Erny

For those reading and commenting on the above, I wouldn't take it too literally, (although I do think I know what Nekhbet means by it). By that I mean it doesn't mean the dog shouldn't be able to think and make decisions. After all, "training" is about the dog making decisions but making it so that those decisions are the ones we want the dog to make. IMO, earning the respect as a higher ranking animal within the pack is a combination of "dominance" (yep - the word so many looooove to hate) and "leadership". A very diluted explanation of what I mean by that is that the "dominant" component is about showing the dog what not to do and the "leadership" is the component which is about showing the dog what to do. When I think of "Leader" I think of someone whom I can follow; someone who can show me the way; someone whom I can trust to not lead me into harm; someone who will protect me. Eg. My Mum and Dad. When I think of "Dominance" I think of someone who would compete to have their will imposed. By that I don't conjure images of bullying; harshness; hostility; abuse; etc. etc.. More "Thine Will Be Done" springs to mind. Eg. My Dad (who has never in his life raised his voice or fist to me - the quieter he spoke the bigger the trouble I knew I was in) . Training is part of "Dominance" and "Leadership". Hence training is part of the earning of respect as the higher ranking animal. But training isn't the whole of it. Daily interactions - the way we interact : responses/initiatives .... that's the foundation of it. The result of "dominance" is submission, affection, and dependency, whereas "leadership" provides the basis for social cooperation and interactive harmony. (Credits .... I think I read the above line somewhere and that they may not be my own words, but I can't think where I've read it. I do not intend any plagerism by writing it here.) IMO and in essence.

Travel, I guess, Trisven. It's the only solution I can think of at the moment by way of response to your query and it is something I have done myself in the past for a variety of reasons. But as you say - Cosmolo knows your dog and yourself and I presume your relationship with your dog so she should be able to use that assessment to be able to guide you sufficiently.

Yep that's right. It does not increase in intensity automatically. It shouldn't need to, if the setting you select is right for the dog. Why spend your $$$ on something you might not ever need? Still .... your choice and your right to do with your $$$ what you wish , but I'd rather spend my money on stuff that won't need to just sit idle collecting dust somewhere (with any luck ).

I prefer the ones you can set to suit the animal - so that the level is the most minimum it needs to be an effective aversive.

No - difficulties come from some of the models that ramp up as the dog continues to bark. And then take time to re-set once the dog stops. Dogs are pretty cluey, as you know .

The style of collar as well as the way they are initially introduced to the dog BEFORE use can and often does make a big difference to both of these things. I believe that unless the owners are versed and well know their dogs with a good understanding and knowledge of dog behaviour/psychology, people should consult with a trainer/behaviourist before engaging the use of an electronic (RT or anti-bark) or for that matter, spray collar. In the case of barking, one needs to be certain about why their dog is barking as it is the combination of training for rehabilitation as well as use of the collar that does the trick. Collar by itself can lead to all sorts of problems. ETA: BB .... the last of my post here is not directed at you and re-reading it, I felt pertinent to mention that I am not insinuating that use of the anti-bark was in any way related to your rescue dog's aggression.

You might have been lucky with getting your electronic collars through customs, Indigirl, and so might have others. But I think there's been just as many or more who have had theirs seized by Customs on arrival as you are supposed to have special permit to import them. If the collar is seized, it works out to be a very expensive exercise for the purchaser, as they lose that money and then only have to go through the correct channels to buy one anyway. And with the money exchange rate at the moment, it would be quite a reasonable amount, I suspect. If you were to purchase from OS, I think you need to do so with the acceptance that you run a big risk in doing your dough. If you're prepared for that, then so be it. I would suggest to anyone that they consult with a trainer/behaviourist who is familiar with the use of the electronic collars first. Not only to determine suitability but also to help the dog-owner decide on the best model collar for the dog. My preference is for the style that you can set the settings to suit the dog and of course that it is of good quality, waterproof, etc. etc. and I also prefer the rechargable ones. Although this style is that bit more expensive, generally speaking.

bugger that. Erny i had a mind blank which is why i didnt refer to them as e collars. :D ..... I missed that in your post, IHF. You just dobbed yourself in. No worries - I just wanted to clarify so that the incorrect name didn't become habitually used throughout the thread.

