people are idiots pt 294
culprit
necessary supplies. Manu was being a butt head since they were doing kitten
adoptions, and apparently the sound of kittens makes him kind of excited.
ok, really really excited.
so i took him outside, and put him in a down stay while the husband bought
the necessary stuff. so there was this kid sitting there with a kitten on
his shoulder, meowing loudly, which already had Manu twitching and sliding
from butt cheek to butt cheek, when this Golden Retriever, off leash, comes
up to Manu, sniffing all over. Manu was pissed. growling, down right
snarling at this idiot dog. breaks his stay and lunges, something he hasn't
done in a *long* time. i reeled him in and mentioned to the owner that
having a dog off leash around strange pit bulls might not be the brightest
idea, and he's like, "yeah, thanks", all sarcastic like. i suddenly had a
flash of accidentally dropping the leash, but then my brane got the better
of me and i gave him a pop and said "leave it".
He kept growling, and the idiot Golden kept looking at him as he walked
away. husband came out and said "what happened?" i said, loud enough for
idiot owner to hear, "oh, that idiot thought having his dog off lead around
Manu was a good idea. good thing Manu didn't break his lead."
*sigh*
people are incredibly stupid.
-kelly
Spot
that bright at times...........:) My aunt has one who I've only ever played
with 3 times and the dog just lets anyone walk into the house. I got more
of an alarm response out of her 16 year old shepard mix today when I walked
in the house then I did the golden.
Some guard dog she is, more like a marshmallow who will smother you to death
Celeste
"culprit" <culp...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:3rvob8F...@individual.net...
ThePupp...@animail.net
"culprit" <culp...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:3rvob8F...@individual.net...
>
> today Manu, the husband and i went to a big box
> pet store to get some necessary supplies.
You mean you needed a new leash and pronged spiked
pinch choke collar that he won't ESCAPE from.
> Manu was being a butt head
Naaah? Do tell?
> since they were doing kitten adoptions,
Oh yeah, he LOVES kitty kats.
> and apparently the sound of kittens
> makes him kind of excited.
THAT'S on accHOWENT of you used your own DEAD
kitty kat to tease him to train him to your
new shock system.
> ok, really really excited.
Like when he MAULED your $7,000.00 kitty kat to
death right in front of your own eyes.
> so i took him outside, and put him in a down stay
You mean you jerked and choked him till he laid DHOWEN.
> while the husband bought the necessary stuff.
The pronged spiked pinch choke collar and leash
that won't open when jerked choked and twisted
as your dog tries to ESCAPE.
> so there was this kid sitting there with
> a kitten on his shoulder, meowing loudly,
They shouldn't let kids HOWET alone.
> which already had Manu twitching and
> sliding from butt cheek to butt cheek,
Naaah? Despite you jerkin and chokin him?
> when this Golden Retriever, off leash,
> comes up to Manu, sniffing all over.
Manu LOVES to play.
> Manu was pissed.
Naaah?
> growling, down right snarling at this idiot dog.
Who's the IDIOT, culprit?
> breaks his stay
On accHOWENT of you wasn't jerkin and chokin him enough.
> and lunges, something he hasn't done in a *long* time.
On accHOWENT of you ain't had him in pubic in a long
time on accHOWENT of you're AFRAID of his BAD behaviors.
> i reeled him in
You mean you choked him somemore.
> and mentioned to the owner that having a
> dog off leash around strange pit bulls
A dog is a dog, culprit.
> might not be the brightest idea,
Pit Bulls GOT a BAD REPUTATION on accHOWENT
of so many of them are owned by dog abusing
mental cases like yourself, kelly.
> and he's like, "yeah, thanks", all sarcastic like.
His dog doesn't fight on accHOWENT of dogs
only fight when they're AFRAID.
> i suddenly had a flash of accidentally dropping
> the leash, but then my brane got the better of me
SURPRISE SURPRISE SURPRISE!
> and i gave him a pop and said "leave it".
You mean you jerked and choked him somemore.
> He kept growling,
Naaah? Do tell?
> and the idiot Golden kept looking at him
So?
> as he walked away.
You mean he didn't want to attack your friendly dog?
> husband came out and said "what happened?"
> i said, loud enough for idiot owner to hear,
> "oh, that idiot thought having his dog off
> lead around Manu was a good idea.
That was kindly of you.
> good thing Manu didn't break his lead."
Like HOWE he done twice pryor.
> *sigh*
You're PATHETIC.
> people are incredibly stupid.
Yeah. AND INSANE.
> -kelly
Subject: culprit aka kelly aka metta's Seven THOWEsand Dollar DEAD KAT
HOWEDY Juanita,
"Juanita" <JJMo...@nospam.worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:DmZMc.325758$Gx4.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Sorry, I've been going out of town all day
> every day for the past 3 days . .
Well, you'd have to be HOWETA your mind
not to see what's goin DHOWEN here abHOWETS.
> "culprit" <culp...@flashmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2mgmbhF...@uni-berlin.de...
> > you want to know what kind of person your pal tpw is?
Talk is cheap. Talk BUSINESS.
> > in which he harasses and
> > verbally abuses me
Not so. The Amazing Puppy Wizard
only calls a spade a spade, therebye
avoidin obsfucation.
> about my recently deceased cat
You mean the seven thHOWESAND dollar kat
your dogs murdered on accHOWENT of YOU
TRAINED THEM TO. YOU BAITED the SHOCK
BARRIER with the KAT to PROOF IT.
NHOWE WHAT do you EXXXPECT is gonna
happen when you walk in with the kat, put IT
in the recovery area behind your interior shock
fence you'd been BAITING THEM with your KAT.
Then, on accHOWENT OF you're a MENTAL
CASE, you FORGOT to put their SHOCK
COLLARS back on before turnin them loose.
DEAD KAT.
> > and the state of my health.
Your postin history is clear. You don't have
to worry abHOWET it noMOORE. We understand.
> > yes,
What health? The Amazing Puppy Wizard
sez we don't NEED to say STUFF like THAT.
> > he's using the recent death of a beloved animal
Your posting history will show you mishandled
and abused that kat till it got deathly ill relapsing
into his viral illness on accHOWENT of the dogs
TERRORIZING HIM when he'd lay on the stairs.
> > as ammunition to try to upset me.
The Amazing Puppy Wizard doesn't EXXXPECT
these dog lovers are gonna admit to readin an
understanding what HE sez is goin DHOWEN.
> How did your beloved cat die?
She trained her dogs to MURDER IT just
like HOWE The Amazing Puppy Wizard
would provoke a dog to attack.
She teased her two submissive aggressive
pitbull dogs on the kat but UN like The Amazing
Puppy Wizard CHOSE to HURT her dogs and
trained them to attack each other as well.
> Juanita
Her kat was beloved, death was her blessing.
HOWEDY culprit aka kelly aka metta (metta is
culprit aka kelly's aka on the CRAZY PERSONS
news groups so she's not DISCREDITED as bein
NUTSO on the NON CRAZY person's news groups),
"culprit" <culp...@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:2mgmbhF...@uni-berlin.de...
> you want to know what kind of person your pal tpw is?
The Amazing Puppy Wizard is the only dog trainer
in history who teaches people all over the Whole
Wild World to handle train and rehabilitate ALL
behavior problems NEARLY INSTANLY for FREE,
withHOWET HURTIN noWON.
> i just got a personal email from him (because i
> made the mistake of responding to you, i'm sure),
> cc'd to a bunch of other folks i don't know,
Marilyn and professor dermer and perhps Larry,
cause THEY understand a little abHOWET behavior.
> in which he harasses and verbally abuses
> me about my recently deceased cat
You mean the kat you trained your dogs to MURDER.
> and the state of my health.
Well perhaps if you wasn't MENTAL you
wouldn'ta HURT your dogs till they MURDERED
your DEAD kat.
> yes, he's using the recent death of a beloved
> animal as ammunition to try to upset me.
The Amazing Puppy Wizard is QUOTING YOUR
CASE HISSSTORY of TRAINING YOUR DOGS
to MURDER YOUR KAT by FORGETTING to PUT
their SHOCK COLLARS on them when you got
back from the vet after $1500.00 in surgery.
> you still call this guy amusing?
You wanna see amusing?:
"we'll keep the indoor boundary set up, and keep
***testing the dogs with it (hiding behind the railing
and meowing usually does the trick)*** so that they're
familiar with the warning tone.
Manu is already pretty sure he knows what it means,
and whenever Lola trips it, he'll bite her hind leg and
pull her down the steps so the tone stops. he's such
a big brother, always trying to keep sis out of trouble."
And THEN (Drumroll please, Mr. Maestro...):
****************************
Your Attention to center ring...
> "anyway,
No. Get it straight. You mean anyHOWE.
> "we had it installed outside today, and started the
> indoor part of training. we decided to put the training fence
> on the stairway, since the cats like to hang out up there and
> the dogs aren't allowed to go up."
****************************
"i dropped of Mo upstairs, as usual, and headed
down to let the dogs out of their crates.
for some reason i'll never know,
*(EVERY WON KNOWS NHOWE.)
*(forgetting to put their SHOCK COLLARS ON THEM)
Mo followed me downstairs. he never does this.
and i didn't hear him coming. however, the dogs did.
they ran to investigate, and found a strange smelling,
bloody cat in their house.
needless to say, they attacked him"
Cause culprit aka kelly aka METTA FORGOT
to put their shock collars back on after uncrating
them and she DIDN'T TELL MO THEY WASN'T
WEARIN THEIR SHOCK COLLARS.
> i call him frightening.
Naaah. Leavin you runnin loose is frightenin.
> -kelly
HOWEDY People,
"culprit" <culp...@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:2mg1gvF...@uni-berlin.de...
> she's darling.
INDEEDY. Like HOWE culprit aka kelly aka
metta's $7,000.00 DEAD kat WAS.
> the pups wish her a speedy recovery.
The PUPS would MURDER her just like
HOWE YOU TRAINED THEM to MURDER
YOUR OWN DEAD KAT.
> since i can't have cats for a while,
Cause you trained your dogs to MURDER IT.
> i'd like to experience them vicariously,
A WIZE idea.
> so please feel free to keep posting pix and stories!
INDEEDY. LikeWIZE, The Amazing Puppy Wizard
will keep posting YOUR CASE HISTORY to IDENTIFY
EXXXPOSE and DISCREDIT you and your pals as
the lying animal abusng mental cases you are.
Here's the IN-complete story (short version) of
HOWE culprit aka kelly aka metta (metta is culprit
aka kelly's aka on the MENTAL PERSONS news
groups) TRAINED HER DOGS to MURDER HER
DEAD KAT:
> -kelly
From: culprit (culp...@flashmail.com)
Subject: Re: Video clip......."Nero" practicing bark alert,
while walking backwards
Date: 2004-06-05 18:53:50 PST
"micha el" <spam_yurs...@spamyourmamma.com> wrote in message
news:yIydnZpPsIz...@comcast.com...
> Anyway, contrary to your PR, this is what
> it felt like to me when I got shocked by
> Hope's collar.
> It felt like a bomb going off in my
> hand and forearm.
there are different brands of fences, and each
one has a variety of settings, set to the dog's
specific reaction. Lola's collar is set to give
more juice than Manu's, because she's more
likely to ignore the buzz, whereas Manu wants
nothing to do with it. i have no idea what brand or
setting Hope's collar was set at.
there's also the fact that Hope has lots of thick
fur and a good fat layer (to keep her warm in the
water) and my dogs are scrawny and nekkid.
so maybe Hope needs a higher setting to work
for her. it's really hard to say without comparing
the collars directly.
and you're right, if Lola really wants out of the yard,
she'll run through the fence. the annoyance doesn't
keep her in, which is why she's always supervised
outdoors.
Manu, OTOH, is happy to stay as far from the
fence as he can. what can i say, he's part eevil
pit bull and part fraidy cat.
-kelly
From: culprit (culp...@flashmail.com)
Subject: we got "the fence"
Date: 2004-02-14 15:48:26 PST
after having the appraisal for the real fencing coming out at
over $11,000, we decided to put up an invisible fence, just
until we can save some cash for the real one. after we put up
the real fence, the invisible one will probably remain as a
"fail safe" to keep the dogs off the real fence.
yes, i'm aware of most of the cons, i've always been
against them myself, until i talked to a lot of people
who have them, and had the invisible fence trainer
come out to meet the dogs.
i'll only be letting them out when i'm home and can keep a
direct eye on them, and we've discussed it with all of the
neighbors, and they've committed to containing their dogs,
so they won't come into my yard unless invited.
anyway, we had it installed outside today, and started the
indoor part of training. we decided to put the training fence
on the stairway, since the cats like to hang out up there and
the dogs aren't allowed to go up.
we put up a baby gate just past the invisible barrier,
so that they can't go through it, even if they want to.
i tried the collar on myself before we let the dogs try it,
and while it is uncomfortable, it's not painful, and i'm
comfortable with the dogs wearing it.
we thought Manu would require a higher setting than Lola,
because she's pretty sensitive to correction, and he is a big
meathead who doesn't feel a thing. this played out with the
first part of training, with Lola turning around and leaving
the steps at the first buzz, and Manu just standing there,
wagging his tail, like he didn't feel a thing.
we upped the setting three more times before Manu
"got it", and then he immediately turned around and
didn't go up the steps at all after that.
the weird thing is that Lola, who was clearly
bothered by the experience, kept trying to go
up to get the cat's area anyway.
this confirmed something i had suspected.
Lola may be more sensitive to correction, but
she also has more "drive", and will put up with
something she dislikes longer than Manu will.
Lola sat on the steps, cycling through the collar's
three 10 second failsafe cycles, then tried to climb
over the baby gate as though nothing had happened.
we decided to up the correction one setting, with the
theory that she'd find it so unpleasant it would stop
her from climbing the steps, then we'd turn it back
down once she realized she shouldn't be up there.
unfortunately, she never did realize it, so we had
to leave it on the higher setting.
so hers is set lower than Manu's, but she reacts a
lot more strongly to it (scratching at her neck, etc)
than he does.
we'll keep the indoor boundary set up, and keep
testing the dogs with it (hiding behind the railing
and meowing usually does the trick) so that they're
familiar with the warning tone.
Manu is already pretty sure he knows what it means,
and whenever Lola trips it, he'll bite her hind leg and
pull her down the steps so the tone stops. he's such
a big brother, always trying to keep sis out of trouble.
the outdoor training will begin later in the week, i'll post
updates once we get done with them.
-kelly
From: culprit (culp...@flashmail.com)
Subject: another tragedy
Date: 2004-06-24 14:16:01 PST
today Mo-kitty woke up in a large spot of blood.
his wound had been bleeding all night. i took
him to the vet, who said that this was not abnormal,
did some blood tests, and sent him home with me.
since he's not allowed to groom himself, he had
quite a bit of blood on him, which i was going to
clean up later.
i dropped of Mo upstairs, as usual, and headed
down to let the dogs out of their crates.
for some reason i'll never know, Mo followed me
downstairs. he never does this. and i didn't hear
him coming. however, the dogs did.
they ran to investigate, and found a strange smelling,
bloody cat in their house.
needless to say, they attacked him.
poor Mo had that stupid cone on his head and
couldn't see to escape. he was weak and sick
and didn't have a chance.
he didn't survive the trip back to the vets.
he died in my lap on the way there.
i'm in shock right now.
everyone is telling me to get the dogs out of
the house to deal with my grief, but how can
i deal without them?
they didn't understand that what they did is
wrong, they're not people. they smelled
blood and instinct took over. i thought about
getting rid of them for about two seconds.
but i can't. i love them too much. and i need
them more than ever right now. poor dogs,
they know something is wrong, and they're all
cuddled up to me.
they don't even know that they caused my suffering.
i'm not angry at them. just sad at Mo's passing.
after all that work to make him well, for him to die
in this way... it's like a cosmic joke. like a bad movie.
i'm emotionally torn. i'm numb. and i'm so very tired.
-kelly
Janet Puistonen
Let me get this straight: your dog, who apparently wants to eat every
animal, be it canine or feline, he sees is just fine, but a friendly dog is
an "idiot"? I gather that the point of this post is that anyone who thinks
that any pit can be trusted to behave in a civilized manner is "dumb"?
Thanks for clearing that up. (Newsflash: normal dogs approach each other and
sniff. It is not a sign of "idiot" behavior. Now, growling, snarling and
lunging at an inoffensive stranger...what is that?)
Janet Puistonen
> Sounds like the dog suited the owner somewhat. Goldens are nice but
> not all that bright at times...........:) My aunt has one who I've
> only ever played with 3 times and the dog just lets anyone walk into
> the house. I got more of an alarm response out of her 16 year old
> shepard mix today when I walked in the house then I did the golden.
>
> Some guard dog she is, more like a marshmallow who will smother you
> to death
> Celeste
Since when does guardian instinct equate to intelligence? That's like saying
that prey drive equals intelligence.
I have two dogs, one of whom is very intelligent and responsive, the other
of whom is probably the dumbest dog I've ever owned. Guess which one barks
and growls when people approach the house?
sighthounds & siberians
<box...@verizon.net> wrote:
>Spot wrote:
>> Sounds like the dog suited the owner somewhat. Goldens are nice but
>> not all that bright at times...........:) My aunt has one who I've
>> only ever played with 3 times and the dog just lets anyone walk into
>> the house. I got more of an alarm response out of her 16 year old
>> shepard mix today when I walked in the house then I did the golden.
>>
>> Some guard dog she is, more like a marshmallow who will smother you
>> to death
>> Celeste
>
>Since when does guardian instinct equate to intelligence? That's like saying
>that prey drive equals intelligence.
Since never. Our Tasha, a Siberian Husky, is the smartest dog I'll
ever have. When one of our Greyhounds was lost in some woods about 5
miles from our home, DH took her along to the location where the GH
had been sighted by the police and told her to "find Matty" - - the
first time she'd ever heard those words. Her nose went to the ground
and they walked for about 10 minutes - - DH believing that Tasha was
probably out for a great romp in the woods - - before she stuck her
head into some brush and his head popped out. But like most dogs of
her breed, she has no protective instinct whatsoever, loves just about
everybody she meets, and would let burglars into the house (we don't
have silver for her to show them).
