sandgrubber

I think the wild carnivores around here put on weight when prey is abundant and loose weight in summer and autumn, when hunting is harder.

I think the wild animals around here put on weight when prey is abundant and loose weight in summer and autumn, when hunting is harder.

Rabies is a non-issue cause the dogs are vaccinated and the vaccine is very effective (hence vaccination campaigns in Bali). Most vineyards around here trap gophers, they are soooo abundant. I can't see that dogs hunting is any worse for the gophers than getting caught in a trap. There's no other wildlife for them to catch . . .well, maybe birds. The gopher population supports lots of natural predators . . . at least three species of hawks, two species of owls, bob-cats, mountain lions (probably eat more deer than gophers), foxes, and coyotes. The coyotes carry parvo and distemper but there has been no report of rabies here. We have deer fencing and no deer come on the property (and the dogs don't go off). Rabbits and squirrels are around, but I've seen neither on my property. And then there are skunks and raccoons . . . but I've seen neither and hope not to.

It might be worth posting these links in the General forum under the pinned Studies About Dogs. I'm not great at the science involved, but think it says something significant about: (a) mutation as affecting genetic problems (b) problems arising from multiple genes. I am always glad to see any progress on polygenetic factors . . . I'd guess that HD, OCD, various temperament disorders, and lots of other factors for which genetics seems to be important, but there is no simple/effective genetic test are polygenetic. Let's hope progress on this rare problem is a harbinger of progress on some of the nagging problems that plague dog breeders.

When I moved from WA to a vineyard in the coastal mountains of California, I brought two Labbie girls with me. It's rainy season, an both of 'em have taken to staying out in the rain, digging holes and catching gophers (abundant ground-dwelling rodents . . .rat-sized). Fine with me . . . gopher eat roots and that's bad for the vineyard . . . . (although it's not nice having a wet, muddy dog get in the bed, so I'm having to set some limits). Problem is, I can't tell how much nutrition my girls are getting from their carnivore habits, and they're putting on weight. The ground is saturated and I think nests are getting flooded all over the place, hence the girls have a lot to catch and eat. Some people say a 'prey diet' is healthy. The girls seem very happy hunting. But how do you set limits? I'm a softy and, being Labbies, they look at me with big pleading eyes if I cut back on their rations. Is it ok to let them get fat in a time of plenty and then take it off when the ground is dry and hard and their hunting is more work with less reward?

I've hosted two wanna-be dog trainers in a boarding kennel that wanted to offer training. It's been a sad experience. Both trainers were great with dogs . . . with limitations. Neither was good at communicating with owners, unfortunately, at least as important as dog handling skills. I am willing to believe there are some good and some great trainers/behaviourists. But survival requires a combination of dog skills, dealing with dog owner skills, and marketing/business skills that is pretty unusual. As a 'consumer', I don't think I'm impressed with NDTF certs . . . or German qualifications of trainer to Schutz. The sad fact about dog training is that it's mostly owner training, and requires considerable business skill. A few people manage to build up a following and keep busy classes, with private consults on the side. The majority of wanna-be's go nowhere cause their skills in dealing with dog owners and business aren't up to their skill in dealing with dogs. And then there's the secondary problem that dog needs are highly diverse, and human attitudes/temperament/judgement is important. The NDTF IV trainer I worked with, as a kennel helper, twice allowed contact between dogs that resulted in significant injury (a SWF was nearly killed and required thousands of dollars of rehab, and a pedigree Labrador was attacked by a mastiff-X and lost an ear). This got ugly, and I feel lucky to have had insurance and to have avoided lawsuits. Bottom line . . . dog trainer requires a skill set that is unusual, and only a few succeed in the area. Those who succeed may not be the best with dogs . . . but they do know how to relate to clients and the social/legal/financial system. Not an easy business.

