Santo66

OMG what a terrible thing to happen, my heart goes out to the poor dog and owners who were victims of such an horrific attack.........but the owner of the attacking dog didn't know his dog was DA.......I don't believe that for a second There is a remote possiblity if threatened that a good stable dog may fight under pressure, but attacking dogs are cranky dogs with other dogs to some degree and an owner of a dog like that couldn't no matter how stupid they are be oblivious to the tendency for his dog to be DA and when that is the case, you can't afford to let dogs like that off leash around other dogs and that's the problem with places like dog parks and beaches etc, you can't control what idots may be there too with the wrong dogs at large which they have no control over themselves

You can see what works best for a particular dog quite easily where you really have only two types of "basic" reinforcement being aversive or motivational then a fine tuning of either collectively. My opinion it's no good to keep plugging away at motivational training with a dog who lacks genetic focus and drive where a couple of corrections and consequence for the wrong behaviour does the world of good for that particular dog.....on the other hand, it's no good leash cranking a dog that does have strong genetic focus and drive like the Jack Russell I saw a couple of weeks ago with failed check chain training......he was a little pocket rocket, took to reward based training like a duck to water, awesome little dog I was initally coached in check chain training in the days when you did what the instructor told you to do in that obedience club and the old check chain was "the" tool of the trade so to speak, but it wasn't until I owned a dog of my own with genuine high drive that put the clairty into motivational and reward based training, but it doesn't work the best on all dog types, but as far is whether you can see what works best, I believe you can in the matter of minutes how a dog naturally responds to some simple exercises yes?

I don't think that owners/handlers preferences should be ignored, but often their preferences are based on misinformation and I think we have an obligation to the dog and owner to provide the most appropriate information so they are properly informed. I see too many failed attempts at training using the wrong methods for the dog type from misguided knowledge.

Most owners would know what techniques are best otherwise they wouldn't be hiring trainers?. Assessment of the dog I think is first and foremost then the competency of the owner/handler and work it from there. You can teach people how to handle and train a dog, not everyone is incapable of taking their skills to a new level we all have to start somewhere?

Hi Santl66 If you've observed, or know about the Alpha training method, you should know that the dogs do end up walking off lead very successfully, and do so without a problem under extremely distracting conditions. As I've said all along, there are many ways to achieve the same result. As long as the training is conducted in a humane and ethical manner, whatever method suits the owner is going to work best, and will create the best trust and bond between owner and dog. So why the halti then..........if the training is adequate in focus and reward and the dog is easily adaptable to that type of training the same can be achieved without a leash and collar at all? Training results also depends on the individual dog's inherited traits.....one of mine is sensational in focus and off leash obedience in distractions, the other same breed, is still work in progess and twice the better dog's age with double the amount of work and is still not as good and reliable at 6 years old as as my better dog was at 12 months old. The better dog was trained on a flat collar, the more difficult dog works better on a prong collar, horses for courses I guess? I am a firm believer from my two dogs alone, that a training method although it's essential for the owner to be satisfied and confident applying the methods, it depends on the individual dog what works best and a good trainer IMHO is one who can determine what method to use for the best results by reading the dog correctly......some trainers are very good at that, some are useless and some use a one method fits all approach? One of mine as I mentioned same breed different lines though, lacks drive, is easily distracted the other is the opposite. The dog with the lower drive responds best to correction based methods, he doesn't have the drive my other dog has to become excited over toy reward above all else so the training methods vary between the dogs. The driven dog won't accept a prong collar correction as aversion elevates aggression and he could bite me where my other immediately submits and behaves.........so employing the opposite methods on each of my dogs which I have tried results in a lack of responsivness all round when the wrong method is used for the dog type.

This is just my opinion, but the halti I think is a stupid device to train a dog with unless the end result is to have a dog who behaves whilst wearing the halti as the permanent walking tool. I know quite a few dogs collar wise to a halti who behave beautifully with the halti on, but take the halti off and they are all over the place which tells me they are not trained at all and only equipment managed? To me, a training collar needs to have the provsion to be switched on and off so that in a relaxed state it feels to the dog as natural as wearing no collar at all........this can't be achieved with a halti even without pressure, the dog can see the band over his/her nose......to create a collar wise dog which is useless for off leash obedience and control, the halti is the best tool to cause that situation arising. With that said, any trainer who favours a halti over a training tool with provison to be switched on and off is not a dog trainer, they are a dog management adviser, to me there is a big difference but I guess it depends on what you want as the end result?

