Aidan3

I think firstly we have to recognise that it was the DPI that raised the concerns. What the Game Council were proposing went against DPI guidelines. I don't think anyone is disputing the facts about Game Council hunts. The Greens were just supporting the current DPI guidelines. We're only discussing baiting because people have bought it up here when in fact it was not suggested as an alternative, hunting with a dog was suggested as an alternative by both the DPI and the Greens. They are only objecting to the deliberate holding of the pigs, not the use of dogs or rifles in reducing feral pig numbers.

Do you have a reference for this? I couln't find any when checking out Greens policy on feral animals. The article says they prefer a single dog trained to flush the pig, then return so the hunter can take a safe shot. Greens have a very strong stance against the use of 1080. I have never flushed pigs with dogs nor seem it done, but I have been around pigs. I am not sure one dogs could flush a wild pig that did not want to go. I think to get an adult pig moving and not trying to fight back you would need at least a few dogs and I bet 5 is about right. Pigs are very big, can be very mean and not afraid to fight. Yes, I thought it sounded an unlikely strategy, more like wallaby hunting. But still, the Greens do not favour poisoning and in fact have suggested hunting with a dog as the preferred option.

It's inevitable that people will want to hunt, we've evolved that way and we're built for it. Our brains light up when we do it, some more than others. It's the same with gathering. I take my daughter walking with the dogs and she spends the whole time finding interesting rocks, shells and wildflowers. No-one taught her that. She gets bored quickly when we go fishing though.

Do you have a reference for this? I couln't find any when checking out Greens policy on feral animals. The article says they prefer a single dog trained to flush the pig, then return so the hunter can take a safe shot. Greens have a very strong stance against the use of 1080.

Wood-chip does keep the mud down. The only problem I have with it is ingestion, if they take their food over to the chips.

I'm not sure that's quite what psychologists say :D

Wait, wait, wait - so you're saying Cesar doesn't have magical powers? What's next - clickers don't have magical powers? Is nothing sacred any more?!?

If they are already very vocal then you can capture it and put it on cue with clicker training. You have to do it properly though, follow through so that it's properly on cue. Changing a bark to a growl is not a lot harder, you shape through selective reinforcement. I taught my Golden to bark at the door when he wanted to go out. This was a terrible mistake, once he figured out he could ask he would come in and out a lot more often. It was also quite jarring, having him bark inside. So what I did was shape him to "whisper" by ignoring the loudest barks (at first), then rewarding only progressively softer barks until we got down to a whisper. He figured out what I wanted very quickly, mercifully. After I had taught that, I conditioned another cue (known as an "S-delta" if you want to look it up) that meant that I wasn't going to reinforce for some time. So he might ask, I would say "shush", then he would go do something else until I had finished what I was doing.

Apparently Cesar himself seems to think it's relevant! Despite this, if you watch the video he frequently elicits the dog "actually looked aggressive for a second or two" response. Maybe he has figured it out and no longer does it that way. I hope so.

Just curious, did you see the bit where the camera-person stole the treat? Why do you think anyone might come to the conclusion that the dog had thought he had done something wrong?

I used extinction and reinforcement procedures with my neighbours Rottweiler. When he barked we would just stand there until he started to wear out a bit, then I would say good and immediately walk off. I continued in that vein each night until we shaped less and less barking. Make sure the fence is sturdy, or that they really aren't coming over it before you try this

He likes you to be happy

Which in itself is a pretty good indication that it's a response to things in the environment that predict trouble, and not "guilt".

I'd be looking at the discriminative stimuli, of which there are probably several. They seem to be very good at remembering places that are important to survival. We go hiking a lot, and there is this one tree, unremarkable but for the fact that my dogs once (4 or 5 years ago) treed a possum there. Of all the trees in the bush, this is the one they seek out, then look up expectantly at, every single time.

He knows he's in trouble, he doesn't need to know what for, nor did he set out to intentionally cause mischief.

