Black Bronson

Sell them the pups that you breed then. I can't see any ethical, ANKC registered breeder who takes pride in their work voluntarily handing over entire stock to a BYB so they can breed better quality pups. It's a seperate class, but there's also been talk that there will be neuter titles sometime in the future. I am not up on the dog show gossip lately so maybe someone esle can fill in the gaps. Most speciality champ shows have a neuter class and if that's not top shelf, then I dunno what is! A desexed show class is a bit of fun and gets people involved and interested, but what's the use of a desexed champion when the excellence can't be reproduced

Wow. I am of the total opposite. I'd stay clear of any breeder who puts all their puppies on main register. You only have to look at what's being bred by novice breeders in all breeds to see why it's dangerous to put everything on the main. There is variance in most litters and I think it's important to still scrutinize the litter to only pick 'the best'. I'm not sure how you can say that by putting some pups on limited, means the breeder isn't confident with their breeding. In one well planned litter, you could get a very high quality, well put together dog, but yet it's littermate may have different qualities which doesn't see it as well conformed, and thus should be placed on limited. Doesn't mean that it's not 'quality'. The others may still be of very high quality and better than many being shown, but to put them all on main with no restrictions on breeding will only see them end up in the hands of novices who will ruin the lines. To me, breeders who put restrictions on their dogs are being responsible for their breed. well said Stormie. I don't think every pup in a litter is worthy of putting on the mains, and breeders who are objective and selective for their breed's future and maintaining quality in the lines, would not be so quick to send out their pups with mains reg and no restrictions at all. fifi I agree, not every pup in the litter are always good examples which are called "faulty" and should be on limited register. However, a "faulty" puppy is hardly of good quality is it???. If the puppy is good quality, it should be on main automatically. Why should it be put on main if its good quality? Pet owners/newbies to the breed are just as entitled to a 'good quality' dog. A dog should only be placed on the main register if it's going to a responsible home for showing and maybe breeding down the track. If I was breeding good quality dogs, I'd want to uphold my reputation of my lines. I would only sell main reg puppies to people I knew and trusted and even then they'd probably be on terms, because I wouldn't want my lines out there being used by anyone, to breed with anything. I see it all the time in my breed. Complete novice breeders that have managed to come across a dog on main reg who has some good lines back there, and putting it to everything and anything, making some terribly conformed dogs, but using the names of the previous lines to 'cash in' and try to say their dogs are of good quality because they've got XXXX breeding. There are no rules that determine only show or breeding prospects are to be main registered and the rest limited???. Limited is really the same as unpapered in the old days. A limited register has no real purpose other than a set of papers for the hell of it........it doesn't have much meaning other than verification of the breed and family tree.

You can after the 12 week vacc? I always thought you could only do it after their 16 week. Something else to chat to with the vet, thanks BB. My boy had his puppy vacc at 6 weeks and then again at about 12 weeks. I didn't do a 3rd vacc, because I thought I was doing the right thing. But it seems I got it a bit mixed up. Fast track a bit and I'm 'talking' with Dr. Jean Dodds, she told me that had his 2nd puppy vacc been after 14 weeks of age, I wouldn't need to go for the annual booster, but because he had his before 14wo, she recommended that I do the one annual booster at 15mo. I had intended to do that, thinking that his earlier health issues would have been well and truly in hand and he'd be well and strong come the 15mo mark. But that wasn't to be the case so I didn't go ahead with the booster. What I did instead was have him titred, even though this was 12 months on from his last puppy vacc. Results showed sufficient level of antibodies, even though he'd had 2 x puppy vacc and not 3, and even though the 2nd vacc was at 12wo. Don't know if this info is any help to you working things out in your mind? Thanks Erny, much appreciated ;)

Half of these vets are not worth two bob..........try this and see how she goes damn well annoys me They need to give you options............we can do an xray, we can do a stool culture etc etc. Half the time you have to research the symptoms yourself and tell the vet what you want done which shouldn't happen. I would take her back Jaxx'sBuddy and tell the vet to do their job properly. The level of attention you have been given IMO is sub-standard.

