Dominant Dogs

[JoeK]

Is anyone else seriously loving Joe's accent?

Thank you, so very kind.

Like the training make good dog, I hoping my chatting makes good english, yes?. I tell my wife I get on here for my english improving, but she ask why a dog forum to do this, she think I come here because for chat about dogs, nothing do do with learning better english, but is good excuse to chat dogs for me, but I dont think she believe me?. Never mind is good to chat dogs for pleasure anyway, yes?

Joe

[corvus]

Is anyone else seriously loving Joe's accent?

Thank you, so very kind.

Like the training make good dog, I hoping my chatting makes good english, yes?. I tell my wife I get on here for my english improving, but she ask why a dog forum to do this, she think I come here because for chat about dogs, nothing do do with learning better english, but is good excuse to chat dogs for me, but I dont think she believe me?. Never mind is good to chat dogs for pleasure anyway, yes?

Joe

Love it! I think your english is already improving and you've barely been here a week, Joe. May as well practice your english chatting about something you're interested in. :D

[moosmum]

Is anyone else seriously loving Joe's accent?

Thank you, so very kind.

Like the training make good dog, I hoping my chatting makes good english, yes?. I tell my wife I get on here for my english improving, but she ask why a dog forum to do this, she think I come here because for chat about dogs, nothing do do with learning better english, but is good excuse to chat dogs for me, but I dont think she believe me?. Never mind is good to chat dogs for pleasure anyway, yes?

Joe

Love it! I think your english is already improving and you've barely been here a week, Joe. May as well practice your english chatting about something you're interested in. :D

X 2, and you do get your point across very effectively.

[JoeK]

So what happens if 2 dominant dogs come face to face - as I'm guessing this is what's happening in these cases?

As long as both dogs are on lead and are apart, all you have to do is put your hand gently on the side of your dog's face, and redirect it to avoid eye contact.

You may be able to train your dog to look away with a verbal command too. Distraction is another tool you can use.

Truly dominant dogs facing face, nothing happens unless one tries to dominate other. Domimant dogs are not reactive like people think is true. Sometimes a defensive dog will feel scared of a dominant dog and try to act tough with him and a fight will happen, usually not bad fighting because the lesser dominant dog will back down and the fighting stops. But when we have the real trouble is when two dominant dogs come to challenge over something like food or posession and they both engage to fight is when they want to kill each other, very bad fight happening. They also steadily get more interested in the fighting living together because both dogs think they are the boss.

If two dog meet and want to kill each other instantly, one of this dogs will be defense driving to cause the fighting trigger I have found in my experiences. Claiming the boss figure in dominance takes more time to happen usually.

Joe

I forgetting to mention, often two dogs in the dominance first meeting ignor each other, then often very slow in the movements they check each other out, bit of sniff, walk around each other, tails high with little fast wagging on the end of the tail, and what you need to watch is if one dog puts is head over the other one shoulder and that one he growl, fight is coming and I separate them, not taking the chance with this posture of each other.

Joe

Edited March 16, 2011 by JoeK

[JoeK]

Is anyone else seriously loving Joe's accent?

Thank you, so very kind.

Like the training make good dog, I hoping my chatting makes good english, yes?. I tell my wife I get on here for my english improving, but she ask why a dog forum to do this, she think I come here because for chat about dogs, nothing do do with learning better english, but is good excuse to chat dogs for me, but I dont think she believe me?. Never mind is good to chat dogs for pleasure anyway, yes?

Joe

Love it! I think your english is already improving and you've barely been here a week, Joe. May as well practice your english chatting about something you're interested in. :D

Thank you, I tell my wife that too.

Joe

[Greytmate]

Truly dominant dogs facing face, nothing happens unless one tries to dominate other. Domimant dogs are not reactive like people think is true. Sometimes a defensive dog will feel scared of a dominant dog and try to act tough with him and a fight will happen, usually not bad fighting because the lesser dominant dog will back down and the fighting stops. But when we have the real trouble is when two dominant dogs come to challenge over something like food or posession and they both engage to fight is when they want to kill each other, very bad fight happening. They also steadily get more interested in the fighting living together because both dogs think they are the boss.

If two dog meet and want to kill each other instantly, one of this dogs will be defense driving to cause the fighting trigger I have found in my experiences. Claiming the boss figure in dominance takes more time to happen usually.

I think that territory can be a resource, just like the food or the possession.

A dog can consider a place (and the things that are within it) as its own territory if it is regularly taken there for activity.

With dogs that live together or not, I don't think any incident is just about generally being 'the boss', it's about controlling territory or another specific resource and will also depend on whether the dogs are aroused/excited/motivated enough for a challenge at that moment.

