MonElite Posted March 4, 2006 Share Posted March 4, 2006 I am not after shutzhund stuff, I am just after a dog who will recall no matter what! Or is there very little difference in the level of control/training between stopping a defence dog from biting, and the simple matter of having an errant dog come when called? IMHO there is verry little difference between the two scenarios you have mentioned. For example, your lovely (lets assume its small) dog is off lead and it runs towards my dog agressive dobe and doesnt want to leave, you are unable to recall your dog, it will be either that your dog will get kicked by me to prevent him from getting closer to my dog, or if Im unable to scare your dog off/walk away with mine and your dog ends up too close to my dogs teeth, it can be dead or seriously injured. Scenario 2 you are in the park your dog spots his friend across the road, runs towards it, you are unable to call it back and it gets run over by a car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KismetKat Posted March 4, 2006 Share Posted March 4, 2006 (edited) I am unsure how to read your post myszka - it comes across as being slightly aggressive and condecending. I trust tho, that this was not your intention. I wuill tho argue your first scenario - firstly if you expect ME to have 100% control over my dog (small or otherwise), then why not can I expect the same from you? Instead of kicking my (smaller or otherwise) dog, why are you not controlling your own? Secondly, why on EARTH are you walking your known dog-aggressive dog in an offleash park in the first place? 2nd scenario - yes this, and other sundry scenarios that one could imagine, are all reasons why I want I a more reliable recall. She is great at it under most conditions, but does occasionally suffer from 'deaf dog' when totally focused elswhere (possums for instance). i WANT to do something about it. However I guess the main thrust of my post was about the idealogy behind K9's method that the handler is the centre of the dogs universe and playing with other dogs is something of a no no. Thing is, like I said, part of what gives me joy in dog ownership is watchig her play with doggie friends. Is there a middle ground? Edited March 4, 2006 by KismetKat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yogibear Posted March 4, 2006 Share Posted March 4, 2006 Yes there is you can have a dog that will play ith other dogs and still come when called It takes hard work but then so does all training. Have you seen really reliable recalls by leslie neilson that is an excellent program that works really well i use a very similar program PM me your email and i will try to put something on papaer for you yb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonElite Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 KK - all my post was meant to do is answer your question of "is there a difference between a recall of a defence biting dog an a pet in an off leash park. IMHO there hardly is any and I gave two examples of why I belive so. As to walking my dog in any area I have a right to be in an off leash park with him on lead just like anyone else would. And Id expect any other owner to have their dog under adequate control as not to run up to my dog when I ask them not to. If your off lead dog comes flying towards mine on lead that doesnt like other dogs in his face, no matter where we are, I as alpha have an obligation to my dog to protect him, and if that means with my foot, it will be my foot. Hopefully before I use my foot your dog will take my hints before and leave us alone, and I will give it plenty off opportunities to leave us alone, but if it persists........ Im using "your" and "mine" dog as an example for this conversation, I dont actually mean your particular dog, I know nothing about your dog and its behaviours. Its just to ilustrate a scenario and what I personally would do. Middle ground? what do you mena by that? 5 out of 10 recalls? Im kidding here, dont take it personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cactus Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 I can understand where Tess is coming from. Some of us really value our dogs personality to the point where we accept their foibles as part of them and look at perfectly trained dogs as somewhat 'robotic'. By foibles I dont mean real behavioural issues. But I guess its all a matter of perspective. Sure we all want our dogs to have the basics down pat, but beyond that, some of us enjoy seeing our dogs reveal their personalities and enjoy the world through unstructured (but supervised) play. Maybe its just that we are attributing human values to them- maybe they dont share that sense of freedom at all. Maybe it isnt mentally unhealthy for them to be utterly dependant and servile as it would be for us. I just enjoy the fact that my dogs can be happy without me. Geeze I might croak tomorrow so they'd better like playing with others! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KismetKat Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 KK - all my post was meant to do is answer your question of "is there a difference between a recall of a defence biting dog an a pet in an off leash park. That is what I hoped - but this medium leaves itself open to many a msinterpreation of intent. Thus my cautious post. However I still take you to task about offleash parks - sure you might have the "right" to take your dog-aggressive dog there onlead, but I strongly feel it is very irresponsible. You are taking an animal with a problem into an environement you cannot control. it is this sort of thinking ('it is someone elses fault') that is leading us into living in "nanny states". Middle ground? what do you mena by that? 5 out of 10 recalls? Im kidding here, dont take it personally. Not taking it personally - and she is better than 5 out of 10 anyways *pokes tongue* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kavik Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 I also have a dog aggro dog. I don't take her to offleash parks - I do take her to quiet parks and she has a run when no one else is there. I understand where myszka is coming from. I can have my dog aggro dog under control and on leash on the street and what frustrates me more than anything is where another dog (friendly or not!) comes running up and the owner can't call it away! My dog can only go so far because of the leash, but the offlead dog can go anywhere. Sometimes the other dog has crossed a road to get to me! Sometimes I purposely cross a road if I see another dog coming. And Zoe who is dog aggro has the best recall of my dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KismetKat Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 I understand where myszka is coming from. I can have my dog aggro dog under control and on leash on the street and what frustrates me more than anything is where another dog (friendly or not!) comes running up and the owner can't call it away! That situation is perfectly understandable - you are in an onleash situation with another dog being offleash! And I too pick my times at visiting the park - I go at busy times. No not busy human times (weekends I especially avoid) but during the week I know of busy dog times when I know at least a couple of her friends will be there. She is fine when she has her mates to play with and other doggy parents to interact with, but a situation with no dog friends, and non-doggy humans barbequing or picnicking or playing touch footy - well best I avoid those till her recall is 100%. Mind you, why so many non-dog people insist on picnicking in dog parks escapes me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greytmate Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 However I still take you to task about offleash parks - sure you might have the "right" to take your dog-aggressive dog there onlead, but I strongly feel it is very irresponsible. You take her to task? It is actually illegal to have a dog that is not under control at any park, whether it is an off-leash park or not. It is you that is breaking the law by having a dog that will not reliably recall off-leash in public. The law states that the dog must be under control at all times. If your dog does not recall reliably, then it is not under your control. Just because a park is designated off-leash, does not mean that it is not public space for everyone else to enjoy as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KismetKat Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 It is actually illegal to have a dog that is not under control at any park, whether it is an off-leash park or not. In which case myszka is equally guilty - even tho onleash she does not have 100% control of her dog. She has admitted that she would have to scare or kick another dog away! Just because a park is designated off-leash, does not mean that it is not public space for everyone else to enjoy as well. and what about the kids on razor scoooters zooming around the play area. A right menace they are. Perhaps I could get them muzzled and leashed, or even put down? What is needed is some commonsense. As you would not picnic in the middle of an offleash area, you would also not picnic in the middle of a play area with a scooter trail. To insist on doing so is errant arrogance and stupidity. what did i say earlier about nanny states? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greytmate Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 I would scare other dogs away too if they tried to intrude into my space while I was walking my dog. Not every dog appreciates other dogs in their face. If you have a look at the Victorian dog laws, dogs are not supposed to be off-leash within a certain distance of a child's playground, even though the off leash area may be adjacent to the playground. So your dog should not be near kids on razor scooters within play areas. What about a child's right to be able to ride a scooter within a park without colliding with a dog? I don't think such children are menacing, anyone would think you are suggesting that they are purposely trying to hurt your dog. People should be able to picnic in any area of a park that they like. Many times I have had picnics on the grass with my dog lying next to me off-leash, and the off-leash area is the appropriate place to do this. Dogs are not permitted to be off-lead within a certain distance of BBQ areas either, regardless of whether the BBQ area is in or adjacent to an off-leash area. Say what you like about nanny states. I think perhaps you should read up on the legislation before you accuse others of being irresponsible. You obviously have little knowledge about your own responsibilities as a dog owner. The whole concept of leash free areas in parks is that the responsibility