Actually a freind of mine was charged by council a couple of years ago when her Golden Retriever a lovely but silly dog with not much training knocked a kid over when off leash where it shouldn't have been......kid bumped his head on the bitumen from the fall and grazed his forehead, my friend was devistated given her dog is a friendly and gentle dog, but boisterous and she learned quickly what can happen with lack of off lash control where especially kids are involved.

Yes, I did exactly that the second time I spotted this dog and it chased us to the next corner. Having words with the owner on that occassion I thought may have sunken in that playing on the front lawn with that dog they have no control over was a bad idea, but they don't learn and surely I am not the only one that dog has chased as there are dog walkers commonly using the pathway. I was worried more about my dog eating this little dog when mine became hostile and the little dog in full bravado wouldn't back off

I am not one to dob people in for breaches of dog managment compliance, we can all make unintended mistakes, but on one of our regular walks, there is a house side on to a pathway who have a dog aggressive smallish Terrier X who twice now has been out the front with it's owners, seen my dog on leash and charged over trying to bite at the legs of my big dog.........suffice to say the owners chase the dog and try and catch it but ultimately have not one scrap of control. The second time this dog ran at us, my dog became aggressive at this dog snapping at his front legs and the owners who I gave a piece of my mind in no uncertain terms blamed me suggesting my dog should be muzzled as the size difference could cause their dog at large not under effective control some injury or worse? A week before Xmas I am walking down the pathway and could see the owner and a couple kids on their front lawn and blow me down, this dog comes charging out for the 3rd time, kids and owner chasing it and......I pull my dog around sort of behind me and kick my foot out at the dog yelling at it to piss off, and the dog lunges in and grabs me by the leg of my pants, I kicked it off and the onwner had got there by that stage and grabbed the dog........my dog is going off his rocker at that stage, the woman who owns this dog is abusing me WTF??......to cut a long story short, I had enough after 3 times being pestered by this dog and copping abuse from the owners, I reported the incident to council. Yesterday, the local ranger called me telling me that the owners of the dog were fined on multiple breaches and with a warning in place that if the dog reported again for rushing in an aggressive manner will be declared a dangerous dog........ranger pointed out that a dog is a dog whether it be small medium or large, in this case was a small dog, if they are at large and rushing in an aggressive manner, they are potentially dangerous and will be declared regardless of size. Hopefully now these people will learn to keep their damn dog in and further more the ranger said the error I made was not reporting the first incident 12 months ago. I think most of us have had incidents with off leash dogs which can be rather scary ruining the aura of what was a pleasant walk and that council in this case did something about it, I think it was a good result. :D

Someone needs to point out to Qantas that the Amstaff has been incorrectly included with the breeds banned under the customs act preferably addressed by a solicitor with request for the breed restriction to be removed. Breed banning can only be effected in Australia on an official basis which also applies to councils when the breed is rectricted by the customs act......it's the very reason that the Amstaff is specifically excluded from BSL criteria and Qantas could suffer some financial consequences with a dog left on the runway so to speak because of a ban they have no rights to put into place, Amstaff is not a restricted breed to unofficially lump in with the breeds that are on the basis of a whim it appears? Having said that, the ground staff are probably breed idiots anyway where an Amstaff would be accepted booked in as Labrador/Ridgeback X. Arguing against a policy written in black and white is harder than arguing that the dog booked to fly is not an Amstaff is a better way to tackle the situation.

We have a friend who got a failed Labrador from the blind school for a pet..........he was an awesome pet dog who was partially trained and for our purpose was pretty well bomb proof to noise, but he wasn't strong enough for a guide dog in noise to the high standards they require which caused him to fail their selection process. My dog at the time was terribly storm and noise phobic and we had a good chat to the trainers about it and they claimed absolutely 100% the phobia which is fear of noise was a genetic nerve weakness which the breeders who supply guide dogs actually breed to prevent it by only using breeding pairs of high nerve strength. It makes sense as it wouldn't be a good situation for a guide dog to freak out from a storm or loud noises when the poor owner is blind and reliant on the dog's stability.