Dominant dogs can and do challenge other dogs to retain their dominant position when they feel its worthwhile to do so to control a resource, I wouldn't say they are never reactive. But I wouldn't say that every dog that reacts to another dog is being or attempting to be dominant. You wouldn't be able to gently turn the head and avert the gaze of a dog that was overreacting defensively, but you can do it with a self-assured dog that is calmly and stiffly sizing up a likely competitor who is doing the same thing back.

In fact, I don't really like using the word dominant to describe a dog, as I believe that dog heirachy is fluid, and a dog can only be dominant in a particular time and circumstance and in relation to the other dogs it is with. If we are trying to describe an individual dog and its inherent traits there are much better words to use than dominant. Better to use words that describe a dog's actions, rather than just a label like that.

[JoeK]

Truly dominant dogs facing face, nothing happens unless one tries to dominate other. Domimant dogs are not reactive like people think is true. Sometimes a defensive dog will feel scared of a dominant dog and try to act tough with him and a fight will happen, usually not bad fighting because the lesser dominant dog will back down and the fighting stops. But when we have the real trouble is when two dominant dogs come to challenge over something like food or posession and they both engage to fight is when they want to kill each other, very bad fight happening. They also steadily get more interested in the fighting living together because both dogs think they are the boss.

If two dog meet and want to kill each other instantly, one of this dogs will be defense driving to cause the fighting trigger I have found in my experiences. Claiming the boss figure in dominance takes more time to happen usually.

I think that territory can be a resource, just like the food or the possession.

A dog can consider a place (and the things that are within it) as its own territory if it is regularly taken there for activity.

With dogs that live together or not, I don't think any incident is just about generally being 'the boss', it's about controlling territory or another specific resource and will also depend on whether the dogs are aroused/excited/motivated enough for a challenge at that moment.

Dominant dogs can and do challenge other dogs to retain their dominant position when they feel its worthwhile to do so to control a resource, I wouldn't say they are never reactive. But I wouldn't say that every dog that reacts to another dog is being or attempting to be dominant. You wouldn't be able to gently turn the head and avert the gaze of a dog that was overreacting defensively, but you can do it with a self-assured dog that is calmly and stiffly sizing up a likely competitor who is doing the same thing back.

In fact, I don't really like using the word dominant to describe a dog, as I believe that dog heirachy is fluid, and a dog can only be dominant in a particular time and circumstance and in relation to the other dogs it is with. If we are trying to describe an individual dog and its inherent traits there are much better words to use than dominant. Better to use words that describe a dog's actions, rather than just a label like that.

Yes, I very much commend this summary of the dominance is very good explanation I thinking also.

Many a time people tell me Joe, my dog is very hard and dominant. What I see sometimes is insecure dog working aggressively in the defense drive, or I see territorial dog working in defense drive feeling his territory is under the threat. Sometimes they tell me Joe, this dog is weak and lacking manhood, he just stand there and do nothing?. But, sometimes this dog who stand there and do nothing, is very confident and dominant dog and he do nothing because nobody challenge him and the other dogs submit to his aura, yes?

Dominance is very difficult term, and meaning different things for different peoples and groups, but most important for me saying (my opinion) please for nobody thinking automatic that dominant means aggression and reactive is not true. Many true dominant dogs never fighting another dog because the other dogs submitting to the dominance aura he projecting. Is like nobody much will pick a fight with a soldier on guard with machine gun, you not beat him un armed is a given. The submissive dog he think the same with the dominant dog is a given he dont win should he fight him, so the soldier and the dominant dog can stand there and do nothing, yes?

Thanks

Joe.

Edited March 17, 2011 by JoeK

[corvus]

I would love it if Erik were just a little less defensive. He scares the hell out of people that come to the door, but really he just feels overwhelmed. It's not good for him. I think that he would be happier if he was a little more discriminatory about potential threats. I've done stacks of socialisation with him and I believe it has helped, but I also think he's always going to be a bit fiery.

[Greytmate]

Truly dominant dogs facing face, nothing happens unless one tries to dominate other. Domimant dogs are not reactive like people think is true. Sometimes a defensive dog will feel scared of a dominant dog and try to act tough with him and a fight will happen, usually not bad fighting because the lesser dominant dog will back down and the fighting stops. But when we have the real trouble is when two dominant dogs come to challenge over something like food or posession and they both engage to fight is when they want to kill each other, very bad fight happening. They also steadily get more interested in the fighting living together because both dogs think they are the boss.

If two dog meet and want to kill each other instantly, one of this dogs will be defense driving to cause the fighting trigger I have found in my experiences. Claiming the boss figure in dominance takes more time to happen usually.

I think that territory can be a resource, just like the food or the possession.

A dog can consider a place (and the things that are within it) as its own territory if it is regularly taken there for activity.

With dogs that live together or not, I don't think any incident is just about generally being 'the boss', it's about controlling territory or another specific resource and will also depend on whether the dogs are aroused/excited/motivated enough for a challenge at that moment.

