Just Midol

I like Cosmos The thing I am confused about is the specifically say they tested both single dogs and dogs in pairs but then don't really give any real results. I don't believe dogs feel envy but in order to properly refute a study you have to have read the entire study.

http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/2414/do...us-and-petulant Does anyone have a link to the study? I want to see how they conducted the study and whether they tested the dogs alone as well. I find the study to be a load of crap just based on that info, but I want to read it properly.

A leader is someone who sets the rules and regulates. I set the rules for my dogs, and I regulate the resources. How is that not leading my pack (in terms of a social pack, not a hunting pack)? ETA: Wait, is your point that whilst WE are performing what a leader would... the dog isn't recognising us as the leader?

Yeah, their details would be great. CanineCountry originally said they'd deliver to me and then changed their minds when I went to place an order.

Does anyone know of anyone within 2 hours or so of Brisbane who sells meats and bones? http://www.caninecountry.com.au won't deliver to me so I am checking if anyone else is cheaper before I drive all the way there. I recall someone mentioning a store somewhere (WEIA?) selling stuff cheap.

A good cordless model would do fine.

Great point...you could see this is as a mutual understanding and agreement between two distinct personalities for the purpose of calm co-existence or you could see this as hierarchy. isn't that hierarchy? I think it is. Dog A: If I eat that piece of poo Dog B will kick the crap out of me. Dob B: If he eats that piece of poo I'll kick the crap out of him. Mutual understanding, social hierarchy.

Yay But another question. Under his theories, if we went and grabbed a few dingos (or any wild dog which does not work as a "pack" but more as a loose community) and placed them in a confined area (such as a backyard and/or a house) that they would not work out any hierarchy of most important -> least important dog? If not, how would the dogs function? Every dog is always doing to be attempting to "go" first. Under his ideas (of no pack structure or social hierarchy existing in dogs) logically the only conclusion is either death, or constant fights. Even if the dogs work out that "we have to let x dog go first or we get the snot beaten out of us" then that's a social hierarchy. I understand, and even accept that in the wild such dogs have no social structure, but I am finding it hard to accept within a confined area. Lily has learnt that she does not mess with Gizmos food, and if food is somehow dropped that she does not intefere with it unless I say so or Gizmo will tell her off. She has learnt that if she goes first, Gizmo will give her a talking to. That's social structure, he is more important/powerful than she is so she must listen to him. Pack used in this post is simply social structure, not to do with the concept of hunting. Basically, I am having trouble grasping that dogs have no social hierarchy and structure within a confined area From what you've posted, it seems his theories focus on the wild where we are more interested in the domestic setting. Not sure if this post has made sense, but if not, say so and I'll put it a different way.

geez and its hardly a situation related to this discussion is it well she would have no reason to re-charge the consultation fee for the operation as she has already done a diagnosis and plan of treatment. Hardly the same as giving a money back guarentee for ones word Midol. She asked if my vet gives consults for no charge if we dont fix the problem. If we didn't, I wouldn't have been charged. Can't be bothered, you seem to disagree with everything I say simply because I say it.

Yeah, she's not my normal vet :S I use the man, but the man wasn't there. If the treatment doesn't work, then I get my next consult free. She doesn't say that, it's just what happens. When Montu had an issue with his mouth we couldn't figure out what it was without an operation. We treated it as though it was a bite first, then if it wasn't, I'd come back and we'd operate and she'd take the price of the first consult off the operation. That's hardly an issue of incompetence.

I want to, when is he coming? It's hard to ask my questions over the internet, for some reason I think it'd be easier in person. Plus, some of the questions I want to ask I probably can't.

crap. then your vet has no confidence in their abilities. Strength in your convictions. What? They give free follow up consults? How is that no confidence in their abilities? If anything, it is good service. Sorry, but you have no idea of my vets skill levels so it's pretty damn rude to insult my vet(s) like that. I've also been given antibiotics three times and only had to pay for them once (for three different issues.)

If they can prevent her from getting preggers, then there is no real reason to desex other than convenience. Can't you get those funky implants?

do you ever take it off? Certainly, it goes on for 5-8 hours a day.

Midol one question.. why on earth would you want to even consider putting an E collar on a pup or a dog ASAP??? if he gets stimulated by your rewarding hin then what is that going to achieve? please explain this? Because I'm not going to wait for him to disobey me, what if one day I ask him to recall and he doesn't, it's been 100% before but this one time he decides not to and I don't have a lead on him? I have no way of correcting it. My way of training recalls is to never, ever, give the dog an option of disobeying right from when he is a pup to an adult. He's got an e-collar on him now, and has had it on him for about 5 weeks now. I've never had to use it yet, but I'll remain prepared for when I do need to use it. I don't use an e-collar as a correction usually, but will do so, and I'd use an e-collar before I'd use any other tool - I don't even use prongs anymore as I feel the e-collar causes less discomfort, but is more effective. When I do use my e-collar as a correction I think it is one of the softest corrections I can apply. I use Steves method which works off the lowest level the dog can feel, it probably causes less discomfort than pulling on a lead does! I've also bonded him too closely to me and I'm having to fix that and the two ways I've been told to do this is: 1) Less time with me. 2) Less vocal handler praise, more physical praise. The combination of both means he is more likely to ignore one of my commands in the near future as his only reward at this stage, is my praise which I can not give too much of.