Mustang Sally
Marcel Beaudoin
news:wTB6f.1262$p_6.772@trndny07:
> Let me get this straight: your dog, who apparently wants to eat every
> animal, be it canine or feline, he sees is just fine, but a friendly
> dog is an "idiot"? I gather that the point of this post is that
> anyone who thinks that any pit can be trusted to behave in a civilized
> manner is "dumb"? Thanks for clearing that up. (Newsflash: normal dogs
> approach each other and sniff. It is not a sign of "idiot" behavior.
> Now, growling, snarling and lunging at an inoffensive stranger...what
> is that?)
If you had actually read what Kelly wrote, you would have seen that she had
Manu in a down/stay on a leash, while the GR was off-leash and wandering
free. In that case, it is the responsability of the owner whose dog is off-
leash to ensure his/her dog is under control.
Marcel
Spot
bits n pieces.
Did you EVEN READ the post. I said the dog suited the owner somewhat. No
where did I ever say that ALL dogs are stupid and dumb I said that Goldens
are not all that bright sometimes.
Celeste
"Janet Puistonen" <box...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:SWB6f.930$SH6.209@trndny08...
culprit
> Let me get this straight: your dog, who apparently wants to eat every
> animal, be it canine or feline, he sees is just fine, but a friendly dog
is
> an "idiot"? I gather that the point of this post is that anyone who
thinks
> that any pit can be trusted to behave in a civilized manner is "dumb"?
> Thanks for clearing that up. (Newsflash: normal dogs approach each other
and
> sniff. It is not a sign of "idiot" behavior. Now, growling, snarling and
> lunging at an inoffensive stranger...what is that?)
try reading the original post again, then try reading this one.
are you aware that many dogs who are leashed become aggressive around
unleashed dogs? this is common behavior.
are you aware that many dogs are uncomfortable being sniffed when they're
restrained and the dog doing the sniffing is not?
are you aware that having a dog off lead in a busy public area (like a
shopping complex) is not only illegal, it's completely stupid?
are you aware that most dogs are excited by environments like big box pet
stores, with their smells, their sounds, etc?
are you aware that every cute small terrier on leash in that damn place that
was dragging its owner to the meowing cats probably had the same idea as
Manu, i just had the common sense to take my 70 pound pit bull outside,
rather than frighten anyone with his exuberance and breed?
all dogs have their butt-head days, Manu's was just majorly complicated by
the fact that some idiot let his dog walk up and sniff a restrained dog of
totally unknown temperament on a bad day.
which i think is utterly stupid.
and i think the neighbors' dogs that Manu regularly romps with, as well as
his sister, would take offense to your first statement, but fortunately,
they can't read very well.
-kelly
TO...@dog-play.com
> Let me get this straight: your dog, who apparently wants to eat every
> animal, be it canine or feline, he sees is just fine, but a friendly dog is
> an "idiot"? I gather that the point of this post is that anyone who thinks
> that any pit can be trusted to behave in a civilized manner is "dumb"?
> Thanks for clearing that up. (Newsflash: normal dogs approach each other and
> sniff. It is not a sign of "idiot" behavior. Now, growling, snarling and
> lunging at an inoffensive stranger...what is that?)
It is is not polite in the dog world for one dog to come up into the face
of another dog. A dog that has good manners in the dog world stops
several feet away, engages eye contact, looks away, and presents body
posture that invites greeting and play. It is simply rude dog behavior to
walk right up to another dog without dog mumber one finding out if dog
number two is interested in meeting. The owner of a dog that has never
learned correct dog greeting behavior needs to prevent that dog from being
rude.
Golden Retrievers are probably among the most notorious for being entirely
lacking in good dog manners.
Dogs that are on leash and behaving themselves should be able to be in
public without being subject to rude behavior. One dog running up to
another and sniffing in public is no more acceptable than some random
person giving another random person a big hug at the mall. There is a
time and a place where we expect "friendly" greetings. A dog park, for
example, or a bar if you are human. But no person goes out shopping with
the expectation that it is OK if some random stranger walks up and gives
them a kiss on the cheek, and no dog should have to put up with the
equivalent from strange dogs.
--
Diane Blackman
There is no moral victory in proclaiming to abhor violence
while preaching with violent words.
http://dog-play.com/ http://dogplayshops.com/
sighthounds & siberians
<mbea...@scintrextrace.com> wrote:
That's true. It's also true that it's not a great idea to take a dog
that isn't friendly with other dogs to places where there are likely
to be lots of other dogs. Because dogs will be dogs, you know.
Mustang Sally
flick
news:wTB6f.1262$p_6.772@trndny07...
Perhaps Manu would not have growled if he'd been standing up and felt on
equal footing with the GR. But there's nothing unusual about a pit who is
aggressive toward other animals, including other dogs. IME there would also
be nothing strange about a dog who didn't want other dogs approaching *its
owner.*
Besides, is it legal for a dog owner to have their dog off-leash in front of
a Pet Smart? Usually, there's a leash law. If I had any one of my dogs
off-leash, would I *allow it* to approach a dog it didn't already know as a
friend? Nope.
Would you similarly think there was something odd about, oh, an Aussie that
saw a bunch of sheep and could barely contain itself because it wanted to
herd them? Or a GR that got excited if it saw some kids throwing a frisbee?
I think not.
flick 100785
flick
news:8konl1p49be8ta1fq...@4ax.com...
>
> That's true. It's also true that it's not a great idea to take a dog
> that isn't friendly with other dogs to places where there are likely
> to be lots of other dogs. Because dogs will be dogs, you know.
Sure. It's hard to account for other people's errors, too. Like people who
allow their dog off-leash and let it approach strange dogs.
I don't see this as such a problem, since Manu lunged only after he was
approached by the GR, which had its attention on him. I betcha he walks
past other, leashed and controlled dogs just fine.
flick 100785
Melinda Shore
flick <fl...@starband.net> wrote:
>Perhaps Manu would not have growled if he'd been standing up and felt on
>equal footing with the GR.
The likelihood of running into an idiot at Petsmart, or the
dog park, or any one of a number of places that attracts
people who don't really train their dogs is pretty high, and
I think it's generally useful to keep that in mind when
making decisions about where/when to take the dogs
someplace. Saber can still get pretty attitudy towards
strange dogs and a lot of dogs find his behavior offensive.
I figure part of my job is keeping my dogs out of situations
in which there's a good expectation that something stupid is
going to happen.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - sh...@panix.com
What we have here is a form of looting. -- Nobel laureate in
economics George Akerlof, on Bush economic policy
culprit
"flick" <fl...@starband.net> wrote in message
news:83e3b$435bec0b$94402b1b$15...@STARBAND.NET...
> Sure. It's hard to account for other people's errors, too. Like people
who
> allow their dog off-leash and let it approach strange dogs.
>
> I don't see this as such a problem, since Manu lunged only after he was
> approached by the GR, which had its attention on him. I betcha he walks
> past other, leashed and controlled dogs just fine.
>
this is exactly true. the reason we take Manu out more often that Lola, is
that Manu is happy to sit or down and stay while other smaller or boingier
dogs go by and doesn't even show much interest. we do this for the peace of
mind of the other owner, and because a lot of owners don't pay attention to
their own dogs. his aggression only comes out when he is provoked or
protecting his pack. for the most part, he ignores other dogs, or just pees
over their pee spots.
Lola, OTOH, thinks every dog is her friend and gets right up in their face
to lick them. kind of like that golden. so she doesn't go to dog popular
places.
Yes, Manu was having a butt head day, as i said, but it was extremely
unusual, and as i said, his aggression is only caused by provocation. this
was not a normal experience.
-kelly
flick
news:djgqpp$sf4$1...@panix2.panix.com...
> In article <b4f14$435beb61$94402b1b$15...@STARBAND.NET>,
> flick <fl...@starband.net> wrote:
>>Perhaps Manu would not have growled if he'd been standing up and felt on
>>equal footing with the GR.
>
> The likelihood of running into an idiot at Petsmart, or the
> dog park, or any one of a number of places that attracts
> people who don't really train their dogs is pretty high, and
> I think it's generally useful to keep that in mind when
> making decisions about where/when to take the dogs
> someplace. Saber can still get pretty attitudy towards
> strange dogs and a lot of dogs find his behavior offensive.
> I figure part of my job is keeping my dogs out of situations
> in which there's a good expectation that something stupid is
> going to happen.
Let me get this straight. It's somehow Kelly's fault that they were in a
place that you think has a high likelihood of stupid dog owners? Wow.
If I were out with one of my dogs, leashed, in an area where there was a
leash law; some idiot dog owner *allowed his dog* to get close to mine; this
didn't appear to be proceeding in a friendly manner; I'd blame the owner of
the unleashed dog, Melinda. My dog was legally under control. The other
dog was loose, and NOT under the owner's control.
You're expected to maintain control of your dog. Kelly did that. The owner
of the GR did not. Had Manu bitten that GR, it would have been the GR
owner's fault, legally. At least, where I live it would have been.
Nobody can be expected to make allowances for every idiot out there.
flick 100785
culprit
"Melinda Shore" <sh...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:djgqpp$sf4$1...@panix2.panix.com...
> In article <b4f14$435beb61$94402b1b$15...@STARBAND.NET>,
>
> dog park, or any one of a number of places that attracts
> people who don't really train their dogs is pretty high, and
> I think it's generally useful to keep that in mind when
> making decisions about where/when to take the dogs
> someplace. Saber can still get pretty attitudy towards
> strange dogs and a lot of dogs find his behavior offensive.
> I figure part of my job is keeping my dogs out of situations
> in which there's a good expectation that something stupid is
> going to happen.
Melinda, Manu will not let either the husband or i clip his nails at all.
we've tried every single damn suggestion given here. because of this, we
take him to the groomer at the big box store to get his nails trimmed for
$8. for some unknown reason, he stands perfectly still and gentlemanly for
strangers to clip them.
i'm sure you've never experienced a problem like this, so it may be
difficult to understand the necessity of bringing one's dog out in public.
now go have fun with your perfectly trained doggy friends.
-kelly
flick
>
> Melinda, Manu will not let either the husband or i clip his nails at all.
> we've tried every single damn suggestion given here. because of this, we
> take him to the groomer at the big box store to get his nails trimmed for
> $8. for some unknown reason, he stands perfectly still and gentlemanly
> for
> strangers to clip them.
Heh, my Aussie (God rest her) was just like this. If I tried to clip her
nails, she'd scream. At the vet, she'd stand like a statue, silently.
Go figure.
flick 100785
Melinda Shore
flick <fl...@starband.net> wrote:
>Let me get this straight. It's somehow Kelly's fault that they were in a
>place that you think has a high likelihood of stupid dog owners? Wow.
If you didn't understand what I posted, you should have felt
free to ask me about it. That would be better than making
stuff up.
I don't think that it's Kelly's "fault" that somebody else
didn't have control of her dog. I do think that Kelly
should have anticipated that she'd encounter some moron who
didn't have control of their dog.
>Nobody can be expected to make allowances for every idiot out there.
Nobody's expected to. But it seems to me that running into
a moron at Petsmart is a high-probability event (and I'm not
just talking about their trainers) and that the consequences
of something going wrong can be very high indeed. Given the
combination of the high likelihood that there'd be someone
there with inadequate control of her dog with the
possibility of serious injury if things did go wrong, it
seems to me that a little discretion might not be a terrible
thing. Heaven knows I'm not completely (or even
particularly) risk-averse but I do think it's a good idea to
be analytical and to use judgment.
flick
> In article <ac86f$435c380d$94402b1b$18...@STARBAND.NET>,
> flick <fl...@starband.net> wrote:
>>Let me get this straight. It's somehow Kelly's fault that they were in a
>>place that you think has a high likelihood of stupid dog owners? Wow.
>
> If you didn't understand what I posted, you should have felt
> free to ask me about it. That would be better than making
> stuff up.
I didn't "make stuff up." You're being a freekin' bitch to Kelly about
something that was not her fault. It was the fault of the loose dog's
owner.
> I don't think that it's Kelly's "fault" that somebody else
> didn't have control of her dog. I do think that Kelly
> should have anticipated that she'd encounter some moron who
> didn't have control of their dog.
Same thing, different words.
>>Nobody can be expected to make allowances for every idiot out there.
>
> Nobody's expected to. But it seems to me that running into
> a moron at Petsmart is a high-probability event (and I'm not
> just talking about their trainers) and that the consequences
> of something going wrong can be very high indeed. Given the
> combination of the high likelihood that there'd be someone
> there with inadequate control of her dog with the
> possibility of serious injury if things did go wrong, it
> seems to me that a little discretion might not be a terrible
> thing. Heaven knows I'm not completely (or even
> particularly) risk-averse but I do think it's a good idea to
> be analytical and to use judgment.
Uh, yes, Melinda. You're blaming the victim.
A person who has a well-behaved, leashed dog should be able to take it
anywhere it's legal to do so. Period. If there's an unleashed - and
therefore illegal - dog that causes problems, that's the fault of that dog's
owner.
Really, anywhere there are likely to be other dogs, there might be dumbass
owners who'd cause problems. BFD. The only way to avoid that is to never
take your dog anywhere. Another place you're likely to run into that is at
the vet's office. Or walking in the park. Or walking down the sidewalk,
depending on where you live. Maybe Kelly should only take Manu out at
midnight, to a deserted piece of fenced property miles from everywhere.
Do you also blame drivers for being hit by out-of-control drunks?
Sheesh.
flick 100785
culprit
> Really, anywhere there are likely to be other dogs, there might be dumbass
> owners who'd cause problems. BFD. The only way to avoid that is to never
> take your dog anywhere. Another place you're likely to run into that is
at
> the vet's office. Or walking in the park. Or walking down the sidewalk,
> depending on where you live. Maybe Kelly should only take Manu out at
> midnight, to a deserted piece of fenced property miles from everywhere.
incidentally, we do have Manu sit outside the waiting room at the vet until
they have an exam room open for us. whiny sick dogs can really stress each
other out.
-kelly
flick
>
> incidentally, we do have Manu sit outside the waiting room at the vet
> until
> they have an exam room open for us. whiny sick dogs can really stress
> each
> other out.
Oh, that sounds like it could be a good idea!
Our "problem dog at vet" is the Chow mix. He's petrified with fear there.
Invariably somebody thinks he's cute and tries to pet him, whereupon he
loses control of all sphincter muscles :-(.
flick 100785
>
> -kelly
>
>
Melinda Shore
flick <fl...@starband.net> wrote:
>Same thing, different words.
No, it really isn't, and the difference isn't subtle,
either. I think this is an important point. In an ideal
world the risk to us and ours would be completely dependent
on our own decisions. In this world, however, it's also
dependent on factors completely beyond our control. Some of
them are foreseeable (weather events, loud music at rock
concerts, people who take poorly-trained dogs into public
places) and some are not (a bus emptying its holding tank on
a bridge in Chicago at the same time that a tourist boat
happens to be passing underneath it). I think that keeping
my dogs safe is more important than allocating blame. I
also know that people tend to really lousy at evaluating
risk.
I've got a dog-aggressive dog. He goes a lot of places,
including places where there are other dogs, but he doesn't
go places where there's a high likelihood of badly-trained
dogs running around off-leash. Those places includes the
dog park (although I've taken him there a few times when
there aren't likely to be many other people around) and the
Farmer's Market. And yes, the feed store, which has the
added irritant of smelling like food.
Judy
> Nobody can be expected to make allowances for every idiot out there.
True. It's an impossible task because there are so danged many of them.
However, I don't drive on New Year's Eve.
~~Judy
Judy
news:3s3vj5F...@individual.net...
To clarify - and I seem to be needing to do a lot of that lately - what I
mean is that I stay totally OFF the roads on New Year's Eve. Sometimes you
just have to accept that there are going to be idiots out there someplace
and let them have their idiocy.
~~Judy
Robin Nuttall
> Let me get this straight: your dog, who apparently wants to eat every
> animal, be it canine or feline, he sees is just fine, but a friendly dog is
> an "idiot"? I gather that the point of this post is that anyone who thinks
> that any pit can be trusted to behave in a civilized manner is "dumb"?
> Thanks for clearing that up. (Newsflash: normal dogs approach each other and
> sniff. It is not a sign of "idiot" behavior. Now, growling, snarling and
> lunging at an inoffensive stranger...what is that?)
I have to make a comment here. I don't find Goldens particularly
"friendly". Many dogs don't either. They tend to be obnoxiously,
obsequeously aggressive. Sure, they approach with all the "hi! hi! hi!
pet me! love me!" stuff, but they approach very rapidly, they get right
in the dog's face, they do not back off, they ignore doggie clues to
back off, and they are extremely insistent in BEING obnoxiously forward.
Many Golden owners think this is perfectly acceptable behavior. That
it's okay to have thier dog come up and mug other dogs with
friendliness. Other dogs are often horrified, offended, or angered by
this. They want a bit of respect, a bit of time, and a bit of space.
When they tell the Goldens to back off, the other dog then gets labeled
as "vicious" or "aggressive." In truth, it's the Golden who was
aggressive, it's just a different type of aggression.
Judy
news:HW47f.271678$084.271211@attbi_s22...
In truth, it's the Golden who was
> aggressive, it's just a different type of aggression.
I have a friend who is afraid of dogs. She can control her fears if the
dogs are quiet and approach her slowly and gently.
A bouncing Golden rushing up into her space is just as frightening to her as
a snarling (for the sake of argument) Rottweiler.
Leash laws apply to all breeds. It applies to that Golden "who loves the
whole world" and it applies to the Border Collie "who has a 100% reliable
recall and down-stay".
And it should surely apply to people who own miniature poodles - who Spenser
has a complete hatred for. If he's on a leash, he actually feels more
vulnerable to that dog who is NOT leashed. Fortunately, he is small enough
that when we get caught in one of those situations, I can pick him up -
where he does feel safe. But I shouldn't have to do that. And my friend
shouldn't have to worry about walking along the strip mall in front of
PetsMart and being accosted by an unleashed dog of any breed.
~~Judy
Tee
If you hadn't specified Goldens I'd have thought you were talking Boxers. I
explain, sooooo often, why I'm not letting Fancy get closer to someone's dog
and why I always make a wide arc around another dog with its owner attached.
