Erny

Ok - breeding (or responses by entires to intact bitches) is not my forte - I have not had the experience of dealing with this type of problem where the cause of the vocalisation has been 'sexually' induced. Consequently I am unable to give you any reference to knowledge on successes, failures and the liklihood of either, nor whether the e-collar (or similar device) is the most appropriate behaviour training tool for this instance. An RT can be an excellent training tool as well as being able to assist in behavioural modification. But you should be mindful that you need to be there to be able to deliver the appropriate stimulation level whenever the dog exhibits the unwanted behaviour. Depending on your lifestyle and work commitments, this can often be impracticle if not impossible and as a result your dog might learn not to vocalise at certain times (eg when you are home) but not necessarily others (eg when you are not there). In addition to the above, a further problem can be created. IE Because the stimulation is not able to be delivered on a consistant schedule but is, rather, delivered on an intermittent schedule (ie irregularly) the treatment might serve to make the behaviour more difficult to improssible to eradicate. A bit like gambling addiction really - the addicted poker machine player doesn't quit as the result of many losses. To the contrary, the addicted gambler continues because occassionally there is a win. Whether an anti-bark collar or RT, I'd be warey of allowing your two dogs running together. Otherwise I can envisage a situation of your two dogs standing in proximity, your dog vocalising and receiving a stim and pairing your other dog as the cause of it. Or there is the possibility of the collar stimming the dog during 'play' vocalisation - add that to the excitement of play and it could result in aggression from one to the other. Amstaffchick : Have you tried training your dog for an incompatable behaviour? Eg. Drop and drop/stay. Not to suggest the dog cannot vocalise whilst in this position, although intensity of the vocalisation may be impeded. And a dog in drop will not go through the window. I would expect a good quality level of training would be required to attain obedience in the face of inate sexual drive but the mental stimulation your continued and consistant training would provide can only benefit. The RT will work because they are not reliant on vibration or noise - the stimulation is delivered by you pushing the button on the remote. As to whether an anti-bark style collar would operate sufficiently would depend on the level of vibration your dog's throat creates when he is whining. I agree that K9 Force might have more knowledge via experience as once again, I've not had cause to utilise e-collar devices for 'whining'. This question is more easily answered by suggesting you consult with a behaviourist who (a) knows e-collars and (b) has one. This way the feel of the stimulation it delivers can be experienced (and no, there's nothing to be frightened of). There is a fair amount of writings regarding the 'electrical' component of the stimulation (found in Steven Lindsay's "Applied Dog Behaviour and Training" Volume 3) but it does go on a fair amount about the comparison of open circuits and closed circuits, voltage -vs- current etc. etc. Even if I wrote it out here, you would probably still be none the wiser for knowing what the dog feels when the stimulation is delivered. I will say this - the 'electrical' terminology is scarier than the delivery of an appropriate level of stim ;). This would be the anti-bark type e-collar you speak of. Not the RT. Most anti-bark collars are activated by the vibration in the dog's throat, caused by the vocalisation (usually barking). The problem with others which might be activated by noise is that another noise in the proximate environment (eg. another dog barking) might be sufficient to activate the collar and the dog wearing it will receive the aversive - quite likely for not doing anything 'wrong'. There are other styles of "anti-bark" collars. There are those that provide an aversive stimulation by the spray of citronella every time the dog's vocalisation works to activate the collar. Neither K9 Force nor myself are particularly fond of these collars, but that's not to say they haven't done the trick for some. There is the JetAir collar - which shoots a strong jet of compressed air to the dog's chin/nose. In your case this might be sufficient for your dog, but check with K9 Force for his opinion also. As to which or what collar style is suitable for your dog (assuming this is the right mode of behavious modification treatment) would be your judgement call in the absence of a behaviourist assessing your dog's temperament. I hope some of this information is useful to you. It took me a lot longer than I anticipated to run through your questions. I'd recommend you read up on the operation of various e-collar and anti-bark collar styles - I think you've already been pointed in the direction of K9 Forces web-site page on the subject. ETA: Please excuse any spelling errors. It's late and I didn't spell-check before submitting the post.

