# All Those Who Think Cesar Millans' Techniques Work...



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

It seems they aren't always as effective as his supporters would have him believe.... 

One of the dogs featured on his show, 'Cotton' has recently had his teeth filed down because the family found he reverted to his previous behaviour only a day after CM left. The family couldn't stop him biting, so took him back to CM for a follow up, at which point it was suggested they keep Cotton muzzled at all times. However, they ha dalready tried that and failed, so they had his teeth filed down instead. 

Last Chance for Biting Dogs, Dental Work | Dancing Dog Blog

I wonder how many other dogs have reverted to their previous behaviour once CM has left.... many trainer/behaviourists an dothers have been saying for ages that his 'behaviour modification' will not have any long term effects, it seems they may have been right all along...


----------



## wohic (Jun 19, 2006)

But thats down to the owners ! milan is so right when he states that its almost aways the owners that 'cause' the behaviour in the dogs, a lot of his cases are dogs that most people would have put to sleep, and he turns many around, just because not all owners keep up with the guidance that milan has taught and instigated it does not mean his methods have failed......... its rather like having a horse schooled to high dressage standards then putting her in the hands of a novice rider, she will soon become sloppy again.


----------



## ryanr1987 (Mar 7, 2009)

wohic said:


> But thats down to the owners ! milan is so right when he states that its almost aways the owners that 'cause' the behaviour in the dogs, a lot of his cases are dogs that most people would have put to sleep, and he turns many around, just because not all owners keep up with the guidance that milan has taught and instigated it does not mean his methods have failed......... its rather like having a horse schooled to high dressage standards then putting her in the hands of a novice rider, she will soon become sloppy again.


Agree 100%


----------



## Nebbz (Jan 27, 2008)

all i will say is...look at daddy...if hes that bad then how the hell did he convert a dog trained to viciously attack other dogs and kill them, to a dog that helps retrain them, Its the owners fault if they are not keeping up the training, training takes time and effort. it aint ever going to happen over night


----------



## Evie (Jan 28, 2008)

But he claims to rehabilitate dogs - which implies that they can function in their environment without his support. There's a big difference between bullying a dog into submission and changing its mind about what it perceives as a threat.


----------



## ryanr1987 (Mar 7, 2009)

ceaser is great hes firm with dogs which is what you need to be esp with dominant dogs too many soft owners around that let there dogs walk all over them the pack leader is meant to be strong,firm and that is what ceaser does


----------



## Evie (Jan 28, 2008)

Nebbz said:


> all i will say is...look at daddy...if hes that bad then how the hell did he convert a dog trained to viciously attack other dogs and kill them, to a dog that helps retrain them, Its the owners fault if they are not keeping up the training, training takes time and effort. it aint ever going to happen over night


If he was taking dogs and keeping them himself - fair enough but he is teaching people techniques that are potentially dangerous and very difficult to maintain. Part of being a behaviourist is recognising who the owner of the dog is and giving them techniques that are safe, non-confrontational and within their capabilities.


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

ryanr1987 said:


> ceaser is great hes firm with dogs which is what you need to be esp with dominant dogs too many soft owners around that let there dogs walk all over them the pack leader is meant to be strong,firm and that is what ceaser does


Urgh I hate the theory of problem dog = dominant dog. It's so one size fits all and promotes laziness in the trainer and abuse of the dog.


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

wohic said:


> But thats down to the owners ! milan is so right when he states that its almost aways the owners that 'cause' the behaviour in the dogs, a lot of his cases are dogs that most people would have put to sleep, and he turns many around, just because not all owners keep up with the guidance that milan has taught and instigated it does not mean his methods have failed......... its rather like having a horse schooled to high dressage standards then putting her in the hands of a novice rider, she will soon become sloppy again.


Cesar Millan claims to have cured these animals before leaving them with the owner alone though, doesn't he? So surely if it's common knowledge that owners not keeping up with the training means the dog reverts to it's problem behaviour, it must also be common knowledge that Cesar Millan does not and can not do what he claims to do, which is rehabilitate dogs within the program?


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

Surely someone who is "rehabilitated" from using drugs is "cured" and will never use drugs again, right?

Oh, wait, it doesn't work that way. If it becomes rewarding again to use drugs, then the person who's "cured" will use drugs. Sometimes that's just opportunity and sometimes that's negative things happening that make the user fall back on their own ways.

ANY obedience trainer will tell you that if you don't_ keep up with_ the training, you don't have a trained dog! It's no good if the trainer can get all the behaviours they want if you don't ensure that YOU also get the behaviours you want.


----------



## wohic (Jun 19, 2006)

KathyM said:


> Cesar Millan claims to have cured these animals before leaving them with the owner alone though, doesn't he? So surely if it's common knowledge that owners not keeping up with the training means the dog reverts to it's problem behaviour, it must also be common knowledge that Cesar Millan does not and can not do what he claims to do, which is rehabilitate dogs within the program?


never actually heard him say 'cure' he trains the owners and rehabilitates the dogs, drug addicts, anorexics, alchaholics etc can all rehabilitate but quickly fall by the way side again, its naive to think that a single day of training by any method by any trainer will be totally life changing , how ever when shown how to deal with the situations as they arise if that guidance is followed calmly then it should work long term

just as an example I had a very nervous Red Setter brought to me, that would not walk down the street let alone go in the show ring, as soon as he saw any one he would wet himself shake and cower, he had had no abuse and in fact was molly coddled......... I had him 7 days he went home a happy boisterous confident dog that would wander through a crowded street tail set high and wagging , proud of who he was, all i did with this dog was walk tall and proud and ignore his behavior, he was 100% improved after just one session as he took his strength and confidence from me.
two weeks later and despite many conversations with the owner he was back to his old self, yet with me he had been fine and was rehabilitated, his owners projected the fear on to him .. there actions caused his reactions and without them having a total change of direction the dog would never have changed.


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

wohic said:


> its naive to think that a single day of training by any method by any trainer will be totally life changing


Asolutely which is another reason to add to the many why Cesar Millan's show should not be on television lol. 

He doesn't rehabilitate anything, he temporarily forces them into complete fearful submission, films the result, then leaves them to either be put through this on a regular basis by their owners (who think they're doing right by abusing their dogs like he shows them how to) or revert within sometimes hours to the dog that was on the verge of PTS, while his short program takes credit for saving their lives. 

You're right, you have to be naive to think he is a good trainer that rehabilitates dogs. Shame people believe what they see on an edited TV program and are blinded by his hotpants and shiny white teeth (wurggghh). :lol2:


----------



## ryanr1987 (Mar 7, 2009)

KathyM said:


> Asolutely which is another reason to add to the many why Cesar Millan's show should not be on television lol.
> 
> He doesn't rehabilitate anything, he temporarily forces them into complete fearful submission, films the result, then leaves them to either be put through this on a regular basis by their owners (who think they're doing right by abusing their dogs like he shows them how to) or revert within sometimes hours to the dog that was on the verge of PTS, while his short program takes credit for saving their lives.
> 
> You're right, you have to be naive to think he is a good trainer that rehabilitates dogs. Shame people believe what they see on an edited TV program and are blinded by his hotpants and shiny white teeth (wurggghh). :lol2:


 i'd like to see you deal with dangeous dogs like he does. peopl are too soft with dogs. you need to show a dog whos boss.


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

You can lead a dog using positive methods only. I have. I have a 53kg rescue bullmastiff who came to me having had NO socialisation at all, not any, none. She is now 7 and knows who is in charge, without me once having had to yank, alpha roll, asphyxiate, beat, prod, or otherwise abuse her like Cesar Millan does. As a result, she is not a dangerous dog. I wouldn't have any dog trained with those methods in my house, they'd be a liability.


----------



## ryanr1987 (Mar 7, 2009)

KathyM said:


> You can lead a dog using positive methods only. I have. I have a 53kg rescue bullmastiff who came to me having had NO socialisation at all, not any, none. She is now 7 and knows who is in charge, without me once having had to yank, alpha roll, asphyxiate, beat, prod, or otherwise abuse her like Cesar Millan does. As a result, she is not a dangerous dog. I wouldn't have any dog trained with those methods in my house, they'd be a liability.


 thats just one dog. bullmastiffs are less dominant then some of the flock guarding dogs which need a firm hand. dogs such as caucasian ovcharkas and central asian ovcharkas,kangals,tibetan mastiffs,rotties,geman shepheds need a FIRM owner and you really need to show whos boss.


