Just Midol

Good work! Such simple things make life so much more pleasurable with a dog.

Ick, they require an auto sit. I intentionally don't teach auto-sits. Ohhh well. Whats the maximum leash length?

Thanks. Went to the ANKC site but I'm blind and didn't see them.

Someone needs to setup a site so we can post reviews on vets and training groups. I might look into doing it myself.

If you're strapped for cash I could probably have a look and see if mine still works and post you it. It was in pretty bad condition last time I used it though, I had to replace a load of wiring inside the unit. It's a 12v unit or can use a bunch of those D sized batteries.

Is there a site that lists the requirements of each level in obedience and the rules?

What's her pen made of? Can you whip up one made of chain link fencing? Concreate base. That's what my shep has.

Yeah, I'd go for an electric fence over a containment system. If you get the proper white tape, the dog can generalise and not go near similar tape which is always a bonus.

Don't drag her forward. Encourage her forwards, praise, act stupid. Do not pull.

Change of direction and stopping takes forever. I tried doing that with Gizmo but after 4 days he hadn't figured it out. I just used a correction collar instead and he had it in a matter of minutes.

He suspects it is just heat stress causing him to be less active. Not sure if I agree but he has told me to drop his diet down a touch and head back in 3 weeks and reweigh him. If his weight has risen, we'll do the tests. He said because Gizmo is only 3kg overweight it isn't urgent so we can take our time - he doesn't want me spending a large sum of money on tests if it isn't needed. He suspects it isn't a thyroid issue as he has none of the symptoms, other than weight gain, that a thyroid issue would bring. The best thing is he didn't try to sell me food, just told me to cut my barf back. He was amazed at how little I feed but said Gizmo was in good condition so he is getting all the nutrients he requires.

No, but it is an all meat diet. I've been using all meat diets for over 2 years now. By meat that includes bones & offal. He only gets plain mince twice or three times a week, the rest are bones.

Someone should run a seminar on using the e-collar with aggression...

Our neighbours cant get to the dogs, they are about 50-100m inside the boundary so we'd notice. It is possible someone is feeding him, but I doubt it. I am betting on a medical issue here. We'll see what the vet says but if there is no medical problem then I'm not sure what I am going to do. Gizmo always wants food, is always hungry. It's working well for training but I don't like having him this hungry all the time but I don't have an option. Vet tomorrow! Had to cancel this mornings appointment.

Midol, the anthropomorphising I was referring to was the fact that you feel a dog is being dominant if is it not listening to you. You come accross as placing YOUR human emotions and beliefs onto your dog's actions. Almost as though you take it as a challenge to your persona and status when your dog doesn't listen to a command. I never said that was the only reason. In fact, I've said multiple times that it isn't the only reason. There are probably dozens of reasons why a dog won't respond to a command, one of those is dominance. I'm not placing any of my emotions into the dog's actions. Anyway, won't be checking back in, cbf posting in here when people ignore half of the things I say.

Thanks Yeah, at the start a few seemed closed minded and I was going to edit those entries but figured I'd show the way people changed their views. Once they realised the correct ways to use the tools everyone seemed eager to use them! Including myself of course, with the head collars. The main problem I found was people had been using the tools incorrectly (this is including myself) so our views were a bit off. I remember the person who was most against using check chains actually complained that her dog was too well behaved and she couldn't practice I'd love to get the same group next time with the same people but I doubt it. Don't mean to be rude, but who were you? I think I know who you are but not 100% sure. Yeah, it's great writing things out. I have the next two days written by pen but cbf typing it up just yet I've already finished assessments 3 & 4, I actually did them on the plane Super eager. Where did you do your first block? I want to redo mine too lol - anyone have some spare money floating around. i did my block at melbourne it was great. Steve Austin was a guest speaker at one of our lectures. I'm glad I went to melbourne now, apparently we get access to more instructors in melb.