People assume she's unfriendly which she really isn't most of the time but
she's provoking without realizing it. Her lifted ears, deathly still
stance, head raised above the other dog and one front leg lifted slightly is
snapping posture in most other dogs. When she starts making these
seizure-like body movements, very jerky-like, all the while staying within
6" of the other dog's face and breathing heavier she usually gets snapped
at. Then she looks hurt and confused.
That's Boxer body language for playing but its antagonistic behavior with
other dogs and I don't always want her being snapped at or making another
dog feel unnecessarily vulnerable. This hasn't helped us in our
socialization because if I let her socialize she almost always unwittingly
instigates a snap back at her and if I don't let her socialize then its like
there's something wrong with other dogs. With other bully breeds its not an
issue but with non-bully breeds it is.
--
Tara
Mary Healey
news:byM6f.1380$c%.116@trndny02:
> Oh get over it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Jesus some people only
> comprehend bits n pieces.
>
> Did you EVEN READ the post. I said the dog suited the owner somewhat.
> No where did I ever say that ALL dogs are stupid and dumb I said that
> Goldens are not all that bright sometimes.
That you did. But Janet's question, "since when does guardian instinct
equate to intelligence?" is a good one, considering your anecdote was of a
non-guarding Golden (correct temperament, btw) and your comment was about
intelligence. See how someone reading your post might think you've
connected the two?
Me, I've got two dogs with "incorrect" temperaments for their breed.
Ranger (ACD) is about as protective as a stuffed bunny, whereas Duke (Lab)
has shown a frightening willingness to take down unwary "invaders".
Neither is stupid. Neither is particularly brilliant by any measure of
canine intelligence. One is more protective than the other, that's all.
shelly
>People assume she's unfriendly which she really isn't most of
>the time but she's provoking without realizing it. Her
>lifted ears, deathly still stance, head raised above the
>other dog and one front leg lifted slightly is snapping
>posture in most other dogs. When she starts making these
>seizure-like body movements, very jerky-like, all the while
>staying within 6" of the other dog's face and breathing
>heavier she usually gets snapped at. Then she looks hurt and
>confused.
interesting. with harriet, what you've described is 100%
aggressive behavior. she's very much like a Pit Bull in her
warning signals. staring, tall ears, raised head, and
standing still are warnings signs that, left to her own
devices, she *will* attack the other dog.
when she meets the rare dog that she doesn't feel compelled to
dislike, she tends to crab toward it at an oblique angle, and
pretend that she can't see it. that sort of approach seems to
work well. when she's made up her mind that the other dog is
playmate material, she starts play bowing. and boinging.
and, generally, doing all sorts of ridiculous things that are
apt to make the other dog rethink its decision to solicit play
from her.
--
shelly
http://www.cat-sidh.net
http://cat-sidh.blogspot.com/
Tee
news:Pine.BSF.4.56.05...@tesla.bluemarble.net...
>
> interesting. with harriet, what you've described is 100%
> aggressive behavior. she's very much like a Pit Bull in her
> warning signals. staring, tall ears, raised head, and
> standing still are warnings signs that, left to her own
> devices, she *will* attack the other dog.
I used to think that Boxers engaged in this behavior to purposely provoke
the other dog. To a large extent I still believe that but its fairly normal
"hello, wanna play?" behavior that isn't tied to aggression. I'd classify
Hattie as "the rare Boxer" that does have negative intent when engaging in
this behavior. Alot of Boxer crawl, most the submissive ones from my
experience, when they want to play but that too doesn't rule out aggression.
When Boxers do this to each other one of them will break the stiff dance and
hen-peck with a growl and then the game of chase, with lots of acrobatics
thrown in, is on.
> when she meets the rare dog that she doesn't feel compelled to
> dislike, she tends to crab toward it at an oblique angle, and
> pretend that she can't see it. that sort of approach seems to
> work well. when she's made up her mind that the other dog is
> playmate material, she starts play bowing. and boinging.
> and, generally, doing all sorts of ridiculous things that are
> apt to make the other dog rethink its decision to solicit play
> from her.
I've seen this more in male Boxers but even then not alot on the whole. I
can't put to words the body language of a Boxer getting ready to fight when
meeting a strange dog. Its subtly different from what I describe above but
different enough for me to notice. One thing that is always a given, from
my experience, is raised hackles between the shoulder blades. I find it
fairly normal for the nub hackles (lower portion of the back) to rough up
but when it happens at the shoulders and continues downward that's usually a
good fight indicator.
--
Tara
cimawr
Melinda Shore wrote:
> In article <4545$435c4986$94402b1b$19...@STARBAND.NET>,
>
He goes a lot of places,
> including places where there are other dogs, but he doesn't
> go places where there's a high likelihood of badly-trained
> dogs running around off-leash. Those places includes the
> dog park
And those places do NOT include big box pet stores in shopping
centers. Perhaps it's different in the smallish town where you live,
but around here - and I'm betting it's the same near Seattle - one does
NOT expect to meet off-leash dogs on the parking lot of a PetsMart or
similar store.
In fact, in the eight years I've been going to the one near me, I
have *never* seen an off-leash dog outside the store. Inside the store,
I've only seen them within the confines of the dog training area.
Anybody who lets their dog off-leash outside one of those stores is a
moron, unless the dog is well-trained enough to hold a heel or "with
me". And anyone who allows their dog to charge at and molest ANY dog on
a down-stay - let alone a Pit Bull - is beyond moronic.
*MY* dogs - at least the older two - would almost certainly have
reacted with snarling and snapping in that situation, and they would be
perfectly justified in doing so. Only difference being that I wouldn't
correct them for it; the dog needing correction in those circumstances
is the off-leash one, and my dogs can deliver such a correction quite
nicely.
cimawr
>animal, be it canine or feline, he sees is just fine, but a friendly dog is
>an "idiot"?
Yep. And that "friendly" dog was actually being extremely rude and
obnoxious. I suggest you take a look at the article entitled "He Just
Wants to Say Hi" at www.flyingdogpress.com.
Melinda Shore
cimawr <rhyf...@msn.com> wrote:
> Anybody who lets their dog off-leash outside one of those stores is a
>moron, unless the dog is well-trained enough to hold a heel or "with
>me". And anyone who allows their dog to charge at and molest ANY dog on
>a down-stay - let alone a Pit Bull - is beyond moronic.
Sure - I don't dispute that and that's not what I'm taking
issue with.
And, BTW, I see off-leash dogs at the feed store all the
time. I don't go to Petsmart so I don't know what goes on
there, but I would expect a higher proportion of morons
there than I would at the feed store.
> *MY* dogs - at least the older two - would almost certainly have
>reacted with snarling and snapping in that situation,
Your dogs probably aren't capable of killing a Golden that
provoked them, and they probably wouldn't be euthanized even
if they did go on what would look to a casual bystander to
be the offensive. Unfortunately, pit bull ownership carries
a lot of baggage with it, and managing interactions with
other dogs is a particularly large piece of baggage.
There's no such thing as a perfect analogy and there are
probably vanishingly few good ones, but acknowledging ahead
of time that this one is flawed, at a minimum in terms of
incentives and proportion, let's try anyway: nobody is
to blame for computer viruses but their authors. However,
it's certainly unwise to make a practice of opening .exe
attachments from unknown sources.
Janet Puistonen
>
>> Let me get this straight: your dog, who apparently wants to eat every
>> animal, be it canine or feline, he sees is just fine, but a friendly
>> anyone who thinks that any pit can be trusted to behave in a
>> civilized manner is "dumb"? Thanks for clearing that up. (Newsflash:
>> normal dogs approach each other and sniff. It is not a sign of
>> "idiot" behavior. Now, growling, snarling and lunging at an
>> inoffensive stranger...what is that?)
>
> she had Manu in a down/stay on a leash, while the GR was off-leash
> and wandering free. In that case, it is the responsability of the
> owner whose dog is off- leash to ensure his/her dog is under control.
>
I actually read what Kelly wrote. I agree that it was the responsibility of
the other owner to have his dog under control. However, I don't see
approaching another dog and sniffing as out of control behavior in a dog. It
is perfectly normal behavior in a dog. Certainly not worthy of branding the
other dog and its owner "idiots."
Janet Puistonen
> Oh get over it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Jesus some people only
> comprehend bits n pieces.
> somewhat. No where did I ever say that ALL dogs are stupid and dumb
> I said that Goldens are not all that bright sometimes.
>
Yes, I read it. And my reading comprehension is just fine, thank you.
You are evidently one of those people who assume that when people don't
agree with you it must be because they just don't understand what you said.
You made a foolish generalization about a breed, and followed it up with
"evidence" that proved just how ill-founded it was.
Robin Nuttall
> I actually read what Kelly wrote. I agree that it was the responsibility of
> the other owner to have his dog under control. However, I don't see
> approaching another dog and sniffing as out of control behavior in a dog. It
> is perfectly normal behavior in a dog. Certainly not worthy of branding the
> other dog and its owner "idiots."
It totally depends on the speed and type of approach, the aggressivness
of the sniffing, etc. It can be an extremely rude act indeed for a dog
to do this. Sniffing should be preceeded by all kinds of other greeting
behaviors. And yes, for a dog to come up to a strange dog who is in a
supine position and sniff is pretty darn aggressive.
shelly
>I actually read what Kelly wrote. I agree that it was the
>responsibility of the other owner to have his dog under
>control. However, I don't see approaching another dog and
>sniffing as out of control behavior in a dog. It is perfectly
>normal behavior in a dog. Certainly not worthy of branding
>the other dog and its owner "idiots."
i *totally* disagree with regard to the owner. i think it's
incredibly rude, thoughtless, and irresponsible of owners to
allow their off-lead dogs to approach strange dogs and/or
people. neither my dog nor i want strange dogs approaching
her, and we especially do not want them sniffing her. it is
notnotnot okay.
Robin Nuttall
Exactly. Cala does not like other dogs getting in her face. She doesn't
like strange dogs shoving their noses up her butt either. There's a
protocol to meeting and greeting, and that is NOT IT.
cimawr
Janet Puistonen wrote:
> However, I don't see
> approaching another dog and sniffing as out of control behavior in a dog. It
> is perfectly normal behavior in a dog. Certainly not worthy of branding the
> other dog and its owner "idiots."
Go back and re-read the original post. Approaching another dog who is
indicating a desire to meet, and mutually sniffing noses/butts, is
normal.
Going up to another dog who is clearly indicating that s/he does NOT
want to be greeted, and "sniffing all over" , is only normal if your
dog is a clueless butthead - which, unfortunately, many Golden
Retrievers are.
In human terms, it's the difference between approaching someone
indicating a willingness to make acquaintence, and offering your hand
for shaking, and running up to someone you don't know, abruptly
throwing your arms around them, and giving them a big kiss - or
standing about 6 inches away, sticking your face right up to the other
person's, bouncing on your toes, and saying "Hi! Hi! Look at me!", and
then FOLLOWING them and continuing the behaviour when they try to back
away from you.
A LOT of otherwise very friendly people would be forced to shove you
away and say "STOP it!!" . That would not make them "aggressive"
people; it would make them normal people dealing with someone behaving
obnoxiously.
Marcel Beaudoin
> I actually read what Kelly wrote. I agree that it was the
> responsibility of the other owner to have his dog under control.
> However, I don't see approaching another dog and sniffing as out of
> control behavior in a dog. It is perfectly normal behavior in a dog.
> Certainly not worthy of branding the other dog and its owner "idiots."
It is only common courtesy for people to ask if their unleashed, out-of-
control dog can interact with a leashed dog.
--
Marcel and Moogli
http://mudbunny.blogspot.com/
shelly
>I used to think that Boxers engaged in this behavior to
>purposely provoke the other dog.
heh. they really are eeevil dogs, aren't they?
>I'd classify Hattie as "the rare Boxer" that does have
>negative intent when engaging in this behavior. Alot of
>Boxer crawl, most the submissive ones from my experience,
>when they want to play but that too doesn't rule out
>aggression.
i've seen harriet do the "submissive" crawl with *one* dog.
my take on that one incident was that the action was
passive-aggressive, and not truly submissive. she really
wanted to kick the other dog's ass in the worst way, and took
the first opportunity to try to do so. that was years ago,
and to this day, when the two dogs--both bitches--are
together, they are capable of pretending the other does not
exist. i wouldn't leave them alone unattended, though,
because one of them might not survive it.
>When Boxers do this to each other one of them will break the
>stiff dance and hen-peck with a growl and then the game of
>chase, with lots of acrobatics thrown in, is on.
harriet has done the "smack-down and play pounce" routine,
too. it seems to happen when she's not sure the other dog
will Respect Her Authori-tahy. if it reacts submissively or,
better, with a play bow, then riotous games of biteyface and
chase shall commence.
>I've seen this more in male Boxers but even then not alot on
>the whole. I can't put to words the body language of a Boxer
>getting ready to fight when meeting a strange dog. Its
>subtly different from what I describe above but different
>enough for me to notice.
with harriet, *any* sort of hard eyes or stiffness of posture
mean she's having evil thoughts. but, like you, i can't
describe how something like hard eyes are different from
normal eye contact. like most Boxers, she's into eye contact
in a big way. she has no trouble maintaining eye contact in a
way that is communicative without any sort of aggressive
posturing.
>One thing that is always a given, from my experience, is
>raised hackles between the shoulder blades. I find it fairly
>normal for the nub hackles (lower portion of the back) to
>rough up but when it happens at the shoulders and continues
>downward that's usually a good fight indicator.
heh. harriet is, unsurprisingly, weird about that, too. when
she plays, she looks like a ridgeback, with a hackles from
stem to stern. she doesn't tend to hackle in aggression at
other dogs, though.
shelly
>Exactly. Cala does not like other dogs getting in her face.
>She doesn't like strange dogs shoving their noses up her butt
>either. There's a protocol to meeting and greeting, and that
>is NOT IT.
oh man. sniffing the butt is *the* most grievous sin, as far
as harriet is concerned. it is just Not Done. she's learned
to tolerate it when she has to, but with very good grace.
Judy
news:3s47n8F...@individual.net...
> People assume she's unfriendly which she really isn't most of the time but
> she's provoking without realizing it.
It is fascinating to me to watch different breeds meet and watch the
different body stances - and that it actually works for them so much of the
time.
My schnauzers are fine with boxer play approaches - because they have known
a boxer. They aren't allowed to play with the boxer because he totally
abuses them in the name of play but they are willing. Most boxer people we
meet are like you - they keep the dog back because they are so often
misunderstood. But when we tell them our dogs speak Boxer Play, they are
usually willing to let the dogs approach each other if they want.
They are a little intimidated by Golden play approaches - but given a few
minutes (off-lead ideally) they adapt. (They have a Golden cousin - who has
even worse dog manners than the typical Golden). They accept the border
collie stare but sometimes have a little trouble interpreting Aussie. Sassy
lived with a Doberman (who actually thinks that she is a schnauzer) so
speaks Dobie just fine. Spenser didn't so is less sure of them. Spenser
hated a Staffy on sight - who from what I could see was turning himself
inside out with play invitations.
Every schnauzer recognizes every other schnauzer - size is not an issue.
The body language appears to be totally familiar to them. And schnauzers
meeting each other initially may go through a snarling match but it is just
part of the routine. Other breeds may interpret that as aggression. For
the schnauzers, it's a prelude to a game of chase.
Like, I said, it's just completely fascinating to me to watch these
creatures and their reactions to the world and each other.
~~Judy
Tee
news:Pine.BSF.4.56.05...@tesla.bluemarble.net...
>
> heh. they really are eeevil dogs, aren't they?
Yup!
> i've seen harriet do the "submissive" crawl with *one* dog.
> my take on that one incident was that the action was
> passive-aggressive, and not truly submissive.
Fancy stalks in both crouched down, neck extended, mode and by crawling.
However, if she's at the vet's or somewhere in public where I tell her to
down, or she tries to get around me (like when I keep her in a sit and tell
her good girl for relaxing in a down), she'll start crawling to get to other
dogs but its a nub-wiggling, loose-bodied crawl. The stalking crawl has her
tightly controlled and ready to spring at the blink of an eye. Here again,
I've seen many more boy Boxers do the play crawl and many more girlies do
the stalking crawl.
> she really
> wanted to kick the other dog's ass in the worst way, and took
> the first opportunity to try to do so. that was years ago,
> and to this day, when the two dogs--both bitches--are
> together, they are capable of pretending the other does not
> exist. i wouldn't leave them alone unattended, though,
> because one of them might not survive it.
Isn't that "I'm ignoring you because you're beneath me and unworthy of my
esteemed attention" thing Boxer girls do hilarious? Fancy does it *all* the
time. Its even a game around here. There are certain sing-song things I
can say to her that will commence the game and she'll ignore, ignore,
ignore, with nose way up in the air, no matter how close I get to her with
my taunts.
> harriet has done the "smack-down and play pounce" routine,
> too. it seems to happen when she's not sure the other dog
> will Respect Her Authori-tahy. if it reacts submissively or,
> better, with a play bow, then riotous games of biteyface and
> chase shall commence.
This is what Fancy and other Boxers I've had do to determine another dog's
intent. Its part of the provoking thing. How the other dog reacts to the
Boxer's obnoxious posturing is what determines the outcome more often than
not.
> with harriet, *any* sort of hard eyes or stiffness of posture
> mean she's having evil thoughts. but, like you, i can't
> describe how something like hard eyes are different from
> normal eye contact. like most Boxers, she's into eye contact
> in a big way. she has no trouble maintaining eye contact in a
> way that is communicative without any sort of aggressive
> posturing.
Reading the eyes is much like seeing the invisible coil inside the dog's
body. You can tell how tightly that spring is coiled and when its going to
give way to a spring or lunge by knowing your dog. Fancy plays with eye
contact. She's not 100% predictable with it in that she tries to fake other
dogs out by looking away and doing the "this blade of grass is currently
more interesting than you are" but she's still watching the other dog
peripherally.
> heh. harriet is, unsurprisingly, weird about that, too. when
> she plays, she looks like a ridgeback, with a hackles from
> stem to stern. she doesn't tend to hackle in aggression at
> other dogs, though.
LOL, I haven't seen a hackly playing Boxer yet.
--
Tara
Melinda Shore
Judy <dou...@cableracer.com> wrote:
>My schnauzers are fine with boxer play approaches - because they have known
>a boxer.
