Staranais

This is exactly why I don't go to dog parks. I personally probably wouldn't report a dog that bit me while I was breaking up a dog fight, since I think most dogs could redirect and bite a person in those circumstances. When you step in between two fighting dogs, getting bitten is just a risk you take. But I can understand why you might feel you need to report the owner if that's what it takes to make her control her dog. Edited to add, I have actually been bitten before while breaking up a dog fight, at an obedience school. I didn't blame the dog for biting me in the heat of the moment - it was so juiced up on adrenaline I'm suspect it didn't even know where it's teeth were going - but I was really angry at the dog's owner for having her dog off leash when she knew it was dog aggressive and didn't have a reliable recall. Still makes me grumpy to think about it.

That sounds like heaps of fun. Would be interested to hear about what is involved, after you guys have gone along.

Yeah, after hours vets are always $$$, although the price you were quoted is quite a bit steeper than they are around here. Just wondering, have you considered pet insurance? I have it now myself (organised it too late for my little girl's OCD, unfortunately!) and it's a nice feeling knowing that for $5 a week I can pay for absolutely anything that might arise unexpectedly. Hope she's feeling better soon.

Interestingly, the dog I have now (belgian shepherd) is much more of an escape artist, and much more likely to cause trouble if she escaped, than my old SBT boy ever was. And no, he never had a run with a concrete floor either. The only time he ever escaped the yard was once when we left the door open. Luckily, I found him waiting for me on the front doorstep when I got home. This guy should have kept his dogs contained. Period. It doesn't matter what breed they are. I would be furious if I found any stray dog - of whatever size or breed or temperament - in my yard. No one should be allowed to keep a dog that they can't keep contained.

It is very unlikely, yes. I think hypothyroidism is diagnosed more often than it truly occurs, but low TT4 levels are seen frequently (which is not the same as "hypothyroidism", TT4 is not a stand alone test in dogs). That's what they told us in class... that hypothyroidism is the most common, but also the most overdiagnosed, canine endocrinopathy. Interesting.

My last boy was second hand (got him at 4 or 5 years old), and he had a 99.9% recall. So don't despair, it can be done. I got him recalling for toys (prey drive), since he was far more interested in them than he was in food.

It was interesting, although I would have liked to argue with the author about some of it.

You might be interested to know that it's definitely not just one vet's opinion, it's pretty much universally accepted that waiting until a bitch has had at least one season before desexing her reduces the risk she will suffer from incontinence (desexing before the first or second heat dramatically lowers the risk she'll get mammary tumours, though, so like all things there's a compromise to be made there somewhere).

Our vet doesn't charge it either. But that doesn't mean you don't pay that money - it just means that the cost of procuring, storing, and dispensing the drugs is added into the cost of the consult, or is covered by a higher mark up on the medication itself, rather than having a separate "dispensing fee". It just comes down how to each individual practice likes to charge out their drugs, and their staffs' time. I wouldn't mind paying a small dispensing fee, as long as the overall bill was reasonable.

No doubt you've seen it but I've seen video of a dog cued to go to his bed (rather than rush to the door barking) when the doorbell was used. Reliability occured VERY quickly. Used sensibly, it's very potent. I think there is an article on clickertraining.com that shows how this is trained. My favourite technique with door-bell barkers is to teach them to bark briefly instead of continuously. All you do is click then toss a treat when they have barked for 1 second (or whatever you want, so long as you are consistent). Then click while they are eating, then toss another treat. Knock on the door again to repeat. Next time click for the same amount of barking, but click again for slightly more silence. Simple, effective, works from day one. I may be a bit thick, but I don't get this at all Aidan Are you trying to teach a disobedient partially trained dog not to bark at the door bell, aren't we jumping the gun a bit with door bell behaviour instead of concentrating on general obedience??? Forgive my confusion, but are we talking about the same thing? How could you possibly know that the dog lacked general obedience because he barked continuously at the door bell? My dogs bark at the door bell and both of them have well above average general obedience In any case, what has general obedience got to do with barking at the door bell? My grandmother's Shitzhu has appalling general obedience and she couldn't care less, it doesn't cause her any problems and the dog is easily groomed, seen to by the vet, walked etc If she came to me because her dog barked at the door bell (and she does bark at the door bell but my grandmother likes it, being elderly and living alone) I would just teach Bella not to bark at the door bell and everyone would be happy. Sounds to me like you're both talking about different things - sounds to me like Black Bronson wants the dog to be able to leave the door bell and shut up and relax on command, whereas Aidan wants to teach them not to bark at the door at all and go to their bed automatically when the doorbell rings? Both sound like pretty good skills to have, depending on the situation & what the owner wants? My girl will down stay and watch the door while I open it and greet people on command, but it's not automatic for her, I need to ask her to do so. I don't mind, though - I actually quite like having a big belgian sitting behind me watching the door & obviously waiting for my next command when I open the door late at night. Feels very safe. :D