----------



## Evie (Jan 28, 2008)

ryanr1987 said:


> i'd like to see you deal with dangeous dogs like he does. peopl are too soft with dogs. you need to show a dog whos boss.


I really hate to do this ryan but isn't your dog that you raised from a pup a fear biter? Stop watchin Milan :bash:


----------



## ryanr1987 (Mar 7, 2009)

Evie said:


> I really hate to do this ryan but isn't your dog that you raised from a pup a fear biter? Stop watchin Milan :bash:


 nah she was a fear biter shes confident and now has no fear of strangers she was late one.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

dog owners usually are the ones needing training...

at least half, if not more, of dog owners haven't a clue.

most so-called animal loving dog owners need to be taken down to the creek and have their heads held under the water until the thrashing stops...

... cruelty is having dogs that have been made MENTAL from idiot owners...


... they love their dogs alright... till the dogs are paranoid, neurotic misfits that haven't a clue...


might as well raise your kids in a cellar... it's no less cruel... mentally.


... my dog is right... my old doberman was so awesome i used to give little back yard shows... very well adjusted.

ceasar has it right... i took his approach decades ago with my dogs... i had to understand the dog's mind and how it worked when i kept dogs...

... few dog owners have a clue as to how dogs think... all those grannies with their psycho fi-fi dogs are a great example...

dogs are higher animals... they have souls... what most, and i mean MOST dog owners put their dogs through mentally is nothing short of criminal... i would prefer the dog to be shot in the street dead than let them continue a bizarre, brain damaging life another day.

... like those monkeys and chimps... and big parrots even... they have complex minds and can be screwed up easily by well intentioned by misguided owners... 

... who's seen any of these nutter dogs??

if you know from experience what a well adjusted dog looks and acts like then you see them literally daily...

these dogs need shot and their owners hit with a vertical butt-stroke while we're at it... and never allowed to be near a dog again...


and these folks that want a billy-bad-*ss dog... then have to get rid of the monster they created... and blame the dog..

don't get me started on the retarded dog owners...

i'll go postal!:lol2:

ceasar has the proper holistic approach... dogs are not unlike a kid when it comes to raising them... in the sense that you can ruin or crush a kid's spirit and make them mentally scarred just as you can a dog...

... all thes arm chair dog experts we seem to have everywhere... argueing and disagreeing about dog training and keeping dogs...

REAL dog owners that have their s**t in one bag will tell you, the proofs in the pudding... a well adjusted, disciplined dog that is well content speaks for itself...

... even an old hillbilly like me can raise a fine dog... it's not rocket science as they say...

... most of these dog owners are either too lazy or too stupid to learn about dogs and get into their heads...

... we might as well let 7 year olds drive pickup trucks... it's no less wrong than what these MAJORITY of dog owners do!:whistling2:

good intentions don't cut it with dogs... go take all that LOVE and shove it...

dogs want sound leadership and they need structure and consistency...


all that baby talk and lovin'.... save it...

it's all about the pack with dogs... we humans always name things... it's what we do... dogs look for hierarchies in all things... that's how they are... we talk, dogs use body language...

... talk of permits... you should go to classes or take a test before you can get a dog... no, that would just validate these idiots by making them all certified...

... alright... my little rant is over...
:blush::lol2:
maybe it's a good thing that dogs have a short life as compared to us humans, they won't suffer for decades...: victory:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

too much???:blush:

:lol2::lol2:


----------



## ryanr1987 (Mar 7, 2009)

HABU said:


> too much???:blush:
> 
> :lol2::lol2:


:lol2: was a good read mate


----------



## Mischievous_Mark (Mar 16, 2008)

Hmmm i can see this thread getting locked for some reason 

Its amazing how one man can cause such arguements 

Truth be told i dont mind his train methods, as with all trainers they are all going to be different...


----------



## ryanr1987 (Mar 7, 2009)

Mischievous_Mark said:


> Hmmm i can see this thread getting locked for some reason
> 
> Its amazing how one man can cause such arguements
> 
> Truth be told i dont mind his train methods, as with all trainers they are all going to be different...


 :lol2: it's the threads with cesar millan,yellow anaconda witten in them that cause the most arguments on this forum


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

HABU said:


> dog owners usually are the ones needing training...
> most so-called animal loving dog owners need to be taken down to the creek and have their heads held under the water until the thrashing stops...
> ... cruelty is having dogs that have been made MENTAL from idiot owners...might as well raise your kids in a cellar... it's no less cruel... mentally. in the sense that you can ruin or crush a kid's spirit and make them mentally scarred just as you can a dog...
> ... we might as well let 7 year olds drive pickup trucks... it's no less wrong than what these MAJORITY of dog owners do!:whistling2:
> ...


:notworthy::notworthy:


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

GSD are very sensitive dogs and dont do well with hard, bullying owners and my Rottie was 15 weeks old when I got him and came from a hard bullying breeder he was a very fearful puppy and although now he loves people and is a very sweet dog he still wets himself and cowers if anyone shouts loudly.
There is a difference between kind, firm training and harsh bully boy tactics and the end result is very dramatic.

EDIT Cesar Milan is a behavourist NOT a Trainer


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Mischievous_Mark said:


> Hmmm i can see this thread getting locked for some reason
> 
> Its amazing how one man can cause such arguements
> 
> Truth be told i dont mind his train methods, as with all trainers they are all going to be different...


 
why?

dogs are dogs... for the most part...

... how many ways can you tied a square knot?

most dogs spend their day confused...

... this is the problem, or one of them... too many cooks trying to make the same recipe but differently...

a well adjusted dog want to please his packleader... they want praise... 


dogs can be trained passively even... they will learn what they need to do if the master is aware of how dogs think...

... i know how to train a dog... teach it things. my old dog knew his hand signals even... habu, my old dobie was a wonder dog in many people's minds that knew him...

... teaching/leading a dog is a life long process... a dog will naturally fall into step if he is lead well by a good pack leader...

... teaching a dog is merely showing him your rules... clearly.

... training is giving a dog a job... letting him get good at that job... and it's a conduit for the dog to recieve positive attention from the pack leader... what all dogs crave... if they haven't been ruined yet..


... dogs live in the moment... as a dog owner, you have to think in the moment... think like a dog... the way you carry yourself, your bearing and as ceasar says, "your energy" must be perfected by the owner of the animal...

... i can walk into a room with a dog there that i have never laid eyes on before and i can communucate with it just by my bearing... the owner won't even realise it...

... a dog can sense the kind of person you are and what your mood is just by putting all the non verbal clues together...

they say a real man is someone who animals come to... let you get close to them... domestic or wild... because you're not a percieved threat...

... cats too...

but dogs pick up on a person's vibes... your energy. when a dog sees me walk into the room, after a minute or two, he sees a pack leader...

i'm not bragging and i haven't been to any fancy dog schools but i've worked endless hours with lots of dogs... i have had many rewarding bonds with dogs... i am a dog guy by my nature...

... now everyone has their own ways in these matters but!...

... any dog people worth their salt all go to the same place and all have shared principles... they become innate handlers... you learn and practice your ways and mannerisms so well that it becomes second nature to you... you just know what's right and what's wrong... you know what your dog is going to do before he does... you can tell what they are thinking and how they feel in much the same ways as dogs do people...


... you can't play the role of pack leader, you have to BE the packleader... it's a state of mind...

... dogs don't want to be in charge... that's why they suck at it... they want and respect a powerful, fair and natural leader... it comforts them knowing that their pack leader is in control and a no nonsense leader... dogs want only to know the rules... and to them rules are sacred... they should never change... people are inconsistant... this greatly upsets a dog... there is no room for chaos in a pack... it's destabilizing to a pack... that's why dogs gravitate to and need order...