Yes, I have heard of such a vaccine here...........I will check and find out what specific vaccine our vet uses. It annoys me when asking questions at the vet, like is it best to have the 16 week booster also and they treat you like an idiot ;) "This is how we do it" answers doesn't mean that regime is best for the puppy Well that's obviously what they think is best if that's what they do? They're hardly going to tell you they think it's best to finish at 12 weeks, but tell you to finish at 16wks. What they do and what's best can be two different things???. I have already had a Coccidia mis-diagnosis and incorrectly treated because "that's what they do" with puppy diarreha. What they do with puppy diarreha doesn't work with Coccidia and the puppy ends up in emergency care on a drip after passing blood and dehydrating because they don't look outside the square ;)

I'm curious as to why not? My Pointer was done at 6 weeks with Protech C4 and is getting done at 12 weeks [this Tuesday] don't know what they use as I have never been there before so I'm looking forward to meeting them. There has been parvo going around here at the moment. I don't feel concerned for my puppy as he's a very healthy strong boy who hasn't been bombarded with vaccines and chemicals to kill fleas etc. But I'm rather unsure if I should give him a 16 week vacc also? Ofcourse I will ask the vet Tuesday. That's the concern, where some vets recommend the 16 week vaccination is necessary and others say that the 12 week "should" be adequate. I don't want my puppy being the one that the 12 week final wasn't adequate enough for him

Hi Black Bronson, It needs to be understood that their are different vaccines made by manufacturers and there are indeed ones than can be administered safely twice only with no need for a 3rd at 16wks as they specifically get through the dams antibodies. So if you go to your vet and he gives say a Protech C3 at 6-8 wks and then another 4 weeks later that is all that is needed. Other vets use vaccines which require three shots to provide full immunity. So trust your vet he has told you that brand does not require a 3rd 16 week vaccination as he knows the brand used. Thanks Chocolate, I am fine with that if it's the case with certain vaccine brands etc, but the concern are the puppies also under vet advice with two shot vaccines that contracted Parvo and died around 6 months of age I don't know what vaccines were used in these cases, perhaps they were 3 shot vaccines only administered twice, but I know of several cases of Parvo with puppies vaccinated at 6 & 12 week finals shots, the same regime my puppy is on???.

I always had the understanding that the wisdom of the limited register was designed for non breedworthy pedigrees, not as a tool to place restrictions upon quality puppies...........perhaps I am wrong??? Yes you are wrong. My puppies are desexed before sale. They are top quality & many are show worthy, the main thing with a few is that they have gone over size, which is very common with toy poodles from some wonderful lines. Do you actually realise how many dogs, especially my breed are sold on limited register & then bred from or cross bred ? It is the most common breed used for this purpose & in puppy farms. Pet people deserve a health tested, quality pedigree purebred dog too. They don't have to have a dog with a fault. How are we to promote ownership & pride of our chosen breed if we expect all to go in the show ring or be bred from ? Many of the public still think a pedigree dog is only for this purpose, a snob/status thing or only for the wealthy. This image has to be changed. Limited register does not mean inferior. Dogs SA are allowing desexed dogs to be shown from July this year. In the cat world neutered cats are shown, do well & are very popular with those who love to show but not breed. Desexed showings are a specific category aren't they???................It's not permitted in the ANKC top shelf breed exhibits I didn't think???

Not necessarily. If a breeder is using imported stock....stock that they paid a premium to import, I can definitely see why they would want pet pups to be desexed.....because they would not want their imported lines used indiscriminately. They would want to be the ones to engineer the use of the genetic material being used as they obviously imported with a view to the future. And I suppose the same can be said of any breeder who puts a lot of time, effort and forethought into their program and maps out the future carefully. They would not want just anyone using their lines, and who can blame them? Of course we know why breeders place restrictions on their puppies, but if they have such a keen desire to do so, they could always keep the litter for themselves. As a purchaser for me, there is no in between.........either sell the whole puppy unrestricted or don't sell them at all. Personally, I am just not interested in restricted puppy sales and provides absolutely no benefits to the purchaser whatsoever Unrestricted dogs sold can be used to breed with - yes i know that they cant be registered but hell most BYB dont care - they see a really nice dog they scooped up entire with no legal contract binding them to anything and off they go to shepherds with crappy hips and oodles and god knows what else. If the dog is a pet why does it need to be on a main register?? this register is for entire dogs which are to be used for breeding and showing?! As the rottie breeder mentioned earlier - sorry name has evaded me :D - there are plenty of dogs that were pick in their litter and show quality dogs in pet homes on the limited register - doesnt mean the dog isnt fantastic just means its a pet and will be desexed - i dont see a problem here and i can understand it completely As for the other conditions hell no to the whole return of the dog thing - if u sell to a pet home then commit to it u cant have it back in 2 yrs time cause u changed ur mind!! by all means ask to show it on behalf of the owner but its the dogs owners decision not the breeders. Diet i too would give reccomendations and information then its up to the owner, same with Vet and Grooming. I fully support breeders rescrictions and their right to select their dogs future homes but i think that the breeder u are talking about here is not really wanting to sell this puppy to a pet home. Keep looking lol That's a theory on the BYB, but the BYB will breed regardless so isn't it better for the BYB to have some quality more healthy dogs to breed with than using the products of other BYB breedings. Desexing clauses doesn't stop the BYB, it forces them to use crappy dogs in their programs instead of good ones........but BYB breedings are another story