Oh - sorry to hear that the last one was cancelled due to inclement weather . These workshops are excellent and even great for those who don't have a dog or don't wish to put their dogs to the 'test'. It is wonderful simply watching them and recognising instinctive drive in motion. Even more inspiring to watch it blossom from seemably nothing. Hope the weather is kind for you for the 12th. ;)

Well thank goodness. I was beginning to feel unloved. Enjoyable topic to discuss Jesomil. Thanks for placing it.

Thanks Tapferhund. And thanks everyone else who's already put their hands up - Jeff and Rom. Naturally, the more the merrier cheaper. The hard part is that until FOI do the search, I don't know how much it will be. I'll be in touch - but in the meantime, for all those others who would like to take advantage of new legislation to allow prong collars, it will be helpful if we can know the support will also be there - both of donation and your written submissions. I know money doesn't grow on trees and we all have our financial stresses. But I feel we need to try. Thanks Rom - will look out for the posty.

Provided the dogs can survive the initial withdrawal of the ready supply of kibble ............................................................ ............................................................ ............................... and their squeaky toys.

Ok - submissions are still very thin on the ground, but I'm doing what I can to target this submission appropriately. At the good suggestion of a person HR put me in contact with, I'm making an application to FOI for information pertaining to documents/reports that were submitted to the minister, as well as such that was given to the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee in support of and when the move to have prong collars banned in Victoria was made. The fee for the application is $22.00. I can wear that. But they also charge $20.00 per hour for searching for the information sought, as well as $5.00 per hour supervision charges as well as 20c per page of photo copying (A4). Of course, I won't know how much the total will come to because I don't know how difficult it will be to search for the info nor how much info is there and can't promise that I can fund the total expense on my own. So I need to ask if others will help finance the fee by division or donation when the time comes - regardless of the final outcome of our current attempt.

Sometimes though it's how, when and why a physical correction is applied that can make a (good) difference. And it is not just about the application of a physical correction (if one is deemed suitable to apply - much depends on the dog, the circumstances and the environment as to what is productive) - there are other objectives and effects in the equation.

I understand what you're saying. If I was teasing my avatar girl (usually trying to get her to play with a toy), she'd get p#$$ed off (although in a friendly way) and she'd nose punch the toy back at me. If I had to feed her something (eg. medication) that she didn't want (on each of those occasions - only two - the meds made her more ill - perhaps she knew something I didn't She was fine with all other meds I had to administer), she'd sometimes try the same thing. It may have some derivative of "instinct" to it but was altered due to learnt behaviour. That I'm not sure (rescue dog). But it was her gentle but firm way of saying to me she didn't want what I was doing - it was not about provoking or testing a reaction - in fact it was quite the opposite. I would not class this as "nose punching" although others might. ETA: When I use my computer mouse to move to another thread or forum and it 'freezes', I "punch" the mouse button to get a reaction . Doesn't always work though .

Is this question directed to me, or the poster above, RM? I believe it is an instinct and that more dogs "know" it (instinctively) than we might think, but that the instinct needs to be triggered - and I don't think this happens frequently. I had a human-aggressive dog "nose punch" me in recent times and have come across the behaviour once or twice more over the years past.

Speaking unscientifically (in other words, I haven't read anything on it - not to suggest it is not written or proven), but I would suggest that if we released a pack of our domestic dogs to live wild, their inate sense of 'pack' would return and that it would hold more definition than much of what owners depict in their dogs at home. I believe it is there - always. With different dogs it seems more dormant than in others. The same can be said of herding instincts. I attended one of the herding days Four Paws K9 Training run. I watched "raw" (ie never herded before) dogs who got in with the sheep and almost immediately "knew" what they wanted to do. I watched others who initially didn't seem to have a clue, but with a little time, patience and guidance, I could see their instinct gently rise, unfold and bloom. It's there. In different strengths. But it is there. But I very much believe the dog's environment and current situation has a big impact on it.