Dominant dogs can and do challenge other dogs to retain their dominant position when they feel its worthwhile to do so to control a resource, I wouldn't say they are never reactive. But I wouldn't say that every dog that reacts to another dog is being or attempting to be dominant. You wouldn't be able to gently turn the head and avert the gaze of a dog that was overreacting defensively, but you can do it with a self-assured dog that is calmly and stiffly sizing up a likely competitor who is doing the same thing back.

In fact, I don't really like using the word dominant to describe a dog, as I believe that dog heirachy is fluid, and a dog can only be dominant in a particular time and circumstance and in relation to the other dogs it is with. If we are trying to describe an individual dog and its inherent traits there are much better words to use than dominant. Better to use words that describe a dog's actions, rather than just a label like that.

Yes, I very much commend this summary of the dominance is very good explanation I thinking also.

Many a time people tell me Joe, my dog is very hard and dominant. What I see sometimes is insecure dog working aggressively in the defense drive, or I see territorial dog working in defense drive feeling his territory is under the threat. Sometimes they tell me Joe, this dog is weak and lacking manhood, he just stand there and do nothing?. But, sometimes this dog who stand there and do nothing, is very confident and dominant dog and he do nothing because nobody challenge him and the other dogs submit to his aura, yes?

Dominance is very difficult term, and meaning different things for different peoples and groups, but most important for me saying (my opinion) please for nobody thinking automatic that dominant means aggression and reactive is not true. Many true dominant dogs never fighting another dog because the other dogs submitting to the dominance aura he projecting. Is like nobody much will pick a fight with a soldier on guard with machine gun, you not beat him un armed is a given. The submissive dog he think the same with the dominant dog is a given he dont win should he fight him, so the soldier and the dominant dog can stand there and do nothing, yes?

Thanks

Joe.

Yes, definitely.

One dog I had, Sam, was very confident, happy, peaceful and could be described as dominant. He was never aggressive, and didn't react much to other dogs apart from standing still and tall, and a quick bum sniff if he could be bothered. He did not even acknowledge toy-sized dogs at all, it was as though they didn't exist. No matter what they did to him. He would react to a bitch in season by drooling copiously all over her.

We went to agility class every week. There was a large male rough collie there, of similar temperament to Sam.

Both of these dogs were surrounded by dozens of other dogs. Both were happy to be at agility and very well behaved.

Then Sam and the Collie started eye balling each other when we were waiting our turn for pieces of equipment. They would stiffen and scratch and stare with a hard eye for a while, then Sam would start to growl very deeply and softly. You could feel it more than hear it.

But all I needed to do to stop the stare and the stance was to gently turn Sam's head away and lead him off. But I had to do this every time I caught Sam staring, and so did the collie's owner.

This only happened when standing around for ages waiting for equipment, both dogs were fine when off lead and working. So we made sure we kept our dogs right away from each other and the situation couldn't develop.

Edited March 17, 2011 by Greytmate

[aussielover]

There is a difference between dominant towards other dogs and dominant towards humans.

Dominant dogs want everything their way, and they are not afraid of using force to get it.

[JoeK]

Truly dominant dogs facing face, nothing happens unless one tries to dominate other. Domimant dogs are not reactive like people think is true. Sometimes a defensive dog will feel scared of a dominant dog and try to act tough with him and a fight will happen, usually not bad fighting because the lesser dominant dog will back down and the fighting stops. But when we have the real trouble is when two dominant dogs come to challenge over something like food or posession and they both engage to fight is when they want to kill each other, very bad fight happening. They also steadily get more interested in the fighting living together because both dogs think they are the boss.

If two dog meet and want to kill each other instantly, one of this dogs will be defense driving to cause the fighting trigger I have found in my experiences. Claiming the boss figure in dominance takes more time to happen usually.

I think that territory can be a resource, just like the food or the possession.

A dog can consider a place (and the things that are within it) as its own territory if it is regularly taken there for activity.

With dogs that live together or not, I don't think any incident is just about generally being 'the boss', it's about controlling territory or another specific resource and will also depend on whether the dogs are aroused/excited/motivated enough for a challenge at that moment.

Dominant dogs can and do challenge other dogs to retain their dominant position when they feel its worthwhile to do so to control a resource, I wouldn't say they are never reactive. But I wouldn't say that every dog that reacts to another dog is being or attempting to be dominant. You wouldn't be able to gently turn the head and avert the gaze of a dog that was overreacting defensively, but you can do it with a self-assured dog that is calmly and stiffly sizing up a likely competitor who is doing the same thing back.

In fact, I don't really like using the word dominant to describe a dog, as I believe that dog heirachy is fluid, and a dog can only be dominant in a particular time and circumstance and in relation to the other dogs it is with. If we are trying to describe an individual dog and its inherent traits there are much better words to use than dominant. Better to use words that describe a dog's actions, rather than just a label like that.

