Erny

Hhhmmmm, probably a bit late, given that you've committed and perhaps the training "The Dog Whisperer" (John Richardson - or whichever other "franchisee" you consult with) will be "just what the Doctor ordered". However, a friend of mine had an experience with John Richardson himself when her dog was only very young. Not good experiences. If you're interested, feel free to PM me, tollerblaize, and I can give you some details of what my friend (a now learned dog trainer) has informed me.

Thank goodness, Ruth .... I admit - I was beginning to worry. Glad all are ok. Look forward to the video clips.

Sure, but I still don't remember what I did with that bloody credit slip and today I left my wallet at the dog food place, I was just lucky that a fellow trainer was there and returned it to me ;) ohps .... not funny :p . Lucky, though.

Unfortunately, Lablover, I haven't had the honour of meeting Karen Overall, but I have some of her writings and place alot of faith and store in them - I too am a fan - her ideas are always well and factually backed, and they make sense. You? Met her? If so, lucky you.

Thanks Haven .... I'll go searching. You and your super memory !!!

Excessive drooling is consistant with stress. A dog feeling "car-sick" is generally in a stressed state, hence the drooling. What can happen further is that actually being in the car is paired with the feeling sick/stressed and, therefore, some dogs exhibit the stress symptoms even though the car is not moving. I've found one of the best ways to deal with this problem is in small increments. It does involve avoiding taking your dog for an actual drive for a little while. Stage One. Start with the two rear passenger doors open (I'm assuming your dog travels in the back?). As one of the earlier posts mentioned, your aim will be to feed your dog in the car. Don't force your dog in the car. If he will only approach the car to a certain point, work at that point. This is where your dog will be given its meal/s each day. Once pup is comfortable and is approaching that distance quite happily, move in a little bit and feed at that point. Keep going with this process (it might be a slow or quick process, depending on how aversive your dog finds being in the car) until you can feed your dog in the car. Allow your dog to exit the car at any time it choses and keep both doors either side of the car open. Stage Two. Once your dog is feeding comfortably in the car, close one of the doors, re-open it. If there were no issues with that, close it again. Finish the session on that .. ie allow your dog to finish its meal and exit the car through the remaining open door. Repeat this a few times. Stage Three. Provided your dog is comfortable with one side door closed, close the other door, and re-open it. If your dog appeared comfortable with this, close the door again for a few minutes (or at least while your dog remains interested in eating its meal). Just before the meal is finished, re-open the door and allow your dog to exit. Stage Four. Assuming the first three stages have progressed and the dog is comfortable with them, you can progress to the car being started. Be in the car. Start it for a few moments and switch off. Repeat, each time letting the car run for a little bit longer. Stage Five. Drive the car to the end of the driveway and back. I think you get the drift from there? What you're doing here is helping to get your pup used to riding in the car and repairing any bad association it might have developed with having felt sick in the car. Hope it works out for you. It sounds like a long process, but as you've got in early (ie not waited for months or years), you'll probably find things will progress in leaps and bounds if you work on the initial stage in small increments first.

I thought we did - but my next action in the process of training is dependant on what behaviour the dog gives me .... so I guess you're right. I am a "reactive" trainer. Having had it, since then, more fully explained and understood as to what you meant by "pro-active" allowed me to see the differences. I'm just pondering on where the "pro-active" method you describe might and might not be applied to the advantage of outcome of the dog's training. Sorry for the questions but thanks for your answers.

Coolibah - with reference to our recent "PM's" - looking forward to hearing back from you with some video footage of your dog's behaviour and urging you NOT to consider the behaviour as being anywhere remotely related to the dog being confused about how to play. I'm still trying to find the thread you said you read called "Can I Play" - for some reason my searches have come up "nada". I get the impression that from that thread you're thinking your dog's behaviour relates to a confusion about being able to play properly. This has to be so NOT THE CASE in your case and I'm sincerely worried that you might take dangerous risks if you approach this dog with that type of theory. Perhaps other doler's can tell me where this thread is.

K9 - Just following the posts in this thread, and wanting to make sure I'm understanding. With what temperament types do you not use your "pro-active" training method described in this thread? Does what you're trying to teach the dog have a bearing on whether you use the "pro-active" training method? ETA: Or is it only the temperament that influences your decision?