... you can't hurt a dog's feelings... or embarass him... a dog can feel as though he's disappointed his leader... or sense the leaders displeasure... but they as i said, live in the moment... all is forgiven with a well adjusted dog if the master says so... they don't hold grudges or get depressed if they are sound in the mind...

... they vie for the pack leader's attention... the pack leader is their rock... it's what anchors them...

a stupid owner that is inconsistant and worse, stresses a dog out..

... they can tell when their packleader is lame... they sometimes are forced in their doggy minds, to step up and be the pack leader... because their own leader sucks so badly... and these dogs ALWAYS do the packleader thing with people badly... unacceptable behaviors will happen... because a dog is doing what he doesn't want to do... be the packleader...

a dog will strive to emulate a great leader... these are the old, wise dogs that are true jewels... they have learned how to be a good dog and use good judgement from their master... leadership by example is a hallmark of a good packleader


now honestly, how many folks think about these things when the think about their dogs???

... i may be so full of crap that my hair stinks here with what i think... but i consider myself pretty decent with dog flesh...

... if you aren't going to take your dog seriously and raise it right... then you have no business with a dog.

little old ladies can be great pack leaders... it's not complex or unnatural...


... nice as some owners are and in spite of how much they love their dog... it's an injustice to the dog to be a pushover or a "NICE" owner..

... dogs look for your weaknesses and will push the envelope of what they can get away with..

i never hit dogs... i wear my displeasure and dissapoinment with them on my sleeve... where they can sense it... having your master displeased with you is the ultimate fear of a good dog... a fine dog will just shut it all down when he know he dissapointed his packleader...


... these mental basket cases that 90% of dog owners create often don't know these things... some don't even know how to be a dog anymore because of their owners...

i hate retarded dogs... mentally dinged-up dogs are a scourge... they aren't even dogs... just crap factories...

... forget dog training...owners need to work on themselves... in all but a small minority of of dog owners...

lots of people have it right... but oceans of people do not!: victory:

most dog owners are just slowly destroying their dogs... it can take years sometimes to completely turn a dog's mind into so much mashed potatoes... then it's too late.

now they're giving dogs chill pills... vet's playing shrink...

jesus H. christ!:lol2: it's come to that now!


----------



## wohic (Jun 19, 2006)

HABU said:


> dog owners usually are the ones needing training...
> 
> at least half, if not more, of dog owners haven't a clue.
> 
> ...


habu I think I love you :notworthy: absolutely spot on.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Shell195 said:


> GSD are very sensitive dogs and dont do well with hard, bullying owners and my Rottie was 15 weeks old when I got him and came from a hard bullying breeder he was a very fearful puppy and although now he loves people and is a very sweet dog he still wets himself and cowers if anyone shouts loudly.
> There is a difference between kind, firm training and harsh bully boy tactics and the end result is very dramatic.
> 
> EDIT Cesar Milan is a behavourist NOT a Trainer


 
you don't bully dogs.. you dominate them... huge difference... and puppies are babies... their minds are not nearly fully developed... you have to be very slow and gradual... their brains are wireing themselves as pups... how you work with them decides what kind of mind they will have later in life... they are putty... patience, repetition, and consistency is the key


and what by the way folks is a dog trainer anyway?

trainers work for the military and police... but these are specialty dogs... tools.

what are our pet dogs?... and this dog trainer stuff?

civilian dogs don't need so called trainers.. they need masters... benevolent , firm masters who are all about the dog...

pet dogs are family members... not tools.

where are the kid trainers? people trainers?:lol2:

pack leaders don't need trainers..


----------



## Mischievous_Mark (Mar 16, 2008)

HABU said:


> you don't bully dogs.. you dominate them... huge difference... and puppies are babies... their minds are not nearly fully developed... you have to be very slow and gradual... their brains are wireing themselves as pups... how you work with them decides what kind of mind they will have later in life... they are putty... patience, repetition, and consistency is the key
> 
> 
> and what by the way folks is a dog trainer anyway?
> ...


there in the local schools they are called Teachers :whistling2:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

wohic said:


> habu I think I love you :notworthy: absolutely spot on.


 
haha!! have a twinkie on me!!:2thumb:: victory:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Mischievous_Mark said:


> there in the local schools they are called Teachers :whistling2:


 
teachers don't raise your children... would you want them to?


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)




----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

HABU said:


> you don't bully dogs.. you dominate them... huge difference... and puppies are babies... their minds are not nearly fully developed... you have to be very slow and gradual... their brains are wireing themselves as pups... how you work with them decides what kind of mind they will have later in life... they are putty... patience, repetition, and consistency is the key
> 
> 
> and what by the way folks is a dog trainer anyway?
> ...


 
I agree Habu but hitting a puppy with a mop until it cowers and pees in fear is bullying not dominating it just creates a fearful puppy.

Why when you type do I have this image of you sat in a rocking chair with a wisp of grass in your mouth, I even hear a deep south accent saying the words:blush:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Shell195 said:


> I agree Habu but hitting a puppy with a mop until it cowers and pees in fear is bullying not dominating it just creates a fearful puppy.
> 
> Why when you type do I have this image of you sat in a rocking chair with a wisp of grass in your mouth, I even hear a deep south accent saying the words:blush:


 
haha!!!











not far off...



.. and about hitting a dog... you don't do it...

a dog will be distrustful of you... the more you hit a dog the more distrustful it will become... until you and the dog have a strained relationship...

... a dog and being the pack leader is based all on trust.

break the trust and all is lost... it cripples the whole point of having dogs..

... violence begets violence... a dog will always remember these things...

GSD or doberman has the mind of a three year old... they can understand like 160 words... not commands.. words...

break the trust and you break the bond...


as kid rock once sang in a song..." you get what you put in... and people get what they deserve..." 

... this is true in all things... don't do that which you are unwilling to give your full attention and effort...

... i bet more than a few people on this forum have never seen a well adjusted dog... they are a delight to behold... sadly, few dogs ever reach their full potential... people are selfish in these amtters..

it's almost always about them... what they like.

when you assume dog ownership you must make it about the animal... develope the animal... whatever it's breed...


fish or cut bait.: victory:


----------



## Berber King (Dec 29, 2007)

Habu :2thumb:


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

HABU said:


> haha!!!
> 
> image
> 
> ...


 

You are so wise Habu I wish others were more like you:notworthy: You have a deep understanding of many things, maybe you should open a training class then there would be less damaged dogs in the world.
"The Habu Dog Owner training program"


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

i believe i have killed another thread... i have a habit of doing that occasionally!:lol2:


please... continue... i'll not disrupt any further...:whistling2:


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

midori said:


> It seems they aren't always as effective as his supporters would have him believe....
> 
> One of the dogs featured on his show, 'Cotton' has recently had his teeth filed down because the family found he reverted to his previous behaviour only a day after CM left. The family couldn't stop him biting, so took him back to CM for a follow up, at which point it was suggested they keep Cotton muzzled at all times. However, they ha dalready tried that and failed, so they had his teeth filed down instead.
> 
> ...