Not necessarily. If a breeder is using imported stock....stock that they paid a premium to import, I can definitely see why they would want pet pups to be desexed.....because they would not want their imported lines used indiscriminately. They would want to be the ones to engineer the use of the genetic material being used as they obviously imported with a view to the future. And I suppose the same can be said of any breeder who puts a lot of time, effort and forethought into their program and maps out the future carefully. They would not want just anyone using their lines, and who can blame them? Of course we know why breeders place restrictions on their puppies, but if they have such a keen desire to do so, they could always keep the litter for themselves. As a purchaser for me, there is no in between.........either sell the whole puppy unrestricted or don't sell them at all. Personally, I am just not interested in restricted puppy sales and provides absolutely no benefits to the purchaser whatsoever :D But why? As repeated. If the dog is not to be bred from, why? And I'm also confused as to why a breeder should keep an entire litter regardless of individual pup quality, just because otherwise they'd go on limit? I also might add, Limit is not designed to benefit the buyer. It is designed to keep breeder's lines safe and help ensure that any random, indiscrimiate breeding doesn't take place. I don't think that was ever the intention of the limited register???. I still have the papers for my old dogs back from the early '80's. They either were sold papered and the lesser quality puppies back then were sold without papers. The limited register was a recognition of pedigree for an non breedworthy example I recall was it's intended purpose???.

I always had the understanding that the wisdom of the limited register was designed for non breedworthy pedigrees, not as a tool to place restrictions upon quality puppies...........perhaps I am wrong???

Wow. I am of the total opposite. I'd stay clear of any breeder who puts all their puppies on main register. You only have to look at what's being bred by novice breeders in all breeds to see why it's dangerous to put everything on the main. There is variance in most litters and I think it's important to still scrutinize the litter to only pick 'the best'. I'm not sure how you can say that by putting some pups on limited, means the breeder isn't confident with their breeding. In one well planned litter, you could get a very high quality, well put together dog, but yet it's littermate may have different qualities which doesn't see it as well conformed, and thus should be placed on limited. Doesn't mean that it's not 'quality'. The others may still be of very high quality and better than many being shown, but to put them all on main with no restrictions on breeding will only see them end up in the hands of novices who will ruin the lines. To me, breeders who put restrictions on their dogs are being responsible for their breed. well said Stormie. I don't think every pup in a litter is worthy of putting on the mains, and breeders who are objective and selective for their breed's future and maintaining quality in the lines, would not be so quick to send out their pups with mains reg and no restrictions at all. fifi I agree, not every pup in the litter are always good examples which are called "faulty" and should be on limited register. However, a "faulty" puppy is hardly of good quality is it???. If the puppy is good quality, it should be on main automatically.

I don't agree with desexing a male anyway and there is no way in the world I would remotely consider a large breed desexed at anything under 18 months. Bugger your desexing clause SecretKei if you feel it's not the best option for you and your boy

Not necessarily. If a breeder is using imported stock....stock that they paid a premium to import, I can definitely see why they would want pet pups to be desexed.....because they would not want their imported lines used indiscriminately. They would want to be the ones to engineer the use of the genetic material being used as they obviously imported with a view to the future. And I suppose the same can be said of any breeder who puts a lot of time, effort and forethought into their program and maps out the future carefully. They would not want just anyone using their lines, and who can blame them? Of course we know why breeders place restrictions on their puppies, but if they have such a keen desire to do so, they could always keep the litter for themselves. As a purchaser for me, there is no in between.........either sell the whole puppy unrestricted or don't sell them at all. Personally, I am just not interested in restricted puppy sales and provides absolutely no benefits to the purchaser whatsoever

