Erny

The dictionary definition : A person who rules, guides and inspires others. The dictionary definition of 'guide' : To lead the way for (a person); to control the movement or course of (an animal ... ) ... I think this question is particularly difficult to answer in 'words' because without being in the mind of the dog and being able to hear its thoughts, there is a degree of subjectivity to the answer. In an attempt to proffer a reply, however ...... I look for signs that my dog defers to me including in times of stress and/or uncertainty and when an important decision is to be made. I look for a dog who is relaxed and in harmony with me in both familiar and unfamiliar environments. I look for a dog who is calm of mind whether in play or in rest; for a dog who is not confused of its boundaries and limitations. Contentment. When I've used this expression I've meant it to mean the exhibition of actions which prescribe to the dog the trustworthy leadership it needs, depends on and can rely on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. This includes providing the dog with what it needs and in the right proportions (as much as is humanly possible) and in the right order of priority. Understanding that what dogs need in what proportions/priorities are not the same as our own and hence delivering accordingly; that dogs perceive the world with the same senses that we possess, but that those senses are used in a different priority order and to different degrees than what we are capable of. Demonstration of your ability to guard and protect your dog (but not in a human nurturing way, as we commonly make the mistake of doing) and your acceptance and insistence that this is your role/responsibility. As per the above - a dog who defers to you in times of stress and/or uncertainty; a dog who is relaxed and in harmony with you. A dog who is calm of mind whether in play or in rest; a dog who is not confused of its boundaries and limitations; contentment.

It's really difficult to think of what a person is doing that might be affecting and/or that you can change without having the opportunity to see them and the dog in question, in action. Unfortunately Brissy is a bit far away from me ;) so all I can do is offer the tips that I have. Something is affecting her perception of you when you are (a) feeding her and (b) not feeding her. Think of your body language when you are feeding. (When people go into "train the dog" mode, their bodies are often held differently - a bit more rigid. Voice tone changes to something more stern.) You'd be busy with her meal and as a result not so conscious about being stern or holding body in a certain way. These small nuances can be so easily picked up by our dogs. Your tone of voice may also be a bit different at that time. Do you recall her when you are giving her her meal? Have you tried changing tone of voice as suggested above?

Don't feel terrible - if she felt terrible it's unlikely she'd want to come to you - and besides, you're working on it. ;) Try softening your voice when you give the commands. Make the commands 'happy'. In fact, why not have a game of it - but instead of calling "come", call "pup, pup, pup, pup" in a high pitch voice and a happy expression on your face. As soon as she reaches you have a game with a toy or something that she really likes to do - something that might 'jolly' her up a bit. Because you've not used a command word, you won't need to worry about giving a release word (if that's how you are training). Try doing this exercise also when it's meal time and when she reaches you, offer her her food and leave her to eat it. Try separating the two exercises. In other words, do a recall but don't immediately follow up with stand. Give a little break in between exercises. ETA: Where are you located, Staffit. Maybe you can arrange to have someone help and show you.

Have a think about your body language. When she reaches you from the "come" are you bent over her? Try standing up taller as she reaches you - reward her (without bending over) for "upright and "confident". What method are you using for the "stand"? Is it 'guide, show, place' with your arm over and around the outside of her? This is quite a dominant pose - although many dogs do cope with it without any problems, some dogs can't help but feel intimidated by it. Another method (eg. lure into position - but remember to quickly wean off so as not to develop the method into one of 'bribing') might assist. Is your dog receiving attention for rolling over? You might need to think about whether this action has been being inadvertently reinforced.

If you go to this link : E-collar research update you'll see there is a discussion here on DOL about some research that was conducted. Research material is referred to in there too. I've noticed that much research seems to involve the application of high level stims. It also seems to involve non-control comparisons where there is room for doubt as to the accuracy of the results found. I have read other materials in relation to e-collars. I have also watched video footage/DVD from oversea's trainers discussing the e-collar and its use in training and behaviour problem solving. Not all the materials were mine (eg borrowed books, DVD's etc.) A good part of my understanding in the use of the e-collar has also been as a result of many, many discussions (over time) with well respected dog trainers both in Vic and interstate, as well as having use of the e-collar tool demonstrated and explained (explanations pertaining to both the pro's and con's ie use and mis-use). ETA: Wasn't going to ask this, but seeing as I've posted here again and that I'm curious ..... I don't know what you're referring to here? Where did I say "passive readers" ? What was it in reference to?