Great video

Nothing could be further from the truth. In LAT (or it's variants) you condition the dog to engage with the trigger without aggression or fear or over-excitement or whatever the problem is. There is no distraction, in fact you are drawing their attention to the stimulus, visually at first. This is definitely not LAT and I haven't seen anyone do anything like this and make any serious claims about their ability to train reactive or aggressive dogs. You get closer as the dog gets better at dealing with the stimulus, which can happen very quickly. Like any training, you don't start in the deep end. You wouldn't do it with sit or stay or any other behaviour, why would you do it with an aggressive or fearful dog?

Yes, no references there either. Oxford may have never even looked at it, let alone drawn that conclusion. Creative interpretation is rife in the media. Going out on a limb here, I tend to view some amount of injury as reasonable. If the dog is working and doing something he loves, then some degree of injury is par for the course. Strictly talking about the dogs here, not the horses or the foxes.

I know next to nothing about fox hunting so had a quick Google and on Wiki it says "that the animal rarely endures hours of torment and pursuit by hounds, and research by Oxford University shows that the fox is normally killed after only an average of 17 minutes of chase" I wonder if that is true or not. Oxford is known for putting out false study information, so do not believe a word they say. LOL I think the concern is wikipedia, the citation given was a BBC news article. Google Scholar might turn something up if anyone wants to verify the source.

Here Here I agree Poodlefan, Whippys are brilliant at thieving Hmm, it seems my canine crime ring needs to recruit some Whippets! My GSD can open windows, and smash them if they don't open. She even used the big old key which we'd foolishly left in the back door once. I'm thinking she can do the breaking, the Whippets can do the entering. Then if the cops come, she can flee the scene and leave the little guys to plead innocence :D

OP wasn't sure what she thought of what Cesar was doing in the video. I don't think it's unreasonable for a variety of people to put their opinion forward if someone asks these sorts of questions, but the last few posts seem to suggest that "if you don't agree with some of the things Cesar does, you should keep your opinion to yourself and stop being a trouble-maker". Wouldn't that be a cosy little world?

Glad you're going to speak to Steve. The one thing that stood out to me was that you mentioned corrections a lot but didn't mention rewards (unless I missed it). It's difficult to teach dogs to do stuff if you're only telling them when they got something wrong, remember that commands are meaningless until you can attach a meaning to them. Another thing to consider, if he isn't "getting it", but he's being corrected for getting it wrong - then that's a very confusing and stressful situation and can lead to all sorts of displacement behaviours which you won't necessarily want (particularly the ones that will be a problem for your other dogs).

You might be surprised what DOES work in 30 minutes or an hour. But I'll tell you what they can't do - shoot a 30 minute episode of a television show in 30 mins or an hour! Besides, no-one goes to a dog trainer and says "you've got a max of 60 minutes or I'm putting this dog down". Nor do they really "try everything". If they're willing to try more than a couple of trainers, they're willing to keep trying (or putting up with unwanted behaviour). When you hear the things these people have been advised in the past you've got to cringe, there are no shortages of really bad or just plain ineffective trainers out there. Some of them even believe they are amazing.

Sure. Do you see the same responses? Do you see them play like this when they are in a highly aroused, anxious state? Some of those "taps" weren't little either. I was trying to say im pretty sure it doesnt hurt the dog. His techniques work and save a lot of dogs so i dont see the issue? and i dont see why people find it so *offensive* would you rather see these dogs get euthanised? This might come as a surprise but there are a lot of dog trainers (myself included) who work with dogs just like this (and worse), saving dogs from euthanasia (on occasion), without ever "tapping" them. So asking me if I would "rather see these dogs get euthanised" is a bit glib. And how do you know it doesn't hurt the dog? Some of them look pretty pissed off to me. Do you know they've been saved? Tell me what happened to Shadow, or JonBee? You might get a surprise if you digger a little deeper to get below the myth of "great Cesar's ghost".