Wow. I am of the total opposite. I'd stay clear of any breeder who puts all their puppies on main register. You only have to look at what's being bred by novice breeders in all breeds to see why it's dangerous to put everything on the main. There is variance in most litters and I think it's important to still scrutinize the litter to only pick 'the best'. I'm not sure how you can say that by putting some pups on limited, means the breeder isn't confident with their breeding. In one well planned litter, you could get a very high quality, well put together dog, but yet it's littermate may have different qualities which doesn't see it as well conformed, and thus should be placed on limited. Doesn't mean that it's not 'quality'. The others may still be of very high quality and better than many being shown, but to put them all on main with no restrictions on breeding will only see them end up in the hands of novices who will ruin the lines. To me, breeders who put restrictions on their dogs are being responsible for their breed. I was offered a puppy in my recent search on limited for $1250. On main, the puppy was $3500 my choice???. I can't see how that scenario was being responsible for the breed and the option was driven by money :D Pay the money and you can do with the dog as you wish, don't pay the money and it's restricted

I'm with t-time on this one (for the most part) I just purchased a puppy with restrictions. The dog is not at public stud and the breeder will most likely want him back to stud a litter. I have no problem with this as the bloodlines are sought after and the breeder is just covering her backside in case I do the wrong thing (which I wouldn't anyway but you never know with some people) Quality bred doesn't necessarily mean breeding quality. Of coarse every breeder would like every single puppy in their litter to be show quality but the reality is that it doesn't happen... you will get a couple of pet quality dogs in the litter. Why should these dogs not be desexed and on limited register just because their breeding is 'quality'? If you are after a pet then going with a good breeder is your best bet for health reasons, but does conformation and main register really matter when you just want a nice addition to the family? In regards to zug zugs post I think those are some pretty hefty requirements. I believe (and i state now, this is my opinion only) - it needs to be desexed Agree completely - it cannot be desexed until it is an adult and the breeder wants the option to take it back if it is of show quality (if not, then you can desex it and keep it) Uhhhh..... Not unless you are LEASING the dog, if you are buying it then certainly not. - it needs to be regularly vaccinated Of course, although I believe after 1 year of age vacc only need to be done every 3 years. - it is not allowed to be vaccinated for anything ever Ever? Or not after 1 year as mentioned above? If they are never vaccinated for anything EVER, then that is irresponsible. - it needs to go to the breeder's vet, not yours Too bad if you live interstate. Although I can understand where they are coming from.. some people prefer some vets over others... If I sold pups I would RECOMMEND a certain vet, but wouldn't force. - it can never be taken to any vet but needs to be taken back to the breeder herself if anything is ever wrong with it The breeder should be INFORMED of any problems, but I agree... vet first. - it needs to be fed on a raw diet only If the dog is yours then that's not up to them. Raw diets are good, but you should be able to make that choice yourself. - it needs to go to a groomer of the breeder's choice Again, same with the vets, people have preferences for certain groomers, but I would only recommend, not force. - no kids Under the age of 3 I tend to agree. I know that won't go down well, but in reality, all it takes is a 2 year old to pull the dogs tail and it's bye-bye child... the older the kid, the more you can teach them how to behave around dogs. And yet another disclaimer... these are my OPINIONS only (I have already been in trouble a few times for having an opinion so please don't eat me) So, what advantage is it for the buyer to purchase a puppy with restrictions over an unrestricted purchase..........NOTHING

Not necessary :D :D very rude Mysticview has similar ideals to mine when it comes to the sale of a puppy Once you have made the decision to sell to a particular person, the puppy is paid for and gone to their new home, you can only hope that as a dedicated breeder, you've done your best and provided the new owners with as much info and offers of support as you can. The rest is up to your puppy buyer and here's hoping your instincts were right and you chose a good one! :D Why? My Pet puppies are never sold on Main Register - always Limited with a desexing clause - and if I've made a mistake about the show potential of a particular puppy then too bad for me. ;) T-time, I have just recently purchased a puppy, and you wouldn't believe the nonesense that some breeders carry on with to the point that only newbie dog owners would be caught by their restrictions. To make matters worse in my breed, the restrictive breeders were primarily the ones with the average bloodlines and the highest prices, nothing special in their lines at all..........so why go through with all the garbage for an average puppy :D I purchased from an extremely high level of proven bloodines, on main register, chose the pedigree name with papers ready when collecting the puppy and had pick of the litter Beautiful, that's how it should be