Go ahead and flame me. But sometimes 'bias' has a rational cause. Breed-ism is a lot like racism. I don't consider myself racist, but, as an older white woman, there are some predominantly minority districts of some US cities that I wouldn't go into after dark, especially when things have been stirred up. My town is ~50% Latino. In general, I think the US Latino community has higher moral standards than the white community . . . but where the turmult of factors has resulted in gangs being formed . . . some places are dangerous for people like me (probably dangerous for Latinas too, but they are much better at reading the signs than I am). The gang types prefer certain types of dogs. I spent six years managing a kennel that liked to mix dogs, and have more experience with the DA than the HA dimension of breed-specific K9 behavior. By-in-large, with significant exceptions, we found gun dogs easy to mix with other dogs, and terriers, especially bull terriers and bull-terrier crosses (though some foxies or JRT's are nightmares), a source of concern . . . and tagged as 'don't mix'. Often, the owners were quick to say "Don't mix" or "Mix with caution and avoid some sort of dog (often avoid males with males). Some terriers are sweet-as, and can mix freely. Some are friendly, but have body language that other dogs find provocative (eg, the friendly SBT body slam) and inadvertently cause fights, some have the sort of temper that causes damage when someone or something (often another bull terrier cross) presses the wrong button. Eg, the kennel had a several incidents of bull terrier types who are from the same family and sharing a run getting into spats that required veterinary attention. We also had one incident of two entire male Weimies doing damage to eachother . . . so it's not unique to the bull terriers . . . but they seem to be relatively more frequent in crossing the DA/HA line. I know some goldies . . . some Labbies as well, have dangerous trigger settings. I had a goldie breeder next door . . . and her girls occasionally had fight-to-kill fights, generally resource guarding (strangely, the resource was sprayed water, which the mob loved . . . they got into vicious fights if the wrong dogs were out together when the sprinklers were turned on). But in my experience, these are a small minority associated with problem owners. Smoke often goes with fire.

Lovely story. Wish that every special needs pup that ends out homeless could do as well.

This is a BAD NEWS story. Read the ending: "Lucky and Sparkles have been renamed Teagan and Layla, and need a new home. "The new owner would ideally be at home often to give the girls the attention and love they need," Ms McGrath said. Anyone interested in adopting the pair can visit www.petrescue.com.au/view/99794." It seems likely that they will both be PTS soon.

Great post!!!

Agreed. And it's a big problem. If you don't love dogs, you shouldn't be getting a puppy, cute or not. Don't look at the puppy. Try to understand what you'll get when it grows up.

Hey, why does everything have to be a debate? Ok, lots of opinionated people, a controversial subject, off she goes. I would have liked to see more discussion of movement and rhythm as affecting communication with dogs . . . and I'm disappointed that several people jumped on the 'cruelty' bandwagon (in my book, the most serious dog cruelty I see, and I see it regularly, is putting an active, social animal in solitary confinement with little exercise, and then getting mad at the poor thing cause it goes nuts and starts destroying stuff). Also disappointed that those critical of CM didn't pick up on the hardest part of dog training . . . training the owners. From what I've watched of CM, the owners sit and watch in awe, then enjoy a half an hour of dealing with a dog that has been calmed and put in line by calm assertive treatment, delivered in a way that speaks to a dog's brain. But I doubt they have really learned CM's technique . . . which if Gladwell is correct in the 'dance' assertion, is going to be hard to duplicate. I've tried to work with two aspiring dog trainers in my kennel management days: one a CM devotee, one a new-school German with years of Schutz and an emphasis on positive reinforcement via play. Both had great dog handling skills. Both failed cause they couldn't transfer what they know to the dog owners. And I've seen a fair share of my kennel clients go out for training, show improvement for awhile, and then slip back into the 'same old used-to-be'. Dog training requires skill. Dog owner training . . . often requires someone who can talk the spots off a leopard. p.s. thinking back over my own contribution, and the typical Myth Busters crash scenes, I realise I missed a term in the physics argument. Yes, Pressure = force/area and area increases as a squared term . . . so a flat palm is not the same as a knuckle or toe. But it's equally important that force comes from change in kinetic energy, ie, a moving object crashing to a stop and transferring the energy in its motion. Kinetic energy increases as the square of velocity (ie speed) X mass (ie, weight). So, you can do a lot of damage from a fast kick developed from a full leg swing (long swing allows more gain in momentum). (In self defense class we were taught to move into a punch so the aggressor couldn't develop a full swing). And kicking a mobile bit, eg, a tail, doesn't transfer much momentum, so it does little. Jeez. May even be that kicking a small dog so that it flies across the room delivers a lot of fright, but not so much pain, while kicking a massive dog really hits home. Maybe that's why abused ankle biters don't give up. . . they've learned that getting the boot is aggressive, but not dangerous. All in all, I think it's been a good thread, and thanks to everybody for contributing.

