SkySoaringMagpie

For me the red flag is not the pricing structure so much as the fact she bagged other breeders' pricing structure and accused them of only being in it for the money. So I agree with those who said "run!" It sounds a little like "look, there goes Elvis!" to me. One thing people with a flat structure with the same price for show and pets are not doing is trying to make money.

Feathered Saluki (own) Smooth Saluki (own) Afghan (live with) Sloughi Azawakh Chart Polski Deerhound Irish Wolfhound Skye Terrier And a Papillon for when I'm too old to manage the sighties. Also, I can see adopting a scruffer lurcher if one needs rescue one day and I have the time.

You know, I would happily sacrifice getting an All Breeds CC on one weekend of the year to have the opportunity to show at a National in my breed. Even if they held the first one in Perth and I had no hope of getting there. Many of us don't get the opportunity at all and are envious of breeds who have been able to keep enough state clubs together to make it happen.

:laugh:

Erny's advice is excellent. I guess I'm concerned that your friend has been sold this bitch as a show prospect. The bitch will have to be examined by a range of male judges - some smokers, some who will wear a wide brimmed hat and sunnies, some with bad hips etc. And if judges can't get their hands on her she will be refused. Based on what you have written here, I would be sending the bitch back unless I also had room for her permanently as a companion to work on her issues. There are all sorts of excuses "she's been in season, she had a fright in the ring during a fear period, etc etc". However a dog with a solid temperament isn't phased by these things.

Liz (Saturday) and Miles (Sunday) Gunter. Group 4 judge did GS on Saturday and Sunday

Well, the part I'm still most cautious about is the 100 per cent measure. For me it means any time any where in any circumstances - it's a quantifiable measure that means something very specific, the dog always comes back on time, no exceptions. I think I'd be more comfortable saying that you can train a reliable recall on a sighthound.

To be honest, I think if you put all the posters here in a room and we had a chat over a cup of tea there would be very little disagreement. But to answer your question, Corvus asked a question about recall during prey drive in the Saluki 101 thread ages ago. My answer, while acknowledging that some people can do it, was that for newbies the "safer answer would be no". For me safety is the primary consideration which is why I bother training recalls in the first place. However the newbie is free to disagree with me and say "OK lady, you say the safer answer is no but I'm going to try". I am not the Boss of all things Saluki and there are plenty of other experienced people posting in that thread. So if the newbie has a fully fenced area and a spare rabbit or two and has done all their preparation good luck to them!

Damnit that was going to be my answer!!! Leaving aside pet psychics, who I think are a separate issue, these days anyone can call themselves a whisperer just like anyone can call themselves a behaviourist. Millan was not the first dog trainer to style himself as "the dog whisperer". Many people have a lot more time for the first one - Paul Owens. I think everything comes down to small pieces of data that some people are either more naturally able to read and put in context or have studiously taught themselves to read and put in context. I am no whisperer, but I wag my bum too when approaching some dogs and it works. The reason I do it is not because I have natural bum wagging intuition. I learned it from someone who either learned it from someone else or worked it out themselves from watching dogs interact.

That's excellent! Do you have pix of your Affie working? Or not working - either way. We'd love to see them in the Sighthound thread and I'm sure my OH would love to chat to another Afghan trialler. I think tho' that a bunch of us have been saying we think it's possible. The point I think we have been trying to make is that 100 per cent is a tricky thing to define and it is a long way up the mountain for most people with the chance of something pretty nasty happening if you over-estimate what you and your dog are capable of. Re the lack of humility issue, as I have already said the thing that got my back up initially was your comment to MRB about her dog having no recall and calling the shots. I wonder if this is a case of "what is self evident to me, should be so for others as well". It's an easy trap to fall into having fallen into it myself, but a lot of what is second nature to me now wasn't once. Sometimes I look at someone doing something I think is just clearly counterproductive and dumb and have to remind myself that there was a time when I didn't know how to fix whatever the person is trying to fix either. When you know it's simple and obvious, when you don't, it feels impossible. EFS

When i was a new saluki owner more than one person told me to listen to as much as I can, observe as much as I can and then try for myself and make up my own mind. I guess people still say that, I know I do.

I can see all the DOL trainers scribbling this one down in their notepad for "things to proof against". Hee!

The problem is not the methods tho'. People working computer helpdesks have the expression PICNIC - Problem in Chair Not In Computer. I don't know if there is a similar expression for dog training but often people on breed lists saying "DON'T!" aren't saying that because they believe it's impossible. They're saying it because they believe tha in most cases it is highly unlikely that your average person can stick with what is required. Especially if that person is a newbie asking a question. Experienced people won't ask because they already know the answer for them.

