SkySoaringMagpie

Nothing to do with dogs, but there was a study in the media recently about how the contraceptive pill interferes with this. Apparently if you're on the pill, you're more likely to find men who are genetically similar attractive.

DogsVictoria have come up with a great idea for a fundraiser - a virtual show. You can enter obedience and dog sport dogs, and "progeny of mixed marriages" as well as show dogs. $10 per dog, and a catalogue will be sent to those the funds have been raised to help. More info in this thread: http://www.dolforums.com.au/index.php?showtopic=158985

Run free Turbo.

I can think of a positive training technique I'd apply to that

Fantastic news, glad it was nothing serious.

x 2

Perhaps the trick would be to use an odour the dog doesn't find offensive or attractive so that it is just a signal? No idea how you would go about determining that tho'...

You have asked me similar detailed questions but neither Willow nor myself are Ian Dunbar. Our reflection of what was said comes through the filter of our own experience with our own dogs. For example, your question about what it acheives knowing what the dog is capable of off-leash. There are reasons why I might find that useful, but if you are training a recall with aversives, I don't have anything to contribute because I don't train that way. Perhaps the e-collar training body in the US that heard him speak has a transcript you could read if you email and ask them. I don't know who they are but I'm sure Erny could identify the group as it is the largest e-collar training association in the US. In any case, I suggest you go back to the source material on his website and do some reading and exploring with your own dogs. If it works for you great, if not, oh well. I'm not going to put energy into convincing you.

Can you expand on this? In the Mal example (remember that this is about his Mal, not Mals as a breed) he said that while he knew it could pace all day, it could only sprint 200 yards before getting tired and slowing down a lot. Whereas he knew he could sprint for longer than 200 yards. So that gave him extra information he could use when offleash training that he would not apply to say, being offleash with a greyhound, which could cover a mile really, really fast. Likewise with the squirrels, he did not say this, but other North American friends have talked about not releasing the dog until they know the squirrel will get away. The calculation will be different for a young Saluki than it would be for an old Corgi.

This has reminded me that Dunbar talked about something similar, but in the North American context. He said they needed to pick squirrels for training rewards, because squirrels shoot straight up a tree, rather than covering a lot of country so the dog gets to chase as a reward for good behaviour, but doesn't go dashing over the horizon or killing the squirrels. One thing he was very strong on was quantifying the dog's capabilities in relation to its environment and using that when making judgements about training outdoors. He also made an interesting observation about jogging with his Mal, he'd already worked out what the Mal's sprint and pace capabilities were, and what his were as its human owner, and considered how that would affect judgments he made when free running.

I think it's like being a good driver. Most people think they are, yet find themselves surrounded by idiots on the road.

Our latest addition came from a breeder who has been in the game a long time and this pup was 90 per cent there with house training by the time she got to us at 10 weeks. The pup also already had a rock solid sit.

The Companion Dog Club in Canberra used to run them but don't any more. I would imagine it's hard to deal with all the associated issues (skilled instructor, insurance, etc)

Sorry, should have explained. They are remedial classes designed for dogs that have dog/dog aggression issues but they are not for dogs that are really dangerous. Such classes need to be taught by someone who knows their stuff. The lady who taught them in Canberra was in that category, and she is also a vet. It is hard to find people qualified and prepared to run such classes so they are not common. Growl classes can't accept dogs who have a poor fight/bite ratio. In plain language, that means the dogs that can be accepted growl and carry on a lot but don't do serious damage to other dogs. If a dog has sent other dogs to the vet with serious injuries they need a one on one consult, with someone who knows what they are dealing with. Personal recommendations from other dog owners are best.

Only to say that aids are aids to training and should not become a crutch. He did mention being invited to speak at a conference of e-collar trainers in the US, and talked about helping out a check chain training class. He also gave a plan for using a halti that involved phasing the halti out. My impression is that his goal is to lessen people's reliance on tools beyond the initial training phase, particularly those tools which can be misused. My take was that he was interested in being pragmatic about religious wars if there is an opportunity to benefit the dogs. He did not mention anything about countenancing the use of e-collars, but it didn't really come up in discussion. Most of the recall work he ran through was to do with voice based distance control and no-one asked about e-collars.