Poor dog! :devil:


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

HABU said:


> too much???:blush:
> 
> :lol2::lol2:



Oh no dear. I'd say a well balanced, to the point post which highlighted just the right bits. You ought to do public speaking. You'd be ever so good at it.:flrt:


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

Shell195 said:


> GSD are very sensitive dogs and dont do well with hard, bullying owners and my Rottie was 15 weeks old when I got him and came from a hard bullying breeder he was a very fearful puppy and although now he loves people and is a very sweet dog he still wets himself and cowers if anyone shouts loudly.
> There is a difference between kind, firm training and harsh bully boy tactics and the end result is very dramatic.
> 
> EDIT Cesar Milan is a behavourist NOT a Trainer


 Cesar Milan isn't about being harsh or bullying though. He is about being someone a dog can look to for guidance, protection and discipline.
Earlier this year I sold one of my chihuahua puppies to a lady who I vetted carefully, met twice etc. She sounded perfect and had owned the breed before. She had the listtle dog 3 days and phoned me to say he kept peeing himself when she picked him up and was terrified to go into the garden. I drove like the wind and was at her house in 2 hours (Milton Keynes from Wisbech) I knocked on the door, picked up the dog, handed her her money and asked for his paperwork.
He'd been gone 3 days and he smothering and mothering of him had turned him into a terrified dog with her. When I went to fetch him, he took one look at me and ran towards me and didn't piddle or yelp when I picked him up as she'd said he did with her.
I still have him, I decided to keep all 3 puppies and never breed any more if she was the sort of idiot who wanted the breed. Here, he is a normal bouncy little dog who comes down to the goats with me, hares around like a nutter, jumps all over Ursa when he lays on the floor and play fights with the other little dogs.
I don't bully any of my dogs. I'm not harsh with them. No alpha rolling or yanking, tugging, slapping or anything else. I couldn't if I wanted to cos my arthritis means they are faster than I am. 
However, I do expect good manners and respect from them and I get it simply because I am a domineering sort of person in life. Body language and eye contact is what I use and it's what they understand. Chalky came on leaps and bounds too, from being an utter brat when he got turfed out of the car in front of the cottage 2 years ago, to being a loving, affectionate, polite and obedient dog who adores me. His previous owners would not recognise him. And he wasn't a youngster either. I put him at around 5 years old back then. I guess I must be doing something right and I like the way Cesar deals with dogs and his thinking.
I never really understood the 'ignore the bad but reward the good' training method. I mean, should I have ignored Chalky when he was mauling the chickens or chasing the goats? When he bit someone, should I have ignored it and told the person with the sore bum to do the same? The same methods have been used on children for the last several years and look at the little hooligans that has produced.
Punish the bad and praise the good is my philosophy. It was the philosophy I used when training my son to become a decent human being.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

fenwoman said:


> Cesar Milan isn't about being harsh or bullying though. He is about being someone a dog can look to for guidance, protection and discipline.
> Earlier this year I sold one of my chihuahua puppies to a lady who I vetted carefully, met twice etc. She sounded perfect and had owned the breed before. She had the listtle dog 3 days and phoned me to say he kept peeing himself when she picked him up and was terrified to go into the garden. I drove like the wind and was at her house in 2 hours (Milton Keynes from Wisbech) I knocked on the door, picked up the dog, handed her her money and asked for his paperwork.
> He'd been gone 3 days and he smothering and mothering of him had turned him into a terrified dog with her. When I went to fetch him, he took one look at me and ran towards me and didn't piddle or yelp when I picked him up as she'd said he did with her.
> I still have him, I decided to keep all 3 puppies and never breed any more if she was the sort of idiot who wanted the breed. Here, he is a normal bouncy little dog who comes down to the goats with me, hares around like a nutter, jumps all over Ursa when he lays on the floor and play fights with the other little dogs.
> ...


So how did you punish Chalky for chasing the chickens?


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

i had previously wrote an epic post ... the best post ever written on a forum...ever to post here... but i got kicked off the net and i lost it...

i'm not completely over it... almost...: victory:


i'm about to bust though... i kinda want to lay out my thoughts on the matter of keeping dogs... just to put it out there for folks to dissect...


i believe i have a powerful philosophy to share went it comes to dogs... they are so dear to me...

(don't let any americans know i said dear...:lol2

but i don't think that i can duplicate my original post that was erased...

it came from somewhere inside me... i do that sometimes... the words just spill out by themselves... i just type what my mind is saying... a very detached thing...


... i should really stay away from dog threads... people would get upset with my frankness and honesty...


... dogs are cursed by their commonality... and people take for granted common things sadly.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

HABU said:


> i had previously wrote an epic post ... the best post ever written on a forum...ever to post here... but i got kicked off the net and i lost it...
> 
> i'm not completely over it... almost...: victory:
> 
> ...


 OT. Are there any Shawnee people where you live? Or any forest for that matter. I picture you in an ancient log cabin right in themiddle of the forest somewhere. Am I close?


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

fenwoman said:


> OT. Are there any Shawnee people where you live? Or any forest for that matter. I picture you in an ancient log cabin right in themiddle of the forest somewhere. Am I close?


 
shawnee indians?


there are lots of cabins here... log cabins that people have... beyond awesome... i have pics of a few somewhere... a log cabin completes the rustic, pioneer nature of this place...:2thumb:


they are very popular here.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

HABU said:


> shawnee indians?
> 
> 
> there are lots of cabins here... log cabins that people have... beyond awesome... i have pics of a few somewhere... a log cabin completes the rustic, pioneer nature of this place...:2thumb:
> ...


 Yes Shawnee indians. Do you live in a log cabin in the forest?


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

fenwoman said:


> Yes Shawnee indians. Do you live in a log cabin in the forest?


 
i live in an old farm house but there this trailer i may be buying very soon... don't laugh please!:lol2:


a fine trailer for $1,500.... and they wanted cash but haven't sold it yet.. now they want to talk to me... i knew they stood a weak chance of selling it outright... i may get it and make a few payments and buy it... and then, after it's mine... i'll find me a couple acres right in the state forest here and get it moved from the lot to my land...


i still have my veteran's guarenteed loan yet unused.... 


... set myself up for my old age... wild turkeys and copperheads in my garden... i want a proper creek too... and timber.... with the 100 square mile forest here as my back yard...


... my plans are coming to fruition it seems.... i must be living right.: victory:


then i can breed my dogs and train them... maybe get another trailer, fix it up and have guests stay on my spread.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

fenwoman said:


> Yes Shawnee indians. Do you live in a log cabin in the forest?


 


















here's some artifacts from here... arrowheads and things turn up on the river bottoms where they have plowed fields... the rain exposes them... tons of articats... they sell arrowheads at the flea markets... farmers have huge collections from the shawnee...


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

HABU said:


> i live in an old farm house but there this trailer i may be buying very soon... don't laugh please!:lol2:
> 
> 
> a fine trailer for $1,500.... and they wanted cash but haven't sold it yet.. now they want to talk to me... i knew they stood a weak chance of selling it outright... i may get it and make a few payments and buy it... and then, after it's mine... i'll find me a couple acres right in the state forest here and get it moved from the lot to my land...
> ...


 Well pardon my language but................sod the copper heads. They'd be garden-spade heads if it was my garden <shudder>
How can you keep dogs safe with poisonous snakes about?
Apart from the snakes, it sounds very nice.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

HABU said:


> image
> 
> image
> here's some artifacts from here... arrowheads and things turn up on the river bottoms where they have plowed fields... the rain exposes them... tons of articats... they sell arrowheads at the flea markets... farmers have huge collections from the shawnee...


That's fascinating. Are there Shawnee still living? When I lived in Canada there was a reservation a couple of hours drive away. They made a living from gambling and selling duty free cigarettes.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

fenwoman said:


> That's fascinating. Are there Shawnee still living? When I lived in Canada there was a reservation a couple of hours drive away. They made a living from gambling and selling duty free cigarettes.


 
no, some wannabe's here that have some shawnee blood.... and claim to be shawnee... like i have a good amount of cherokee in me... but i don't walk around thinking i'm an indian...

... i am of british blood but i don't run around like the irish americans here acting like they just got off the boat...:lol2:


now down a ways from me is cherkee north carolina... in the smokeys... they have the eastern tribe there of cherokee... and then there is the western tribe that are descended from the cherokee from the trail of tears that president jackson ordered... my cherokee people were the ones that hid out in the hills of eastern kentucky during the trail of tears.... they avoided getting rounded up... and since the cherokee were the "civilized" tribe... they intermarried there where i'm from when it was safe... lot's of scot-irish men took squaws as wives... few women were in those hills other than indians.

ever heard of the serpent mound?... it's right up the road from me... lots of indian mounds are here from the mound builder indians... the miami indians were big here too

the cherokee and shawnee were bitter enemies... shawnee forest was the shawnee hunting grounds....


my county, scioto county is the shawnee word for deer...: victory:


i know my history here...:2thumb:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

fenwoman said:


> Well pardon my language but................sod the copper heads. They'd be garden-spade heads if it was my garden <shudder>
> How can you keep dogs safe with poisonous snakes about?
> Apart from the snakes, it sounds very nice.


 
teach them to stay clear of rattlesnakes and copperheads...


