Erny

Good ..... I wasn't sure if I was on the same page as you. A dog will be more likely to defer to a confident leader and handler. As per my above post, obedience training goes part way to leadership. It's not the be-all and end-all. But it is very helpful. Yes - as per explanation in my above post. I would not link "intelligence/biddibility" with "emotional depth", if you understand my meaning. However, pack drive is certainly a big advantage. The cause of the aggression needs to be taken into account, as does any genetic influence of the breed.

If a dog has learnt obedience skills, these obedience skills can be used to assist in the behaviour modification program. Training a dog in obedience also goes part way to leadership - ie the owner demonstrating on a regular basis that he/she retains/maintains the right to govern. But obedience by itself does not go to changing the dog's emotional state. So obedience is only part of the equation. Does that answer your question, Ruthless? Because I wasn't really sure what you meant by "training the aggression out of them from an obedience point of view"?

I completely agree with the above. Sometimes the problem is, though, that the problem doesn't progress as fast as the owner might prefer (quite often due to owners needing the time to develop consistency, timing co-ordination and such like ..... which is understandable) and feeling/thinking that what they are doing isn't working. Sometimes it is because the owners simply don't think the effort is worth it because they don't believe it will work at all. Having the dogs trained at least demonstrates to the owners what their dog CAN be like - that it DOES work and can give them faith (and an understanding that the problem lays in their own hands) and further encourages them to continue on, if only they will. And often I find that people will dot from trainer to trainer, from one week to the next, attempting different exercises/methodologies. Neither one methodology might be incorrect, but as Cosmolo suggests, it doesn't help the dog recognise a 'pattern' it can believe and trust in. I don't think trainers are completely blameless either - especially when an owner has access to many on a routine basis. They should be asking the owner what method they have been recommended, how long they've been trying it and whether they have been consistent in it. It's also helpful if the owner informs a trainer of this whether invited to or not. I usually try to encourage people to "stick with it" and "work through it" if they can, explaining that in the end, it will be THEM the dog has learnt to defer to, rather than the trainer. But sometimes, a trainer handler can help hurdle behaviour the owners simply cannot and this can work ...... provided the owners continue to work through with it. Private lessons/consults following this is a huge benefit to the owners who by that stage are the ones who need the coaching.

I am not a fan of "free feeding". It does not stand you in good stead for when you wish to utilise treats for training. It isn't natural for dogs to have a permanent supply of food available to them. ETA: Leni .... take your caps lock off when you type. Typing in capital letters is akin to yelling, when it comes to internet communication.

Your Leadership is intact? .... Assuming "yes", but don't dismiss it if it is not as this is can be an important component of dogs 'creating'. On the assumption it is all in order there, what about crating the foxie (even indoors) and leaving him with a bone to gnaw on while you are gone. ETA: I jumped a step in my line of questioning ..... If you are there but one or all of the other dogs are not, what's the Foxie's behaviour like?

What's he like if you take him for a walk and leave the others at home?

I would have liked to have been there. Dr Bruce Syme is a really helpful person and Vet - unlike many others, doesn't seem to push his own product lines for the sake of the almighty dollar and his suggestions always seem to be for the benefit of the animal, not his own pocket. He also seems to have a good knowledge base on the inner-workings of a dog. I like all of that in a Vet. Should go visit his website again (it's been a while) to see if he's planning on any seminars over this way.

I like the dog's shoulder to be in line with my left leg. Same reason as Rom. I am not a fan of the UK style of 'crowding' either. I like the dog's head to be tilted slightly to the right (ie checking in with where my leg is) and I like the dog to check-in by a glance up every now and then, but I am not keen on the continual nose being pointed upwards towards me continuously. I like a dog who is able to check-in on the environment ahead of us and provide me with warning should I be about to fall into a bottomless pit. But I don't trial. For myself, I train for what I identify as practicality. But someone else's requirements may be different, so I work to train to suit.

This was discussed in the "health" forum. From memory, a DOLer's "tennis ball obsessive" dog had worn down its teeth and was informed by her Vet it was most likely due to the substance which makes up the outside surface of the tennis balls.

In my girl's case, it was about half of the stated quantity. I tended to adjust it from that, depending on how much physical exercise was received on the day. But that was for my girl. Dog's metabolic rates differ from individual to individual. I always looked at my girl from one day to the next. It was her body form that told me whether quantity was sufficient, excessive or otherwise.

But I would suggest that training in drive (thereby offering drive satisfaction in one form or another) is better than not. Depending on how dominant or recessive the gene, it is possible that drive work (coupled with neutralisation) would have more hope of averting these instinctive behaviours. If you understand the dog and the propensity () for the behaviour, hard work at the beginning can certainly help. But genetics don't go away. They are always there.