Prior to the Siberian onslaught Greta's best friend was a
boxer/GSD cross who's very boxer-ish, and while she kind of
liked him Greta remained baffled by him up until the end.
Marcel Beaudoin
news:3s4cdaF...@individual.net:
> Every schnauzer recognizes every other schnauzer - size is not an
> issue. The body language appears to be totally familiar to them. And
> schnauzers meeting each other initially may go through a snarling
> match but it is just part of the routine. Other breeds may interpret
> that as aggression. For the schnauzers, it's a prelude to a game of
> chase.
This knowledge also extends to mixed breeds with schnauzer in them. Moolgi
and his mother (1/4 and 1/2 miniature schnauzer, resepctively) play rough
enough that, at the dog park, people come and ask us if we need help
seperating them.
Janet Puistonen
> "Janet Puistonen" <box...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:wTB6f.1262$p_6.772@trndny07...
>
>> Let me get this straight: your dog, who apparently wants to eat every
>> animal, be it canine or feline, he sees is just fine, but a friendly
>> dog is an "idiot"? I gather that the point of this post is that
>> anyone who thinks that any pit can be trusted to behave in a
>> civilized manner is "dumb"? Thanks for clearing that up. (Newsflash:
>> normal dogs approach each other and sniff. It is not a sign of
>> "idiot" behavior. Now, growling, snarling and lunging at an
>> inoffensive stranger...what is that?)
>
>
> are you aware that many dogs who are leashed become aggressive around
> unleashed dogs? this is common behavior.
> are you aware that many dogs are uncomfortable being sniffed when
> they're restrained and the dog doing the sniffing is not?
Yes to all of the above. Of course, you didn't say any of that before...
> are you aware that having a dog off lead in a busy public area (like a
> shopping complex) is not only illegal, it's completely stupid?
> are you aware that most dogs are excited by environments like big box
> pet stores, with their smells, their sounds, etc?
> are you aware that every cute small terrier on leash in that damn
> place that was dragging its owner to the meowing cats probably had
> the same idea as Manu, i just had the common sense to take my 70
> pound pit bull outside, rather than frighten anyone with his
> exuberance and breed?
>
> all dogs have their butt-head days, Manu's was just majorly
> complicated by the fact that some idiot let his dog walk up and sniff
> a restrained dog of totally unknown temperament on a bad day.
>
> which i think is utterly stupid.
>
> and i think the neighbors' dogs that Manu regularly romps with, as
> well as his sister, would take offense to your first statement, but
> fortunately, they can't read very well.
>
> -kelly
I agree with you completely on the leashed/unleashed thing. If you had said
that the guy was unwise to let his dog approach a leashed dog, I would have
agreed with you. Of course, when people's unleashed dogs approach mine when
he's leashed, I don't have to worry for a second that my dog will initiate
agression. But then my dog is an intelligent, well-bred golden with correct
golden temperament. My last dog, who was a GSD, I wouldn't be so sure about.
(For that matter, I absolutely hate it when people bring their obviously
excited dogs over to greet mine when they are all on leashes, because it is
almost inevitable that the leashes will get tangled up and that way lies a
lot of annoyance and potential for nasty incidents. Let them meet each other
when they are both off leash and can interact naturally, IMHO.)
To further pursue your points about dog behavior, let's consider the fact
that the vast majority of dog conflicts are dominance-related, and that it
takes two to make a dog fight out of such an encounter. Once one dog backs
down, it's over. So a person who knows that his dog will always surrender
dominance doesn't tend to worry about getting into a dog fight if his dog
greets another dog in a normal doggy way: by sniffing. Now, that doesn't
absolve this guy of a responsibility to have his dog under control and obey
leash laws, but on the other hand, I still don't see any evidence that this
guy's dog was out of control. Didn't he simply walk away when Manu lunged at
him?
But what you *said* was the dog was an "idiot" simply for sniffing yours,
and that the guy was an "idiot" for letting his dog approach a pit bull. (A
pit bull who, in another post, you said looked so little like one that many
people thought he was some kind of lab.) You said you told him it wasn't a
good idea to let his dog approach a pit bull. Not for letting his unleashed
dog approach a leashed dog. It struck me that YOU were perpetuating the idea
that no pit is trustworthy. Not to mention blaming this guy for the anxiety
and unease you felt when your already over-stressed dog acted out in a way
he normally night not have.
shelly
>To further pursue your points about dog behavior, let's
>consider the fact that the vast majority of dog conflicts are
>dominance-related,
some are, for sure, but "vast majority"?
>and that it takes two to make a dog fight out of such an
>encounter. Once one dog backs down, it's over. So a person
>who knows that his dog will always surrender dominance
>doesn't tend to worry about getting into a dog fight if his
>dog greets another dog in a normal doggy way: by sniffing.
the problem is that, for many dogs, it is *not* okay for a
strange dog to approach them, invade their space, and sniff
them. some dogs find that to be incredibly rude and
obnoxious, and are not shy about informing the space invader
of it.
>Now, that doesn't absolve this guy of a responsibility to
>have his dog under control and obey leash laws, but on the
>other hand, I still don't see any evidence that this guy's
>dog was out of control. Didn't he simply walk away when Manu
>lunged at him?
the dog was either not under the owner's control or the owner
was an asshat. it's impossible to know, but i expect it made
no difference to Manu.
>But what you *said* was the dog was an "idiot" simply for
>sniffing yours,
idiot can mean foolish, which i tend to think is appropriate.
but, perhaps "socially retarded" might have been a better way
to word it.
Janet Puistonen
> In human terms, it's the difference between approaching someone
> indicating a willingness to make acquaintence, and offering your hand
> for shaking, and running up to someone you don't know, abruptly
> throwing your arms around them, and giving them a big kiss - or
> standing about 6 inches away, sticking your face right up to the other
> person's, bouncing on your toes, and saying "Hi! Hi! Look at me!", and
> then FOLLOWING them and continuing the behaviour when they try to back
> away from you.
> A LOT of otherwise very friendly people would be forced to shove you
> away and say "STOP it!!" . That would not make them "aggressive"
> people; it would make them normal people dealing with someone behaving
> obnoxiously.
Look, I think you're right on the behavioral issue.
What got me about the OP was that she reported castigating the owner for
letting his dog approach A PIT BULL, not for letting him approach a leashed
dog, a dog in a down stay, or whatever. (I found this especially ironic
since she had made the point in another post that her dog doesn't look like
a pit to most people.)
As I said, if she wanted to confirm the belief that a lot of people have
that no pit can be trusted, that's the way to go. I doubt that is her goal.
Marcel Beaudoin
> To further pursue your points about dog behavior, let's consider the
> fact that the vast majority of dog conflicts are dominance-related,
> and that it takes two to make a dog fight out of such an encounter.
> Once one dog backs down, it's over. So a person who knows that his dog
> will always surrender dominance doesn't tend to worry about getting
> into a dog fight if his dog greets another dog in a normal doggy way:
> by sniffing.
Oh. My. God.
Tell me that you don't actually believe that. I bet you would sing a
different tune if a dog that you owned that "always surrenders" and so you
don't worry about getting in a dog fight got tagged by another dog and
needed a pack of stitches to sew its face back together.
Note - Not hoping that this would ever happen to somone, but if I, a dog
owner fairly inexperienced with dog-dog aggression can see this scenario
happening, I would think that it would be blindingly obvious.
Janet Puistonen
Leaving aside the fact that we have no evidence that the guy's dog was "out
of control," it *should* be common courtesy to ask whether your dog is
leashed or not, unless you are in a dog park or some other area where dogs
commonly interact. But very, very few people do, unfortunately.
Judy
news:djiui4$c94$1...@panix2.panix.com...
> Prior to the Siberian onslaught Greta's best friend was a
> boxer/GSD cross who's very boxer-ish, and while she kind of
> liked him Greta remained baffled by him up until the end.
The Golden dog cousin is completely baffled by the schnauzers. He thinks he
wants to play with them - and he seems to recognize what they're doing as
"play"- but he doesn't haven't a clue how to go about it. I've never seen
that dog in something as common as a play bow. He runs around and barks,
usually carrying a sneaker, but has no idea how to play with another dog.
~~Judy
shelly
>What got me about the OP was that she reported castigating
>the owner for letting his dog approach A PIT BULL, not for
>letting him approach a leashed dog, a dog in a down stay, or
>whatever.
the fact is that allowing an unleashed dog to approach a
strange Pit Bull is a really, really stupid thing to do.
it's generally more stupid than letting that same unleashed
dog approach a dog of just about any other breed (though that,
too, is stupid). being realistic about that is part of
responsible Pit Bull ownership, and is not, in my opinion,
fear-mongering.
for what it's worth, under the same circumstances, i don't
think i would have done things any differently than Kelly did.
>(I found this especially ironic since she had made
>the point in another post that her dog doesn't look like a
>pit to most people.)
i think it's an object lesson in how difficult it can be to
identify Pit Bulls.
Judy
news:Xns96F974D4A2291...@130.133.1.4...
> This knowledge also extends to mixed breeds with schnauzer in them. Moolgi
> and his mother (1/4 and 1/2 miniature schnauzer, resepctively) play rough
> enough that, at the dog park, people come and ask us if we need help
> seperating them.
This has happened to DH while he was walking the two dogs at a trial. The
dogs usually react by stopping their snarling to see if there is any
attention or treats that they should be aware of.
I've noticed also that our dogs initiate play (outside of the complete
blind-sided pounce they use on each other - it's a brother-sister thing) by
giving a sideways stare or by pawing at each other's faces. Wonder if they
learned this from the boxer or if it's one reason why they understand boxer
play so easily? Spenser uses a very nice play bow with other dogs - ears
back, making himself small and non-threatening. Sassy is more likely to do
a stiff-legged bounce right up to their faces and then place a paw on their
nose. And yet, other dogs understand them both.
~~Judy
Janet Puistonen
> on 2005-10-24 at 15:44 <box...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> To further pursue your points about dog behavior, let's
>> consider the fact that the vast majority of dog conflicts are
>> dominance-related,
>
> some are, for sure, but "vast majority"?
According to what most "dog experts" say. Would you agree to "most"?
>> and that it takes two to make a dog fight out of such an
>> encounter. Once one dog backs down, it's over. So a person
>> who knows that his dog will always surrender dominance
>> doesn't tend to worry about getting into a dog fight if his
>> dog greets another dog in a normal doggy way: by sniffing.
>
> the problem is that, for many dogs, it is *not* okay for a
> strange dog to approach them, invade their space, and sniff
> them. some dogs find that to be incredibly rude and
> obnoxious, and are not shy about informing the space invader
> of it.
Sure. It's completely normal. All I'm saying is that the non-dominant dog
will normally back off immediately in that situation. I'm not saying it
gives people license to let their dogs bounce into the face of every passing
canine--and certainly not saying that they have any right to complain if
their dog gets a rough reception. (But then, this guy didn't complain,
according to what the OP said.)
<snip>
>> But what you *said* was the dog was an "idiot" simply for
>> sniffing yours,
>
> idiot can mean foolish, which i tend to think is appropriate.
> but, perhaps "socially retarded" might have been a better way
> to word it.
I'd agree with that. I admit my feelings were probably colored by the
follow-up post which "confirmed" that dogs who aren't agressive or
guardian-like are "idiots."
Robin Nuttall
> "Tee" <crappol...@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:3s47n8F...@individual.net...
>
>>People assume she's unfriendly which she really isn't most of the time but
>>she's provoking without realizing it.
>
>
> It is fascinating to me to watch different breeds meet and watch the
> different body stances - and that it actually works for them so much of the
> time.
Heh. Cala's Great Love Of Her Life is Jura the Springer
(www.huxleyspringers.com). Jura, Mr. Joe Cool, stands sidways, five feet
away, head cocked, tail low but buzzy. "Hi." he says. "You are Stunning.
You are a Goddess. Will you consent to my worship?" Cala puffs up. "Yes.
I am thou Goddess. I am Stunning. You may approach." So he sidles
closer. She sidles up to him. Whap! she play bows. Thump! he follows.
Much loud chasing ensues, concluding with them in a panting heap,
playing "I can get myself smaller than you." "No! I am flatter to the
floor, my head is lower!" "no me!" as they alternately wedge their heads
underneath the other ones to prove who is the MOST in lurrv.
Last week I had Kip the Border Terrier here. Kip is one of those
obsequeously aggressive dogs. He tends to fly up to dogs then fling
himself on his back right under their face and lay there and make
panty-grunty noises. Well Cala simply did NOT know what to do with this.
She wanted to play, but he wouldn't move off of his back. So she kept
poking him with her feet. "DO something! Why are you lying there like a
sap! Move! I want to chase you! I want you to chase me!" Then she'd
accidently poke him in the balls, he'd get all upset and leave, and
she'd be like, "what the heck was that all about. I don't get him."
Janet Puistonen
> "Janet Puistonen" <box...@verizon.net> wrote in
> news:6j77f.4231$c%.1432@trndny02:
>
>> To further pursue your points about dog behavior, let's consider the
>> fact that the vast majority of dog conflicts are dominance-related,
>> and that it takes two to make a dog fight out of such an encounter.
>> Once one dog backs down, it's over. So a person who knows that his
>> dog will always surrender dominance doesn't tend to worry about
>> getting into a dog fight if his dog greets another dog in a normal
>> doggy way: by sniffing.
>
> Oh. My. God.
>
> Tell me that you don't actually believe that. I bet you would sing a
> different tune if a dog that you owned that "always surrenders" and
> so you don't worry about getting in a dog fight got tagged by another
> dog and needed a pack of stitches to sew its face back together.
I said it takes two to make "a dog fight out of such an encounter."
"Getting tagged," as you put it, is not a dog fight.
> Note - Not hoping that this would ever happen to somone, but if I, a
> dog owner fairly inexperienced with dog-dog aggression can see this
> scenario happening, I would think that it would be blindingly obvious.
Sure--but it isn't "a dog fight." If you had ever had a dog that was
actually involved in a dog fight, or seen one, you would know the
difference. Unlike you, I have.
I'm not suggesting that the hypothetical dog who always backs down isn't in
danger of getting hurt if he or she persists in getting in other dogs'
faces. I'm just suggesting that in the majority of dog encounters, that dog
isn't going to get into a fight.
shelly
>According to what most "dog experts" say. Would you agree to
>"most"?
not in my experience.
>Sure. It's completely normal. All I'm saying is that the
>non-dominant dog will normally back off immediately in that
>situation.
ha! except for the ones--like IME many Goldens--who do not
back off.
>I'm not saying it gives people license to let their dogs
>bounce into the face of every passing canine--and certainly
>not saying that they have any right to complain if their dog
>gets a rough reception. (But then, this guy didn't complain,
>according to what the OP said.)
the problem is that Kelly and Manu shouldn't have had to deal
with the other dog or owner at all. my mom used to say that
you shouldn't have to tell someone to stop stepping on your
toes.
>I'd agree with that. I admit my feelings were probably
>colored by the follow-up post which "confirmed" that dogs who
>aren't agressive or guardian-like are "idiots."
i think everyone--Kelly included--understands that that's just
silly. harriet has no shortage of smarts (she's got too many
for her own good), yet she's the least protective dog i've
ever lived with. she chooses to use her s00per p0w3rZ for
other sorts of eeevil.
Robin Nuttall
> I don't have to worry for a second that my dog will initiate
> agression. But then my dog is an intelligent, well-bred golden with correct
> golden temperament.
Really? So tell me how your dog approaches strange dogs? Does he walk
right up and sniff them? Make big waggy wiggly and rush up to them? Both
of these are NOT appropriate. And so far you're impressing me as yep, a
typical Golden owner--Goldens do no wrong...
flick
>
> And, BTW, I see off-leash dogs at the feed store all the
> time. I don't go to Petsmart so I don't know what goes on
> there, but I would expect a higher proportion of morons
> there than I would at the feed store.
That is where I see off-leash dogs - the feed store. Sadly, many of the
country people who live 'round these parts are unable to see the wisdom of
confining their dogs, when it would be appropriate to do so. If anything,
the country-dwellers seem even more resistant to leashes, etc. than city
people. YMMV.
flick 100785
Janet Puistonen
Yes, really.
No, now that he is grown up he usually pauses, wagging his tail, then they
approach each other and do a mutual sniff routine. Then he usually breaks
off to go check out interesting scents left behind by others. Occasionally
they go into the play bow routine and start chasing each other around.
You know, a bunch of other people are right now engaged in talking about how
different breeds act in different ways--to human eyes, anyway--and how they
sometimes seem not to understand each other's approach and play behaviors.
So why don't you go tell all of them that their dogs don't approach other
dogs the "correct" way, either?
Robin Nuttall
> Robin Nuttall wrote:
>
> You know, a bunch of other people are right now engaged in talking about how
> different breeds act in different ways--to human eyes, anyway--and how they
> sometimes seem not to understand each other's approach and play behaviors.
> So why don't you go tell all of them that their dogs don't approach other
> dogs the "correct" way, either?
A lot of them don't (see my post about Kip, the obsequeously aggressive BT).
I'm around a lot of Goldens because I do agility. I have noticed two
things that are extremely common to Goldens and those who own them.
1. The dogs, as a group, are obnoxiously friendly in a totally
INappropriate way. Rushing up into a dog's face, even with a waggy tail
and a "smile" is not.not.not appropriate dog greeting behavior. And they
don't back off. They wiggle and wag and push and push.
2. The owners of the dogs have NO clue what appropriate dog behavior is,
and excuse all of this totally inappropriate behavior by "oh he's just
so FRIENDLY!!!" Aggression takes many forms. Aggressivly friendly is
just as much a form of aggression as aggressively unfriendly.
Yes, all dogs have greeting behaviors. And that of Goldens may be
perfectly appropriate for other goldens. If they want to go mug each
other with friendliness and be obnoxiously forward that's fine. But that
doesn't make it appropriate for dogs in general. Many dogs hate it,
which is why so many Golden owners seem to think other breeds are
"mean." They aren't mean, they just don't like some strange dog to come
flying up into their face and slobber all over them. Many dog breeds
prefer a formal introduction and a bit of a warm-up period. That doesn't
make those dogs bad or vicious. It actually makes them smart IMO.