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

fenwoman said:


> Yes Shawnee indians. Do you live in a log cabin in the forest?


 

i wish!!:2thumb:


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

fenwoman said:


> Well pardon my language but................sod the copper heads. They'd be garden-spade heads if it was my garden <shudder>
> How can you keep dogs safe with poisonous snakes about?


By training your dogs not to approach snakes.

My parents worked bird dogs on the West Mesa near Albuquerque, there were rattlers *everywhere* and my parents just plain taught the dogs to recognise snake-smell and AVOID it at all costs.

Surely you don't kill adders on your land, Fenny?


----------



## sarahc (Jan 7, 2009)

*cesar milan*

I've read both his books and found them helpful although I'm told the program gives a different perspective.Incidently Daddy was never a trained attack dog,Cesar has had from a puppy and he's always been a model citizen of a pitbull.


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

Yes, I often hear people say he rehabilitated Daddy from being a fighting pit bull (and use it as some sort of evidence of his efficacy as a miracle life-saving trainer) but then others say he has had him since a puppy. I don't know which is true but it'd be interesting to know.


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

KathyM said:


> Yes, I often hear people say he rehabilitated Daddy from being a fighting pit bull (and use it as some sort of evidence of his efficacy as a miracle life-saving trainer) but then others say he has had him since a puppy. I don't know which is true but it'd be interesting to know.


 
CM has had him since four months old. 

Cesar Millan - Pack Profiles - Daddy


----------



## sarahc (Jan 7, 2009)

*daddy*

the story of Daddy is in the book Cesar has written himself.The dog was bought as a tiny puppy by a black rapper,hence the name.He handed him to Cesar for training with the instructions to give him back a dog he could take anywhere.That is exactly what Daddy has become and he has stayed with Cesar who holds him in very high regard.I liked Cesar from reading the books,I think he really cares.I have now bought season one of the dog whisperer but haven't watched yet.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

Ssthisto said:


> By training your dogs not to approach snakes.
> 
> My parents worked bird dogs on the West Mesa near Albuquerque, there were rattlers *everywhere* and my parents just plain taught the dogs to recognise snake-smell and AVOID it at all costs.
> 
> Surely you don't kill adders on your land, Fenny?


 There are no adders on my land. The fens are not adder habitat generally. I'm not sure how I would react if I found several adders had taken up residence on my land. I don't think I'd be very happy about it though what with all the dogs plus cats, plus silly innocent puppies who didn't know that adders didn't like to be played with.
I have no knowledge of snakes at all. I don't keep them myself and don't think I would. I prefer my pets to be those which can show emotions or which can display that they rather like me. My dislike of snakes in the wild probably comes from not understanding them, plus the fact that they could kill animals which I have a strong emotional attachment to, makes them undesireable in my eyes.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

HABU said:


> no, some wannabe's here that have some shawnee blood.... and claim to be shawnee... like i have a good amount of cherokee in me... but i don't walk around thinking i'm an indian...
> 
> ... i am of british blood but i don't run around like the irish americans here acting like they just got off the boat...:lol2:
> 
> ...


 Never heard of serpent mound,nor the trail of tears. I am about to google both though so I will know. I find history fascinating. The Polish people say that to be well balanced and succesful in life, you need to keep one eye focussed on the past and one on the future. If you focus both on the future alone, you will never succeed.
I have Romany gypsy blood inme. It's pretty diluted though so like you and your indian blood, I cannot call myself Gypsy. I do feel some affinity towards Romany folk though and can understand some of the cant (language) and some of the words used. While I cannot call myself Romany, I cannot either call myself Gorgio (non Gypsy) because I'm not 100% that either. I guess you and I are pretty lucky really to have such a varied cultural history in our genes.
I must admit, I tend to wonder how Indian people feel when they know that once, the whole of the continent belonged to them and now it belongs to the white man. It is the same for Africa and Australia I suppose, although in Africa, the native man is once more in control.
I bet the Indians wish that they had slaughtered the first white men and carried on killing any who came because this mioght have meant that instead of the status quo, they would be in control of their own lands instead of feeling like squatters in it.
If people tried to come and set up home on my modest bit of land, I would drive them off it and if more and more came and took over, killed and ate all my animals and left me with nothing but the upstairs of my cottage, I know I would wish I'd fought harder to defend what was mine.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

when i get some land i'm stocking it with critters... and i'll feed and attract the local wildlife to it... raise a flower garden and grow some food plants for the critters...

i want humming birds everywhere and deer walking around...

i want my own mini nature preserve and a safe zone during hunting seasons...

i want box turtles in the yard and fence lizards skittering about... maybe a frog pond by the dreek..

a real habu-land if you will....

then i'll sit back on my porch and soak it all in...


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

fenwoman said:


> Never heard of serpent mound,nor the trail of tears. I am about to google both though so I will know. I find history fascinating. The Polish people say that to be well balanced and succesful in life, you need to keep one eye focussed on the past and one on the future. If you focus both on the future alone, you will never succeed.
> I have Romany gypsy blood inme. It's pretty diluted though so like you and your indian blood, I cannot call myself Gypsy. I do feel some affinity towards Romany folk though and can understand some of the cant (language) and some of the words used. While I cannot call myself Romany, I cannot either call myself Gorgio (non Gypsy) because I'm not 100% that either. I guess you and I are pretty lucky really to have such a varied cultural history in our genes.
> I must admit, I tend to wonder how Indian people feel when they know that once, the whole of the continent belonged to them and now it belongs to the white man. It is the same for Africa and Australia I suppose, although in Africa, the native man is once more in control.
> I bet the Indians wish that they had slaughtered the first white men and carried on killing any who came because this mioght have meant that instead of the status quo, they would be in control of their own lands instead of feeling like squatters in it.
> If people tried to come and set up home on my modest bit of land, I would drive them off it and if more and more came and took over, killed and ate all my animals and left me with nothing but the upstairs of my cottage, I know I would wish I'd fought harder to defend what was mine.


 
the cherokee lived as white men did... they had their own alphabet... they grew crops and lived in cabins..

the supreme court here agreed with the cherokee when they were to be moved west of the mississippi... but president jackson ignored the court ruling and illegally rounded the cherokee up and made them walk all the way from the appalachians to the designated indian lands west of the mississippi... thousands died along the way... that's a very long walk... and only the most fit survived...

... sad days those were and criminal...


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

HABU said:


> the cherokee lived as white men did... they had their own alphabet... they grew crops and lived in cabins..
> 
> the supreme court here agreed with the cherokee when they were to be moved west of the mississippi... but president jackson ignored the court ruling and illegally rounded the cherokee up and made them walk all the way from the appalachians to the designated indian lands west of the mississippi... thousands died along the way... that's a very long walk... and only the most fit survived...
> 
> ... sad days those were and criminal...


 I've just read about it. Sadly in those days, anyone not white was conidered only a little above an animal . Slavery was still in existance too so the indians were merely a nuisance which needed to be removed. Shameful really by today's standards, although according to what I've just read, some of the ordinary foot soldiers who were involved in forcing them to move and burned their homes and killed indians, hated what they were being made to do.Flipping politicians through the ages have always caused misery.


----------



## SnakeBreeder (Mar 11, 2007)

It's all down to the owners.
Some people are just not suitable to have pets.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

Zoo-Man said:


> So how did you punish Chalky for chasing the chickens?


Ask again


----------



## wohic (Jun 19, 2006)

Zoo-Man said:


> Ask again




how would you deal with it ?


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

wohic said:


> how would you deal with it ?


Well for a start, keep the dog & chickens apart by means of a good sturdy chicken pen!


----------



## wohic (Jun 19, 2006)

Zoo-Man said:


> Well for a start, keep the dog & chickens apart by means of a good sturdy chicken pen!



:gasp: not great for the chickens though, they fair far better when free ranged.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

wohic said:


> :gasp: not great for the chickens though, they fair far better when free ranged.


I'm sure Fenwoman has enough land to provide a big enough enclosure for her chickens. Surely far better for the chickens to be in a secure pen than to be in the mouth of a terrier.