It is definitely the "gold standard", and I prefer all of my animals to be on fluids any time they're under GA (especially my cats - considering how prone older cats are to kidney issues, and how easily renal perfusion can drop under GA, I personally think it's really important to support cats with fluid any time they're under. I probably won't bother with blood tests when I get my young girl operated on in a month or so, though, just because of her age. Although admittedly, basic blood work on all animals before a GA is probably gold standard procedure too. I definitely would get her bloods run if she were old, or ill in any way. It's true that humans don't necessarily get blood work done before operations, and aren't always on fluids for minor procedures, but it's important to understand that humans are kept at a much lighter plane of anaesthetic than animals are, using a different cocktail of drugs to do so (humans are typically given neuromuscular junction blockers to relax their muscles, so they can be given much less actual anaesthetic agent than we give to animals). Humans also generally have much more monitoring equipment on them, and generally many more skilled people looking after them during the procedure (not just one GP doctor, with perhaps a nurse helping out!) My anaesthesia lecturer told us in class that healthy humans tend to die under anaesthesia at a rate of about 1/10,000. For healthy cats and dogs, the death rate is somewhere around 1/1000 - ten times as high, just because of the greater anaesthetic depth and lower level of monitoring they generally receive. And for horses, for various reasons, it's about 1/100! My point being, human and animal anaesthesia can't be directly compared. We do things a little differently for humans and for animals, and the risks are sometimes different as a result. I have no idea how much spaying should cost in Australia, but I wonder if the clinic the OP's puppy buyer went to is in a high socioeconomic area? Clinics do charge different prices in different areas. Partly to cover a much higher rent, partly because they can. Vets like to make a profit, just like everyone else, and some choose to do that by running a practice in a richer area and charging what the market will pay.

What if you had a dog who had Erik's drive for toys for food? Daisy is always hungry. Even when she's eaten almost 2kg of cat food in less than five minutes. She always wants to eat. I don't know if she'd ever stop eating. Also, if I didn't cut out her meals when we were doing lots of training, she'd get fat very quickly. I don't understand how you could feel comfortable creating desire for one natural instinct but not another (prey vs food). I don't think that's what she's saying, I think she's saying she's happy to deprive the dogs of things they find pleasant, but not things that they really think they need. So she doesn't give tasty treats out for no reason, those are reserved for training, but she doesn't create a genuine appetite by making the dogs hungry before training either. Sorry if I'm putting words in your mouth, Corvus. That approach does raise a good question, though, in that my dog's prey drive is also generally much higher than her food drive. I imagine, if I could ask her, she would say that she often feels that she needs to bite something, whereas food is only pleasant for her. So in that case, would you personally think it was OK to deprive her of food (until she started to feel a genuine appetite), but not OK to deprive her of toys? I guess my answer would be that I'm happy to deprive my dog of anything that doesn't seriously impact her quality of life. I don't want her sitting round miserable because she's starving or bored out of her little skull all day. But I don't mind giving her hunger pangs, or making her a little bored, before training sessions.

He's right, "correction chain" isn't actually that much of a euphemism, since it doesn't hide what the chain is for (correcting the dog). Now, if they were calling them "happy dog chains", or "good dog chains", or "guidance chains", or "leadership chains", or something obscure like that, well I agree that would be pretty pathetic.

Didn't pay a cent for my pedigree wheaten and my pedigree kerry blue. Your point? Can you get me a working line GSD from titled parents on main register for a good Schutzhund prospect for free Sheridan??? I will have 2 please I can't, but on a related note I could get you some good SAR prospect for free. Many of the SAR dogs here are ex-pound dogs - they end up in the pound as they're just a little too drivey and energetic for the average family to handle. Different strokes for different folks. You can get good pets, and you can get good working dogs, from both pedigree and non purebred animals.

It's good marketing, though!

I was having a laugh about that the other day with a friend, it's gone from a choke or strangle collar, to a check chain to a correction collar, when people start feeling bad about this name I'd like to know what they'll change it to next Not intended to make the OP feel bad, at the end of the day the device is still the same, you'll either feel bad about it or not, changing the name wont change your feelings :p Yeah, it's kind of like pretending a halti isn't an aversive so you feel better about using one. I'm afraid I know plenty of "positive" trainers who take that line.

This is actually something I've been thinking about a lot recently. I'm wondering if all these things we call rewards - prey, food, attention, praise, sex - are way less important to dogs than the one, overarching "meta reward" of being able to control the environment (and therefore predict and control access to the good stuff, and predict and prevent the bad stuff). Unpredictability seems to be anathema to just about all of the animals I have worked with. Whereas the dogs I've worked with all seems to really, really appreciate clarity and consistency. Which, if true, would have big consequences for which training methods are kinder to the dog. Anything easy for them to understand, anything that allows them to feel that they control the trainer, may well make them happier than something confusing or unpredictable, no matter how "kind" or "unkind" each method is. Can a predictable punisher ever be "kinder" (in the sense of making the dog happier) than an unpredictable reinforcer? Can a positive training session be perceived as "negative" overall by the dog, if it's frustrating? Can a training session based on punishment be perceived as "positive" overall by the dog, if it enhances the dog's feeling of understanding or control? I haven't actually formed my own judgement on that yet, just throwing it out on the table for discussion.