Yes, I very much commend this summary of the dominance is very good explanation I thinking also.

Many a time people tell me Joe, my dog is very hard and dominant. What I see sometimes is insecure dog working aggressively in the defense drive, or I see territorial dog working in defense drive feeling his territory is under the threat. Sometimes they tell me Joe, this dog is weak and lacking manhood, he just stand there and do nothing?. But, sometimes this dog who stand there and do nothing, is very confident and dominant dog and he do nothing because nobody challenge him and the other dogs submit to his aura, yes?

Dominance is very difficult term, and meaning different things for different peoples and groups, but most important for me saying (my opinion) please for nobody thinking automatic that dominant means aggression and reactive is not true. Many true dominant dogs never fighting another dog because the other dogs submitting to the dominance aura he projecting. Is like nobody much will pick a fight with a soldier on guard with machine gun, you not beat him un armed is a given. The submissive dog he think the same with the dominant dog is a given he dont win should he fight him, so the soldier and the dominant dog can stand there and do nothing, yes?

Thanks

Joe.

Yes, definitely.

One dog I had, Sam, was very confident, happy, peaceful and could be described as dominant. He was never aggressive, and didn't react much to other dogs apart from standing still and tall, and a quick bum sniff if he could be bothered. He did not even acknowledge toy-sized dogs at all, it was as though they didn't exist. No matter what they did to him. He would react to a bitch in season by drooling copiously all over her.

We went to agility class every week. There was a large male rough collie there, of similar temperament to Sam.

Both of these dogs were surrounded by dozens of other dogs. Both were happy to be at agility and very well behaved.

Then Sam and the Collie started eye balling each other when we were waiting our turn for pieces of equipment. They would stiffen and scratch and stare with a hard eye for a while, then Sam would start to growl very deeply and softly. You could feel it more than hear it.

But all I needed to do to stop the stare and the stance was to gently turn Sam's head away and lead him off. But I had to do this every time I caught Sam staring, and so did the collie's owner.

This only happened when standing around for ages waiting for equipment, both dogs were fine when off lead and working. So we made sure we kept our dogs right away from each other and the situation couldn't develop.

The growl begin very soft like a pussy cat purring I describe when they first start a hairy eyeball then he wind him up the growl if you not stop them. The low and soft growl very common I find in the dominant Shepherd dog often too.

Joe

[JoeK]

There is a difference between dominant towards other dogs and dominant towards humans.

Dominant dogs want everything their way, and they are not afraid of using force to get it.

Yes, maybe little bit, but perhaps some defense more than dominance you seeing?

Joe

[Jumabaar]

There is a difference between dominant towards other dogs and dominant towards humans.

Dominant dogs want everything their way, and they are not afraid of using force to get it.

Yes, maybe little bit, but perhaps some defense more than dominance you seeing?

Joe

I agree with Joe, most dominant dogs don't see the need to use force, because if they are truly dominant they don't need to use it.

Dogs that are dominant to humans also don't need to use force because their human just does what the dog tells them to do. I think dogs that use force with humans are more fearful (defensive) because they are being forced to be dominant/ take the lead when they are not naturally meant to be.

[corvus]

I agree with Joe, most dominant dogs don't see the need to use force, because if they are truly dominant they don't need to use it.

Well... What if said dog is quite small? I think it's erroneous to completely disregard relative size. I've met some little dogs that have things well in hand, but I've never met one that can do it with a look. My last dog, Penny, got close, but she knew it wouldn't work on every dog.

[JoeK]

I agree with Joe, most dominant dogs don't see the need to use force, because if they are truly dominant they don't need to use it.

Well... What if said dog is quite small? I think it's erroneous to completely disregard relative size. I've met some little dogs that have things well in hand, but I've never met one that can do it with a look. My last dog, Penny, got close, but she knew it wouldn't work on every dog.

The dominant little dog I think maybe sometimes get defensive and reactive when their dominance not taken seriously. I remember little dog one time he display the dominance trait and the owner just flick him away with the foot, like easily managed because he small, cant flick away Shepherd dog on the foot, too big yes, and he get very nasty in the same way as big dog, but because he little, he doesnt impact on the mind as dominant trait and people think he just snappy little bugger, but he snappy because he get flicked around and not getting his own way. With the big dog, people more respect because he cause much injury and cant also push him around as easily in the body so the dominance of the dog doesnt grow into reactivity as much as happens in the little dog from more easily handling, but the trait I dont think matter because of size of dog, is the same in all size, except the little dog learn fast what happens if he try to dominate big dominant dog, maybe he try one maybe two times and the one who try three time probably now at the bridge of the rainbow yes!

Joe