That's what I said earlier tkay.....totally agree! I'm only responding to these two comments here, and won't be responding to anything else in this thread. Anthropomorphism is applying attributes unique to humans to animals. If a dog can't "know" something and can't make a choice then behaviour modification is impossible. A choice is deciding between two outcomes. Lets say I was using an e-collar as +P. The dog quickly learns (so he knows) that if he disobeys my sit even at a distance, he'll get a zap. This means he makes the choice to listen to my command. Also Kelpie, if you honestly think that comment was Anthropomorphising then you better fire almost all of the trainers working for you. I heard every single one of them refer to a dogs ability to make choices.

I tried dry food for 3 weeks, his weight still slowly went up No one else is feeding him. Everyone in my family knows if they feed my dog shit there will be hell to pay I really don't think it is diet related as for over 8 months he did fine on barf @ 350g a day then suddenly he started going up. That was on fatty barf as well, now he is on 200g a day and lean beef so really, he should be losing weight very fast. I'll try dry food again though I guess, a specific weight loss one.

It's submitting, submission is giving control to someone else. If the dog hands over control to you, then that's a form of submission.

I need ideas on getting experience with dogs! I contacted our local shelter, but they have a "full qualified trainer & behaviourist" but they're still going to see if they can offer me anything. They were worried our methods could clash but I'm happy to have their trainer instruct me on her methods and only perform those. We only have one obedience club in our area, I'll contact them tomorrow. But does anyone have any other ideas on how I could obtain experience?

Ethics are personal though, and not relevant to a discussion on dominance. When people start discussing ethics in training I usually tune out. As long as the dog isn't abused, I don't care how or why it is trained. Why do we need to know that? Our dogs are influenced by us so knowing how they'd behave without us is useless information that benefits no one. Knowing how they behave and pack structure works in our homes, in a captive environment is far more useful than knowing how some random scavangers live. If I knew my sibes wouldn't stick together as a pack in the "wild" then how does that benefit me? What benefit does it bring to my training? I only care about how they interact with my influence, as that's all that is relevant. ETA: I do find such information interesting though. Besides, imo, if we dumped a family of sibes out and a family of cavaliers they are going to behave completely different. We've altered the domestic dogs instincts and behaviours, so even comparing to the village dogs is useless as very few of our dogs even resemble them. Not to mention I don't even know what type of dog you're refering to as the "village dog" Yaha. I don't know of a single person who thinks pack structure isn't altered by our behaviour. It's obvious we have an influence on the packs in our homes, it's not new. I don't know of a single person in the dog world (but I don't know that many) who thinks we have no influence over the pack hierarchy in our homes, that's pretty much the entire point of the dominance theory, that we have to ensure our dogs know we are the leaders of the pack. In wild grey wolf packs, the alpha or dominant dog is based on parentage. In a domestic/captive situation it isn't. So if someone is keeping a wolf a a domestic or captive environment which information is more important to them? The info on wolves in captivity or the info on wolves in the wild? You've still not given me a single reason to demonstrate why we need to know how a dog would react without our influence.

If a prey item runs past it's a distraction. I've said about 50 times now that my comment only applies when something is NOT a distraction. I really can't be bothered discussing this if everyone keeps picking and choosing which parts of my comments they want to read. We don't use instincts for everything, only certain behaviours are trained by developing a dogs instincts. Not all, even so, my GSD is a high drive dog and I fully expect him to control his instincts, if he doesn't he is punished for it. It doesn't take them long to realise that they listen to me, not their instincts. This is so far off topic that I can't be bothered though. Having the expectation that a dog has impulse control is not something so far fetched that they can't do it. We do have control over them and it is demonstrated by many of the top trainers every single day. That is what seperates a good trainer from a great trainer. I've quickly learnt that the not being able to do x with y breed is a load of shit, and something lazy owners and trainers use to justify their dogs poor training. Still fail to see what your point is. Why is the village dog relevant? Why is it relevant studying how dogs interact without humans? If anything the one we should be comparing our dogs is to the captive grey wolf packs - to me that is the real logical comparison, same species and similar living conditions. The fact is our dogs are influenced by us, all that matters is how they behave with us. I don't care if my dogs would have a pack structure if I let them run wild. I only care if they have a pack structure when they are with me, and they do. I honestly can't see the point your trying to make. Even if you did somehow convince me that there is no pack structure in domestic dogs and dominance does not exist it wouldn't change how I train my dogs, it's all semantics.

