarily: ...to setup the environment to train a dog in an aroused state is tricky, however, if you can do the training while the dog is in an over-aroused state it can be very effective. E.g.: I train our dog with the flick pole: she is chasing the lure, gets over-aroused, however, it is very easy to control the environment (e.g. you can do it in your garden), timing, speed of the lure etc. etc. I started with 'TAKE-IT' and 'LEAVE-IT' commands and doing it now also with basic obedience commands (drop, recalls, stay...). If you train your dog only in a low aroused state, the dog won't hear you when he gets into an over-aroused state (triggered by a bird, rabbit, other dogs etc.)...the key is the controlled environment... ETA:...and yes, this Joseph E. LeDoux seems to be an interesting guy...will do more reading..

...reminds me a little bit of the 'CM pig's ear incident'...only the people directly involved will know exactly what happened and it is doubtful that the public get an unbiased, objective report as everyone involved and writing about it will just pursue his/hers own interests.

Feeling scared as you say is a behavior and rewarding that fearful behavior gives the message that being scared is ok. Only reward dogs when they are relaxed confident and doing the right thing. I am personally not a fan of constant food rewards.Praise and positive voice / body language speaks volumes to a dog. Sorry Purdie but feeling scared is not a behaviour. Feeling scared is an emotion. Biting someone (triggered by feeling scared) is a behaviour. I use food rewards extensively with my clients' fearful dogs. If used correctly they are extremely powerful - much more so than praise. of course it depends on how we define 'emotion', but if it is defined as an 'experience closely linked to the arousal of the nervous system' then I'm pretty sure that I / we can manipulate and reinforce emotions...e.g. when the dog is too close to the object that triggers the fear and cause this arousal we can use distance to manage the level of the arousal and therefore the dogs emotions...conversely if we would ignore the dog's fear and drag the dog behind us, his fear level will become likely so overwhelming that it will cause significant behavior issues that will be even harder to eliminate. ...we can also manipulate / reinforce emotions with drugs, by stimulations of senses, music, food... According to scientific studies about 'emotions', 'the level of emotional tension is determined by the strength of a need and probability of its satisfaction', and these are parameters that definitely can be manipulated / reinforced. ETA:...and of course,'feeling scared' is the emotion, not the resulting behavior; the resulting behaviour is ducking for cover, trying to hide, trying to move away from the object that triggers the fear...and that is where the reinforcement training starts: once you managed the emotional state of the dog by increasing the trigger zone to a distance big enough to lower his fear level that allows him to respond to you, you can start with rewarding wanted behaviour, e.g. every step closer to the object that triggers the fear...at the end the dogs learns that e.g. a parked car is no danger and the fear (=emotion) and the unwanted behaviour (ducking for cover, trying to hide...) disappears.

...it is the theobromine in the cacao that is toxic...milk chocolate has less cacao than dark chocolate e.g. baking chocolate, hence it is less toxic for dogs. To say it is harmless for dogs is a little bit like using 'my grandpa smoked his whole life and died with 100 years' as evidence that smoking has no negative health effects.

...my kids feed on chocolate, peanuts butter etc....while this is not always the healthiest diet for kids, the ingredients are not - in the product specific dosage - toxic for them. It seems that some people don't understand that the digestive system of a dog works totally different, e.g. you can use one Xylitol tablet in your coffee and it won't do you any harm, however, one Xylitol tablet is enough to kill a dog....as chocolate does... BTW: Xylitol is not necessarily classified as artificial sugar replacement as it is a sugar alcohol and - in small conc. - prevalent in many fruits (hence a natural sugar). Therefore human food might contain Xylitol without the term 'Xylitol' mentioned on the package. ETA...some funny spelling errors :D ... ETA: ...instead of 'Xylitol' the package could state 'natural sweetener' for example...

not much to do with luck, instead it is about time consuming training. You have to replace one reflex (the not wanted one) with another reflex and that takes time and repetition, repetition ...repetition...if you only do it twice a week and let the dog get away the rest of the week with this unwanted behaviour it just doesn't work. The reward (whether it is a treat, ball / toy, pat ...) helps to keep the dog keen to focus on you, so it is just a vehicle that allows you to repeat the exercises. Unfortunately, people tend to believe it is like throwing a pill in to fix a medical issue - dog training doesn't work like this, and especially if you want to use positive reinforcement as your trainings tool and want to be successful you have to accept that it is a time consuming measure.

careful with peanuts butter - a lot of them contains Xylitol which is extrem dangerous for dogs!

