Aidan3

As I was scrolling down through the first pic I was thinking "that's got to be the work of a GSD" :laugh:

Sounds like it would work great if you were shown how to use it properly. Whatever you do, don't get a Malinois and learn bite-work with these people!

Probably yes, but the harness may be easier for some handlers, especially inexperienced ones like myself. A harness does a brilliant job of getting the leash out of the way completely. My old girl usually wore a harness because she was usually dragging a long line.

No, but I've seen dogs who suffer a constant threat of aversive or a constant fear of an unpredictable correction from a prong collar in inexperienced or incompetent hands. By the same token, I've never made a dog walk in a head halter that was a "constant aversive". Head halters, properly, should be response prevention - much the same as a harness or flat collar, but with leverage. If a dog is not comfortable wearing a head halter, they shouldn't be wearing it. When I condition a dog to wear a head halter (a rare event), they do everything but buckle the clip themselves. Given that there is no threat of correction for not willingly putting their nose in the loop and willingly holding still while I buckle the clip, I'd have to put faith in the evidence that the head halter was not a constant aversive for these dogs.

An aversive stimulus is one which an animal will work to avoid or escape (but may learn not to). Basically, it's something unpleasant. M-sass' comment tries to justify the use of one piece of aversive equipment by making an apples to oranges comparison with another. I never saw a dog delight in receiving a prong collar correction, either. Nor would I use a head halter on a dog who couldn't be quickly conditioned to wearing a head halter comfortably.

I don't use them and don't encourage their use, but I really wish the PPG would stop putting out this nonsense in this way. Why write scare campaigns full of low-probability risks when you could discuss the real issues?

You really need someone to help you in person, preferably with a suitable snake - and a strong sense of ethics.

True. Repeatedly throughout our evolutionary history it has paid off to get scared of certain sounds and take immediate action.

I'd still not be comfortable about a dog that caused damage in response to play-fighting, but it does depend a lot on the antecedents. My old GSD would respond very quickly to things that she perceived as a threat, but her response was to intimidate and hold the threat back, biting was a last resort. She did, however, bite other dogs in redirected aggression. Did not ever draw blood. In a different home she may have learned to bite and cause damage, who knows?

True, might not have been such a serious bite after all. Particularly with a bit of leg thrashing around, can even do more incidental damage than intended by the dog.

How do we turn it into a ringtone?

Redirected aggression is a well known and relatively common phenomenon. The report (which may be exaggerated) makes it sound like a very deep wound, which would be uncharacteristic of social aggression. I'm not sure that I'd want to take a risk on having that dog around, even if the owner had some part to play.

A recent Harvard study showed that tinfoil hats amplify radio waves in government controlled frequency bands to the skull. Traditionally they have been worn in a belief that they protect the wearer from mind control - who do you think started that false information campaign though?

Whenever you write about what happens in your house, it freaks me out. I don't know how you stay there. I'd be gone in a flash. The simple explanation for that one is that water-based paint does a terrible job of holding back oils. So a greasy (or sooty) hand-print will keep showing through layers of water based paint. Layer upon layer upon layer in my personal experience. A spirit-based primer (no joke!) will seal it in and water-based paint sticks to that. ETA: cool story (although it cost me a fortune). I supplied a material to protect signage outdoors at Uluru. A year or so later the film started to fail so I asked them to send one back to me. The whole sign was covered with ochre hand prints, but it wasn't superficial. The ochre hand prints were etched deep into the film (this is a film developed by Du Pont to resist very strong chemicals). They looked like aboriginal hand paintings. We sent a sign off to a lab and the explanation that came back was interesting. We've all heard of acid rain. Well, acid is also present in dew. It's very dilute, but as the sun dries the dew, the acid becomes more and more concentrated. Eventually it etches the film, then ochre from the dust in the atmosphere stains it. The dew tends to settle where the surface tension on the film was lowered by skin oils, hence the hand patterns. Oh ok, that might explain that mystery then, but there are many others :laugh: Just cover them all with spirit-based primer :laugh:

Whenever you write about what happens in your house, it freaks me out. I don't know how you stay there. I'd be gone in a flash. The simple explanation for that one is that water-based paint does a terrible job of holding back oils. So a greasy (or sooty) hand-print will keep showing through layers of water based paint. Layer upon layer upon layer in my personal experience. A spirit-based primer (no joke!) will seal it in and water-based paint sticks to that. ETA: cool story (although it cost me a fortune). I supplied a material to protect signage outdoors at Uluru. A year or so later the film started to fail so I asked them to send one back to me. The whole sign was covered with ochre hand prints, but it wasn't superficial. The ochre hand prints were etched deep into the film (this is a film developed by Du Pont to resist very strong chemicals). They looked like aboriginal hand paintings. We sent a sign off to a lab and the explanation that came back was interesting. We've all heard of acid rain. Well, acid is also present in dew. It's very dilute, but as the sun dries the dew, the acid becomes more and more concentrated. Eventually it etches the film, then ochre from the dust in the atmosphere stains it. The dew tends to settle where the surface tension on the film was lowered by skin oils, hence the hand patterns.

You know, I was expecting more rational, informed responses from some of my friends :laugh: We did find a striking similarity between that noise and an impression of a lion given by a local animal behaviourist during a radio interview. Mostly just recommendations that I should have been studying, though.

Typical, I still have to sit my neuro exam on Wednesday :laugh:

I think Boxers are highly underrated. In the old days they didn't tend to respond too well to correction-based training, plowing the paddock for an hour. I've had a number come to me and their owners have been amazed at what their supposedly "stupid" dog was capable of in a single session.

Could I just interject here as a breeder/owner of Staffords and say that I would always recommend a male Stafford over a female as a pet.....whether I've been unlucky or something else, I don't know...but I've always found the males to be a lot more tractable and easily dealt with. As has been mentioned in this thread, I too believe that the word "bitch" was coined for a female Stafford!!! I'd agree with that, but as far as how you handle and train them goes you wouldn't pick one over the other because of your own place in the pack or some physical ability to assert dominance that you may or may not have. How they interact with other dogs is a different story...

I think so. But if we find a dog who is persistent and intense in pursuing a particular activity, then that dog is "high drive". The morphology of herding is different to retrieving, but both are modified prey drive.

Hardly any, and it depends a bit on what you mean by "happy to assert dominance over a male dog"? My old bitch would have had you up against the wall if you'd tried a dominance down on her or something like that :laugh: It's important to recognise the difference between "asserting dominance" and "earning respect". The latter is done by being consistent, trust-worthy, and using your brain to solve problems with respect for the dog also. The former is something people do when they haven't learned how to form a working relationship with a dog and just want it "back in it's box". No matter which breed you end up with, taking a bit of time to learn how to build that working relationship through reward, consistency, and understanding is well worth your while. Whether you get a male or a female, or a SBT or a boxer, it doesn't really matter.

I walk daily along an off-leash beach, which is different to an off-leash dog park, but there are similarities. There are several regular SBTs, a couple of AmStaffs, even a Johnson Bulldog (whose owner is very selective about which dogs he plays with). The range of social behaviours varies amongst them but all of these dogs fit in well and I've never seen any trouble. Some of them show excellent self-handicapping and will immediately display cut-off signals if the other dog is getting a bit OTT or shows signs of feeling overwhelmed. Others are a bit rough, but harmless and they pick their play-mates well. A more "typical" bull breed will front up to a bit of conflict, or might even escalate play to elicit a bit of conflict. So while you can find some highly sociable and more conflict-avoidant bullies, you wouldn't place bets on a pup turning out that way.

I actually listened to it over and over with high-quality headphones. If this is anything like Japanese movies, I'm in trouble... Make sure you check in tomorrow so we know that nothing got you during the night and whatever you do, don't copy it and forward it on to anyone!! :laugh: I put it on my Facebook!!!

I actually listened to it over and over with high-quality headphones. If this is anything like Japanese movies, I'm in trouble...