----------



## Charlottie (Oct 4, 2008)

Well put the chickens away from the dog hes out, i know this could be a problem or she could use postive methods to train the dog to stay away from chickens! im also interested to know how she did this using milians methods, HABU has already stated he has trained his dogs to stay away from adders without violence towards the dog! 
I am always intergied (sp??) by how training works and different methods. 
I personally dont agree with milians methods i think that he is proteyed(sp) as a trainer that can help the dog change even after he has left - which has been proved wrong in this case!! I agree with other that postive methods can work really well with dogs i dont own any dogs but have seen many examples, of a dog which has been trained well with positive methods.


----------



## Emmaj (Dec 3, 2007)

but she trained him out of that so she has no need to have seperate places for them :gasp:


----------



## wohic (Jun 19, 2006)

Zoo-Man said:


> I'm sure Fenwoman has enough land to provide a big enough enclosure for her chickens. Surely far better for the chickens to be in a secure pen than to be in the mouth of a terrier.[/QUOTE
> 
> IMO far better to allow all the animals to have a good quality of life and for the terrier to learn to be among the chickens without chasing them rather than imprisoning the chickens so they cant roam, clear the land and generally do chickey things
> 
> if a dog chased a cat would you pen the cat up or train the dog to leave the cat alone ?


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

Emmaj said:


> but she trained him out of that so she has no need to have seperate places for them :gasp:


Yes, but how?


----------



## Charlottie (Oct 4, 2008)

Emmaj said:


> but she trained him out of that so she has no need to have seperate places for them :gasp:


I didn't mean thats what she should of done.. i meant thats what she could of done.. if you get me i understand thats she trained her dog.. just curious on how.. im always asking qu =) .. hope that makes sense!


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

wohic said:


> IMO far better to allow all the animals to have a good quality of life and for the terrier to learn to be among the chickens without chasing them rather than imprisoning the chickens so they cant roam, clear the land and generally do chickey things
> 
> if a dog chased a cat would you pen the cat up or train the dog to leave the cat alone ?


I know people who have a dog that is not compatable with their cat & the cat & dog are kept seperate in the house, just having the dog put away in one room whilst the cat is doing whatever in that room, & vice versa when the dog is interacting with the owners, etc. 

I agree with you Wohic, that it is much better to train a dog to behave around other animals, but I would do this with positive methods. I would use the positive association technique.


----------



## wohic (Jun 19, 2006)

Zoo-Man said:


> Yes, but how?



well i taught my terrier type not to chase chickens in about 5 minutes..... it went like this

pull up to farm, let dog out of car, dog sees chickens 'whoo hoo I could have fun here ' thinks dog and off she runs

wohics gentle voice then bellows 'dont you bloody dare rose get back here' dog slopes back looking guilty. trots off in house, she half heartedly tested my reaction later that day with the geese, that time i left the geese to show her it was not a great game being chased ...... Rose thought the geese hissing and running after her was a bit much and now walks past them rather sheepishly.


----------



## wohic (Jun 19, 2006)

Zoo-Man said:


> I would use the positive association technique.




which wold work how in the heat of the moment when a dog is about to do something that is putting itself or another animal at risk ?


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

wohic said:


> which wold work how in the heat of the moment when a dog is about to do something that is putting itself or another animal at risk ?


Well it would obviously be ideal to use the technique before it came to that. Of course, if it was necessary in the situation you mentioned, a loud shout or noise to break the dog's focus would be advisable.


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

My 11 dogs and 17 cats get on really well:flrt:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Charlottie said:


> Well put the chickens away from the dog hes out, i know this could be a problem or she could use postive methods to train the dog to stay away from chickens! im also interested to know how she did this using milians methods, HABU has already stated he has trained his dogs to stay away from adders without violence towards the dog!
> I am always intergied (sp??) by how training works and different methods.
> I personally dont agree with milians methods i think that he is proteyed(sp) as a trainer that can help the dog change even after he has left - which has been proved wrong in this case!! I agree with other that postive methods can work really well with dogs i dont own any dogs but have seen many examples, of a dog which has been trained well with positive methods.


 
you teach a puppy his name first... then no... or with me... "aaah!".. they learn that anything that they are doing that gets an "aaah" or a no.... means don't do that... dogs just want to please you... good dogs anyway...

you have to develope a common language...

my dogs would leave anything that i said "aaah" at alone... for good.

even so far as to whenever they are doing something new... or find something, they would look at me to see if it was alright by me...

simple stuff folks.

... i have a friend that owns beagles... and they never bark...

not out of fear but they no that barking incessantly is not what their master wants...

... my doberman would spit out his food if i said "aah"... then i could say "ok!' and he'd know that meant it was fine what he was doing...

... nothing magic about training a dog...

teach them yes and no... they like it when they know the rules... they hate mixed signals... they want to please their pack leader and obey...


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

wohic said:


> which wold work how in the heat of the moment when a dog is about to do something that is putting itself or another animal at risk ?


 
no means that they must stop dead in their tracks... whatever it is they are doing...


----------



## Charlottie (Oct 4, 2008)

HABU said:


> you teach a puppy his name first... then no... or with me... "aaah!".. they learn that anything that they are doing that gets an "aaah" or a no.... means don't do that... dogs just want to please you... good dogs anyway...
> 
> you have to develope a common language...
> 
> ...


Put simply enough! Ta, it just amazes me on how many different ways their are to triaining dogs and other animals! But with anything there are good and bad ways above is a good method =) 
I never quite get how making the dog afaird helps with training them or thier behaviour especially if the person who is training them isn't there most of time!!!


----------



## Mrs Mental (May 5, 2009)

Ummmmmm dogs & chickens - all I can say is my dogs both come back to me on first recall so dog goes to chase chicken I call dog back and he/she comes back - simple really. Both dogs will drop to the ground on one command so if need be one shout of 'down' and that them lying on the floor. Both my dogs will drop food/bones/chews from their mouths if I tell them too and not eat until told etc etc

Training isn't something that is learnt in a day - its an ongoing daily process. I train my dogs every day when I'm out with them, they dont know that, they think its all play & ball/toy time. 

You dont teach children at a young age all the rules of life and expect them to remember them all do you? You need to remind them and clarify things and sometimes reassess things, dog in my mind are no different.

Personally I dont like what I've seen of this Caesar chappy - I wouldnt like to be poked and jerked myself so dont use those methods to teach my dogs things, patience and understanding are the keys to a dog having a good life. : victory:


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

wohic said:


> which wold work how in the heat of the moment when a dog is about to do something that is putting itself or another animal at risk ?


 Luckily I don't have to read any of zooman's silly posts. However, I want to comment on the bit you quoted. I assume that he has no livestock and no determined terriers to chase them. In other words he has zero experience, yet still he feels he is qualified to not only make judgements, but spout his opinion. It might be a good idea to get himself an adult untrained hunting dog, and set it among a flock of chickens, or let it see a rabbit etc, and try yelling to get it's attention. I hope he'll cry and feel sorry when he cleans up the gory mess left by the dog.Dogs in predator mode, do not respond to yells or loud noises, or tugging on the led. They get totally fixated on the prey and nothing will stop them. But he wouldn't have any experience of that would he with his caged chihuahua.:bash:


----------



## Emmaj (Dec 3, 2007)

fenwoman said:


> Luckily I don't have to read any of zooman's silly posts. However, I want to comment on the bit you quoted. I assume that he has no livestock and no determined terriers to chase them. In other words he has zero experience, yet still he feels he is qualified to not only make judgements, but spout his opinion. It might be a good idea to get himself an adult untrained hunting dog, and set it among a flock of chickens, or let it see a rabbit etc, and try yelling to get it's attention. I hope he'll cry and feel sorry when he cleans up the gory mess left by the dog.Dogs in predator mode, do not respond to yells or loud noises, or tugging on the led. They get totally fixated on the prey and nothing will stop them. But he wouldn't have any experience of that would he with his caged chihuahua.:bash:


I dont have any live stock or bunnies anymore BUT!! i know exactly what my dogs would do if they were to come into contact with them they are pet bred dogs but still have a very high prey drive and hunting instincts so yes i would be one of them people having to clean up a horrendous mess if mine ever got in with chickens or rabbits 


unless properly trained to hunt an such of course 
I 100% agree with you when a dog with high prey drive sets into hunt mode there is no amount of anything to bring them back until they have acheived what they want and the is to GET IT!!!