of the dog owner is to ensure that their dog does not interfere with the public enjoyment of public property. The fact that we have been given leash free areas is a recognition that some dogs owners can be responsible for ensuring that their dog is under control without having to be on leash. The whole concept of leash-free ares was never about giving anybody the right to allow their dog total freedom in public space. It seems that you are the one with the arrogant attitude here, and it is the attitude that dogs have more rights than other park users that will convince councils to reduce leash-free areas. Having a picnic in an open park is not the same as having a picnic on a bike path, and if you cannot see the difference, it can only be due to your own stupidity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 (edited) I 100% agree with Greytmate's comments here. But then, KismetKat, you'd know that, because you've been involved with more than just one or two threads on this topic ... in fact, wasn't one of them started by you? Although IMO it's already been discussed, tried, hashed etc. and even though some might not be able to recognise the 'respect and responsibility' Greytmate is referring to, may I respectfully suggest that if the debate on parks is to continue, we do so by resurrecting one of the 'other' threads for which the topic was relevant, rather than to distort a really great thread about socialisation & neutralisation? Edited March 5, 2006 by Erny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KismetKat Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 (edited) Actually greymate, I wasn't meaning kids and razor scooters and dogs, but kids on razor scooters and people! Parents buy these dangerous things and let kids who are FAR too young for them (imho) ride them about - often with either no helmets, or helmets that don't fit and are worn incorrectly. As an experienced motorcyclist it's a pet peeve. And I am well aware of the regulations regarding offleash dogs and playgrounds/bbq areas - and I observe them. I've also picnicked in an offlead area with my dog, but am tolerant of wandering labradors sniffing for a handout (which they don't get ). It's all a bit like that post about the dog beach where the woman didn't mind having a dog shake water over her cos it was a dog beach and it was to be expected and she was dressed approppriately anyway. However if a woman went to the dog beach, without a dog, and was dressed in her best cream linen suit... The nanny state would have various GR owners lining up to pay her drycleaning bill. How about her not doing something so silly in the first place? ETA - sorry erny, i have posted about this before, the thread has wandered offtopic. I really DID want to know about the middle ground from K9's methods. Edited March 5, 2006 by KismetKat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonElite Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 Ill start a new subject re off leash park and recalls etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve K9Pro Posted March 6, 2006 Author Share Posted March 6, 2006 Kismetkat: Firstly, my dog is 2 years old and I don't think I did all that stuff that I am apparently meant to have done in the first 12 months.So, is it too late? K9: yes if your dog has been socialised to other dogs for example, then its too late, & this has been extensively covered in the thread... Secondly, part of the joy I get out of my dog is watching her romp and play with her doggie friends. I would not give that up for quids as I get so much enjoyment out of it. K9: My dogs get that enjoyment out of playing with me... Thirdly - danger of playing. Well I have been going to the same park for 2 years now and at the times I go there are generally the same people/dogs there. I guess they are a 'loose"pack. (????) They know each other and have their special friends and genrally all get on (or ignore). Given the circumstances (regulars) does this make it a semi-controlled environment and is 'semi-controlled' enough? Certainly my dog recently got a bit snappish (and I say snappish, not overly aggressive) with some younger boisterous dogs, but with some advice from Erny and some firm words that now seems all under control. K9: there isnt any control here at all, an issue could start at the home of one of the regulars & that dog could easily bring those issues to the dog park, attack your dog & transfer the problem onto your dog. In my opnion thats simply not worth it. If this did happen, anything you do would be a reaction.... Fourthly - all that being said I do want a reliable recall when offlead. K9: the word reliable leaves things quite a bit open, reliable means to me that you can rely on it always... This wont be the case if she has so much fun playing with other dogs & not you... I want to addresss those which is why I am interested in K9's workshps when he comes down here. But how hardline must one be with a family pet??? K9: people often say you cant get 100% reliability from a dog, I dont believe them, I have gotten & seen it many times, but it is built on a combination of things, not a training program... Everyone has their own goals, I can take my dogs anywhere at all with no leash no matter what distraction, thats gives them a lot more freedom than they would receive if they werent reliable.. I am not after shutzhund stuff, I am just after a dog who will