I think this is certainly true of people within a breed who say, for example, "you can't teach a Husky not to pull on leash because that's what they were bred for". I have seen people rock up to classes with that script already in their head that excuses them from trying at all. The other script that pops up all the time is "they're a rescue, that's why they don't X". It's a sad way of thinking, and that is not what I am recommending. Instead I think if your dog has a predisposition against a certain necessary behaviour you need to really try at it, not give up. And really trying means considering everything. So, I also think that - as I mentioned upthread - while within breeds you tend to have the breed fatalists (you can't do obedience with an Afghan) you also have those who say "bugger you all, I'll give it a go". In that latter group you get people who try all sorts of things and so we're not talking every day average training techniques. In fact, when I was approached to train to be an instructor I said "are you kidding me?" My first Saluki girl and I had failed Advanced class 3 times before passing and I had no idea why I'd be considered a good prospect to teach. The person who approached me said "that is exactly the kind of trainer we need, someone who has had to think outside the box to get results because that is what you need when you instruct". Now she knew me and had formed a view that I was capable of thinking outside the box and applying it with success. Online, you can only go on what people say. I know that even talking about the fact I had a dog that I failed a class with is enough for some people to dismiss my POV or say I haven't tried. The fact I am still working with my dogs says otherwise tho' I think. Edited to fix spelling of Husky

Can't speak for Diva but no, not you. Jesomil is the one I have a quarrel with here. I note you say that 100 per cent needs some definition clarified and I think that is the point we are trying to make. High standards are good, great training is great and there are people particularly in the USA who do awesome things with "hard to train" breeds. However, when people try to be realistic about their breed - and let's remember DOL is a pure breed forum that people read and take information from - I don't think it serves any useful purpose to breezily dismiss those people as having "narrow experience".

Have you trained any of the independent aboriginal breeds? Saluki, Basenji, Afghans etc? If so, have you trained all of them to 100 per cent recall under all circumstances? The key message I am hearing from those who have independent hunting breeds is that, as Diva mentions, a little humility goes a long way. That humility does not mean we don't aspire to high standards, we do, but that's because we love our dogs and want them to be safe not because we want to win pissing competitions online. Wanting our dogs to be safe means taking the approach Rommi and Lewis suggests even if it means someone is sneering somewhere about our lack of training ability because the dog isn't off leash. And if someone with a breed bred to work with humans thinks that's not trying, well, good luck to them. My dogs' safety matters more. And yes, it was your girls I was referring to Diva

Unless you have 100 per cent recall all the time (which is where this thread started) at some point everyone has to deal with a dog not returning or not returning properly ie, on the first call, and pronto. I'd hate us to get to a point where someone describes how they handle something not working and their relationship with their dogs gets picked over or they feel they need to post cue/response ratios or whatever. I'm not MRB but in our house we get the kind of boundary pushing you get when you have 6 sighthounds, 2 of whom are under 2 years old and a 330 meter long perimeter fence that backs on to paddocks with bunnies and hare. Considering that context, I think our furkids are remarkably good. I agree with Erny that one should set one's sights high. Which is why I bother training it in the first place, some people don't with sighthounds which I think is sad. However, I try to be very clear about the difference between the aim and the goal. As PF mentioned earlier in the thread, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

What purpose would you suggest a male with a vasectomy be desexed at 12 months The last male rescue I had was neutered rather than getting a vasectomy because his new owners would have had a hard time with their council when it comes to registering a dog who had a vasectomy. The vasectomy deals with the breeders concerns about unwanted litters and their lines being used inappropriately. Neutering OTOH, is the obvious fix that is clearly visible to anyone. Once a dog is finished his critical growth period I can see it would be easier in a range of situations if he was obviously missing his balls. I don't have an answer when it comes to bitches.

I don't chase ours either because that is a game and so doesn't work for "make sure behaviour you don't like is unsuccessful". That's why I use the expression "walking down" I don't run away but I walk slowly in a direction I calculate will be successful and I do it with a poker face and whatever the equivalent to a poker face is for body language. Lots of playing possum and no wheedling but no "you betta right now!!" chest beating either. It works for whatever reason. In some ways i wish I knew technically how it works because bringing out the blue slip leads we have lying around the house into the back yard is usually enough for them to recall or cease and desist when a verbal cue doesn't work. They know "blue lead = game over" but I'm not exactly sure how we've taught that. The leads have never been used to check or correct FWIW, just to manage the dog when a recall doesn't work. I have heard of other people spending hours chasing their Afghans or Salukis to get them to come inside - perhaps their dogs are smarter than ours. We've never had to do that, I can walk a dog down in under a minute.