"Shock" collars is the name of the collars from which the modern day "e-collar" or "electronic collar" has evolved. Today, "shock" collars are a far cry from the older style collars. But yes, you're right Trisven13. Electronic collar devices and e-collar use is illegal in NSW. Now I am confused. What is the difference between what you are referring to and what Ruthless is talking about in her thread? She's in NSW. Ok - I'm willing to defer on this. It was my understanding that the use of electronic devices on dogs in NSW was taboo. In 'googling' to revisit your "Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act" I realise how much easier it is to navigate the Victorian on-line version ..... although that is perhaps because I'm more used to that site than I am to sites of other States. I'm not saying I'm wrong - I'm saying that I am now doubting myself - especially because I am not constantly in touch with the laws of other States. If I can navigate to find the relevant sections of the Act I'll re-visit here with them.

"Shock" collars is the name of the collars from which the modern day "e-collar" or "electronic collar" has evolved. Today, "shock" collars are a far cry from the older style collars. But yes, you're right Trisven13. Electronic collar devices and e-collar use is illegal in NSW.

Hi Everyone. News of the outcome of the POCTA regulation review 2008 results came out yesterday. Regardless of the depth and breadth of factual information along with submissions attesting to the success of training with the PPCollar, the Government have elected to NOT permit any change to the prohibition of use of the collar. The new regulations and Act, as well as a range of other relevant information, can be downloaded from the following links www.dpi.vic.gov.au/animalwelfare (follow links to legislation page) or www.legislation.vic.gov.au click on 'law today' then select statutory rules or Acts beginning with 'P'. Details of amendments to the Victorian POCTA Regs can be found in the Notice of Decision which is available at www.dpi.vic.gov.au/animalwelfare. This is a copy of the 'parent' submission (just to give you a visual image) and was supported by what turned out to be a not too shabby petition which was tabled at Parliament. I will be taking a break for Christmas but I haven't quit on this and already have an idea or two bouncing around in my head. Thanks to everyone who made an effort to assist in this campaign. Although it might feel like it right now, your efforts are not in vain nor wasted. Cheers, and to you all a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year :D.

Be careful about rushing to put weight on an underweight large/giant breed puppy. The extra food you might give to put some flesh on his bones often will increase his growth spurt rate instead, and that's something you want to avoid. Work slowly but gradually on the weight factor (if that's required). Proper bone development is essential. A weight increase of approximately 1 - 1.2 kg per week is what I aimed for with my youngster.

Thanks for the clarification. I wonder if the authorities would know the difference? I expect that they do, given that for years they've been looking to stop the sport but as I understand it, couldn't do so due to the wording of previous regulation. That the wording has changed to specifically include the 'biting of anything worn' and that the Council are now pulling Sch into the legal lime light indicates to me that they knew exactly what the difference is.

You're "on the button" for that one, Julie. Good idea. I'm surprised the Sch groups haven't made use of it. Many of the dogs I've seen from the spectator lines who are Sch trained are the exemplary of obedience and good behaviour .

I think we're still waiting on this information, Steve. To my knowledge, it was considerably earlier than that when 'papers' were served on those mentioned in the OP. I don't know what has been going on as far as their legal battle from back then is concerned and I'm only presuming at this stage that it relates to the Court case that is now imminent. In the meantime though, Court Case aside (and I by no means intend to make light of it nor do I want to give the impression that it will not affect the sport of Sch Training overall), I think some action to oppose the suppression of the sport that the authorities have been seemingly working hard to bring about regulations so they can in fact target it, is required. ETA: Does that last sentence make sense? I think I'm getting tired - it's been a big day .

To add to the above, if there is anyway to calculate how many (if any at all) of the Sch trained dogs have been reported to council as a 'nuisance' dog, this info could be helpful. After all - on one hand the Councils are crying that there are so many nuisance reports on their books and so few people to deal with them, yet on the other hand they are endeavouring to close down a sport that will result in an even more narrowed field of canine discipline and mental stimulation than we already have. I recognise this is an almost impossible task as given the Council has been trying to target Schutzhund for some time now, who would want to put their hand up to be recognised as a Sch member ?????? But something to keep in mind. Perhaps you don't even have to prove this. Maybe just ask the question to Council and let them try to answer it, seeing as it is they who is decrying this sport as some sort of training towards achieving dangerous dogs .