But is Gizmo letting Lily do some things first because he is not interested in doing it at the time or are there other factors in play? I think that the influence of humans is far stronger in determining the presence of a hierarchy than first thought, and because of this I think that the hierarchies we see are not necessarily interactions between the dogs themselves but behaviours which are influenced by an external factor (ie us). As a result I don't think any perception of dominance can really ever be accurate. This paper suggests that the only strict hierarchies are found in captive environments which to me screams that they are nothing more than a by-product of human intervention and as such will not be understood until we understand exactly what the effects of our intervention are. I have huge issues with that paper. Probably shouldn't go into it now. But comparisons to wild wolf packs is irrelevant. Comparisons to captive wolf packs are the only comparison tools we have. Of course the behaviours and pack structures are influenced by us, but why does it matter? How does it change what they are doing? IMO, it doesn't. If it is a by-product of human intervention how does this change what it is? That paper is very, very flawed in my opinion as well. It is very generalised, ignores the fact that many breeds have had their pack drives virtually stripped from them and some have very strong pack drives retained (such as our own breed, the sibe). Using papers like this to justify your argument is useless though. For every paper you present that claims pack structure doesn't exist I can produce one that says it does, same for dominance. I failed to see how human intervention and external forces changes anything regarding dominance and dominance theory. What is training other than the harnessing of an instinct for our own purposes? As such can the animal be truly said to be disobedient when it follows that instinct (even though it is not at our direction)? Not seeing your point.

If the dog is ignoring you due to a distraction then it isn't trained. I know the phases go teach->train->proof but when I say train I am assuming all 3 stages are complete. I have said a few times now that the dog is ignoring you simply because they don't want to comply, not because they are distracted. If a dog leaves its pack to mate, then it's no longer a part of that pack so whether it is being dominant or not is irrelevant.

From my perspective, nothing. But you've lost control of him which is the key. It might not directly be because the dog is dominant, but it is a dominant action in my opinion, as he is ignoring the control you have. Subordinate dogs should do what the Dominant dog tells it to do - that's how a social hierarchy works. If the dog doesn't listen to the pack leader then it isn't a Subordinate dog, if the dog fails to do so, then it is no longer a subordinate dog imo. Is there neutral territory where the dog is neither subordinate or dominant? IMO, yes, and that's a stage where the dog is fighting for the dominant position which is just as bad if not worse than being the dominant dog. This is all assuming the dog has learnt that there are consequences for ignoring the directions of the pack leader or dominant figure in the hierarchy. I think that you are working off the perception that the social hierarchy is finite and clear, I don't believe it is. It has been shown that the social structures of wild animals are not as finite and strucutred as first thought, in fact many question whether any true hierarchy exists in the wild. It could quite feasibly be a human construct. In that we have decided that there is a hierarchy and it must be enforced, even the dog-dog interactions we observe are influenced by our own behaviours which the dog's interpret and incorporate into their behaviour. Sort of. I believe the pack leader is always the pack leader. They just allow subordinate dogs access to resources first when they aren't interested in them. Like Gizmo, he is the leader here but he lets Lily do things first, that isn't because she is dominant over those things it is because he lets her have access to those things as he doesn't want them, I know in some homes subordinate dogs are food aggressive but I don't believe dominance and aggression are the same thing. I've read the "evidence" that social hierarchys are fluid and I simply have a different interpretation of that evidence. I've yet to see any decent proof that social hierarchys don't exist, yet plenty that say they do. This is all theory, no one is right and no one is wrong.