You're welcome Ravie - will look forward to hearing how you get on. In the meantime, be sure to avoid using substances containing ammonia when you clean up after Kaiser - otherwise Kaiser is likely to be attracted back to those areas. Also, deny Kaiser free access to the house - keep him where you can monitor him. When you see him begin behaviour that indicates he's thinking about urinating inside, a firm "NO" or "aagh" and send him outside.

Only because the subject (ie e-collar) has come up - and is one that you too have contributed toward. For the most part, no, I'm not saying that. But for some issues, as well as could be achieved with the well applied use of an e-collar? - maybe not. Depends on what those issues are. To me "research" is the investigation of facts to collect information on a subject. You've written about the e-collar being no different in application than a shock collar. If that's what you believe then this is where I question how far into your research you are. Today's e-collars deliver a stimulation. They are recognised in this for their difference from the historical 'shock-collars'. I agree and apologise to the OP for this interlude. But as you have raised comments in relation to the e-collar and your "research" into it which beg to question, I think it is warranted that clarity be reached here, otherwise passive readers may misunderstand your writings and inference that the e-collar is not a tool of good use when one trains using techniques such as you do (whatever they might be and for whatever dogs, issues and circumstances they might be). Where has anyone argued that research is a bad thing? Provided the research is current and up-to-date (unless you are planning to study for historical purposes) both in relation to the modern day e-collar and methodology. Because of statements such as .. .. I don't get the impression that you have appreciated this aspect - although I stand to be corrected if this is not the case. What is wrong with achieving the most expedient results possible? IMO this is ultimately in the best interests of all concerned - especially the dog. Remember - we are talking about stim levels that are often even less disturbing to a dog than a number of other training equipment styles. Although admittedly the stim might make the dog want to scratch an itch where the 'buzz' of the stimulation is felt. The quicker a dog learns the less stress it will undergo. I can't see why or how you should have a problem with that? The only presumption I could make is due to the manner in which you have made reference to the e-collar. It doesn't sound to me as though you have begun that research or if you have, that you have not yet accessed the collar as it is today nor the methodology for its use. I agree with your statement that every training method has side effects (or affects) - which is why I don't shut my mind to a method or equipment style. You have inferred to the same presumption you have asked me to avoid - if I've written anything here in relation to the e-collar which can be declared as incorrect, please point out to me where. Please draw my attention to where any have said otherwise? These are your words, not mine by a long shot. No. It seems you presume I am presuming. The difference here is that unlike you, I do not turn my mind against any equipment or tool. This affords me and the dogs the luxury of being able to use what will work best, for the best reasons and for the best interests of the dog. Nothing is discounted. Perhaps you will be likewise once you've completed your research on the e-collar? That's very good and for the purposes of this discussion I'm not questioning your experiences - only that in relation to the e-collar and only because you've written in opposition to it but in a way that depicts you don't fully understand it. That's why I ask how far into your research you are. As most of us do. Being a pack leader is very important IMO ............ but who said "every issue is a leadership/rank issue"? Of course you are - but as you've implied that e-collars are not necessary nor desirable and as you haven't indicated how far into your e-collar research you are, nor written anything that implies knowledge of current day use or effect, what are you basing your opinion on? And again you're right! And we should know of and understand as much about methods and as many as possible, just as we should about the equipment available to us - especially before we claim they are unneccessary, because it will always remain possible that one day you'll work with a dog where the e-collar would have given the best results for you AND the dog, in the best way possible. Where did I say that? Presumption again? I can only read what you write. And what you've written in relation to the e-collar is contra-evidenced to proper understanding of it as it is today. Until right now I had no idea of what issues you've had experience with so didn't know what to think. Yes - I've read carefully - it wasn't sufficient for you. I would be genuinely interested to know/hear what that course comprised of - what theories were taught, what practical handling was afforded you and how long ago that was. You need to be a little careful not to twist words. I think you are making reference here to this following quote? Well - the fact is that what I've said about achieving the same if not higher results in a shorter time frame is that it is a possibility.