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

Mrs Mental said:


> Ummmmmm dogs & chickens - all I can say is my dogs both come back to me on first recall so dog goes to chase chicken I call dog back and he/she comes back - simple really.


indeed it is.


> Both dogs will drop to the ground on one command so if need be one shout of 'down' and that them lying on the floor.


 a very wise dog trainer with dogs which behaved perfectly, said to me when I commented on how obedient they were "I would be an idiot if I didn't expect even my dogs to let me down when I least expect them to. They are dogs after all"



> Both my dogs will drop food/bones/chews from their mouths if I tell them too and not eat until told etc etc


 what use has that trick got?



> Training isn't something that is learnt in a day - its an ongoing daily process. I train my dogs every day when I'm out with them, they dont know that, they think its all play & ball/toy time.


 How wonderful that is. You are an amazing dog owner 




> Personally I dont like what I've seen of this Caesar chappy - I wouldnt like to be poked and jerked myself so dont use those methods to teach my dogs things, patience and understanding are the keys to a dog having a good life. : victory:


Have you only got the 2 dogs? Have you owned them both from puppyhood? Ever had an untrained adult dog? A dog like Chalky I mean, who was dumped out of a car in front of the cottage. Completely untrained, knowing nothing, not even sit, and aged at least 3 according to his teeth. To see how it feels, you could always visit your local rescue and take the worse untrained dog home with you and see whether he listens to you when he wants to kill something. It might be a very interesting and humbling experience.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

Emmaj said:


> I dont have any live stock or bunnies anymore BUT!! i know exactly what my dogs would do if they were to come into contact with them they are pet bred dogs but still have a very high prey drive and hunting instincts so yes i would be one of them people having to clean up a horrendous mess if mine ever got in with chickens or rabbits
> 
> 
> unless properly trained to hunt an such of course
> I 100% agree with you when a dog with high prey drive sets into hunt mode there is no amount of anything to bring them back until they have acheived what they want and the is to GET IT!!!


 I am very please that Chalky is now a model citizen:lol2:
He comes down the bottom with me when I milk the goats twice a day and see to the fowl at the same time. In fact I could leave him in one of the breeding pens overnight and the next morning, all the birds would be fine. He's good with my rabbits, ababy kids, parrots etc. It's taken time to turn him into a gentleman mind. I can now do anything with him. He idolises me and will not be apart from me for one minute without getting ever so upset. He sleeps on my bed and comes with me in the car. I even h ave to leave the wetroom door open when I have a shower or else he goes crazy crying and scraping the door in an effort to get in.
However much zooman wants to believe that I am terribly cruel in order to get my dogs to behave, I think that the way they all respond to me is testament to the fact that I'm not.
I don't want robots, or dogs which won't fart without my permission, but I do expect them to have good manners and on the whole, they have.
As I sit here and type, Chalky is in his usual place, right beside my chair at my feet. It's obvious I use harsh methods to train him isn't it?:lol2:


----------



## Emmaj (Dec 3, 2007)

fenwoman said:


> I am very please that Chalky is now a model citizen:lol2:
> He comes down the bottom with me when I milk the goats twice a day and see to the fowl at the same time. In fact I could leave him in one of the breeding pens overnight and the next morning, all the birds would be fine. He's good with my rabbits, ababy kids, parrots etc. It's taken time to turn him into a gentleman mind. I can now do anything with him. He idolises me and will not be apart from me for one minute without getting ever so upset. He sleeps on my bed and comes with me in the car. I even h ave to leave the wetroom door open when I have a shower or else he goes crazy crying and scraping the door in an effort to get in.
> However much zooman wants to believe that I am terribly cruel in order to get my dogs to behave, I think that the way they all respond to me is testament to the fact that I'm not.
> I don't want robots, or dogs which won't fart without my permission, but I do expect them to have good manners and on the whole, they have.
> As I sit here and type, Chalky is in his usual place, right beside my chair at my feet. It's obvious I use harsh methods to train him isn't it?:lol2:


 
well i have met chalky and Ursa and just from seeing them with you, you can see how much they love you and how well mannered they are too they are lovely dogs pam


----------



## Crownan (Jan 6, 2007)

Woo CAESER RULES OK : victory:

lol. Its the owners that need the rehabilitation. He shows them what they need to do, he doesnt train the dogs...


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

Emmaj said:


> well i have met chalky and Ursa and just from seeing them with you, you can see how much they love you and how well mannered they are too they are lovely dogs pam


 Thanks Emma. I am proud of them both. They have a pretty big fan club locally.


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

fenwoman said:


> It might be a good idea to get himself an adult untrained hunting dog, and set it among a flock of chickens, or let it see a rabbit etc, and try yelling to get it's attention. I hope he'll cry and feel sorry when he cleans up the gory mess left by the dog.Dogs in predator mode, do not respond to yells or loud noises, or tugging on the led. They get totally fixated on the prey and nothing will stop them.


I absolutely, 100% completely agree. That said, even the professional sporting dog trainers with what is considered to be "perfectly trained" gun/falconry dogs often have an accident in the field and the dogs give chase, so it's not just untrained dogs that do it. At the end of the day dogs are predators, no matter how far removed they are from wolves. 
Personally if a dog gave chase as it sounds like Chalky did I wouldn't think twice about punishing this behaviour by the means of something such as a vibration collar, and I most certainly wouldn't be ignoring bad behaviour and treating the good! :whistling2:


----------



## Emmaj (Dec 3, 2007)

fenwoman said:


> Thanks Emma. I am proud of them both. They have a pretty big fan club locally.


 
yes i know an those of us that have been lucky enough to meet them know just what fantastic dogs they are i so have to come meet all your others someday too :2thumb:


----------



## Antw23uk (Jan 12, 2009)

This post makes really interesting reading but im baffled as to how anyone, especially dog owners, cant appreciate at least a little of what CM is going on about?

As already stated he is a behavourist and not a 'trainer', there is a big difference and i think his methods are consistent and make sense. 

There are many different training methods out there to teach a dog how to be obedient, to sit, stay etc but before you teach a dog any of that its important to set boundaries and limitations by being a calm, assertive and consistent owner (his term would be pack leader!) I cant think of any other _'more at one with the animal'_ approach than how CM does it AND get results.

And he is just one of MANY who teaches and thinks like this, its just he has a TV show on it, lol


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> Luckily I don't have to read any of zooman's silly posts. However, I want to comment on the bit you quoted. I assume that he has no livestock and no determined terriers to chase them. In other words he has zero experience, yet still he feels he is qualified to not only make judgements, but spout his opinion. It might be a good idea to get himself an adult untrained hunting dog, and set it among a flock of chickens, or let it see a rabbit etc, and try yelling to get it's attention. I hope he'll cry and feel sorry when he cleans up the gory mess left by the dog.Dogs in predator mode, do not respond to yells or loud noises, or tugging on the led. They get totally fixated on the prey and nothing will stop them. But he wouldn't have any experience of that would he with his caged chihuahua.:bash:


Why does not agreeing with CM's awful techniques mean that someone would put a dog or other animals in this situation? Even to people with no training experience at all, there's such a thing as a lead. :lol2:


----------



## Mrs Mental (May 5, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> indeed it is.
> a very wise dog trainer with dogs which behaved perfectly, said to me when I commented on how obedient they were "I would be an idiot if I didn't expect even my dogs to let me down when I least expect them to. They are dogs after all"
> 
> 
> ...


 
You cant help yourself can you - you are a very miserable bitter sounding woman. No-one is obviously anywhere near as wonderful at dog training as you are all hail to you then


----------



## Captainmatt29 (Feb 28, 2009)

Antw23uk said:


> This post makes really interesting reading but im baffled as to how anyone, especially dog owners, cant appreciate at least a little of what CM is going on about?
> 
> As already stated he is a behavourist and not a 'trainer', there is a big difference and i think his methods are consistent and make sense.
> 
> ...