Agree with Kavik, ordinary obedience classes aren't likely to be appropriate now that it's gone this far. Even if a club did accept her, it's disruptive for the other dogs. The dog needs someone with a practised eye to observe him and then work out a training strategy. Another option, depending on the severity of the dog's issues, is to ask the local obedience clubs if they run growl classes. If a club does run growl classes they should ask your friend a number of questions about the dog's behaviour before accepting her into the class, and they may suggest she needs a one on one consult anyway.

The website is www.dogstardaily.com I haven't looked at it in detail, but I think he has a blog on it. There is a DVD called "Give them a scalpel and they will dissect a kiss" which covers some of what I have relayed back here. He has quite a bit of published material, and indicated they were going to do limited free downloads over the next 6 months. Might be an idea to keep tabs on the website for a bit. The two puppy books are available for free download at the moment.

Good question Midol, you said this: The 4 quadrants are incredibly intuitive, I don't understand how anyone can have trouble with them. If you passed grade 5 english and maths you should be able to figure it out incredibly quickly. Again, two words. If your intelligence level is so low that the meaning of two words confuse you then dog training isn't for you. Now you say this: Bit late to make that distinction I think, but I don't think anyone suggested that trainers don't get it - they suggested that it's confusing for new people and that trainers waste time arguing about it. The arguments are usually about what activity fits where, but I've noted you often decide people don't understand when they simply disagree so perhaps your conclusion is not surprising. As usual, Poodlefan has nailed what is really going on.

Ever taught an obedience class Midol? People have trouble with the concept of taking two steps instead of 5. These people have dogs whether you or I approve or not. If you care about dogs, you try and make it as simple as possible so they get it. The way I do it is to talk about "good stuff for dogs" and "bad stuff for dogs". Doesn't make me sound like an impressive trainer, but people get it if I talk that way. Ask your average punter to explain the quadrant and they'd be lost. Most struggle with "let your dog know when he's done the right thing". I'm not being rude about them either, not being a jargon geek is not a crime. At least they are showing up to class.

Nothing about a DVD, no. Various people recorded various bits, but I don't know them and don't know what understanding they arrived at with Jenny Ireland and Ian Dunbar. Sounds like there is a chance it might be a Nellie Melba farewell, would be nice for us if so!

Did he mention what places/countries he was most needed in? The Asian region is what I remember. He may have mentioned other places as well, just didn't catch them.

No problem. Unfortunately he did say it was the last time he is traveling to Australia to give talks. He explained that they had to make a decision about prioritising time spent abroad teaching, and they want to concentrate on those places in the world that they are most needed. In the scheme of things, Australia is pretty well developed when it comes to dog training.

It's only a problem if the dog can't be called back and is forging ahead of where you want it to be. Ultimately I think this stuff is often massively over processed. You're the leader if the dog is where you're happy for it to be - if that's in front, it's in front.

I'm afraid I do not understand what "instructive" reprimands are? Say you tell your dog to sit, and it doesn't. You then say "Sit!" in a more serious tone. The idea is not to say "sitsitsitsit", but to give the impression "no really, I mean sit, now" when you give the next command. And to repeat if necessary and get on the dog's case until it complies. He suggested showing the treat at that point but not delivering it until the dog repeats the behaviour again on the first cue. Not something I would try with a behaviour that I did not think the dog knew. Did he say why he is pro to putting the cue before the behaviour when luring? I'm sure he did but I can't find it in my notes! I think it is to do with speed IIRC, when people questioned it he said that if you pick your lure properly, you should get the behaviour you want on the first go. He said that if a dog learns, it learns - it doesn't matter how it learned. You refine by differentially rewarding only the above average attempts. Care to share his other "less controversial" techniques you're going to try??? Please??? The leash walking one for adult dogs I will try and if it works I'll start suggesting it. Basically you have your dog on a leash and wait for it to sit. When it does you take a step and wait for it to sit again. Then when that is reliable, two steps, then three, etc etc. The idea is that the dog doesn't forge because it's more inclined to pay attention to what the crazy human is doing because they keep stopping. It seems to flip the "be a tree" method into reverse. No idea if I can get it to work yet! Doggie dictionary??? Are these commands that the dog knows, or is it something else? It's about really defining what you mean by a cue/the dog's name so that you're clear about your criterion for the behaviour