Here's a vet's answer . . . from http://www.vetinfo.com/dfetsorb.html When I palpate bitches I suspect that the most common cause of suspected fetal resorption is imaginary fetuses in the first place! Some people are better at this than I am, though. Fetuses will normally only be resorbed if they die during the first 1/2 of the pregnancy. It is possible for a bitch to resorb only some fetuses while others go on to be born. The most common causes of fetal resorption are inadequate progesterone levels in the bitch, maternal infectious disease (such as brucellosis and canine herpesvirus), endometrial disorders, developmental defects in the fetus (unlikely to affect a whole litter). Testing progesterone levels in the bitch can be done after estrus even if she isn't bred, due to the persistance of the corpus luteum in bitches. This is convenient, since you don't have to breed her in order to test for this problem. A complete physical exam with a general blood panel is a good idea. Testing for brucellosis and canine herpesvirus might be useful, although most bitches who lose litters to herpesvirus will have normal subsequent litters. Bacterial cultures of the vagina may be useful and in some cases uterine biopsy will be necessary to diagnose a problem. There are reproductive specialists in veterinary medicine, known as theriogenologists. They can usually be found at veterinary schools. It would be a really good idea to explore possible causes of not getting bred in the first place, since I am not the only vet who has palpated puppies who weren't there! Read more: Reproduction - Fetal Resorption

Sorry, I do physics better than anatomy. 'Inguinal' is jargon to me and I can't tie it to understanding of physiology . . . but I think the answer is 'yes'. 'Hard' needs to be defined, and is the crux of the physical argument. I think 'hard' equates to high pressure. Pressure is force/area. For the most part, high pressure is what punctures, breaks, and generally does damage. If you distribute force over a broader area, the effect is much different (eg, snoeshoes don't break through and sink in soft snow, while spike heels may damage a softwood floor). I thump indiscriminately and I get the same response from the dog when I hit the 'gut' as when I hit the 'butt'. Physics tells us that force distributed over a broad area (ie, flat hand slap or normal shoes) produces low pressure, and while it may make a lot of noise, does much less damage that force delivered over a small area (knuckle punch, spike heel, kick with pointed toe . . . or for that matter, bullets). I 'thump' with a flat hand. The dogs' reactions show me that it doesn't bother them no matter where I hit. I'm pretty sure that damage/pain comes from 'pressure' (ie force/area). Area increases rapidly as the region of contact enlarges, cause 'enlargement' generally means width and breadth increase together. Hence 'area' tends to increase as a squared term, and will tend to dominate the force term when the point of contact expands. So it comes down to whether CM does a focused toe kick (high pressure), or broadly distributes the force by using the crook of his ankle (large area, hence may lift the dog, but no high pressure, thus pretty harmless). The videos shown in the anti-CM video show him whacking with an ankle or taking of his shoes to use the crook of his ankle. So my guess is that he may surprise the dog by pushing it or lifting it off its feet, but he's not hurting it as in 'gloves off' knuckle punches. Nor do I see a long, max-speed swing (more physics, but boxing equivalent of a fully developed swing). It would take sophisticate instrumentation to see whether and how soon he puts on the brake when he makes contact . . . but I'd guess that the physical effect is more one of 'tap' and 'surprise' than 'damage' or 'hurt'. Apologies for getting mathematical. And to any mathematicians, apologies for not reducing it to the formula Would you hit him in the inguinal region in the same way? Is it a good analogy?

I'm in the US, but lived in Australia for 14 years. If I hit this regulation, I would simply avoid exporting to Australia. Too much fuss. I've had a not-entertaining time trying to sell a house I owned in Australia while resident in California. Ended up spending hundreds of dollars and tens of hours of time dealing with the fact that WA officials will not accept a California Notary Public . . . because the California NP can only sign on an attached piece of paper and the WA burocrats require that the signature be on the page being notarised. In general, Australian bureaucracy is not flexible and is much better at saying 'no' than saying 'yes'. I would not trust lawmakers to write a law that a quality breeder who has little interest in things legal could navigate.

The Lagotto is often marketed as a medium sized non-shedding dog. My perspective is warped by having lived alongside a lagotto breeder who didn't do much to socialize her pups, and bred for show, not temperament. I ran a boarding kennel for six years or so and saw many labradoodles and spoodles. While many of the -oodles were problematic, I'd say the percent problematic was no higher than what I'd expect from a Lagotto. Key problems are need for grooming and temperament. For the labradoodles, there was an additional problem that puppies ended out becomming much larger than expected. As for a non-shedding dog that doesn't require periodic clipping . . . dream on. It may be no harder to produce a new breed that is solid and breeds true than to revive an endangered breed. Problem is, too many people doing both indiscriminately . . . and not enough people being honest with puppy buyers. . . .or selling through pet shops and other middle men, who prevent needed discussion between breeder and seller.