So, you don't breed from any dogs younger than 10? Ten years?? There is some indication that sound sensitivity may be inherited, but it's not as simple as that. A lot of what we might consider genetic traits are more like genetic potentials. What is actually expressed at the end of the day is likely to depend not just on the dog's genetics, but the environment they grew up in, the current environment, stressors they may have been under at times in their development, and of course learning. Maybe even nutrition and what state the dam was in when she was pregnant. My older dog is 4 1/2. He showed his first indication of thunderstorm fear just about a month ago. There's no way that is purely genetic. I am 90% confident he learnt it. And I imagine he learnt it partly because of his temperament and partly because of the relationship he has with other members of our family. I think we have to be very careful here. I imagine that there are fewer selection pressures on dogs these days for things like trait anxiety than there once was. This is good in a way because we are better equipped to help dogs that are a bit different, but bad in that because we can manage them and are more compassionate towards them we don't select so strongly against them. Writing dogs with problems however minor off as having 'weak nerve' is grossly over simplistic and it isn't fair to the dogs. Maybe they are more prone to things like sound sensitivity than other dogs, but we are also capable of managing them so that this is less of a big deal than it might have been many years ago. In some cases we can even 'cure' them. It is not helpful to the dog to label it as having weak nerve and saying "See, this is why it behaves this way." A) that is not necessarily why they behave that way and B) So what? You owe it to the dog in front of you to do what you can to help them. Putting it all down to genes is a good way to absolve yourself of the responsibility of trying to help them and avoiding the opportunity to examine and possibly improve the way you manage and train dogs. Something would IHMO need to happen to the dog to learn consequence of a particular noise........if for instance following a clap of thunder the dog felt pain it may learn to associate pain with the sound of thunder and show fear, but ultimately it's strength of nerve from a genetic perspective. Perhaps your dog didn't show avoidance to thunder, but it may have been on the cusp and unless tested for nerve as occurs with a guide dog for example, your dog may not be overly strong in nerve anyway.........it's not a thing in pet dogs that a high level of importance is placed and I think too many phobias are blamed upon environment to mask breeding practices that could have been done better in selection of mating pairs. Of course you help the noise phobic dog and do you best to try and eliminate the stress, but the point I was making if next time you don't want a noise phobic dog, select a breeder who doesn't produce the fault.

Good point! Anxiety is most often inherited, which means that it may only respond to training & and other external methods to a point (depending on how badly it manifests). I have never had a storm phobic dog until recently - one of my old girls, Freckles, is very scared of thunder and prolonged loud noises (eg fireworks). She will just lie on her bed and shiver uncontrollably, completely miserable; she won't get off her bed, even to eat (and she is usually such a food hog!). I find that Valium works well for her. The wierd thing is that Ziggy, who is usually frightened of anything else, sleeps through storms. Dogs...who can figure them? I too have had a terribly storm phobic dog who would shiver and shake trying to hide under the table to the point he would often vomit if the storm continued on for too long, it's an awful infliction for the poor dog and equally hard for the owners to manage the symptoms if they are severe. Something I learned from guide dog breeders and trainers in regard to the genetic structure of phobias where we can relate to the consequence of guide dogs going into fits of hysteria in storms an becoming unworkable for their sight impaired owners and genetics of the breeding is the number one factor they use in counting phobic possibility.

The breeder did a good job selecting breeding pairs with sound nerve. Storm phobias and fearful behaviour like this is genetic........such a shame to see so many dogs suffer at the hands of breeders who dismiss phobia as a genetic flaw. But is that always the case? My girl has not been phobic all her life - early on she was pretty laid back about them and didn't seem to worry at all, but now she's hopeless. And my daughter's Staffie grew up absolutely bomb-proof and actually loving loud noises (he was the party pooper who always tried to pop every balloon at a party :laugh: ) and not being phased at all by storms, but in later life he became absolutely hysterical over storms and fireworks etc. - to the point where he once smashed a reinforced glass shower screen in the laundry in his hysteria. Yes absolutely a genetic nerve weakness especially as noise doesn't physically cause the dog harm. It can surface in later life as you explained, but any forms of hysteria through non direct physical contact like fireworks, storms, gunfire etc is a genetic nerve imbalance in the breeding. Nerve is also the major contributing factor of a dog's recovery to physical distress.....dog falls off the seat of the car and then won't get back in and becomes fearful of the car in general and forcing the dog can turn into hysteria or even aggression, where a dog with strong nerve will adjust their footing so they don't fall off the seat again, they jump back on the horse so to speak unphased with the clarity of mind to understand what went wrong.

The breeder did a good job selecting breeding pairs with sound nerve. Storm phobias and fearful behaviour like this is genetic........such a shame to see so many dogs suffer at the hands of breeders who dismiss phobia as a genetic flaw.