Yes, I have heard of such a vaccine here...........I will check and find out what specific vaccine our vet uses. It annoys me when asking questions at the vet, like is it best to have the 16 week booster also and they treat you like an idiot :D "This is how we do it" answers doesn't mean that regime is best for the puppy

I am confused regarding the best puppy vaccination schedule against Parvo and have been getting some conflicting advice. My GSD puppy is 12 weeks old, had his C3 at 6 weeks and just had his C5 which the vet considers substantial protection until his 12 month booster. Many recommend an additional 16 week vaccination as the antibodies from the puppies mother can still effect the 12 week vaccination providing proper immunisation???. Our vet dismissed this suggestion claiming that the type or brand of vaccine they use doesn't need it repeated at 16 weeks???. I have read several accounts where puppies have had their 6 and 12 week shots but contracted Parvo and died from the virus around 5 or 6 months old that was perceived as being preventable had they had a booster administered at 16 weeks??? I am interested to hear some thoughts an opinions regarding puppy immunisation :D

I think some breeders get too carried away with their own perceived importance really :D When I purchase a quality bred puppy, I want it on main register with no restrictions. Unless a puppy has obvious faults, my 3 year old is on limited register due to a coat fault in the breed, fair enough, but a well bred puppy may turn out very good and very breed worthy and shouldn't be restricted with desexing clauses or limited registers as you never know until it matures. Restrictions tells me that the breeders are not confident of the quality they are breeding and personally wouldn't purchase from those breeders.

Bitches fighting brings back some nasty memories...............never ever will I have two bitches again, boys only for me I hope they are recovering and not effected or hurt too much. I don't envy your situation and hope you can sort things out ok :D

Exactly! I fail to see how someone can love one and not the other :D As they say: "Unite, fight, get dog laws right" We do have to be careful and not have any more fluff up's that places other breeds under the BSL spotlight. The situation that happened in QLD with the Amstaff was just stupid, what were they thinking

Personally, I think a 10 week old is too small to play with a boisterious adult. I have a 12 week old GSD puppy, a 3 year old and an 8 year old. Our 8 year old is quite but plays hard with the 3 year old and the same thing, will try to play with the puppy in the same manner when excited. We only have them interact under supervision until the puppy is a bit bigger as it doesn't take much to hurt or scare a small puppy when playing with a large rough playing dog. Mine are purely in play mode, but the size difference at the moment is too great to be safe I think Thank you for your response Black Bronson I have been keeping the pup separate from my girl (they mostly kiss through playpen) I agree with you about the age of the pup and keeping it separate from adults. My query is more about my Rottie's behaviour towards the pup because I will continue to foster pups in the future if she is happy with the situation, I would just like to know whether her behaviour is normal and healthy for HER. I thinks it's more about teaching the adult dog to behave with the puppy. Our 3 year old had never interacted with a puppy before and is reactive towards aggressive dogs.........so we had to play this one by ear a bit. What we did was have controlled interactions in the back yard intially with the 3 year old on leash. He did switch into prey drive and try and chase the puppy and barked and had to give him a couple of leash corrections during the "be gentle" phase. The puppy is fairly confident and whilst in his crate, they began to kiss each other through the mesh with wagging tails. We don't have aggression, but knowingly the 3 year old is a hard player we controlled him on leash to settle him down, "gentle" command and praise when he got it right. We had them all out in the back yard together today with us with only the puppy on leash so he didn't start biting the others legs and swinging off tails etc to fire them up......he's at the biting stage with needle sharp teeth Our 8 year old couldn't be bothered and layed down on the lawn, the 3 year old followed us around with the puppy for a while then layed with the old boy and watched. It's all working well, but I wouldn't let them all out together unsupervised just yet in case full play mode kicks in. It appears our 3 year old is liking the puppy and wants to play as he has been offering his ball to the puppy in his crate and are interacting well through the safety of the crate mesh. The puppy is our dog and there to stay, so it's perhaps a bit different to a foster situation with different puppies if they interact and accept all puppies the same way or getting to know a permanent family member could have a different outcome. We haven't tested our boisterious boy with another puppy yet to see if his "gentle" approach works across the board or if it's working with acceptance of our new puppy being a permanent addition :D If the pups were mine and were going to live here with my dogs it would be completely different. My Rotti really does seem to like other dogs/puppies Maybe I'm too protective of the pups. I just couldn't stand the thought of a little pup becoming dog aggressive down the track because I can't read my own dog's behaviour. We had the same thing in mind not wanting the puppy to be scared and cause an aggression issue down the track or the adults to rough play and hurt him.........it is delicate situation.