I guess the length of the stints depends a little bit on how fast the specific breed matures...no idea whether German Spitzes are slower or faster in this realm; it is - IMO - anyway better just to watch the dog and see how he responds: whether he gets tired or whether he is still keen to investigate things and environment. wrt toilet training: if you want him to do the poos and pees while you walk him you have to offer him more than 1 or 2 walks per day at the beginning...better 3-4 times 10 minutes outside than 1 x 20 minutes. When he starts sniffing traces of other dogs it won't take long till he prefers to poo and pee outside...

I must admit i haven't been very good with walking. Taken him out maybe 5 times. 5mins per month so 15 mins each time ...there is quite some room for improvement...the best toilette training is walking the dog with a regular routine...different smells outside plus walking triggers urinating etc... It is also very important for socialisation...just keeping the dog in the backyard is - IMHO - a recipe for disaster. ETA:...as the dog miss out on leash training, socialisation with other dogs, people, cars, etc., mental stimulation, bonding (it is different when walking the dog outside the home) and basic obedience training.

how often and how long do you walk him?

to my knowledge it is pretty normal that a dog has more than one fear period; having a second one with 9 month seems to be just part of the normal development. Just keep on going with socialisation, normal routines and training and be a positive and confident leader for him.

tetanus is a bacteria found in soil and manure - so if your dog didn't eat soil / manure before licking your hand an infection with tetanus is highly unlikely; however, dogs salvia can carry other nasty bugs...

I think it is more that you need formal permit from the council...and this might be easier to get with an official certificate from some kind of organisation, but there might be exceptions for people who can prove that they trained dogs for years.

Thanks for the heads-up...your are right, there was no question mark at the end of the OP's..."Are there any other suggestions that I can pass on." :D

They recommended the dog gets put on Hills H/D http://www.hillspet.com/en/us/products/pd-canine-hd-dry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrochlorothiazide...yeah, it is somehow linked to NaCl, see section 'Mechanism of action' in link...lower NaCl intake will require less water to be adsorbed into the blood via osmotic pressure and thus less 'thirst'.

I also use stainless steel and avoid materials that can break (e.g. glass)...however, it seems to be a total waste of money as she just prefers to drink the water from buckets, garden saucers, puddles etc....can't figure out why and try to keep them dry, but after every rain she's back to the 'alternatives'...

thanks for the heads-up...yes, the 'diabetis' got me, but after some reading I recognize that this is a total different issue - couldn't find any hint so that would verify the benefit of a low (low wrt below normal threshold) sodium diet.

is there any study verifying the correlation between low sodium diet and diabetes for dogs?...I understand that for humans a low sodium diet is recommended due to the fact that a lot of our food is enriched with salts and it is easy to exceed the healthy thresholds; however, if you feed only quality dog food (and no left overs from the table!!!) and have a look at the salt content of the treats (some brands just add salt to make it more tastier for the dog) I assumed that this would be sufficient wrt maintaining the salt intake below the thresholds for dogs?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutering ... there are also some distinct health risks to be considered...

that's an interesting point: when we (dog and I) go to the obedience training, the instructor actually trains me (and the other owners) how to train the dogs. He / she doesn't train our dogs, but advises us how to do it. And with different dogs with different owners it is quite a challenge to give the right advise to every owner with different presuppositions. Conversely, if you leave your dog with the trainer so he works directly with the dog - that would be again a total different story.

...to be able to understand the answer I need to know the question...a quote out of context without disclosing the source is seldom helpful. ..thanks for the link...it seems that the poster read a few books from CM and believed that this is enough to qualify him...

Pity his website is gone now but there's lots still around. Just google a few of Caesar's keywords. In answer, like huski said. Absolutely nothing to stop anyone. what's the purpose of this quote with unknown source?

if there is no regulation there is no regulation - so the umbrella under which every dog traiings school works would be the same... however, there is always the 'duty of care' everyone has to apply to, so indivifuals & organisations without any qualifications might find themselves in deep shit if something goes pear-shaped. You will likely struggle to find an insurance for your business if you can't demonstrate that you are somehow qualified for the service you offer. Our club has an insurance that would cover for accidents on the trainings ground during the official training - I don't think that we would be able to afford the fees if the club couldn't verify that the instructors are qualified.

certificates are one thing, having a talent for 'reading and leading' dogs another...if everything comes together it will make a good instructor / trainer, so I wouldn't judge a trainer just by his / her certification.