Rocky
rec.pets.dogs.behavior:
> I agree that it was the responsibility of
> the other owner to have his dog under control. However, I
> don't see approaching another dog and sniffing as out of
> control behavior in a dog. It is perfectly normal behavior
> in a dog.
Yes, it's perfectly normal dog behaviour, but is still totally
unacceptable in many situations. I can't recall, but do you do
any dog sports? A crowded and high-energy atmosphere is one in
which I keep my well-trained friendly dogs on a short leash,
even around other known-friendly dogs.
And, IMO, an unleashed dog should not be allowed to interact *in
any way* with a leashed dog unless both handlers are fine with
it.
> Certainly not worthy of branding the other dog
> and its owner "idiots."
I agree - the dog wasn't an idiot. Kelly: the GR wasn't an
idiot, just the owner.
--
--Matt. Rocky's a Dog.
TheAmazing...@mail.com
Robin Nuttall wrote:
> Janet Puistonen wrote:
>
> > Let me get this straight: your dog, who apparently wants to eat every
> > animal, be it canine or feline, he sees is just fine, but a friendly dog is
> > an "idiot"? I gather that the point of this post is that anyone who thinks
> > that any pit can be trusted to behave in a civilized manner is "dumb"?
> > Thanks for clearing that up. (Newsflash: normal dogs approach each other and
> > sniff. It is not a sign of "idiot" behavior. Now, growling, snarling and
> > lunging at an inoffensive stranger...what is that?)
>
> I have to make a comment here. I don't find Goldens particularly
> "friendly". Many dogs don't either. They tend to be obnoxiously,
> obsequeously aggressive. Sure, they approach with all the "hi! hi! hi!
> pet me! love me!" stuff, but they approach very rapidly, they get right
> in the dog's face, they do not back off, they ignore doggie clues to
> back off, and they are extremely insistent in BEING obnoxiously forward.
>
> Many Golden owners think this is perfectly acceptable behavior. That
> it's okay to have thier dog come up and mug other dogs with
> friendliness. Other dogs are often horrified, offended, or angered by
> this. They want a bit of respect, a bit of time, and a bit of space.
> When they tell the Goldens to back off, the other dog then gets labeled
> as "vicious" or "aggressive." In truth, it's the Golden who was
> aggressive, it's just a different type of aggression.
ALL AGGRESSION IS FEAR.
ALL FEAR IS CAUSED BY MISHANDLING.
LIKE THIS:
Golden Girl Goddess Of Ethickal Breeding And Competitive Agility
Hello Jeff,
Jeff Dege wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 02:21:10 +0000, Jen wrote:
> > Ok. You have the right to your opinion.
Dog training isn't a matter of OPINION, it's SCIENCE.
> > That's fine.
Not fine if you don't know the SCIENCE.
> > I don't mean any offence.
Not to worry, you don't have to apologize for
having a difference of OPINION about hurting
intimidating and murdering innocent defenseless
dumb critters.
> I have been interacting with a particular strident,
> obnoxious, and ineffective group of self-professed
> "purely positive" trainers.
Water seeks it's own level, don't it.
> So I tend to be a bit sensitive.
Naaah? A SENSITIVE NAZI??? BUNK!
> As for my opinion,
Your opinion is welcome here on these
open unmoderated news groups.
> I generally agree with you.
That's convienient. IN FACT, it's MANDATORY
or the SCIENTIFIC METHOD will FAIL. Let's all
do the Monkey Macarena together so we know
what's up.
> I just recognize that dogs are different,
Different from what? Children? Kats?
> and that what works well for most dogs doesn't
> work for all.
That's because you're not familiar with
the SCIENTIFIC METHOD.
> > "Jeff Dege" <j...@jdege.visi.com> wrote in message
> > news:pan.2005.09.11....@jdege.visi.com...
> >> Like assuming that physical reprimands are bad,
Yeah, like PRESUMING ANY behavior is BAD.
Dogs and children DO NOT DO BAD behaviors
they RESPOND in PREDICTABLE NORMAL NATURAL
NINATE INSTINCTIVE REFLEXIVE ways to situations
and circumstances of their environment which
we create for them.
> >> while ignoring misbehavior is good.
You can't train ANY behavior by IGNORING IT.
> >> You simply can't assume that is the case for all dogs.
Not unless you was following the SCIENTIFIC METHOD, Jeff.
Like this:
Hello Robin, Golden Girl Goddess Of Ethickal
Breeding and Competitive Agility,
Robin Nuttall wrote:
> Jen wrote:
> > Thanks Diana. I'm there now.
Yes, Diana is a true dog lover, just like Robin
only not as kindly to us Ugly Americans!
> > Many of the people here need such a lesson
> > on politeness,
And political correctness, to boot.
> > they are so
> > rude!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Naaah?
> Irony much?
You mean, LIKE THIS?:
Hello Robin,
Robin Nuttall wrote:
> Handsome Jack Morrison wrote:
> > On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 14:01:38 -0500,
> >Jeff Dege <j...@jdege.visi.com> wrote:
Is that the same Jeff Dege who can't train
his own dog not to attack innocent defenseless
dumb critters despite his shock collar and
perfect come command?:
From: Jeff Dege <j...@jdege.visi.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 21:58:22 -0500
Subject: Re: Squirrell chasing / Prey drive !!!!
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 19:06:57 -0400, buzzsaw wrote:
> A Loose Leash !?! Are you kidding me ... this dog is ready to go and the
> site of a squirell he is gone loose leash, tight leash, no leash.
> He can see them clear as far as 5 blocks,
> in fact when a leaf blows he is ready to bounce.
> He sees a empty water bottle, or a sprinkle head
> on the grass as approaching he is tensing up
> because it just may be rocky the squirell.
> I think the e collar is appropiate here?
> Although I never used one on him.
Won't make any difference.
I've been using an e-collar with my JRT, and it's
worked wonders for his recall. But the one time
he bolted after something small and furry, he paid
no attention to the collar until after he'd brought
it to bay.
Jeff Dege.
> >> P- should be used to describe removing or
> >> withholding a reward to make a behavior decrease.
You mean, LIKE THIS?:
From: Gwen Watson <g...@ig.utexas.edu>
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 13:07:06 -0600
Subject: Re: E-Collars - with Vibrator?
Robin Nuttall wrote:
> Gwen Watson wrote:
>> KrisHur wrote:
>> Yes but most people that train to this level also
>> train for RL too unless of course you are refering
>> to kennel dogs. In my posts I am refering to family
>> members who are also achieving titles.
> How many people do you actually know, personally,
> who have OTCH dogs? Or even dogs with a UD or UDX?
> I know quite a few, and not a single one of them
> is a kennel dog. "Real life" manners vary by the
> dog, with some being great and some being awful.
I can't say quite a few. But I can say 2.
At any rate the above is the answer I have been trying to obtain.
Still why is that these dogs have awful manners?
Inconsistency?
Lack of common sense on the handlers part?
Several reasons?
No real reason? Its all very interesting to me and I am
sorry my questioning this has upset and frustrated so many.
It was honest questions.
I have always thought or been told there is never a
bad question. It sure seems as though I have asked
a very bad question by wanting to know how this is
possible.
Gwen
From: Robin Nuttall <robi...@mchsi.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 19:34:18 GMT
Subject: Re: E-Collars - with Vibrator?
Gwen Watson wrote:
> Still why is that these dogs have awful manners?
> Inconsistency? Lack of common sense on the handlers
> part? Several reasons?
Depends on the handler. Some people care about good
manners, some people don't. But it's still totally
disconnected from whether the dog is a good competition
dog, which is the point.
To take it to agility, I know a lot of really top
agility competition dogs who are dog aggressive,
crate protective, etc. My own dogs are absolutely
awful beggars and counter surfers.
Obviously it doesn't bother me personally that much
because I haven't eradicated it. That doesn't mean
they are not trained to a very high level in other things.
> No real reason? Its all very interesting to me and I am sorry
> my questioning this has upset and frustrated so many. It was
> honest questions. I have always thought or been told there
> is never a bad question. It sure seems as though I have
> asked a very bad question by wanting to know how
> this is possible.
No, you've made people mad by nitpicking, overexaggerating,
going off on tangents, changing your questions, and not
bothering to read responses.
Questions are fine.
Not liking the answer and getting combative,
incoherent, and defensive is not so fine.
From: Robin Nuttall <robi...@mchsi.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 04:27:24 GMT
Subject: Re: If you HAD to re-home your dog(s)...
Both my girls would go back to their co-owner.
Viva, despite, or rather because, of her issues,
could go to almost anyone who could give her a
safe, calm environment.
Because of her very bad early start, she has a
real need to be bonded and have a human she can
count on.
Cala would be a different matter. She would need
an experienced working home--someone who knows
how to direct and channel drive without overuse
of correction.
A wimp would turn her into a frustrated and dangerous
dog. Someone who wanted to throw their weight around
and who was too heavy with corrections might also well
end up with a dangerous dog--she's got way too much
fight drive to back down if pushed.
Fortunately my co-owner is smart and could probably
find somewhere quite suitable for both of them.
Robin Nuttall.
> > Also, I think that the process of "withholding" a reward
Withholding rewards can cause aggression,
seizures, phobias of all sorts and OCD'S.
"Despite Skinner's clear denunciation of "negative
reinforcement" (1958) NEARLY EVERY LEARNING THEORY
model involves the USE OF PUNISHMENT. Of curse,
Skinner has never to my knowledge, demonstrated
how we escape the phenomenon that an expected
reward not received is experienced as a punishment
and can produce extensive and persistent aggression
(Azrin et al, 1966)."
> > that resulted in the decrease of a behavior
Witholding rewards increases anxiety which would
increase the behavior or cause the dog to throw
mindless meaningless unthinking random behaviors
to elicit the treat.
"Postitive emotions arising in connection
with the perfection of a skill, irrespective
of its pragmatic significance at a given
moment, serve as the reinforcement. IOW,
emotions, not outside rewards, are what
reinforces any behavior," Ivan Pavlov.
> > would probably more accurately be accounted
> > for by the *extinction* process.
That's so confusing to me I don't see how a dog
can figure it out especially when two or three
of you can't agree on what's going on with all
this alphabet soup.
Extinction is best facilitated by increasing
excitation or DRIVE and briefly alternately
(e.g. randomly presented non physical) distracion
instantly followed by prolonged (5-15 seconds)
and intermittently thereafter non physical praise
before the action is manifest and resume repeating
the process till you've successively - successfully
conditioned the subject's ability to NOT engage that
THOUGHT through NON fulfillment
It's EZ. Takes a little sense of timing, a confident
gently tone, and consistent tempo, IOW, Pavlovian
conditioning.
Should take four repetitions with four different
stimuli in four different environments to EXTINGUISH
ANY BEHAVIOR.
"...all the highest nervous activity, as it manifests
itself in the conditional reflex, consists of a continual
change of these three fundamental processes -- excitation,
inhibition and disinhibition." Ivan P. Pavlov
> Here's a way I use P- in its classic sense.
Is that P as in punishment praise or poo poo?
> Cala loves agility.
Most dogs do. But your dogs "love it" because
they're hyperactive and this vents their anxiety.
How can you "compete" in agility if you got a
dog aggressive bitch who won't even heel after
a year and a half of jerking choking shocking
bribing intimidating crating and ignoring???:
From: "Robin Nuttall" <robi...@mchsi.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 13:26:20 GMT
Subject: Re: Warning about Dog Trainer
There are pullers, then there are PULLERS. Viva
is one of the former, and has learned to walk
very nicely on a loose leash. I'm convinced that
Cala is genetically incapable of walking on a
loose leash.
She's almost 18 months old now, and we have been
working on the issue since I first put a leash on
her. She's so high drive that *nothing* I do is
as reinforcing to her as pulling. I can stand still
till I keel over--she just stands there at the end
of the leash, pulling as hard as she can. I can do
sneak aways until I am dizzy, we just get yo-yo
effect ("okay, I'll pull THIS way now!).
I can clicker her for loose leashes until my thumb
falls off--and she still pulls.
A click and treat is not as reinforcing as the world
around her. Our only real solution at this point is
the pinch collar, which keeps her from totally wearing
me out, or hurting herself by actually flipping at the
end of the leash.
I have a feeling this is something that she will
only develop with age, and will come regardless
of any training I do or don't do.
And yes, I've trained many, many dogs to walk on
a loose leash, but not this one... Robin Nuttal.
> It's very highly reinforcing for her.
You mean when she ATTACKS you because she
gets lots of treats and praise. Do you
suppose that's what's caused your dog's
SEPARATION ANXIETY?:
From: Robin Nuttall <robi...@mchsi.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 15:47:17 GMT
Subject: Re: Crating/Caging: What constitutes abuse?
J1Boss wrote:
> Sally wrote:
> A guest/foster dog who just needs to chill out.
> A dog who's so wound up that they just can't seem
> to stop themselves, and I need to do something -
> like eat or shower or breathe.
Cala is one of those puppies who, when she's tired, just
gets more and more and more and more wound up until she's
on the verge of total meltdown. While it's amusing to see
her tearing through the house on warp speed, it's advantageous
to everyone, including her, if she's crated when she gets
totally wound like that.
I cheerfully tell her she's a good puppy and take her to
her crate. Within 2 minutes she's usually sound asleep.
Keeps me from strangling her, and all she really needs at
that point is to be removed from stimulus so she can crash.
And she does.
> No - don't say that - the crate bashers won't be have
> any reason to call us thugs! I do use crates forever
> though - in my car and at training class and shows.
Yep. Crates are good places. Crates are safe, and
crates take you to fun places and to do fun things.
> > Crates may be helpful to confine dogs with separation
> > anxiety, although many dogs with SA try to escape the
> > crate. Crates are safe places for dogs to hide when
> > visiting children annoy them. Crates are excellent
> > places for dogs to be confined when ill or injured.
Viva has some separation anxiety issues. It's difficult
for her to be uncrated when I'm not home. She feels she
must then take responsibility for the whole house as well
as anything and everything she may see outside.
It's a lot of pressure for her. If I leave her uncrated,
she's always a bit frantic when I get home. If I leave
her crated, she only has responsibility for her own space
and doesn't feel she has to guard the entire house and yard.
She is much calmer and happier being crated while I'm gone.
She'll never have the run of the house when I'm not home
because *she* doesn't like it. Robin Nuttall.
Pavlov Told Us So 100 Years Ago. Sam Corson,
Pavlov's Last Student Demonstrated At UofOH
Oxford, That Rehabilitation Of Hyperactive
Dogs Can Easily And Readily Be Done Using TLC.
Tender Loving Care Is At The Root Of The
Scientific Management Of Doggys.
> But she had a lot of impulse and drive
> control challenges when she was younger.
That so? You mean she was and still is hyperactive,
oppositional, fear aggressive even with opposite sex
dogs and turns on you when FRUSTRATED as per your
posted case history.
You've never finished those "control challenges",
not with EITHER dog especially Cala the one you
TRAINED for three years despite having raised her
since DAY ONE. Your dogs both have SEPARATION
ANXIETY amongst many other PROBLEMS.
Like this:
From: Robin Nuttall <robi...@mchsi.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 00:29:21 GMT
Subject: Re: Doggie temperament test
Suja wrote:
> Robin Nuttall wrote:
>> Oh My. Whoever thought of this thing is an idiot.
>> Many of the STOP TEST AGGRESSIVE DOG responses are
>> exactly the responses you want to have in a high
>> drive, active, curious dog. I got so many of those
>> (pretty much all that way) for Cala that I stopped
>> taking the test. And she's not aggressive.
> Well, I don't agree with that stupid test at all,
> but Cala isn't what I'd call a Newbie dog, is she?
Nope. She's not. She's bred to her working heritage.
But that test doesn't talk about any of that. It
just makes blanket statements.
And FWIW, I full well realize the responsibility I
took on in breeding the litter I did, with the type
of working temperament I was looking for, and got.
Heck no, she's not a beginner dog, but I would never
have placed any dog out of this litter with a beginner
owner. Robin Nuttall.
From: Robin Nuttall <robi...@mchsi.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 16:01:45 GMT
Subject: Re: Shock and awe
shelly wrote:
> In news:3E3EA77C...@mchsi.com,
> Robin Nuttall <robi...@mchsi.com> typed:
>> My dogs don't get to make discipline decisions.
>> My dogs get to be nice with other dogs, period.
>> If they're not nice, they stay on lead until
>> they can learn to be nice.
> exactly. that goes for being the Dog Police and for being
> obnoxious brats who pick on other dogs. i don't tolerate
> either of those behaviors within my own pack or between my
> two and other dogs.
This is something I'm acutely attuned to.
Part of it is owning Dobermans, who have a bad rep anyway.
Part of it is that I know for a fact that my puppy's sire
is profoundly dog aggressive. It was the one thing I did
NOT like about using him, and the plusses outweighed the
minuses. But I watch Cala like a hawk. Being able to go
to offlead parks has actually helped, as she's gotten to
meet a large number of dogs of all shapes and sizes.
But our dog park is different than many in that it's a
huge area with trails cut through brush--mob mentality
doesn't often come into it. Robin Nuttall.
> Namely she would sometimes get too excited,
And bite you:
From: "Robin Nuttall" <robi...@mchsi.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 04:00:43 GMT
Subject: Re: Does your dog do this?
"Andrea" <andrea.sto...@NOSPAM.verizon.net> wrote in message
news:dMB0b.13637$_P1....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
> The "sorry" look and licking is appeasment behavior.
> Dogs to it to avoid retribution, not because they
> really understand how to apologize. Really, you
> should just teach her some bite inhibition so that
> you don't get hurt, and she doesn't have to worry.
I totally agree, but with some dogs that's far
easier said than done.
Cala is finally showing signs of trying to keep
her teeth to herself, and it's been a constant
battle since she was a baby puppy. She's now 17
months old.
I have often been a total mass of bruises from
her releasing overdrive into a nip. Not that
she's ever full-out bitten me, but trust me,
those nips and pinches can be extremely painful.
The higher drive the dog is, the more difficult
it can be to deal with the issue. Robin Nuttall.
> go over the top and vent drive by biting/nipping at me.
Because you are withholding treats choking shocking
intimidating and crating your highly driven working
dogs as per you posted case history which I've spent
the past couple of hours (maybe ten or so...) just
researching your ETHICKAL BREEDING program and your
high drive backyard bred genetically DEFECTIVE
"working dogs" which you'll ONLY SELL to show homes.