Personally, I think a 10 week old is too small to play with a boisterious adult. I have a 12 week old GSD puppy, a 3 year old and an 8 year old. Our 8 year old is quite but plays hard with the 3 year old and the same thing, will try to play with the puppy in the same manner when excited. We only have them interact under supervision until the puppy is a bit bigger as it doesn't take much to hurt or scare a small puppy when playing with a large rough playing dog. Mine are purely in play mode, but the size difference at the moment is too great to be safe I think Thank you for your response Black Bronson I have been keeping the pup separate from my girl (they mostly kiss through playpen) I agree with you about the age of the pup and keeping it separate from adults. My query is more about my Rottie's behaviour towards the pup because I will continue to foster pups in the future if she is happy with the situation, I would just like to know whether her behaviour is normal and healthy for HER. I thinks it's more about teaching the adult dog to behave with the puppy. Our 3 year old had never interacted with a puppy before and is reactive towards aggressive dogs.........so we had to play this one by ear a bit. What we did was have controlled interactions in the back yard intially with the 3 year old on leash. He did switch into prey drive and try and chase the puppy and barked and had to give him a couple of leash corrections during the "be gentle" phase. The puppy is fairly confident and whilst in his crate, they began to kiss each other through the mesh with wagging tails. We don't have aggression, but knowingly the 3 year old is a hard player we controlled him on leash to settle him down, "gentle" command and praise when he got it right. We had them all out in the back yard together today with us with only the puppy on leash so he didn't start biting the others legs and swinging off tails etc to fire them up......he's at the biting stage with needle sharp teeth Our 8 year old couldn't be bothered and layed down on the lawn, the 3 year old followed us around with the puppy for a while then layed with the old boy and watched. It's all working well, but I wouldn't let them all out together unsupervised just yet in case full play mode kicks in. It appears our 3 year old is liking the puppy and wants to play as he has been offering his ball to the puppy in his crate and are interacting well through the safety of the crate mesh. The puppy is our dog and there to stay, so it's perhaps a bit different to a foster situation with different puppies if they interact and accept all puppies the same way or getting to know a permanent family member could have a different outcome. We haven't tested our boisterious boy with another puppy yet to see if his "gentle" approach works across the board or if it's working with acceptance of our new puppy being a permanent addition

I don't see how My dogs are taught a formal heel position, when I ask Daisy to heel I am giving a command, she knows exactly what it means and where she needs to be. I don't have "several walking positions" - there is no command associated with walking, there's just walking. I like the leash to be loose and generally walk with the dogs to my left side out of habit. I don't let my dogs zig zag all over the path walking miles ahead of me, I let them walk perhaps a metre or so in front unless I want to bring them in closer then I do so. Often they walk next to me anyway. Almost daily I walk down to our local sports oval to do training, yep that means casual walking where I might let Daisy walk a little in front of me (still on a loose leash) and I can get her walking in formal heel position with a single verbal command. You said you saw some videos of Daisy - does she look confused to you because I am quite confident she is not even remotely confused ;) I honestly am baffled that people are making such a massive deal out of those of us who aren't so strict on our walks, so I don't make my dogs walk in a specific position the entire time, who cares when they are still under control and responsive to my commands. ETA: I am getting the impression you think my dogs do what they like on walks, which is very far from the truth. Why does the dog move ahead of you Huski, what is her focus to do so??? As far as confusion goes, consistancy is what I am talking about and we train the dog to walk at heel no exceptions. I don't want the dog to think it's ok to walk ahead a bit, I want the dog to learn that when we walk together, we do it one way only. You don't have control with a dog out front for example, my dogs have low threshold to aggression if challenged. If the dog is out front and another dog passing in the opposite direction takes a sudden lunge, my dog could bite before I have time to correct him. At heel I have him close and can keep him calm and focused on me. The control between the two walking positions in that instance is massive. Depending on the dog, there are times if the dog is ahead of you, control is greatly reduced from that of a heel position. Another time was a snake crossing a path in front of us once. I saw it and jumped back with the dog at heel ;) . If the dog was up front when I saw the snake, he would have been on top of it and could have got bitten. Dog's up front doesn't give you better control or match the control in all circumstances and is the reason why I like to walk at heel