I think this needs a BUMP - M-rose? About Buster? How's it happening?? We're sitting here with interest (and fingers crossed!)

Whooo Hooooo! Well done, Nat!

Time out from work - returned (briefly) to the photo ... Is that pilo-erect that I see on the dog's neck? Can anyone out there confirm whether they think so? I didn't spot it on my initial look at the photo, but the more I look at it .... If the hackles are up on the dog's neck and are restricted to that zone, it indicates a confident dog. This message is amplified by the position of the dog's ears - up and pushed forward. Is this dog's tail docked? Or is it lowered/tucked? I'm also wondering about the mouth - did it start "long" and is it in the process of drawing forward to become short? I don't see alot of teeth - mainly (but not only) the front canines, but this could just be the nature of the photograph taken. Quite often, the approach of an aggressive dog that's made the decision to attack, will be stealthy and may include the crouch position as shown in the photo. Ear position changes are also usually noted and when a dog lowers its neck to enable the dog to "deliver a blow with more force". If this dog does not exhibit any preditory aggression behaviour elsewhere (eg. to birds & other small animals), then I my initial thoughts may be seen to be off the track (as they still may be - I can only hypothesise on a picture and written description given). I'd still like to hear back from coolibah as to the questions I posed in my earlier post.

My first impression of this still picture is "predatory aggression". I won't swear to it on the basis that I can't see the whole picture in motion. But I'm certain enough to suggest it is by no means a "play bow", in any sense. Reading Karen Overall's writings in "Clinical Behaviour Medicine for Small Animals", it is suggested that not all dogs that prey on small animals will prey on infants, but the limited research done on this subject suggests that dogs that behavie in such a manner to small infants have previously exhibited pedatory behaviours towards small animals. Question: Does this dog exhibit predatory behaviour towards small animals? I need to come back to this with more thought, but I'm interrupted by the committed to do some "work work" and earn some money to pay for all the dog food I just purchased! My thoughts drifted over the possibility of territorial aggression and I wondered if your dog would display this behaviour when unconfined (not tied up, as the picture suggests - but I'm not suggesting there be no method of control!), not crated and not at home. However, this was JUST a drifting thought as you express, I think, it's only your youngest daughter that the dog aggresses at, in which case this would, in my mind, rule out this as the form of aggression being exhibited. ETA: It puzzles me that your dog barks/growls while exhibiting this behaviour, as in the predatory aggression I'm familiar with, the dog exhibits a quiet, stalking behaviour. I will return for a further look at the photo - is the dog exhibiting this stance as a result of the tie-out restraint? This might be giving me the wrong idea ... again, this can be the problem with not seeing "real life" action. Except the other thing that makes me think it's predatory aggression (other than the stance) is that it appears from the photo that there is no pilo-erect (hackles). Again, I need to give this more thought. One way or the other, this dog is dangerous - particularly around your daughter and I don't blame her one bit for being terrified. I hope the dog is 100% securely contained ... Edited to ask - what do you mean by "sort of calmed down"? Please describe.

Like this, Kitkat? ETA: Damn .... why won't my picture upload???

Hi Haven - I haven't seen any dogs (or any pictures of dogs) demonstrating what I would refer to as a "play bow" in aggression. I can only imagine the "bow" in the situation you refer to may not be the "right down" type of bow to which I refer. Perhaps with less "curve" through the back and with elbows more raised and legs poised for "pounce"? If so, this isn't what I refer to as a "play bow" .... but then I don't profess to have seen everything (yet!). Can you describe, or do you have any pictures? Little nuances can make the biggest of differences.

Are still pictures ideal, Nat? Not on your nelly. But certainly more than what we have so far ....