Interesting, compelling, sickening stuff, every bit
of it. You should be ASHAMED to post here ever again.
I had to force myself to quit with only the tip of
the iceberg uncovered thus far reading only posts
mentioning your dog Carla.
I had no idea you were a backyard breeder too!
You even bred your DEFECTIVE back yard bred bitch
to a DOG AGGRESSIVE sire to get the QUALITIES you
wanted, yet you still couldn't train Carla to come
or heel by 18 months of age, nor PASS the CGC!!!
despite having bred her from your own highly driven
working stock bitch.
And you got the NERVE to say you don't even "BELIEVE"
in the validity of the CGC test BECAUSE YOUR dogs
CONSISTENTLY FAIL TO PASS IT.
AND THEN YOU DISCOVERED your BACKYARD BRED "STUD"
WASN'T GENETICALLY HEALTHY and being the ETHICKAL
BREEDER you are, you had to CONSULT your business
partner who told you to give up on your backyard
ETHICKAL BREEDER project seein as THEY GOT STUNG
BIG TIME by you and your ignoramus shenanagains.
Did you notify your "WORKING SHOW HOME" PUPPY CUSTOMERS?:
From: Robin Nuttall <robi...@mchsi.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:08:34 GMT
Subject: Re: Breeders suck...
Shelly & The Boys wrote:
> Then another friend who recently had a litter had
> mentioned to me that she'd love to see one of her
> pups go to me. I would've LOVED to have a pup
> from her litter. However, for my next pup, I a)
> want a bitch and b) want to wait at least 4 years
> before acquiring another dog so that Bodhi gets
> all training & attention that he should.
> <sigh> All the work to get *into* the breed,
> but apparently once you're in, you're gold. :-)
Yep, once good breeders figure out that not only
do you give your dogs a great home, but you do
actually work with them and title them, you pretty
much walk on water.
And if you're willing to keep a bitch
intact for awhile, you are God.
But I must admit that now that I'm going to spay Cala-
-a mutual decision between myself and my co-owner after
a rather major health problem showed up in her sire's
line--that I'm looking forward to not having any new
dogs for several years.
Maybe it's because Cala is enough to turn anybody's hair gray!
I plan to wait until she's at least 5 or 6 before
thinking about another puppy. That will put Viva
at 10 and probably near/at retirement, and Cala
should be well settled in and hopefully we'll be
a good team by then.
That said, I've already got my eye on a potential
breeding that should happen several years down the
road... Robin Nuttall.
> Obviously this was a no-go.
Seems your entire posted case history 'JUST SEZ NO!'.
IN FACT, it rather makes you LOOK like a lying
dog abusing punk thug coward as we've SEEN and
we AIN'T EVEN GOT STARTED building your GALLOWS
with your own written words, Robin.
> However, I found that a hard correction (P+)
> tended to ramp her up even higher.
Why would you need to HURT a highly driven working
dog force IT to do what he was SELECTIVELY BRED to
do? Wouldn't you think that'd make your selective
breeding program a MOCKERY and a HOAX, Robin?
Or would you prefer to call it a CRUEL JOKE
on all them puppy customers you STUNG by being
a ETHICKAL BREEDER and breeding to a known dog
aggressive "stud" (but that's IRRELEVENT as all
temperament and behavior problems are CAUSED
BY MISHANDLING not BREEDING) who just happend
to turn out to have a CONGENITAL DISEASE that
you OVERLOOKED in your ETHICKAL BREEDERS PROGRAM?
Nice goin Golden Girl Goddess!
> She has a very high fight drive
You mean she PAINICKS when you hurt and intimidate her.
> and will actively move into a physical correction.
You mean she TRIES TO ATTACK you so you got to HANG
HER like you done to that fear aggressive Irish Wolfhound
in your "class" and jerked and choked IT like how you
do your own fear aggressive hyperactive out of control
factory DEFECTIVE bitches.
> And not only that, but P+ corrections actually put
> her even higher into drive, not something I want
> to happen in this case.
INDEED? How did you determine that?
> So instead, I started simply taking her
> to her crate when she bit me.
But of course:
Jen wrote:
> "Robin Nuttall" <robi...@mchsi.com> wrote in message
> news:txeVe.324546$x96.272690@attbi_s72...
> > Yep. Jen keeps saying, "Oh, I don't mean anything
> > negative" while continuously slamming people for
> > "cruel" methods that she can't even define.
Those who slavishly devote themselves to one type of
training and who condemn others are the poorer for it.
I clicker train. I use choke collars. I shape behaviors.
I use drive work for focus and intensity. I use pinch
collars. I use harnesses. I use food. I use positive
and negative punishment.
Some of these things I use frenquently. Some very
infrequently. I tend to focus my training in the
quadrants of positive reinforcement and negative
punishment, and am far more likely to eliminate
undesired behavior through ignoring it than any
other way.
I'll also grab my young dog by the collar, lift
her up on her back feet, and tell her to KNOCK
IT OFF in no uncertain terms when the little snot
gets into overdrive and bites me.
If you want to discuss training, discuss it here.
But be willing to listen as well as talk. And
please stop top posting. Robn Nuttall.
> I was withdrawing her ability to
TO BITE YOU.
> do a very highly reinforcing task--agility.
Ummm, wasn't THAT what makes her BITE YOU?
If this agility GAME is SO REINFORCING why can't
you train her to do the tables and stop line and
A frame and not attack you when you hurt her for
being OBSTINATE and SKITZY in the ring?
> Further, I was doing it in a way that did
> not put her any higher in drive.
You mean hyperactive oppositional and aggressive
when you jerk choke shock ignore and withhold
attention affection rewards trust and respect.
> She learned that biting/nipping resulted
> in the fun stuff stopping.
You mean the jerking choking shocking and withholding.
> She spent enough time in the crate to
> safely come down out of drive,
You mean she felt safe and could relax again.
> then I would take her out and we would do something simple
Or she'd ATTACK you again.
> and praise for being in drive without being over the top.
You mean you praise her for BEING HYPERACTIVE and
NOT ATTACKING you again. Perhaps you should use PREY
DRIVE as well?
You got a volatile dog there. Better watch out
your SHOCK COLLAR don't spark an explosion. I'd
be PREYIN to the Golden Girl Goddess if I was you.
> It's been very effective.
Do tell?
"Robin Nuttall" <robi...@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:yX1Hb.664461$Tr4.1669501@attbi_s03...
> sionnach wrote:
> >>I wish I didn't have otherleftitis.
> > "Otherleftitis" -I love it!
> > Just out of curiosity... and this question's
> > to everyone who trains for tables, esp. Robin:
> > do you train an automatic down on the table,
> > with a quick pull up into a sit if needed- or
> > do you train the table as two seperate things-
> > first get on the table, then sit or down?
> With Viva I trained the latter--she was my first
> agility dog and I had less than adequate instruction
> during her foundation, and have been paying for it
> since, especially on obstacles and the table.
You mean you can't train her despite your shock and
choke devices and slices of Processed American Cheese
Food Substitute cut evenly into 25 equal pieces.
> However, I have retrained her to do a down first
> and it's helping, but swear to Dog the judges in
> this area request a sit 75% of the time and a down
> only 25%! The down is now mostly adequate, the sit
> still sucks twinkies.
Perhaps you should try a piece of liver between
your lips so she'll at least pay attention when
you speak to her?
> With Cala I've trained "get up on the table and lay down."
> But even though I've done that from day one, I'm still
> having some trouble with it--when she's in drive she
> imitates her mother and stands there screeching like a
> banshee instead of doing her job.
That's because you jerk and choke and shock her.
She also gets skitzy on the stop line on the ramp.
That's the other obstacle you got to her her to do.
She barks and screams at you just like Susan Fraser's
dog was shrieking on line and nearly got himsel
DISQUALIFIED from entering any more trials for the
same reason.
> I usually turn my back on her and that helps.
Of course. Works EVERY TIME, don't it.
> Sure would be nice to get a fast down on the
> table but I'm sure not having much success...
You're not having any "success" because you HURT
your dogs, Robin. You've crippled two of them with
so called Woblers's SYNDROME from jerking and choking
them and Viva's got bi-lateral "arthritis" in her
front legs (is THAT PREREQUISITE for BACKYARD BREEDING
STOCK, Robin?) and your Cala nearly broke her back and
"dislocated" her rib when she took a fall off the ramp
she balks on for the same reason you can't even train
Cala to heel after having her from DAY ONE till 18 months
despite all your pain fear force and intimidation TOOLS:
From: Robin Nuttall <robi...@mchsi.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 17:23:03 GMT
Subject: Re: beginning agility
Rocky wrote:
> Robin Nuttall said in rec.pets.dogs.behavior:
> Oh yeah - when Friday's barking *at* me, I might as
> well walk off the course. Naturally, I don't because
> I'm going to use that expensive training time to the max.
Heh. And when Cala is in that mode walking off is the only solution.
>> I'm thrilled for both of you that your dogs have instant
>> and complete off switches. That's exceedingly rare.
> Assuming there was no sarcasm in there - thank you!
Nope, no sarcasm. :)
> Though only one of my dogs has an instant off (and on) switch,
> and I'm doing whatever I can to exploit it while not ruining it.
> It's funny, though - Friday will do a nanosecond down on the
> agility table or at the line, but do you think that I can get
> him to do it away from a trial situation?
And I can get super fast downs everywhere
BUT the table. With both dogs.
I've been working the table a lot more with both
dogs, trying to help the issue, but it's definitely
a weak spot, and since I have the same issue with
both dogs (slow sits and downs, barking) it's got
to be a fault in my training. Robin Nuttall.
From: Robin Nuttall <robi...@mchsi.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 17:04:36 GMT
Subject: Re: Opinions please...sorry, got long...
Sionnach wrote:
>> No, humans should not be allowed to do anything,
>> anywhere, at any time. However, if, say, I have
>> my dog at the vet, and the vet is trying to do
>> something with me supervising the dog, I'd be
>> extremely surprised and upset if the dog protested
>> in my presence--they know that's not allowed
>> and for those moments the vet becomes an extension
>> of me. (I can do this, I'm saying the vet can do
>> this, so deal with it). However, in my absence, I
>> wouldn't be surprised if a vet trying to do something
>> with my dog did elicit a growl. It's never happened
>> yet but you never know.
> With my three- Brenin would never growl at the vet
> or a tech, with or without me. He's very unhappy if
> seperated from me, and will try to get back to me,
> but he's compliant if I've indicated he should go with
> someone.
> He also DOES NOT bite, even in situations where nobody
> would have blamed him if he had- for instance, when someone
> he barely knew scared the heck out of him by suddenly
> grabbing him from behind, picking him up, and flipping
> him over.
> Rocsi will growl if caused pain (for example, when the
> vet was palpating a sore foot), but it's not a threat,
> merely a communication- she doesn't show teeth or make
> any attempt to use them, just grumbles & tries to pull
> away. I don't have any qualms about letting her be
> handled away from me, either.
Well yeah, I'd of course not object if my dog yelped
or growled in pain, though I've never had one growl.
Dobermans tend to be so stoic and so silent that it's
actually a problem--they will NOT show signs of pain
at the vets even if you practically twist their affected
part off their body. So the vet is going, "gee, she seems
fine!" and once I get them home they won't even put a foot
down.
Cala is the first dobe I've ever had that is what
I call a Drama Queen, and man, she plays it to the
hilt. Banged her foot on something the other night
and had a barely perceptible lump. Acted like she
was going to die, limped dramatically until the
next morning when she would alternate limping
pitifully with charging full speed after her ball.
Then she'd remember, "oh, I'm supposed to be hurt!"
From: Robin Nuttall <robi...@mchsi.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 16:07:48 GMT
Subject: Re: beginning agility
Gwen Watson wrote:
> Robin Nuttall wrote:
>> I'm thrilled for both of you that your dogs have
>> instant and complete off switches.
>> That's exceedingly rare.
> Why is it that everytime someone has a different opinion
> then your own you reply in such a way? You do demonstrate
> the inability for diversity of opinions. Too often have a
> seen such remarks from you.
Gwen, it was an HONEST admiring comment. I AM thrilled
that they have instant and complete off switches. Many
people, including me, do not have dogs who are capable
of that. I am GLAD for them that they do. I think it's
got to be in some way genetic.
Viva can come out of drive somewhat quickly, but not
that fast. Cala has trouble coming out of drive at all.
I see you're off on the whacko side again today...and yes,
THAT is meant exactly the way it sounds. You have to be one
of the dumbest people I've ever interacted with on usenet,
and being as I've been here for 10 years now, that's pretty
impressive in and of itself.
*Cala had a very nasty fall off a dogwalk a couple of weeks
ago, landed on her side so hard she bounced up in the air
about 6 inches, and dislocated a rib. Luckily my acupuncturist
was actually in the building that night and was able to slip
the rib back into place.
The next week she was better but her back was now out of
place, so an acupuncture treatment fixed that up and now
she's fine! I know that Solo has issues. I wonder if you
could find an acupuncturist who would be willing to let
you just come hang out for several sessions so Solo can
get comfy, perhaps while he/she is even treating someone
else.
I know my dogs wouldn't mind as long as the other person
and dog weren't disruptive. A good acupuncturist can do
wonders for little miscellaneous ouchies like he's got.
Robin Nuttall.
Subject: Agility
She's 10.5 months old, and has had very little growth
since she was 7.5 months old--when she went into season.
It's somewhat rare for a large breed dog to have a first
season that young--it's more common for it to happen at
about 10-12 months. And she wasn't pulled in by Viva-
-Viva is going into season right now, 3 months after Cala.
So I'm curious to see whether or not Cala's growth
plates will close early. Even if they have, she's
nowhere NEAR ready mentally to do a lot of work,
much less physically. Robin Nuttall.
From: Robin Nuttall <robi...@mchsi.com>
Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 03:17:25 GMT
Subject: Re: Teaching dogs to be calmer....
Rocky wrote:
> HolierThanThou said in rec.pets.dogs.behavior:
>> he isn't hyper like a Jack Russel, or anything.
>> He isjust busy.
> Friday is this way as well. He has a great fast down
> and a good stay/wait, but as soon as we hit agility -
> Things Change. His down goes from fast to lightning
> fast but his stay/wait goes out the window.
> It's not that he isn't trained, obviously - he's just changed
> gears and, at this stage, I'm not going to extraordinary
> lenght to "fix" this and perhaps take the fun out of it.
You know, I'm having a lot of success teaching the stay
as an active part of the game instead of as a boring
"stay there till I say different" exercise.
So instead of asking for a sit or a down, I get Cala to
offer me one for what she wants. Sit, and you get to tug.
Down, and you get a click and a treat, etc.
I've expanded that to a game of sit and wait. (down and
wait). It's very simple. I get a VERY favored toy out.
She has learned to offer a sit. If she gets up before I'm
ready for her to, I simply remove the toy before she can
get to it.
She has to go back and sit again to get the toy. So she's
learning that waiting is merely a prelude to lots more fun!
I conclude the game with a set of commands that she knows
is going to trigger her release. For us, it's "Ready" said
in a teasing drawn out way, then "Okay! GO!!!" for a release
to grab the toy or treat or just run around like an idiot.
She's getting to LOVE the wait game! And because she's
waiting IN drive, I think she will retain it at the start
line better than a conventional stay. Robin Nuttall.
Yeah? We'd think you can use your effective
stay command when you're fighting and bribing
your dogs to hold still for a nail trimmin:
Subject: Trimming claws
Robin Nuttall Mar 30 2003,
I first click and treat for simply turning the dremel
on and having it near them, then click and treat for
holding a foot while the dremel is on, then drop the
clicker (not enough hands!) and at first treat after
each nail, weeding that to a treat after each foot,
then a treat after it's done. With Cala, who truly
does hate it, I sweeten the pot by giving her a tiny
treat as we start, then a bigger treat when we're done.
She still hates it, but will willingly hop on the
couch and will even fight (well not really fight,
you know what I mean) Viva for the prime grinding
position. Robin Nuttall.
From: Robin Nuttall <robi...@mchsi.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 22:46:35 GMT
Subject: Re: Ping Gwen (& Robin N.)
re: agility (was: I want this dog)
Gwen Watson wrote:
> Robin Nuttall wrote:
> Cala sounds wonderful Robin. I know she
> is going to give you a Mach some day!
If I don't kill her first. Viva will get her MACH long before Cala.
> How serious is this. I have never heard of it.
> Is there a way to prevent it, or is it fairly
> easy to remedy?
It can be a chronic problem. It needs rest
and specific rehabilitation
>> I know a rather alarming number of bigger
>> dogs with arthritis in their front feet-
>> -Viva has this.
> I am sorry to hear that. Do you notice it more
> in the winter? I forget how old lovely Viva is. 6?
Viva is 6. Part of hers is because she's missing
a tendon in one foot due to a bad injury 3 years
ago. She gets lots of supplements. Robin Nuttall.
From: Robin Nuttall <robi...@mchsi.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 01:25:06 GMT
Subject: Re: A Note to Owners of Non-Aggressive dogs and Agility
Susan Fraser wrote:
>> No. Sorry, but no. I know you kind of meant that as a
>> joke, but so often, when I say, "my dog doesn't like
>> other dogs in her face," people will say, "well, if
>> Fifi goes over there, she deserves to get bitten,"
>> or "let your dog put my dog in her place!"
> Yes, I totally meant it as a joke. And even though I
> read your AgileDogs post first, I see now that you do
> realize it was a joke and were just using the post
> to illustrate a point.
> *Of course* I do not expect your dog to teach mine
> a lesson. (And I am aghast that someone would!)
I hear it ALL the time. Many, many times when I say,
"she doesn't like other dogs in her face," I hear
"Oh, I hope she bites him, he needs to learn a lesson."
It's maddening. And yes, I was just using your post to
make a point on agiledogs. :)
> In the case of teaching puppies some manners, I have
> often felt that instead of play times with equally
> clueless peers at puppy kindergartens, it would be
> more appropriate for my pushy golden pups to have a
> group of adult dogs of various breesd and temperaments
> to interact with - to mentor to them how to
> show respect and keep an appropriate distance, etc.
> And yes, that would be 'using' the older dogs, but when
> we keep our pups on a leash and refuse to let them interact
> with various types of older dogs, how are they to learn
> appropriate behaviors within their own species?