Oops, sorry. After having read BL's post, I re-read the OP and realise it's the MEAT that is causing the problems. I read it as the BONE itself not being able to be digested. Should have read more carefully - sorry.

After Kal swallowed the knuckle end off a marrow bone and had to endure 3 surgical operations (complications set in) .................. and then did it again with another bone (this time we managed to get it up via the osophegus), I couldn't feed Kal bones as I had done in all the years prior. So teeth care comprised of :- Brushing her teeth using one of those rubber finger type thingies and special doggy toothpaste. Once a week she had a very large marrow bone but I had the butcher cut the ends off so she was only left with the shaft. Initially I would only feed these if I could also sit out with her and watch. But eventually I was comfortable enough to allow her to spend time gnawing on the bone - although I'd be popping out to check periodically. The bone was thrown away by the end of each day, if not sooner. ETA: I used to brush her teeth about 4 - 5 times a week if gingivitis was flairing - on some days, twice a day. This seemed to help a lot. Otherwise, about 3 times a week, once a day.

When I first adopted Kal she had intolerances to certain foods. I switched to VAN and she was able to tolerate a broader variety of food types (ie meats). One thing - I found that if I fed the amount as per package recommendations, it was far too much. I cut it down (both the VAN and meat quantity, so that the rations were in accordance with package recommendations) until I found the right balance. Kal did extremely well on it. I added Omega Special Blend to the food too (also a VAN product). ..... not to mention a variety of other healthy additives here and there. I've had a few people who have approached me due to a skin problems and when they switched to VAN they claimed to have had a good result. I think Haven switched her dog onto VAN and found it made a difference to the fear behaviour her adopted dog was exhibiting. Not a cure, but a difference.

Many do - the advantage (IMO) being that the dog is up and ready to go on signal, and precious additional seconds are not lost (when trialling). However, there are some dogs that are so hyper and rearing to go, that the larger risk is a 'foul' with the dog breaking before the 5 seconds are up. For these dogs, something like a drop on the table is helpful.

Errrrmmm .... cough ... Oops.

Errrrmmm .... cough ... Oops.

Oh .... ............. do you have to have a Kelpie to do the muster? Or a dog at all, for that matter? Or a horse (well .... one that 'works' anyway)? Would really like to go on a muster. But I'd be very envious of those with a "real" job to do (ie working their dogs on the live-stock).

Sorry if I missed it, but how many mg would be suggested for, say, a medium/large dog in the event of snake bite? If I were in a position where getting to the Vet within a feasible period of time for treatment were not possible, or if there were two of us and one could get going with the driving whilst the other administered care, I would probably give the Vitamin C injection regardless of opinion, on the basis that it can't hurt to try.

I had the advance level classes doing the chicken dance (bongo line style) weaving in, through and around dogs being proofed in drop stays. Ran the risk of being the only one game enough to "sing" and act like a chicken, but everyone was great and ended up joining in. Very amusing for the people who had come to the "information session" with a view to joining up, too. I think it would make for increased interest spectator-wise if something like this was introduced into the very prim and proper ways of obedience trialling. ;)

What I will do (ie socialise or neutralise) when I get my next pup will depend completely upon its temperament and also what I want to use the dog for. Either way, I will be aiming closer to neutralisation. Whether that be the "zero" factor or not, I will determine at the appropriate time. ;) ETA: So as to remain "on topic" (:D sorry to the OP) ..... either way, I'd separate a puppy from the mature dogs. For safety reasons. You'd also want to consider if there are any behaviours you DON'T want your puppy to learn off the others.

Know of a story retold where a dog at the airport "hit" on a piece of luggage. Asked of the owner whether the luggage contained fruit - "no". The dog "hit" on this same piece of luggage in the three runs the handler gave. Turns out the luggage contained apple-flavoured condoms. ETA:

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet ........

Nahhhh ..... you've contributed much in the way of common sense and informative posts over the years, PF. Too many "smiley stamps" for valuable information for you to ever look like an idiot.

Agree that "knee-jerk" reaction needs to be checked. Age of the dog is also, IMO, a consideration. But isn't it possible that vaccinations could hinder a dog who is inflicted with neurological (?) abnormality? What I mean is, perhaps the vaccinations are not the cause of the symptomatic condition, but is it really helping the dog by subjecting it to vaccinations which do interrupt the immune system for at least a period of time after administration (or so I am given to understand)? If I am right, then I guess it would be a case of weighing up the advantage compared to the disadvantages. Pitting one health condition against another. The area you live in, saturation of dogs and your dog interactive activities would all be something to take into account. If it were me, I'd probably prefer to periodically titre test.