We need to stand back before forming judgements on CM. He's from a culture (rural Mexico) that doesn't see dogs as sentinent, he relates to dogs better than he does to people (I think a few of us can relate to that), and he has become a TV star, with all the pressures that go with the job. I presume the media prefers the meanest dogs and the most extreme miracle cures . . . and of course wants everything to be resolved in a 30 minute episode. I don't get TV and have only watched a few Dog Whisperer DVD's, which I found impressive. . . though it would be good to see a 2 year on follow-up on the dogs and people involved. I don't think we should get so hung up on passing judgement, and instead focus on learning on what we can learn. . . in my view, the guy has amazing skill in dealing with dog/people problems. I started this thread cause it was great to find an article that focussed on body-language aspects of this skill . . . and cause I'd watched a few people trying to copy the words ('whispers') but not getting the body language (the 'dance'). I'd encourage people to read the article . . . link to a free download provided in the first post in this thread.

My dogs have a strongly routinized schedule and they have a clear sense of meal time. If I'm an hour or two late for feeding, they spend a lot of time looking at me, sitting by the dogfood container or fridge, and otherwise giving hints. I think that's a circadian rhythm with digestive system. Sleep rhythms are more flexible, but seem to have a circadian component. However, the bio-rhythms work along with cues they get from people. When I shared dog care with my mother . . . I'm an extreme early riser and she's not a morning person . . . the dogs readily shifted between my routine and my mother's routine. I think they would naturally rise a bit before dawn, but if early rising means dealing with a grumpy person, they seem happy enough to sleep for an additional couple hours . . . or four hours. I sense that my dogs are highly attuned to my mental state. If I'm having trouble sleeping and, say, am ready to rise at 3:30 am instead of 5 am, they pick up on the mental state and jump all over me in the 'rise and shine' excitement ritual. I can't disguise my state of wakefulness by trying to act like I'm asleep. Perhaps they listen to breathing. Who knows, maybe they sense brain wave patterns. On the other hand, if I get up at 1 am to pee, they generally snore through the whole thing . . . I don't know if this is because they know that peeing doesn't mean getting up, or because they're so deeply asleep at 1 am that they don't pick up my cues. Maybe a bit of both.

Thanks for the post. Interesting! I wonder what 'Northern breeds' means?

In my little world of bitches, this change of chemistry results in everyone humping one another. I've seen a conga line of four in the days when I had four entire girls. The sexual energy can be embarassing, or amusing, depending on your persuasion. But I've never had it turn aggressive. That is all very well until a girl comes into season....changes the chemistry.

I think us humans look at this backwards. The important thing is how it affects the dog. Humans are wimps about pain. Dogs I have known are more fussed by the message that accompanies pain than by the pain itself. Eg, I had a ball-mad Lab who got smashed, full-strength, in the face with a tennis racquet while playing fetch with a teenager. Didn't put her off the slightest. She went right back to wagging with the ball in her mouth, encouraging the kid to hit the thing again. My old girl puts up with some pretty rough bites from pups without flinching. My pup loves a slap on the butt or shoulder . . . regards it as affection. I've seen a dog get bitten bloody by small vermin they are hunting and go back at it with glee. But with most of the dogs I've owned, even a feigned hit that made no contact would have their tail between their legs . . . or even fear urination. From the dog's perspective, physical discomfort seems secondary to the message/context of that pain. Is it is done aggressively, calmly, or playfully, or was it a part of the predator prey battle (with the biter being the prey)? That is what the Gladwell article gets at. I am NOT saying it's ok to hit or otherwise hurt a dog. I'm saying that dogs care at least as much about how it is done than about what is done . . . and that our body language and voice tone matter at least as much as what we say or do to the dog.

I take a smallish deposit . . . mostly to prevent people from 'forgetting' that they have agreed to buy a puppy and leaving me with pups to home at the last minute. I explain that that's what the deposit is for . . . and that it is refundable if they act in good faith, but that I'll pocket it if they muck me around at the last minute. Puppy buyers seem happy to accept this. I have refunded a few deposits . . . for people who have family breakdowns, job losses, transfers, and other events that could be bad for the pup.

I'll bet fast, short replies . .. it's hard to answer all questions in detail when you're getting 10 emails a day. . . . and that happens to the Lab breeders in Perth . . . sometimes it happens when you have no pups

Tools are not methods. Tools alone don't work very well. How does a Manners Minder or anti-bark collar work then?

Oh dear. The old tired battle about positive reinforcement again. Even if you think some of the things CM does are evil (which I don't) you gotta hand it to the guy is brilliant in communicating with dogs. The point of the post was to point out that his special ability was based on highly organised body movement communicates well with dogs. Aidan2 is correct . . . Gladwell also compares CM to a soccer player. I'm not a trainer . . . but found the article fascinating because it gives a much broader, wholistic view on how dogs pick up on humans body language . . . and what sorts of body language are likely to be effective in calming dogs and gaining their respect. If you want to read the article, you can find it on Gladwell's website http://www.gladwell.com/2006/2006_05_22_a_dog.html