That's exactly what I did with Cala. Cala's sire is actually
very dog aggressive. So from a tiny puppy, I made a point to
get Cala out with a variety of dogs, of all ages, shapes,
and sizes.
Some were moresubmissive than her, some were bolder.
Some put her in her place, some did not. She learned
very good dog language skills. Unfortunately, she did
get attacked at least three times when she was young.
Not in these social situations, but by a friend's bitch
who hates puppies. At first, it looked like this would
have no lasting repurcussions.
But as she's matured, Cala has become more
reactive to strange dogs.
Part genetic?
Perhaps. The good thing is, that if you just give her
(literally) five minutes, she relaxes, realizes things
are okay, and is happy to play with the other dog unless
it's truly obnoxious and pushy.
And she isn't looking for a fight--if a dog does tell
her to knock it off, she will flatten to the ground
immediately. Robin Nuttall.
You're lookin at the problemS the wrong way.
These dogs are not "high drive," they're HYPERACTIVE
from MISHANDLING.
Your "training efforts" have made them NERVEHOWES.
The "zippy zoomies" are NOT exuberance, they're ANXIETY.
The dog KNOWS you cannot HURT IT in a trial...same same
same same reason lying "I LOVE KOHELER" lynn's dog Jive
gets high scores in the ring (she trains in a ring daily),
but CANNOT BE FORCED TO WORK A SAR JOB, the same same as
Jeff Dege CAN'T TRAIN HIS OWN DOG not to break command to
attack innocent furry critters despite his SHOCK COLLAR
trained reliable come command.
BWWWWWWAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!
> "Robin Nuttall" <robi...@mchsi.com> wrote in message
> news:mtYYa.102050$YN5.71125@sccrnsc01...
> > "EmilyS" <emil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:10011e64.03080...@posting.google.com...
> > > KWBrown <arfenarfNOS...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > <news:Xns93D162D2FF864ar...@130.133.1.4>...
> > > > "Robin Nuttall" <robi...@mchsi.com> wrote in
> > > > news:GKOYa.98019$YN5.69581@sccrnsc01:
> > > > > Basically if I had this dog I would take her to her
> > > > > "boundry" area for the creek--the place where she
> > > > > goes from being normal to frenzied.
> > > > > I would stop just at that line and ask for attention.
> > > > > I wouldn't command attention. Instead I would simply
> > > > > ignore any and all attempts to getto the stream, and
> > > > > wait for the dog to calm down and look at me.
> > > > > When I had focus, I would calmly release to the
> > > > > creek with a trigger word.
> > > > I think I'm going to take this approach with Storm
> > > > the next time she zooms at agility practice. I'll
> > > > bring her near the course and wait for attention
> > > > before we do anything - and become still and boring
> > > > the instant she loses focus. I don't want to shut
> > > > down all that drive, but she has *got* to pay
> > > > closer attention!
> > > > Kate
> > > the classic "solution" for ring zoomies is to run
> > > away and hide outside of the ring when she starts
> > > zooming. Everyone else is supposed to completely
> > > ignore her, as well.
> > > NO reinforcment.
> > > Presumably at some point, the brainz that have been
> > > leaking out of her head recede. And then she will
> > > notice "mom" is missing and she'll start looking for
> > > you rather frantically. Then someone alerts you and
> > > you come back, calling her excitedly.
> > Yes but that's more of a punishment. Not that it's not
> > a valuable tool, but we're talking about two different
> > things. One is asking for control before something happens
> > and rewarding control with access to the desired activity,
> > the other is reacting to a situation when it's already
> > gotten OUT of control.
> > Dogs with drive need to learn how to channel and direct
> > that drive. It's fun to watch them because it's great to
> > have a motivated dog and everyone is scared to shut them
> > down. On the other hand, you must be able to focus and
> > control that drive or you will never have a consistent
> > performer.
> > And the best way to do that is to help the DOG learn
> > how to reward himself.
> > Instead of you demanding something from him and the
> > situation continuing to escalate as you both get more
> > frenzied, you are calm and you simply wait for the dog
> > to be calm. This might be a LONG wait in some instances,
> > but you've got to do it.
> > And you have to know what you're looking for and
> > reward it *instantly* with a release to the desired
> > object/behavior.
> > So if my goal is to have attention from my dog at
> > the beginning of an agility routine, I will wait
> > for her to focus on me by looking at me for a few
> > seconds.
> > I will then release her to the equipment. As time
> > goes by, I will ask for more focus and direction.
> > Eventually I want her to be able to work with a
> > favored toy in full view, and know that she must
> > perform what I want to get it.
From: "The Puppy Wizard" <ThePuppyWiz...@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 18:23:20 GMT
Subject: Re: Thou Foul Beast, Thou Basest Worm...
HOWEDY robin,
You're a MENTAL CASE.
If you can't pupperly handle dogs you shouldn't
be takin care of them. Fancy that, you talkin
abHOWET "Thou Foul Beast, Thou Basest Worm..."
"Robin Nuttall" <robi...@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:fWSfc.3645$0b4.11722@attbi_s51...
> I have a houseguest this weekend, Jura, a Scottish
> import Springer. And Cala (2 year old Dobe) is just
> being SO insufferable. Now mind you, she knows this
> dog, she's known him since he was a baby puppy and
> he's now a year old. But she's discovered that as
> he's a mere MALE and she's a BITCH, she can reduce
> him to quivering jelly. And she's really, really
> enjoying it.
> I'm always reminded of the scene in McCaig's Nop's
> Trials where Nop totally falls in love with the b**ch
> in the next run, and for days she spurns him in formal
> verse. Cala is telling Jura,
> "Thou foul beast, thou basest worm, thou artst scum,
> thou art not fit to lick the dung from the bottom of
> mine feet."
> All this is accompanied by extravagant facial expressions,
> typically showing each of her 42 teeth in glorious, shining
> white.
> And poor Jura is awed.
> "Oh, thou artst beauteous, might I be permitted
> to worship thou toenails?"
> Now mind you, this is TOTALLY different than what
> happens when Nell stays here. Nell, dingo-dog, 10
> years old and 30 pounds of tough, walks into this
> house and owns it. Viva tolerates her benignly (just
> like she's doing with Jura). Cala gives her a very,
> very wide berth.
> Poor Jura.
A Poor Shepherd Boy And His Dog At His Masters Feet.
Mary Healey
> To further pursue your points about dog behavior, let's consider the
> fact that the vast majority of dog conflicts are dominance-related,
> and that it takes two to make a dog fight out of such an encounter.
Let's first consider the fact that the vast majority of dog conflicts are
clueless-owner related.
> Once one dog backs down, it's over.
Sometimes. Unless, of course, you use REAL pack dynamics and realize that
"not-pack" is going to get its butt kicked by "pack" and its relations.
Mary Healey
> for what it's worth, under the same circumstances, i don't
> think i would have done things any differently than Kelly did.
However my dogs get into these situations, it's my job to protect them
while they're there, and get them out without *their* being damaged.
Everyone else can look to their dog, I'm not putting their Fluffy's health
and safety before that of my own dogs.
"Call your dog before I kick it from here to hell", is a perfectly normal
response from a human in this situation, but it ain't polite. Then again,
rudeness begets rudeness, I find, and the only fault I find with kelly's
story is that she wasn't nearly as threatening toward that normal dog and
its clueless owner as I would have been.
Judy
news:fh87f.472491$_o.254865@attbi_s71...
> I'm around a lot of Goldens because I do agility. I have noticed two
> things that are extremely common to Goldens and those who own them.
>
> 1. The dogs, as a group, are obnoxiously friendly in a totally
> INappropriate way. Rushing up into a dog's face, even with a waggy tail
> and a "smile" is not.not.not appropriate dog greeting behavior. And they
> don't back off. They wiggle and wag and push and push.
>
> 2. The owners of the dogs have NO clue what appropriate dog behavior is,
> and excuse all of this totally inappropriate behavior by "oh he's just
> so FRIENDLY!!!" Aggression takes many forms. Aggressivly friendly is
> just as much a form of aggression as aggressively unfriendly.
I second this.
Common dog behavior at the entry gate is for the dogs to, sure, SEE each
other and be aware of the other dogs around them but there is usually much
less dog interaction than you would think. I do see a few, mostly older,
Goldens who just stand around there and basically stand in line like
everyone else. But the most common Golden scenario involves an owner who
has her Golden on a completely loose lead, letting the dog pretty much
wander around in everyone else's "space". And who then is surprised if
someone has a problem with that - or if the Golden gets involved in some
sort of confrontation.
You want to start a conversation at an agility trial about obnoxious dogs
and/or their clueless owners and the starting point is (for different
reasons) Goldens and Border Collies.
~~Judy
Janet Puistonen
> Janet Puistonen wrote:
>
>> Robin Nuttall wrote:
>
>>
>> You know, a bunch of other people are right now engaged in talking
>> about how different breeds act in different ways--to human eyes,
>> anyway--and how they sometimes seem not to understand each other's
>> approach and play behaviors. So why don't you go tell all of them
>> that their dogs don't approach other dogs the "correct" way, either?
>
> A lot of them don't (see my post about Kip, the obsequeously
> aggressive BT).
What I think their stories may point to is that there may not be a single
"correct" approach across all breeds. (Although obviously the reams of
behavioral stuff written on dogs would argue with that.) But it's been my
observation that most dogs generally sort things out pretty quickly if left
to meet on neutral ground without leashes. There are always axceptions.
> I'm around a lot of Goldens because I do agility. I have noticed two
> things that are extremely common to Goldens and those who own them.
>
> 1. The dogs, as a group, are obnoxiously friendly in a totally
> INappropriate way. Rushing up into a dog's face, even with a waggy
> tail and a "smile" is not.not.not appropriate dog greeting behavior. And
> they don't back off. They wiggle and wag and push and push.
>
> 2. The owners of the dogs have NO clue what appropriate dog behavior
> is, and excuse all of this totally inappropriate behavior by "oh he's
> just so FRIENDLY!!!" Aggression takes many forms. Aggressivly friendly is
> just as much a form of aggression as aggressively unfriendly.
>
> Yes, all dogs have greeting behaviors. And that of Goldens may be
> perfectly appropriate for other goldens. If they want to go mug each
> other with friendliness and be obnoxiously forward that's fine. But
> that doesn't make it appropriate for dogs in general. Many dogs hate
> it, which is why so many Golden owners seem to think other breeds are
> "mean." They aren't mean, they just don't like some strange dog to
> come flying up into their face and slobber all over them. Many dog
> breeds prefer a formal introduction and a bit of a warm-up period. That
> doesn't make those dogs bad or vicious. It actually makes them smart
> IMO.
FYI, this is actually my first golden. (Well, I now have a second golden,
but she's a puppymill product from rescue, who is laden with behavioral
issues, so she's hardly representative of what the breed should be.) Before
that, I had GSDs. So I am well acquainted with dogs with a completely
different temperament who appreciate a completely different style. Don't
count me among golden owners who think other breeds are "mean," etc.
But I don't think being agressively friendly is "dumb" and being reserved is
"smart" any more that I think that outgoing and friendly humans are "dumb"
and shy or reserved humans are "smart." Refraining from attaching such
value judgements to dog temperaments is smart, IMHO. One may like one kind
of temperament more than another, but it's really a matter of personal
taste.
culprit
"Janet Puistonen" <box...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:by77f.1129$0V6.832@trndny06...
>
> What got me about the OP was that she reported castigating the owner for
> letting his dog approach A PIT BULL, not for letting him approach a
leashed
> dog, a dog in a down stay, or whatever.
so you think that in my effort to edjumacate this idjit i should have just
let it slide that letting his offlead dog approach a breed with a high
likelihood of dog aggression is stoopid?
-kelly
Rocky
rec.pets.dogs.behavior:
>>> To further pursue your points about dog behavior, let's
>>> consider the fact that the vast majority of dog conflicts
>>> are dominance-related,
>>
>> some are, for sure, but "vast majority"?
>
> According to what most "dog experts" say. Would you agree
> to "most"?
I'm not a dog expert, though I sometimes play one. My
credentials are that I know a lot of dogs, participate in a lot
of events where there are multiple dogs, and see a lot of
disparate dogs in situations equally disparate.
My totally non-expert yet multitudinally empirically-based
opinion is that most dog conflicts are not dominance related.
Most issues seem to stem from space invasions, and space
protection is rarely a concern with a dominant dog.
Janet Puistonen
> And, IMO, an unleashed dog should not be allowed to interact *in
> any way* with a leashed dog unless both handlers are fine with
> it.
I'd agree. Anyone who has had a dog with any tendency to dog-aggression
should know that. The guy with the golden is, IMHO, probably not even
thinking about it. If he's never had a GSD or and Akita, or a pit or any
other breed with dog agression, it's probably not even on his radar. Does
that make him an idiot? Maybe. I think that's excessively harsh.
>> Certainly not worthy of branding the other dog
>> and its owner "idiots."
>
> I agree - the dog wasn't an idiot. Kelly: the GR wasn't an
> idiot, just the owner.
Okay, I'll agree to that. <G>
Janet Puistonen
It would have been better if she had told him that he shouldn't let his
UNLEASHED dog approach her LEASHED dog, who was moreover in a down stay. The
fact that he is a pit--which apparently isn't at all obvious--may be an
extra factor, but it isn't the key factor. All this guy has now learned is
that even pit owners think their dogs present a danger to other dogs, which
is unfortunate.
I hasten to add, though, that I don't find any fault with Kelly's actions at
all, because events like that are upsetting and it is hard to come out with
the perfect dog behaviorist bon mot in the circumstances. Besides, it wasn't
her fault, and she successfully controlled her dog.
How many times have those of us who have had Rotts, GSDs, Dobermans, or
whatever been approached by someone who asks "Does he bite?" "It depends" is
probably the most accurate answer, but who would give it?
Judy
> You know, a bunch of other people are right now engaged in talking about
how
> different breeds act in different ways--to human eyes, anyway--and how
they
> sometimes seem not to understand each other's approach and play behaviors.
I don't think there were very many people who read the original post who
were the tiniest bit surprised to read that the dog involved was a Golden.
Or to hear what the Golden owner's response to what could have been a bad
situation was.
> So why don't you go tell all of them that their dogs don't approach other
> dogs the "correct" way, either?
Which is why, unlike that Golden, our dogs are on leashes. And why we also
sometimes don't take them places where there may be idiot dogs and their
idiot owners. And why we don't assume that just because our dog is FRIENDLY
that it will be appreciated or even understood by other people and other
dogs.
You know, when two dogs have a confrontation, there is usually/often at
least some blame on both sides. But when one dog is unleashed in a public
area - and is clearly NOT completely under the owner's control or he would
have not left his side - and when that owner even when faced with the
possibility of what could have been a bad situation (no matter who was to
blame) remains clueless about the situation, I'm willing to jump in and
assign at least 51% of the blame to the unleashed side.
~~Judy
Janet B
<box...@verizon.net>, clicked their heels and said:
>The guy with the golden is, IMHO, probably not even
>thinking about it. If he's never had a GSD or and Akita, or a pit or any
>other breed with dog agression, it's probably not even on his radar.
Probably good that my first dog was dog aggressive - undoubtedly helpe
me to not be a clueless Golden owner. My Golden was never allowed to
act stupid or approach another dog without permission (after 15
months, he had no interest in doing so anyway, and little before that
- when he was with ME, he focused on ME). Of course, he wasn't stupid
in general. He was not obnoxious with other dogs, choosing to ignore
any that weren't another Golden, for the most part, unless they were
guests in our home. Then, all of the toys were brought out and
shared.
I had a Golden puppy here for a weekend a few years ago. Lucy
couldn't stand him. He was a typical won't-take-no-for-an-answer "you
must love me - I'm a Golden" Golden. Not all Golden puppies act like
that of course. In the 5 weeks we had Alex, Lucy thought he was just
fine. He knew how to entertain himself and actually paid attention to
other dogs' signals.
--
Janet B
www.bestfriendsdogobedience.com
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/bestfriendsobedience/album
Janet Puistonen
I think that you did the best you could in difficult circumstances. (I also
recall that you yourself have said that Manu doesn't look like a pit to a
lot of people, so the fact that he possibly didn't recognize him as such
doesn't make him an idiot.) I also think that if--as everyone seems to
agree--the crux of the matter is that your dog was leashed and his was not,
and that can be a recipe for trouble for *many* dogs, not just pits, it
would have been preferable if THAT were the point you impressed on him. But,
as I said, it is hard to come out with the perfect words in such
circumstances. I don't expect that of anyone. Well, maybe Diane Goodman. <G>
Robin Nuttall
> You want to start a conversation at an agility trial about obnoxious dogs
> and/or their clueless owners and the starting point is (for different
> reasons) Goldens and Border Collies.
Yep. And you're right. Totally different reasons, but both with real
problems and owners who simply don't have a clue. Although frankly I
think more BC owners have a clue than Golden owners. For every one
Golden owner who is sensible and clued in, I meet 10 who aren't.
culprit
> culprit wrote:
> > >
> Yes to all of the above. Of course, you didn't say any of that before...
sorry, common knowledge. my dog was leashed, the other was not, mine's not
a "nicey-nicey" breed, etc.
>
> I agree with you completely on the leashed/unleashed thing. If you had
said
> that the guy was unwise to let his dog approach a leashed dog, I would
have
> agreed with you. Of course, when people's unleashed dogs approach mine
when
> he's leashed, I don't have to worry for a second that my dog will initiate
> agression. But then my dog is an intelligent, well-bred golden with
correct
> golden temperament.
well i'm glad your dog enjoys having his privates snffed by strangers when
he is completely restrained and has no control over it. my dog hasn't quite
had all the dog bred out of him yet.
My last dog, who was a GSD, I wouldn't be so sure about.