From what I remember of my very scant learnings of training rats/mice (not that I have done so myself), I think with them, once they have made the trail they tend to follow their own scent and therefore follow the same trail over, for the rewards. Could be wrong, but that's what I think I remember of it - was to do with training rats through mazes.

I'm with you, Persephone. My 6mo has learnt the rule of "no bones inside". He understands this now. I leave my doors open. Bones inside? Yuck!!

..........

Baaahhhh .... the mouse missed his contact colours on several pieces of the equipment. Needs more work on "two-on; two-off" IMO. Very cute .

Dirty Dog ..... I have recently had experience with the ways of "Petitions" here in Victoria. If you'd like to contact me (my phone number can be found on my website - link to which is at the foot of this post) I'm happy to share what info I can in that respect, although most of it I've written here anyway. Unfortunately Victoria is way behind the times as far as petition process is concerned and they cannot be done electronically. They must be original signatures on paper. This means petition sheets need to be either handed to you or posted to you by 'snail mail' . What I did was (with the help of a couple of more computer savvy people than I) prepared the format for the petition. I then created a blog-spot and linked the petition format sheet to it. Then sent the link around. People could access it by clicking the link and then printing out the petition sheet. They then had the petition sheet signed and posted the original by snail-mail to a nominated address. I did similar for 'standard' type letters that people could print out and post to the relevant authority/persons. Here's a link though, to the "Rules of Petitions" for Victoria. Only Victorian residents are able to sign. The link I've given is for "Legislative Assembly". If the Petition sheets are addressed to "Legislative Assembly" then only a 'Member of the Legislative Assembly' can table it at Parliament for you. So you'd need to find out if you have someone who is a MLA before you do this. The alternative is for the Petition sheet to be addressed to "Legislative Council". A Member of Legislative Council (MLC) can table that at Parliament for you. I'm not sure which is the better, or whether there's any difference. I know that I didn't exactly have an easy time of it when I was trying to get a petition tabled. Whilst I was originally informed any MP could lodge it, when it came to the crunch, I got the right royal run-around. There's a guy at Parliament who is the person who looks after the petitions at Legislative Assembly and I got to speak to him by telephone. He was extremely helpful and fantastic to talk with. Fact Sheet 8 - Legislative Assembly Parliament of Victoria or this one Information Sheet on Petitions

Poodlefan said it : IMO often (not always) a dog is reacting to protect itself ..... because it doesn't believe its owner will or is capable of doing that for him/her. This is when things become dangerous, because you have a dog who feels it needs to make decisions about things which are part of human civilization. Circumstances dictate though (eg. territorial responses etc) so this is not always the case. I strongly believe that IF a dog has the inclination to protect you at all, he will do so regardless of you being a 'leader'. The dog is likely to sense when you can't manage as he'll pick up on your fear/uncertainty etc. etc. It would all be part of pack dynamics.

Just something I'd like to add in here, something from my own observations and experience and just for the sake of adding some balance to this. Squeak - it's not that I'm challenging either what you have raised in your thread and I do agree that there are 'ways' of saying things and 'ways' of not saying things (as a trainer to a client). But there are people who I have known to have complained because they're out there in class but the trainer hasn't come over to them and given specific instruction in certain exercises when it might be fairly clear that they're not getting anywhere very efficiently with it. When I have taken classes, I appreciate it if anyone comes up to me at the beginning and lets me know that they are doing their own 'thing' - otherwise I feel remiss if I'm not giving assistance or advice to them that might help them through whatever difficulties they might be having. Have you taken the time to speak to your instructor/s to let them know why you are there and that you know what you are doing and wish to do it your own way? And often in those circumstances there isn't a huge amount of time within class to dedicate to 'wordy' explanations due to needing to keep the whole of the class running, but just a tip to 'try this' or 'try that'. One-on-one sessions are of course a completely different kettle of fish and are a big advantage, because the dog and dog-owner can be regarded and worked with as individuals rather than as a group. And I have run (and run) 'specialty classes' which are designed to focus on one particular exercise - to help those who only need help to overcome an obstacle they might be struggling with. I find these limited number classes excellent for certain issues. But again, these are a far cry from what can be managed and what is congenial to class-run training.

JulesP .... - what part of what's been said has upset you?

Thank you, Delkerabo.