Ooops, double post

Settle down, there is no place for this sort of reasoned, logical thinking in a thread about NDTF vs DELTA!!!! Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to watch "Aikido vs Ju Jitsu" and "Judo vs Kenpo" videos on YouTube. I reckon the Aikido master will win because he's non-violent and just uses the Ju Jitsu guy's violence against him... You mean like this one? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWBmEHzbOXI Makes me every time.

The point is they learn everything first THEN specialise. You dont just go into a specialisation and decide to miss the rest because you dont want to deal with it. Exactly. The implications that anyone who uses corrections doesn't use science, doesn't think outside the square, doesn't take the time to train their dog, doesn't have the willpower to use positive only, that have come up in this thread, are not only patronising but also really make the point that many positive trainers just don't understand aversives. So it's all very well to say "well, a positive trainer will refer hard cases on!", but how on earth will they know when to refer a dog to a balanced trainer, if they have no understanding of what a balanced trainer may do differently, or when it may help, or what types of correction are appropriate for them to be using? I too first learned positive-only methods with my first dog, then crossed over to using overt corrections as well as rewards. I suspect there will be many more "reverse crossover" trainers emerging as clicker becomes more mainstream, and people get sick of turning up to positive training schools and getting no results.

I think Lindsay and you are talking about two different things, here. A lot of things that people think are P+ are interruptors or NRMs. I add it to the situation and it decreases the behaviour. It works not by being a conditioned removal of reward, but directly because I am saying "uh" and scowling at her, and to a social animal, that's unpleasant. That's P+, not a NRM, in my book. Just because some P+ are so mild that they are (IMO) perceived by the dog more as communication or guidance than as a threat, they're still punishment. See above. I sure as hell will pussy foot and think real hard before I decide to create an inhibition. That's not something to mess around with IMO. Really? I like my dog to have inhibitions. Inhibitions against biting me, biting my family, biting strangers, against chasing bikes, chasing the neighbourhood kids, humping me, humping the neighbourhood kids, humping other dogs, against eating my cats, against chasing stock... there are all sorts of things she's experimented with in the past, and that I like her being inhibited from doing. It's very easy and quick to tell her that I don't like those things, and once those limits are in place then she and I can spend our time concentrating on the fun things.

In the first volume of Lindsay's book he says "Unfortunately, aversive training methods are often inadequately understood or applied in cases where positive methods would suffice." Lindsay's books provide a thorough, honest, and very detailed summary of what we know about aversive learning, what effect aversives have on dogs in various situations, possible pitfalls and misuses, side-effects to consider, and a list of guidelines on the use of punishments, with the very first one being "Punishment should be used only after other positive training options have been carefully considered or exhausted." And there's the rub. I'm sure that everybody here who uses punishments believes they have exhausted or accurately ruled out the use of positive methods before they go to punishments. So where does that leave us? This strikes me as a strange thing to say. Of course I don't exhaustively rule out all positive methods before I go to punishment. Why on earth would I do something as time consuming and tedious as always exploring all possible positive methods before using punishment? I use punishment every single day with my dog to shape her behaviour. There's no "fall out", well, only if you call a well adjusted, cheerful, spirited, and reasonably well behaved malinois "fallout". I believe she likes me to communicate with her clearly. There's absolutely no reason for me to muddy the waters by trying convoluted methods when a stern glance, or an "uh uh", is all she needs to understand that the boundaries are still in place round here, and she better try another avenue for getting attention or reward. I don't understand the concept of pussy footing around avoiding any sort of punishment in case I hurt her feelings by telling her "uh uh". I know her too well for that, I know how to communicate with her without breaking her. I know that she finds our relationship rewarding enough that she's quite happy for me to show her which behaviours aren't acceptable, so that she can then try something else and get attention or reward. Just like I'm quite happy for her to show me what she does and doesn't like without it being a big deal. When did dog training stop being about communicating with an animal as best we can, and start being a technical exercise in using as little punishment as possible?

My understanding is that a full blood panel test comprises of six analytes : TT4, FT4, TT3, FT3, T4aa, T3aa, TSH. I won't pretend to understand the science of all the testing but I have read that "a TT4 assay may fail to detect thyroiditis, especially in its early stages". Also, the TSH test might not detect thyroiditis until 50 - 70% of the thyroid tissue has been destroyed. Apparently an "elevated serum cholesterol" is another good indicator of thyroid disease. I have notes from when I did a bit of study on hypothyroidism affecting behaviour in dogs and although the "elevated serum cholesterol" might be the result of other things, apparently hypothyroidism is the most common cause. As I understand it, free T4 is also much less likely to give you a false positive than total T4 is. Your total T4 is often elevated in non-thyroid illnesses, so a low TT4 isn't a very good indicator of a malfunctioning thyroid.

I was told we could do the free T4 Oh that's pretty cool. We still can't do it here yet.

Your contributions are always helpful, Erny, and besides, it's just nice to have somewhere to vent when I'm feeling worried. I'm sure people in the "real world" get sick of hearing about my broken dog. No idea how much the hydrotherapy would be - the sea idea is a good one, but I wonder if perhaps the warmth of the hydrotherapy pool is part of what helps the healing? Perhaps I need to make friends with someone with a spa pool!