Yep, and my vet gives me the next consult at no charge. When I took Lily in for an ear issue, I also discussed a urine issue. I got my next checkup for her urine at no cost, even though the two issues were completely unrelated. I guess I would differentiate between a behavioural problem and a training issue though. MAYBE with a behavioural problem my guarantee expectation wouldn't be so iron clad as it isn't so simple. My dogs have never had a major behavioural issue so I'm finding it tough to consider it properly. I think it depends on the issue involved. For example, I wouldn't expect a guarantee on fixing Gizmos DA (but I don't really care about fixing it.)

You should be telling them the time frame & shouldn't most behavioural problems require more than one session anyway? Or first session - break - follow up. If they've been doing what you said in the first and haven't seen results then it's obviously your training program. If they've forgotten a few details and done it wrong then they haven't been doing what you said.

Yes (I expect them). The only two trainers I've used are great. If a trainer tells me what to do, I do it, and don't see results I expect either my money back or another program drawn up. But like Jules, I see a trainer to learn how to fix issues myself and to expand my knowledge, not to fix my dog. That comes down on me. If something did not work at all and I had done it how I was taught I'd expect money back or another session.

Black, meet white. White, meet black. Some people live in a black and white world.

Hmmm. Tkay, your posts are basically reninforcing what I already believed, that pack drive is related to the breed of dog. Some breeds have it, some don't. Obviously individual variations within each breed. Kavik, recent for me was further back than that Sibes used to be let lose, to fend on their own through summer (I think) so they had to be able to survive as a group & hunt. It was in this period that afaik, they were reintroducing the wolf. Don't ask me where I read that though as I really have no idea. It's possible I imagined it.

I am sorry to say I totally disagree, because a dog can run does NOT mean that it's hips are fine. I have a bitch here that can move all day and she works and works...but sadly her hips are stuffed. Another example - a dog that did a lot of winning in the AB ring as well as doing very very well at Specialty level did move great, could keep moving correctly....but sadly that one had very high scoring hips.................you would have never known by the way it moved. As I have said .......Just because a dog moves great does Not mean it has great hips, radiographic evidence is the only True way to know for sure. I would rather have an informed picture of the health status of hips than guess based on movement alone..............but that is my opinion. A husky working (sport or work) is far different to a dog running around a ring. A husky pulling places pretty intense stress on their hips and joints, running does not. The two are nothing alike. I never said judged on movement either, you brought that up yourself. Don't expect you to agree, don't really expect many people to agree. Doesn't really bother me. A husky managing to run multiple trials (sledding) to me is a better indication than any x-ray is and I'd take that over an x-ray. Nothing in the dog world is black & white, so you should stop treating it as though it is.

Question from me! Did he (or do you know of anyone) believe that some breeds of dogs evolved from different species of wolves? Does he take into account that some breeds (like mine) have probably been crossed with wolves fairly recently. I remember reading a study a while ago on ancient dog breeds, they worked out which dogs could be considered ancient by how much of their DNA matches wolves. Naturally, sibes were very, very high. They said this could be because sibes were recently crossed with wolves. Couldn't this mean that some breeds of dogs will have more natural wolf behaviours than others? Also, I'm sure you've seen the movie 8 below. That was based on a true story, the dogs all stayed together. Doesn't this in some way prove that dogs can and do form packs? *I might have my movie names muddled up, I mean the one where they leave the dogs behind.

Always keep an open mind I say! The answers you seek aren't always in the places you look. What has leadership got to do with pack and rank? I can be a good leader but I am not necessarily a dominating boss. If you believe in pack & rank, then you have to believe the pack has a leader, well, you don't have to but the entire hypothetical in my post is based on there being a pack structure with a leader. If you don't agree with that theory, then how can you contribute in a constructive manner to this thread? I was asking for some pretty specific views/opinions, it isn't and was never intended to be a thread to discuss pack & rank theories. Main question was: If you don't believe in pack ranks then you can't answer my question.

I love big dogs, none of mine have ever woken me in the night for a pee :D

:D What? I've discussed training with people who don't believe in it but this particular thread requires you to believe in pack rank/dominance theories in order to contribute properly. If you don't, then you obviously don't believe in leadership... Which is the main point of this thread. A useful contribution would be nice, but I guess I can't expect that from everyone.