It is too difficult to attempt to interpret your dog's body language - particularly as "baring teeth" is a factor and suggests the situation might be potentially and imminently dangerous, without seeing some piccies/movie clip. From your description, it sounds to me as if this tiger is exploring and asserting heirarchy status, perhaps even on you ... but I'd love to see movie clip if possible, or at least some still shots. Can you arrange this? In the meantime, I'd be inclined to make sure the dog and children are never left unsupervised around the dog (you're probably already doing that). Note that a wagging tail indicates arousal .... it doesn't necessarily mean friendship. Playbow can be 1. Invitation to play (in your case I doubt it) 2. Punctuation mark in play (when one dog has become rough & wants to signal no threat/harm intended) 3. Calming signal to another dog who's a little apprehensive 4. Signal to another dog of a small degree of uncertainty. When your dog play bows, is it a full on "relaxed" play bow (eg. elbows on ground, body stretched right back, bum right up in the air) or does it appear a bit tense (eg. perhaps elbows slightly off the ground and general appearance tense)?

Seems to me that is the same as, say, phase 3 of my "hypothetical scenario" set out in my post of 12.06am 15.6.2005. Difference being the handlers' attitude. Instead of thinking: 1. I'll command 2. I'll wait one second (example time frame) 3. I'll correct if no compliance You can think: 1. I'll command 2. I'll correct This "attitude/thinking" would actually speed up the process of our handling leaving only a milli-second for the dog to comply, thereby transmitting the message to the dog that it must work to become faster than that milli-second. The process otherwise appears to be the same, as, even though in the second process described above we're not actually thinking of allowing the dog to comply before we give the correction, there is still that milli-second gap between "command" and the "correction" actually reaching the dog. K9 - assume you will read this .... is this on the mark?

Myszka - if you command THEN correct for non-compliance, then you are, in K9's words as they were to me, being reactive instead of proactive and your actions are being driven by your dog. Either Myszka has a different terminology interpretation to K9 or I am steadily getting more and more confused by the explanations being posted here. Edited to get rid of some of the unneccessary quotes on quotes on quotes

K9 - Here 'tis ....

Doesn't sound any different to the training regime I use either. Just your labels (ie pro-active/reactive) made me think there was a vast difference. ETA - Just one further query on something Myszka raised by way of explanation of your definition of "pro-active" training, where it was suggested that the dog receive the correction at the same time as the command. Is that a consistent part of your training program, or do you only use that in the "training phase re-visited" stage, to overcome a problem. If this is the case, I'm thinking Myszka is referring to what I know as "double trouble".... I'm guessing you'd be familiar with that term, K9?

Ciara - is this question directed to me? If it is, the answer is I only correct if my dog is non-compliant in a known command - but this doesn't happen often and as I mentioned in an earlier post, I can't recall when I last found it necessary to correct her.

pgm: thanks for the reply and you make me because I have this "what works for you works for me" saying running through my head now .... Yes - I think we're on the same page, assuming your corrections are "effective"! I realised the "zing" operated as an effective correction for my girl & ors. when the behaviour I was correcting for altered prior to the "physical correction" happening. I wasn't sure of its "lasting effect" either, at first, but time is a good tester and it's worked for me. As I've mentioned in numerous other posts, though, I agree that it doesn't work for all (most) dogs and thus I haven't lost the art of utilising a "physical correction" (or "zang", as you've so appropriately labelled it! ) ETA: Since her self-assumed "pairing" of "zing" with "zang" ( ), I noticed that "zang", in an unloaded environment, inhibited her drive - another good reason I ceased to "zang" at those times!

I don't know, pgm .... there appears to be one or two others that aren't getting it either! You'll see by my earlier posts that the "pairing" isn't something that I've deliberately set out to achieve. It occurred with my dog (as it has for a few others of the many I've worked with) simply because the "zing" happened immediately preceeding the "physical correction". My dog (and, as I mentioned, for the few others) has demonstrated (body language, command compliance/improvement) that the "zing" is, for her (or them, as the case may be), an "effective" correction and I don't need to follow through with the "physical correction". Have I perhaps explained more clearly in this post?

I've forgotten the actual terminology, but there is such a thing as "once off" learning. But, in any case, I don't think any dog has learnt ALL behaviours (eg. Sit AND Drop AND Stand etc.) by only ever having been corrected once (and I don't mean once in each, but once over the whole range of behaviours). Even in K9's "pro-active" training (which is still under discussion), there is more than one correction applied, but each is to achieve improvement. I'm no different.