Sorry about the "in brief" part - I try not to steer threads off topic .... although due to interest in comments contained in posts, I tend to fail miserably at this. Yes - I know what you mean about the "nose punching". I wasn't sure that was what you were referring to or whether it was something else. Thanks for telling.

RM - you've raised an example of something I have thought of/pondered for quite some time now. We all pretty much know/realise that dog's live for the "now". Not last week or yesterday or a few hours ago. And not later today, tomorrow or next week. When we correct (physically or verbally - depending on which proves to be an effective punisher) our dog for unwanted behaviour, the correction is given in the "now". It is for what the dog did right then. And with the punishment administered, it is consequently over. Done with. And life resumes. When we ignore our dogs it is a punishment that begins at the unwanted behaviour, but continues beyond it (to whatever varying degrees or length of time we apply). It might appear to be a kinder/softer more socially acceptable punishment to many people, but for the dogs it can be quite hard - and moreover, ongoing for a period .... beyond the "now". With these thoughts in mind, I know (IMO) which one seems more "positive" from the dog's point of view, and yet it is often not prescribed to (and in fact objected) by those who perceive themselves as "positive [only] trainers". ETA: It can also be seen as negative reinforcement - the 'aversive stimulus' (in this case "being ignored") until the dog manages to work out what to do to turn off the aversive stimulus. IMO this can be more difficult and stressful for the dog given that it isn't as black and white as other learning principals can be.

but if you could tell in brief I would be interested to know your findings, RM.

I just chanced upon this thread. I don't usually quote full posts, but this one deserves extra credit. Love it CJ - and love the good humour with which you have posted. These are classic.

Just adding my 2 cents ..... I don't think it's just a matter of how eager a dog is for a particular motivator (ie food for food drive; play for play drive; etc) but also about how insistent the dog is for it. For example - generally speaking my girl (since passed) had low drive in all but pack drive. She would go 'ape' for a tasty food treat, but if I made it too difficult (but by no means unattainably so) to achieve, she'd quit. The only thing she wouldn't quit on was pack drive. Admittedly, this made it very easy for me to maintain full and effective control - whether on lead or not. I think we could all do well with more focus on pack drive. ETA: Oops - didn't read every post and think that LP's post was expressing what I've said here?

I'm not sure what you're trying to ponder here. Evolution? Habituation and survival? Something spiritual? Perhaps if you explain further, Pinnacle?

Oops. Spelling error. Yes - there's the Alpha and generally speaking, the Beta and Omega. In the wolf packs I think I recall reading that there is the virtual "vertical" heirarchy system. Being in the wild - open to predation as well as being completely reliant on predatory (ie hunting) co-operation - I think it is important for social animals to have a 'system' of pack order so that the organisation runs smoothly and continues to do so in the event of change (eg. Alpha becoming maimed or killed). But I do believe that different environments within which the dogs live has an impact on the way packs are organised. I think that there is commonly the alpha amongst the dogs (excluding the human 'pack leader') but that it does not go to follow that there is always a Beta and so on and so forth until the very last, the Omega. I think that there are small groups that are not so vertically arranged as their wolf cousins perhaps are. I read about this somewhere and it was something I meant to return to - and I THINK it was Coppenger, or perhaps Lorenz?. Regardless of who it was I read (and it may have been more than one reading/author source), the gyst of it was that the greater the degree of predatory risk and pressure, the greater the import of having precise pack structure. I do think that some dogs amongst the (albeit small) packs we have in domestication, fall into the non-descript category of "follower", but that a specific role may be metered out to it (or contested by it) in the event of heirarchy upheavel/change (eg. dog-leader aging; loss of dog-pack member etc.).