recall no matter what! Or is there very little difference in the level of control/training between stopping a defence dog from biting, and the simple matter of having an errant dog come when called? K9: this means your looking for 100% reliability, you wont get that without some sort of plan including neutralisation. KK: I wuill tho argue your first scenario - firstly if you expect ME to have 100% control over my dog (small or otherwise), then why not can I expect the same from you? K9: You should be able to expect that, but if she doesnt have it this comes down to your loss... or at least your dogs... KK: However I guess the main thrust of my post was about the idealogy behind K9's method that the handler is the centre of the dogs universe and playing with other dogs is something of a no no. Thing is, like I said, part of what gives me joy in dog ownership is watchig her play with doggie friends.Is there a middle ground? K9: yes a dog that isnt reliable. That will always take much more training to achieve less results... C: Some of us really value our dogs personality to the point where we accept their foibles as part of them and look at perfectly trained dogs as somewhat 'robotic'. K9: People often use the term robotic to describe a dog with high level training.... Foibles could cover anything from totally untrained & loveable to having a totally aggressive dog.. Your Foibles may be what someone else would consider unacceptable.. ********************************************************* K9: Middle ground to me means someone wants their cake & eat it to... Wont happen, you will get a recall better than the one you have now, but you wont get 100% reliability, if its a family pet does that matter? It does if you start limiting the dogs freedom if you ask me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KismetKat Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 (edited) Thanks for getting us back on track and providing answers K9 Some thoughts. K9: My dogs get that enjoyment out of playing with me... Oh you are obviously younger and fitter than me! :rolleyes: K9: Middle ground to me means someone wants their cake & eat it to... Never saw the point of not eating a cake I had But seriously - I don't know if the method you describe is practical (or maybe even desirable) for a 'family pet'. If I am the be all and end all to the dog, where do the hubby and kids come in? Kids are already jealous that she's more excited to see me than anyone else Other points about reliability and safety noted. And I do already limit her freedom (tho you might say this is a 'limited' sort of limiting ) as I pick my times/places/situations for allowing her offlead. Thanks K9 ETA - and apologies for not reading all the thread and causing you to repeat earlier comments. Edited March 6, 2006 by KismetKat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lablover Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Kismet, I am interested in your translation regarding robotic dogs. For example, is a guide dog for the blind robotic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve K9Pro Posted March 6, 2006 Author Share Posted March 6, 2006 K9: My dogs get that enjoyment out of playing with me...Oh you are obviously younger and fitter than me! K9: I cant say that, but I can say that I can play with my dogs without acting like a dog... But seriously - I don't know if the method you describe is practical (or maybe even desirable) for a 'family pet'. K9: The term family pet means something different to everyone... As you are reading about this program rather than have tried iot out on a large scale of dogs, & I have put many dogs through this & have hundreds of clients use it, I know that is desireable & extremly practical.. The desireability is less work for you & less risk for the dog with an upside of easier training... If I am the be all and end all to the dog, where do the hubby and kids come in? K9: the humans can be the be all & end all... Kids are already jealous that she's more excited to see me than anyone else K9: I work with dogs not kids lol... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KismetKat Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Lablover - it wasn't me who used the term "robotic", I think it was Cactus - but I don't think she meant it the way you seem to be reading it. It was something along the lines of "some people may think..." The post is on the prevous page - so I can't find it. Certainly I am always vbery impressed with highly trained dogs. K9 - "family pet" means to me a member of the family. I guess I come out of the "slightly dotty english school" of dog ownership, but I am no Mrs Humphrey (was it Humphrey? On All Creatures Great and Small) and her Tricky woo. K9: I work with dogs not kids lol... Lucky you :rolleyes: However given that I didn't do all this neutralisation, I will just have to perservere best I can. I've had some helpful PMs and, although her recall is pretty good, will go back to basics to reinforce and then build on some more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve K9Pro Posted March 6, 2006 Author Share Posted March 6, 2006 K9 - "family pet" means to me a member of the family. K9: My two are family pets..... Lablovers dogs are part of the family too.... But then again, I think Robot from Lost in Space was part of the family.... lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now