Hey Vicki - it's not "games" where I'm concerned, nor is it a case where I feel threatened. I use all sorts of different varieties of training and behavioural methods and tools - whichever will suit the dog, the behaviour issue in question and the current circumstances that it is in at the time. I don't use an e-collar on every dog for every instance, but I don't write off the benefits an e-collar can provide either. When a person joins a discussion discounting and/or rejecting the use of any piece of training equipment though, I really like to know what that rejection is based on. In Pinnacle's case, it has been merely because what she's done with whatever dogs she has worked with has worked for her. But Pinnacle hasn't really identified the 'benchmark' on which that is based. For example (and even 'e-collar' aside), I could attest to using a specific training tool and/or method and be successful at it. That doesn't mean that it couldn't have been done better or more proficiently with the use of a different training tool, or for that matter, method. It also doesn't mean that what I've done and/or doing is going to work as well for one dog as it does for all others. Also, how can you intelligently reject a certain training tool when you don't understand how it works nor how to appropriately and properly apply it?

Wow! That's a lot of moves (I feel for you - it's a lot of work!) and quite often when we move, we don't pay attention to whether or not we are exhibiting our leadership attributes. I think we tend to take it for granted that the dog will understand we're the same leaders as we were back in the old place. But quite often, we're really busy with what we are doing when we are in the throws of moving house (eg. packing and upacking - which are also things that are not 'routine' to the dog, so in themselves can be unsettling) and we might leave the dog to its own devices to a certain extent (if not completely) when we arrive at our new destination. This can weaken our leadership status as perceived by our dog/s - assuming that we had "leadership" status in the first place. It sounds very much to me as if, with every move you made, Kaiser became more and more uncertain of your heirarchy status and has taken it upon himself to fit the bill (as any dog WILL do when it perceives a leadership void). Not to mention the fact that one moment he's part of your indoor pack and then things change to him being left outside .... and then back in again. I don't think Kaiser knows where he fits in and is trying to establish his position - in this case, 'leader'. Not that he necessarily wants to be there, but if he doesn't think you're doing the job, he's got no choice other than to fill this role. I'd recommend you begin acting as Kaiser's leader - in ways that Kaiser will recognise. What you should do, how and when, might be best described, explained and demonstrated by a behaviourist - however for one, following the NILIF (Nothing In Life Is Free) program will be a good start. A search of this forum will bring up tonnes of references to it, but basically it is about Kaiser not receiving anything Kaiser likes from you for free. Other things like not on the beds or couches and through doorways after you (not before) as part of the program will also help. You might also like to reflect on how much exercise Kaiser receives with you on a daily basis as well as what training he receives. ETA: I'm sorry - I re-read your post and realise you mention about Kaiser being fearful of unfamiliar people. I would certainly recommend you consult a behaviourist who will be able to confirm your diagnosis and help you develop a program to work on building his confidence in this area.

And those same "very good behavioural trainers" will refer on where appropriate - this is part of what makes them "very good". I guess the client needs to weigh up the following possible scenario's and make a choice:- Pay a Veterinary Behaviourist big $$$'s and take the punt that meds not required and that a Behaviourist trainer could have prescribed a behaviour modification program equally as well (in which case their financial outlay would have been considerably less). or Pay a Behaviourist trainer a comparitively smaller amount and take the same punt as above (in which case they have chosen the most economical method). But if referred on through necessity, they have both fees to pay. Out of all the clients I have seen I really haven't had to refer to a Vet Behaviourist save for once .... but the owners didn't take up this option due to the $$$'s involved. I have recommended Veterinary attention when I've suspected medical based issues, but that is completely different to the application of drugs to assist in psychological therapy.

To some extent I do turn a blind eye to another dog putting an insubordinate in its place but only IF the action is appropriately executed and warranted. If my dog is in my close proximity (such as you describe, MsJames .... eg. at obedience training), IMO it is my job to stop/prevent 'rude' behaviour from another dog to mine. My dog is my pack and it is my job to protect her from 'rude' annoyances. But if my own dog's behaviour is unwarranted and unreasonable, I will - in my right as pack leader - correct my dog for the wrong and undesireable behaviour. I believe it is the other dog's owner's responsibility also to control his/her dog and only permit calm interaction.

At least until you have seen the behaviourist, I would suggest that you prevent the children going near her when she has possession of ANYTHING that could trigger this resource guarding. By only preventing the children from going near her when she growls is reinforcing her behaviour. Eg. She gets to think "ah, when I am growling they don't come near me". Also, in the interim, I would also suggest that you lift all her toys and don't give her anything of high value until the behaviourist has visited and advised.

I'd be inclined to simply distract/break the behaviour and not add to the fuss by reward - and only show/give reward when she is in a totally relaxed mode. How much exercise does your dog receive on a daily basis? Are you her "leader"?