Don't know the answer to that as I'm not familiar with case law around animals and property. However, presumably the authorities could issue a demand for payment for the cost of the appropriate registration for an entire dog and pursue non-payment through debt recovery action? So I'm not suggesting that people be forced to desex, just that they be required to pay the appropriate price on keeping an entire animal. Whether that price is paid in cash at the council office OR in blood, sweat, tears and hours at the track, the yard, the trial ring or the show ring. Look, I don't like desexing for a range of reasons and mine aren't desexed. But a recent incident at home reminded me that even me, control freak extraordinaire, can't control everything all the time. I am quite happy to pay for the privilege of keeping undesexed dogs and I choose to pay it by being an active and paid up member of my canine control. In considering my response to this issue I'm thinking particularly of a dog I saw recently, an ill-favoured mixed brown bull breed adopted from a shelter which should have known better. It had serious issues that its stressed out owners were totally ill-equipped to handle. I doubt the person who bred that dog paid either of the prices I describe above. I've thought of that dog often since I last saw it. It's a crying shame. Literally. The people who owned it would have been far better off with a dog from a reputable breeder or rescue who could peg what they were capable of and give them the right dog. Without wishing to be harsh, the dog itself would have been better off never having been born.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that "going and getting them" is a magic bullet. I think one builds a better recall with a range of techniques which include both rewarding appropriate behaviour (coming back) and trying to ensure that inappropriate behaviour (not coming back) is unsuccessful. I can stand on the porch and call our Afghans back in to the house. Did it 5 minutes ago. You would have to interview them to find out why they recall but perhaps the answer would be "because we might get a snack, and if we don't come in she'll come and walk us down anyway". As there's no way to know what they're thinking, I'll continue to go with what I think works, and making sure unwanted behaviour is unsuccessful is part of what works for me.

I'm in favour of the system the ACT has (and a number of other jurisdictions). That is, a price on registering (ie legally keeping) an entire dog that exceeds the cost of desexing with an exemption for people who are committed enough to dog sports and conformation to be a member of their relevant canine control organisation. Where the system falls down is enforcement rather than design IMO. The people who are responsible enough to register their dog, participate in dog sport etc are subject to the regime and the people who are not responsible enough to register or otherwise give a shit live outside the system pretty easily. The former are more likely to desex anyway and the latter are more likely to breed an unwanted dog.

I think it depends what you mean by positive only tho'? I have seen a solid recall under heavy distraction (running mob of roos) from a dog trained by someone who I respect a lot who trains positively. However I don't know if he also employs management techniques when the dogs are young. If he does, does that mean he's not positive? The dog was a border collie btw, not a sighthound The method of not ever allowing them to self-reward by not coming back is one I first heard recommended by an old time Saluki tracking trainer which is why I go and get ours when they don't recall. Perhaps it's me being duffer headed but I never considered that incompatible with positive training? For me an aversive training based recall would be one where you employ an e-collar. Edited for clarity.

We're entered on Friday but won't be there because we're off to a family funeral. Might see people on Saturday.

Here's the passage I was thinking of from the book Gazehounds and Coursing by MH Dutch Salmon. After praising the Salukis' physical abilities on fox and hare the author says: The saluki has an independence of mind that may be admirable or infuriating depending on the situation. Their inherent notion seems to be to do as they please and nuts to you. Trying to persuade one that this is not the correct procedure is a tricky business. "Beat some sense into his head" and you'll likely ruin what may be an excellent hound. The saluki will not tolerate high-handedness from anyone. But you can't let them run amok either. A policy of controlled firmness should be implemented from the start. Salukis are definitely not kennel dogs, either. Their constitutions are tough as nails, but emotionally they can't be treated like a piece of machinery. Treated inconsiderately, the saluki may turn shy or rebellious. And they can be flat contrary too. For example, they hate to be left alone; want to be with you all the time. But once with you they're apt to act like you're not even there! And it seems it's always the saluki that won't come back to the hand of the owner after a course. Now I like salukis; I wouldn't be without one. And I realise fully that along with that independence comes a lot of native intelligence, and besides aloofness there is some genuine class. They are a one person, or least one family, dog and I like that. But I can't recommend the saluki to the average dog person. Most (people) aren't suitable. You should be what I call a "saluki person". Keep that in mind before rushing off to buy a saluki. I'd agree with all that, except that at the lure coursing days in Sydney it's usually the Afghans leading their handlers on a merry dance when it comes to recall. If you're curious, the author's view is that the Deerhound has the most admirable temperament of the coursing sighthounds. EFS