> (For that matter, I absolutely hate it when people bring their obviously
> excited dogs over to greet mine when they are all on leashes, because it
is
> almost inevitable that the leashes will get tangled up and that way lies a
> lot of annoyance and potential for nasty incidents. Let them meet each
other
> when they are both off leash and can interact naturally, IMHO.)
yeah, bring your exuberent golden over to meet Manu naturally and let's see
how well that goes. :-(
>
> To further pursue your points about dog behavior, let's consider the fact
> that the vast majority of dog conflicts are dominance-related, and that it
> takes two to make a dog fight out of such an encounter. Once one dog backs
> down, it's over. So a person who knows that his dog will always surrender
> dominance doesn't tend to worry about getting into a dog fight if his dog
> greets another dog in a normal doggy way: by sniffing.
ok, now you make it extremely clear that you know little or nothing about
pit bull or other fighting breed behavior. these dogs were breed to fight
until their masters released them or until they died. no, Manu is not
*trained* to, but the wiring is there, just like your Golden might be hard
wired to chase a ball. never make assumptions about breeds you don't
understand.
>Now, that doesn't
> absolve this guy of a responsibility to have his dog under control and
obey
> leash laws, but on the other hand, I still don't see any evidence that
this
> guy's dog was out of control. Didn't he simply walk away when Manu lunged
at
> him?
um, he was OFF LEASH in a crowded public area full of animals. a shopping
center, not a dog park. this is clearly illegal, and the dog was sniffing
every damn dog (and cat carrier) he saw. i wouldn't call that "under
control". it was a damn kid, not some responsible adult.
>
> But what you *said* was the dog was an "idiot" simply for sniffing yours,
> and that the guy was an "idiot" for letting his dog approach a pit bull.
(A
> pit bull who, in another post, you said looked so little like one that
many
> people thought he was some kind of lab.)
no, since you keep bringing this up, i'll clarify. Manu is tall, and has a
labby muzzle. when he's running about, he doesn't look like the "typy"
short and thick pits you see on tv killing children or whatever they're
doing today. when he's sitting down and you look at that big head and
sloppy grin, you know he's at least part pit. he's not a brindle lab, he's
a tall pit with a long muzzle.
about the dog, sorry, goldens tend to be goofy dogs. i thought that was
their appeal. why kids like them. my grandparents had a golden, and we
loved her till the day she died. she was silly and gave sloppy kisses. she
was incredibly good with people, and kind of goofy around dogs.
>You said you told him it wasn't a
> good idea to let his dog approach a pit bull. Not for letting his
unleashed
> dog approach a leashed dog. It struck me that YOU were perpetuating the
idea
> that no pit is trustworthy.
um, no. i'm trying to *prevent* the type of incident that makes the local
news and makes everyone fear pitbulls. "Pit Bull Mauls Innocent Family
Golden Retriever Outside PetsMart" film at 11.
it's called being proactive. i love my breed. i do anything i have to to
prevent bad incedents, even if they sound a little rude to folks like you.
>Not to mention blaming this guy for the anxiety
> and unease you felt when your already over-stressed dog acted out in a way
> he normally night not have.
hell yeah, i blame him! if i didn't have a stressed dog in my hand, i
woulda called the damn cops.
-kelly
Robin Nuttall
>
> But I don't think being agressively friendly is "dumb" and being reserved is
> "smart" any more that I think that outgoing and friendly humans are "dumb"
> and shy or reserved humans are "smart." Refraining from attaching such
> value judgements to dog temperaments is smart, IMHO. One may like one kind
> of temperament more than another, but it's really a matter of personal
> taste.
I don't think dumbness and smartness are attached to reserve or
friendliness either. However I will fully admit that I don't think most
Goldens are the sharpest pencils in the box. Infinitely willing,
infinitely forgiving, able to be happy with anything, even if that
anything is drilling the same thing over and over 150 times a day--but
smart? Hmmmmm. They can certainly be trained to a very high level due to
their biddability. But I don't call most of them very smart.
Janet Puistonen
Hmmm...do you think that the two can really be separated? I don't get what
you mean by "space invasions," as opposed to, say, "interactions."
culprit
>
> It would have been better if she had told him that he shouldn't let his
> UNLEASHED dog approach her LEASHED dog, who was moreover in a down stay.
um, i seem to remember saying that...
> The
> fact that he is a pit--which apparently isn't at all obvious--
>may be an
> extra factor, but it isn't the key factor. All this guy has now learned is
> that even pit owners think their dogs present a danger to other dogs,
which
> is unfortunate.
no, it's good. pits very well may be a danger to other dogs, they're bred
to fight and kill other dogs. do you understand the term, "dog aggression"?
> I hasten to add, though, that I don't find any fault with Kelly's actions
at
> all, because events like that are upsetting and it is hard to come out
with
> the perfect dog behaviorist bon mot in the circumstances. Besides, it
wasn't
> her fault, and she successfully controlled her dog.
>
> How many times have those of us who have had Rotts, GSDs, Dobermans, or
> whatever been approached by someone who asks "Does he bite?" "It depends"
is
> probably the most accurate answer, but who would give it?
my dogs do not bite people. period. i have no problem saying that because
i believe it completely. when Manu landed on something in the yard and got
a puncture clear through part of the muscle structure, i was able to clean
it out with <cringe> alcohol, and he whined and leaned over and licked me.
nearly *any* dog would bite in that situation.
my dogs do not bite people. they do bit other dogs. and that's the warning
i'll give.
-kelly
culprit
"Rocky" <2d...@rocky-dog.com> wrote in message
news:Fri96F972E91707Aau...@rocky-dog.com...
> I'm not a dog expert, though I sometimes play one. My
> credentials are that I know a lot of dogs, participate in a lot
> of events where there are multiple dogs, and see a lot of
> disparate dogs in situations equally disparate.
>
> My totally non-expert yet multitudinally empirically-based
> opinion is that most dog conflicts are not dominance related.
> Most issues seem to stem from space invasions, and space
> protection is rarely a concern with a dominant dog.
thank goodness i don't see a lot of dog conflicts around here, but most of
what i see is resource related, or maybe a game of tug that just builds up
the excitement level a bit too high.
fortunately, my dogs have a "safe word"
"hey you idiots, what do you think you're doing?"
ok, maybe that's a phrase.
-kelly
Rocky
rec.pets.dogs.behavior:
> It is fascinating to me to watch different breeds meet and
> watch the different body stances - and that it actually
> works for them so much of the time.
This subject is extremely interesting because it hits so close
to home. In my household, after having so many breeds pass
through, I know who should be the doorman for new clients:
Friday, who loves low-key hairy dogs and deals well with
dominance; or Rocky, who tolerates and encourages puppies, is
dominant himself, yet backs off as required. Tag Team
Dog Daycare.
culprit
> INappropriate way. Rushing up into a dog's face, even with a waggy tail
> and a "smile" is not.not.not appropriate dog greeting behavior. And they
> don't back off. They wiggle and wag and push and push.
i'm beginning to think that Lola is a Golden Retriever. interesting, the
last Golden we knew was older and would pin her by the neck and growl ever
time he saw her.
perhaps they had traded braines?
-kelly
Janet Puistonen
> "Janet Puistonen" <box...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:J887f.6445$U2.1143@trndny04...
>> You know, a bunch of other people are right now engaged in talking
>> about how different breeds act in different ways--to human eyes,
>> anyway--and how they sometimes seem not to understand each other's
>> approach and play behaviors.
>
> I don't think there were very many people who read the original post
> who were the tiniest bit surprised to read that the dog involved was
> a Golden. Or to hear what the Golden owner's response to what could
> have been a bad situation was.
>
>> So why don't you go tell all of them that their dogs don't approach
>> other dogs the "correct" way, either?
>
> Which is why, unlike that Golden, our dogs are on leashes. And why
> we also sometimes don't take them places where there may be idiot
> dogs and their idiot owners. And why we don't assume that just
> because our dog is FRIENDLY that it will be appreciated or even
> understood by other people and other dogs.
You can consider the owner an idiot if you wish, but there are people one
sees, mostly living in cities, who walk around with their dogs unleashed all
the time. The dogs are not usually in heel position, but they are under
their owner's control. It sounded to me as if this guy was one of those.
Maybe not. (My dog, btw, is always on a leash unless he is in our yard or in
an "off-leash" dog area. The only time he approaches a leashed dog is if
they have chosen to bring their leashed dog into the off-leash area.)
> You know, when two dogs have a confrontation, there is usually/often
> at least some blame on both sides. But when one dog is unleashed in
> a public area - and is clearly NOT completely under the owner's
> control or he would have not left his side -
That is not clear to me, but then I wasn't there
> when faced with the possibility of what could have been a bad
> situation (no matter who was to blame) remains clueless about the
> situation, I'm willing to jump in and assign at least 51% of the
> blame to the unleashed side.
>
> ~~Judy
I do too.
Rocky
rec.pets.dogs.behavior:
> He runs around and barks,
> usually carrying a sneaker, but has no idea how to play
> with another dog.
FWIW, I received the bestest compliment this morning. Nanuk's
owner said that Nanuk, after being at my place for the day (her
first day) last week, she played spontaneously for the first
time with another dog. Being the ultimate bizness man, I took
full credit, even though my dogs did all the work.
Robin Nuttall
> Rocky wrote:
>>
>>My totally non-expert yet multitudinally empirically-based
>>opinion is that most dog conflicts are not dominance related.
>>Most issues seem to stem from space invasions, and space
>>protection is rarely a concern with a dominant dog.
>
>
> Hmmm...do you think that the two can really be separated? I don't get what
> you mean by "space invasions," as opposed to, say, "interactions."
Let me give an example. Cala is neither a dominant dog nor an aggressive
dog. In fact, she's a bit intimidated by strange dogs. She is very happy
to play with any dog after a few minutes (usually about 5) of
appropriate approach behavior. This includes the dog not invading her
close personal space (a space of about 12" to 18") without asking
permmission.
Cala is happy to totally ignore dogs if they leave her alone. I can have
her in very tight quarters at an agility trial with multiple dogs around
her and she will studiously not see them, not look at them, not try to
interact with them in any way.
However. Any dog who walks straight up to her without pause, or bounds
up to her, or puts their face directly in her face, or shoves their nose
up her butt--again, without any pause, without asking her
permission--that dog is going to see a lot of teeth and hear a lot of
noise. She's never marked another dog--not a bruise, not a puncture. But
her attitude is "who the hell are you, get the f*ck away from me."
That's not a dominance encounter. That's a space issue encounter. And
she is totally and absolutely in the right to react the way she does.
Unfortunately since I own one of "those" breeds, no matter what the
circumstance my dog gets called vicious. So, also unfortunately, I MUST
correct her when she chooses to react, because I can't afford not to do so.
My job then becomes to make 100% sure that no dog ever invades her space
in that way. She now understands that I will protect her from all those
rude dogs. That has greatly helped her reduce her reaction space. But I
have to protect her from more Goldens than any other dogs, by a pretty
darn large factor.
TO...@dog-play.com
> I actually read what Kelly wrote. I agree that it was the responsibility of
> the other owner to have his dog under control. However, I don't see
> approaching another dog and sniffing as out of control behavior in a dog. It
> is perfectly normal behavior in a dog. Certainly not worthy of branding the
> other dog and its owner "idiots."
Well it is equally normal for the dog that is being run up to feel either
fearful or annoyed by that approach. Because it omits all the signals
that say"I'm not aggressive". And the approaching dog is taking upon
itself to deprive the approached dog any ability to signal "don't bother
me."
I suppose there is an arguement to support calling behavior that occurs
often "normal" but that isn't the same as being "acceptable", nor does it
mean it should pass with a nod and a smile.
If a dog lacks the will or skill to use correct greeting behavior then the
dog and the dog's owner should naturally expect to be treated as rude.
Imposing one's self on another is rude in any social world and that
includes dogs. Butt sniffing and the like is something that "normally"
happens after other signals have been exchanged and indications of
interest in continuing introductions have occurred.
--
Diane Blackman
There is no moral victory in proclaiming to abhor violence
while preaching with violent words.
http://dog-play.com/ http://dogplayshops.com/
Tee
news:J887f.6445$U2.1143@trndny04...
>
> You know, a bunch of other people are right now engaged in talking about
> how different breeds act in different ways--to human eyes, anyway--and how
> they sometimes seem not to understand each other's approach and play
I know I started a sub-thread about Boxers and their greeting skills, or
lack thereof. If you're referring to me and/or shelly I don't think Robin
would feel the need to point out our breed's obnoxious behavior. We readily
admit to it and we also, as stated, are very careful when meeting strange
dogs. I tend to veer *away* from strange dogs for the sole purpose of
avoiding mistakes during greeting because I know my dog instigates confusion
and, sometimes, aggression.
--
Tara
Janet Puistonen
> On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 17:11:59 GMT, "Janet Puistonen"
> <box...@verizon.net>, clicked their heels and said:
>
>> The guy with the golden is, IMHO, probably not even
>> thinking about it. If he's never had a GSD or and Akita, or a pit or
>> any other breed with dog agression, it's probably not even on his
>> radar.
>
> Probably good that my first dog was dog aggressive - undoubtedly helpe
> me to not be a clueless Golden owner.
Yeah, well a lifetime of GSDs taught me that lesson too. And most of the
other golden owners I know personally are showing their dogs in comformation
and/or performance areas, and are definitely not clueless.
> My Golden was never allowed to
> act stupid or approach another dog without permission (after 15
> months, he had no interest in doing so anyway, and little before that
> - when he was with ME, he focused on ME). Of course, he wasn't stupid
> in general. He was not obnoxious with other dogs, choosing to ignore
> any that weren't another Golden, for the most part,
Will doesn't seem to have much interest in playing with other dogs either,
now that he's grown up. The major exception was a Vizla--unfortunately
deceased--that belonged to some friends. The two of them would run each
other to exhaustion.
culprit
"Melinda Shore" <sh...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:djirp3$3uc$1...@panix2.panix.com...
> And, BTW, I see off-leash dogs at the feed store all the
> time. I don't go to Petsmart so I don't know what goes on
> there, but I would expect a higher proportion of morons
> there than I would at the feed store.
as do i, which is why my dogs do go to feed stores, garden stores, or
farmer's markets.
but an off lead dog at a large shopping center kind of threw me for a loop.
-kelly
culprit
"shelly" <scouv...@bluemarble.net> wrote in message
news:Pine.BSF.4.56.05...@tesla.bluemarble.net...
>
> interesting. with harriet, what you've described is 100%
> aggressive behavior. she's very much like a Pit Bull in her
> warning signals. staring, tall ears, raised head, and
> standing still are warnings signs that, left to her own
> devices, she *will* attack the other dog.
>
> when she meets the rare dog that she doesn't feel compelled to
> dislike, she tends to crab toward it at an oblique angle, and
> pretend that she can't see it. that sort of approach seems to
> work well. when she's made up her mind that the other dog is
> playmate material, she starts play bowing. and boinging.
> and, generally, doing all sorts of ridiculous things that are
> apt to make the other dog rethink its decision to solicit play
> from her.
Manu's tough. when he doesn't like someone. he stands perfectly still,
staring. ears slightly forward, and that stupid gay tail of his straight
over his back. you can see his whole body lean slightly forward. his tail
might wave slowly over his back. when he decides they're ok, he leans
slightly back, and he tail moves faster.
that's it.
glad there aren't any dogs allowed to play with him unless i say so.
-kelly
culprit
"Tee" <crappol...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:3s4cohF...@individual.net...
> LOL, I haven't seen a hackly playing Boxer yet.
Lola does this too, all the way down her back, and a ring around her tail
puffs up!
-kelly
shelly
>I know I started a sub-thread about Boxers and their greeting
>skills, or lack thereof. If you're referring to me and/or
>shelly I don't think Robin would feel the need to point out
>our breed's obnoxious behavior.
i wouldn't think so. i'm--obviously--perfectly aware of my
dog's issues.
>We readily admit to it and we also, as stated, are very
>careful when meeting strange dogs.
yep. that doesn't mean that i don't take her places where
other dogs will be, but i *am* careful to try to limit it to
places where the expectation is that all dogs will be
restrained. she's perfectly capable of being in close
quarters with other dogs without reacting to them. she,
rightfully, draws the line at space invasion, though.
>I tend to veer *away* from strange dogs for the sole purpose
>of avoiding mistakes during greeting because I know my dog
>instigates confusion and, sometimes, aggression.
that, and there's no telling what the other dog/owner will do.
they're a completely unknown quantity, so even if my dog is
under good control, i can't guarantee that the other dog won't
make life difficult us.
--
shelly
http://www.cat-sidh.net
http://cat-sidh.blogspot.com/
shelly
>Manu's tough. when he doesn't like someone. he stands
>perfectly still, staring. ears slightly forward, and that
>stupid gay tail of his straight over his back. you can see
>his whole body lean slightly forward. his tail might wave
>slowly over his back. when he decides they're ok, he leans
>slightly back, and he tail moves faster.
>
>that's it.
that sounds familiar. elliott's "you must diediedie!" stance
was similar, including the tail carriage, except that his tale
was carried in an upright sickle and usually waved slowly back
and forth.
funnily enough, he was always easier for me to read than
harriet.
shelly
>Yeah, well a lifetime of GSDs taught me that lesson too. And
>most of the other golden owners I know personally are showing
>their dogs in comformation and/or performance areas, and are
>definitely not clueless.
you'll note that Judy and Robin have described obnoxious
Golden behavior that has occurred at performance events.
Rocky
rec.pets.dogs.behavior:
>> And, IMO, an unleashed dog should not be allowed to
>> interact *in any way* with a leashed dog unless both
>> handlers are fine with it.
>
> I'd agree. Anyone who has had a dog with any tendency to
> dog-aggression should know that.
But all dogs have a tendency towards dog aggression. It's only
the circumstances which differ.
> The guy with the golden is, IMHO, probably not even
> thinking about it.
That's the real issue.
> If he's never had a GSD or and Akita, or
> a pit or any other breed with dog agression, it's probably
> not even on his radar. Does that make him an idiot? Maybe.
If he's a uneducable dog owner, then he's an idiot who has
chosen to not take responsibility for his dog's actions. If he
had said "Sorry 'bout that", then he would have demonstrated
some form of responsibility.
> I think that's excessively harsh.
Perspective, I suppose.
culprit
>
> You can consider the owner an idiot if you wish, but there are people one
> sees, mostly living in cities, who walk around with their dogs unleashed
all
> the time. The dogs are not usually in heel position, but they are under
> their owner's control.
i think dog i do not live where you do!
-kelly
culprit
"culprit" <culp...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:3s4lc2F...@individual.net...
oops, should read do NOT go to feed stores, etc.
-kelly