It does - and a good post Cosmolo. In a nut-shell, we need to look at the 'big picture' and avoid disection to the absolute finite detail.

Putting his nose in people's crotches is not a sexual act, so hormones have little if nothing to do with it. It is simply a dog's way of collecting pheramones - scent - which tells the dog much information about the animal it is sniffing. As I mentioned, this is quite normal, but we do need to show them that it's not what humans want. Teach him an incompatible behaviour such as "sit" when he is greeting people and only allow people to pay him attention/pat him, if he is sitting. Prevent the behaviour of human crotch sniffing when you have people around. Praise for the desired behaviour.

I presume you're talking of Chad's inclination to sniffing humans (as opposed to the species of dog)? This is quite normal behaviour for a dog - it is the way they greet other dogs. But although it is normal for them, it generally isn't appreciated by people so dogs need guidance to show them it's not the way things are done in the human world. I cannot answer your question as to why females and not (so much) males. Perhaps he is more intimidated by males? IE Males can be naturally more assertive. Perhaps the males he has met haven't, by coincidence, been in the same position to avail themselves to Chad's inquisitiveness in quite an "up close and personal" manner?

Hhhhmmm .... let me count the possible reasons :- She's 14 months old and hit adolesence. She's pushing your buttons - testing your leadership (if she perceived leadership in the first place - not enough info there to work that one out). Does she have cause to? She's getting attention from you because of the destruction of these valuable items? So maybe inadvertent reward? She does because she can (refer also possible reason number 2)? She needs more exercise - physical and mental stimulation? She needs to be taught her boundaries and limitations - perhaps this hasn't been clear in the past and now that she's a 'teenager' she's crossed your boundaries but doesn't understand those boundaries herself?

Thanks Kavik. I was beginning to wonder if there'd been changes to NSW legislation that I was unaware of. Yes - I can well imagine how a bandana could help bring an asthetic air of 'friendliness' to a dog breed otherwise perceived as unfriendly.

Do NSW have bandanas too?

Back in those days when Victoria could use them :wink:, I haven't had it occur to me (or to anyone when I've been around them) but I too have seen, read and heard the recommendations of having a fail safe to a 'back up' collar just in case. Leerberg puts out a DVD where he (ie Ed Frawley) demonstrates that the prong can come away - although he was working a strong dog and gave a fairly strong correction when this did occur. In the absence of a "fail safe" I often use a check chain as a head collar 'back up' but in those cases I fit a chain that is longer than would normally be required or recommended - this way the check chain will not activate by the mere use of the lead on the head collar and will only come into action in the event of head collar failure. I've not used a check chain as a back up for a prong - the chain part of the prong (where you attach the lead) should be fitting high up on the dog's neck and I usually fit it so that it is slightly off centre - towards the right of the dog. I'm not sure if the check chain would manage to interfere with the operational use of the prong. Visually speaking, I have noticed that prong-collars don't seem to be of the same thickness of metal as they used to be. I'm not suggesting they aren't as strong, but looking at them by comparison they don't appear to be. Don't know if this has anything to do with it? Aside from the possibility of a bent prong (as mentioned by another poster above) I'm also wondering if your friend has the prong fitted correctly. It should be firm - certainly not loose. If it is loose I can see where the prong could work itself loose from its link-mate and come away.

It's always more complicated when you aren't familiar with this side of things. And of course, trying to cover everything (or at least most of the most likely things) in writing can make it seem more complicated than it really might be. Just a reminder though - if you're going for the Home Alone Toy, there will be steps you need to take as and when you do re-introduce washing on the line where your dog has access. And I wouldn't have ANY clothes on the line in the interim (unless you put up a barrier to prevent his access) - you'll only teach him he can play with both the Home Alone Toy as well as the clothes on the line. Yep - it does take money to get a behaviourist in, but it can be so much easier to go through and understand if you do.