Pinnacle - please refer back to my earlier post (#47) above - I'd be interested in hearing from you in relation to the queries raised there. It is fairly obvious from what you have written about or in reference to e-collars that you don't as yet fully understand them or their use, nor the advantages of it. Whilst I hear what you say (ie that you're achieving results that you and your clients are happy with) I'm really interested to know, therefore, how you can discount the correct application of e-collars if you have no comparison/bench mark to measure from. In other words - maybe it's possible that you'd receive even greater achievement that what you presently do, or even perhaps the same or better in a shorter period of time. Perhaps you're dealing with dogs who's temperaments and/or issues don't need to prescribe to any method other than the "positive" one/s that you are applying - but then, what happens when that ends up not being sufficient? These questions/suggestions are the point of my earlier post.

Kelpie-i .............. if it wasn't for the fact that I know about your e-collar experience, what you've written carries a suggestion of kinkiness. Not to get of course. Speaking of "off topic" - apologies to the OP. Seems her thread has travelled away from the original intended subject somewhat.

I understand you are talking about "you" and what "you" would or might do as was requested you do. However, I think it would be fairly clearly understood that unless you're ever in the situation where you need to care, manage and train a "special needs" (so to speak - I'm sure there's a better description) dog, I doubt that anyone could really know. And you might find that although some social activities might need to be curtailed to whatever extent, there are other factors such as learning; rejoicing in the successful and progressive steps of rehabilitation; challenges; etc. that will counter a perceived loss of social interaction with others and their dogs - interaction that doesn't necessarily mean "none" but perhaps simply "controlled". This is not to suggest I wish for everyone to have the experience of a dog with issues - but I can vouch that when or if you do, there is the possibility for something different, something at a much deeper level, that you can come to understand and share with your dog.

What "current results" are you achieving; In relation to what behaviour problems; and Over what time frame? The other "methods" you speak of have been proven in their effectiveness in various and specific applications. I'm not sure therefore what you are trying to say here, but it sounds as though you are saying that you have your own method but have not explored the e-collar as an alternative. That may be fair enough (if the method you use is the best for everyone concerned) - but I don't think your argument can be that the e-collar is unproven in its effectiveness for you as this implies you've trialled its use and assumes you've done so appropriately and with at least some degree of skill. In fact what can you argue (ie debate) against the e-collar at all, if you don't have any knowledge of it?

Pinnacle ............ it seems to me that you have a lot of words to share, but none of them bear any weight of "meaning". You have spoken about the e-collar without exhibiting an ounce of knowledge about them - how they work; why they work; etc. How far into your "research" are you?

Heck! You have a lot of catching up to do, Pinnacle. E-collars of today no longer work in the same way as they did way back then in the days of the "shock-collar". Today's e-collars stimulate the muscle. It is not about shocking the brain.

Midol - it sounds to me here that your dog has actually been "forming" aggression for a while. The above section I've quoted (and particularly - but not exclusively - the section I've highlighted) are tell-tale signs of dog signalling he is not comfortable with the situation he is in and it is especially at these times that your role as leader needs to be activated. In other words, that you take steps to protect him and take charge of the situation. Of course for your dog to understand that's your job (and to trust that you will not fail in it) depends on your leadership attributes that you exhibit to him on a general and daily basis. I would suggest you enrol with a reputable dog training school (if you are not already) where you can work in a controlled environment and begin on desensitisation exercises. I have no idea of your relationship with your dog (as perceived by your dog) but running a check on heirarchy status never goes astray. It would be the most helpful if you could arrange a consultation with a behaviourist so that your dog's behaviour and your relationship could be observed and diagnosis confirmed. This person should be able to set out a program for you in relation to process of desensitisation as well as give you things to do or change in relation to your reactions to your dog's behaviour.

Sorry Am ...... but loved the way you worded this.

The principals of consequential learning are the same for all animals .... humans included. Your comparative analogy is a good one, IMO, SB. I'm surprised your friend couldn't (wouldn't?) see the contrast of her own two views.

I've heard/read that too, Pax and it seemed to fit with my later observations of my own horse.

Could be the "Pavlov" theory. Depending on early day (and even present day) training - pairing praise with food treats can, with repetition, produce a salivatory response. This is where the once meaningless stimuli (ie praise) has become a conditioned stimuli.