I agree with this


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

Antw23uk said:


> This post makes really interesting reading but im baffled as to how anyone, especially dog owners, cant appreciate at least a little of what CM is going on about?
> 
> As already stated he is a behavourist and not a 'trainer', there is a big difference and i think his methods are consistent and make sense.
> 
> ...


 
Quite simply, what you will find is this.... If you come on a forum like this, which is isn't dog specific, you will find lots of people, who probably quite like dogs, own a few (maybe in some cases a lot of) dogs an dprobably know a bit about how to train a dog, they might even have fairly obedient pets. The majority will probably like CM and see him as some 'god-like' figure with dogs and think he is in tune with the dogs. Probably because he is (according to some, I don't get it myself!) a charismatic person who makes things sound like they must be true, and a short TV programme appears to show a 'cured' dog. 

If, however, you go ona forum specifically about dogs, where the peopel on there will all have years and years of experience with dogs, an have probably pretty much lived and breathed dogs in that time, a high proportion of who will work professionally with dogs in some way, you will find that the majority of people posting will not be that keen on CM. The reason?! They know rather alot about dogs themselves and know what methods work the best and which are likely to have 'consequences'. 

People can spout the good old 'he's not a trainer, he's a behaviourist' line as much as they like, but the fact is, plenty of well respected and successful behaviourists refute him. Apart from that, I have seen him attempt to _train_ a dog to walk to heel, to not chase a cat, not to jump in a pool. All maybe stemming around behaviour issues, but they are still _training_. 

What you see is an hour long show, that has the words 'do not attempt these techniques at home' emblazoned across the screen. All very well, but we all know people will try them at home, sometimes with young puppies. This forum has demonstrated that on more than one occasion. You do not see what happens afterwards, or ho wmany of the dogs relapse, as this one had. 

I do agree with some of what CM says. Yes, dogs need exercise, yes, dogs needs to be treated like dogs and not molly-coddled, yes almost all problems are down to the owners, not the dogs. I also don't doubt he has the absolute best intentions, it is clear he is a dog lover, no-one can deny that. I also don't doubt that if he continued working with most of these dogs, the unwanted behaviours would stop. What I do think is that there are almost always better ways of going about things, ways which are as effective, (although might take longer to implement) easier fro the owner to keep up, and which have far less 'consequences' for the dog.


----------



## Antw23uk (Jan 12, 2009)

Mrs Mental said:


> You cant help yourself can you - you are a very miserable bitter sounding woman. No-one is obviously anywhere near as wonderful at dog training as you are all hail to you then


I think name calling is a little unfair.



messengermatt said:


> I agree with this


Thanks Matt :flrt:


----------



## Antw23uk (Jan 12, 2009)

midori said:


> Quite simply, what you will find is this.... If you come on a forum like this, which is isn't dog specific, you will find lots of people, who probably quite like dogs, own a few (maybe in some cases a lot of) dogs an dprobably know a bit about how to train a dog, they might even have fairly obedient pets. The majority will probably like CM and see him as some 'god-like' figure with dogs and think he is in tune with the dogs. Probably because he is (according to some, I don't get it myself!) a charismatic person who makes things sound like they must be true, and a short TV programme appears to show a 'cured' dog.
> 
> If, however, you go ona forum specifically about dogs, where the peopel on there will all have years and years of experience with dogs, an have probably pretty much lived and breathed dogs in that time, a high proportion of who will work professionally with dogs in some way, you will find that the majority of people posting will not be that keen on CM. The reason?! They know rather alot about dogs themselves and know what methods work the best and which are likely to have 'consequences'.
> 
> ...


Erm you could have just said you agreed with me :whistling2: :lol2:


----------



## wohic (Jun 19, 2006)

midori said:


> Quite simply, what you will find is this.... If you come on a forum like this, which is isn't dog specific, you will find lots of people, who probably quite like dogs, own a few (maybe in some cases a lot of) dogs an dprobably know a bit about how to train a dog, they might even have fairly obedient pets. The majority will probably like CM and see him as some 'god-like' figure with dogs and think he is in tune with the dogs. Probably because he is (according to some, I don't get it myself!) a charismatic person who makes things sound like they must be true, and a short TV programme appears to show a 'cured' dog.
> 
> If, however, you go ona forum specifically about dogs, where the peopel on there will all have years and years of experience with dogs, an have probably pretty much lived and breathed dogs in that time, a high proportion of who will work professionally with dogs in some way, you will find that the majority of people posting will not be that keen on CM. The reason?! They know rather alot about dogs themselves and know what methods work the best and which are likely to have 'consequences'.
> 
> ...


a little stereotypical and patronizing towards our members i think.

I have lived and breathed dogs for all my 42 years, have fostered over 100, i have more experience with dogs of all shapes sizes and backgrounds than many people how ever i dont preach and presume.........


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

wohic said:


> a little stereotypical and patronizing towards our members i think.
> 
> I have lived and breathed dogs for all my 42 years, have fostered over 100, i have more experience with dogs of all shapes sizes and backgrounds than many people how ever i dont preach and presume.........


 
is it really patronsing to call pet dog owners just that?! It's not a derogatory term, after all....


----------



## Mrs Mental (May 5, 2009)

Antw23uk said:


> I think name calling is a little unfair.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Matt :flrt:


Yes you are quite right - it was rather childish of me. But quite why does Fenwoman need to be quite so rude in her replies?


----------



## Antw23uk (Jan 12, 2009)

wohic said:


> *a little stereotypical and patronizing towards our members i think.*
> 
> I have lived and breathed dogs for all my 42 years, have fostered over 100, i have more experience with dogs of all shapes sizes and backgrounds than many people how ever i dont preach and presume.........


Well said :notworthy:


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

midori said:


> Quite simply, what you will find is this.... If you come on a forum like this, which is isn't dog specific, you will find lots of people, who probably quite like dogs, own a few (maybe in some cases a lot of) dogs an dprobably know a bit about how to train a dog, they might even have fairly obedient pets. The majority will probably like CM and see him as some 'god-like' figure with dogs and think he is in tune with the dogs. Probably because he is (according to some, I don't get it myself!) a charismatic person who makes things sound like they must be true, and a short TV programme appears to show a 'cured' dog.
> 
> If, however, you go ona forum specifically about dogs, where the peopel on there will all have years and years of experience with dogs, an have probably pretty much lived and breathed dogs in that time, a high proportion of who will work professionally with dogs in some way, you will find that the majority of people posting will not be that keen on CM. The reason?! They know rather alot about dogs themselves and know what methods work the best and which are likely to have 'consequences'.
> 
> ...


 
Hallelujah - agree with every word of this, wish I could've posted as eloquently! :no1:


----------



## wohic (Jun 19, 2006)

midori said:


> is it really patronsing to call pet dog owners just that?! It's not a derogatory term, after all....


to assume that all RFUK members are rather novice in their ownership where as people that frequent dog specific forums are far superior in there knowledge is patronizing.

I am sure that there are truly awful owners on there, on here and across the board, there will also be amazing owners with rounded balanced dogs , a great owner does not have to have owned a million dogs or have watched 50 reruns of 'its me or the dog' good ownership will be reflected in the animals they own, 
It really annoys me that so many people are so narrow minded as to think there is only one way to do things right, you would probably hate my mother as her out look seems akin to fenwomans, her dogs are truely a sight to behold when they hoon across the orchard playing together, then when we sit for dinner, 6 dogs take their places with out being told, no begging or 'rudeness'........ they just know their place in the pack


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

wohic said:


> to assume that all RFUK members are rather novice in their ownership where as people that frequent dog specific forums are far superior in there knowledge is patronizing.
> 
> I am sure that there are truly awful owners on there, on here and across the board, there will also be amazing owners with rounded balanced dogs , a great owner does not have to have owned a million dogs or have watched 50 reruns of 'its me or the dog' good ownership will be reflected in the animals they own,
> It really annoys me that so many people are so narrow minded as to think there is only one way to do things right, you would probably hate my mother as her out look seems akin to fenwomans, her dogs are truely a sight to behold when they hoon across the orchard playing together, then when we sit for dinner, 6 dogs take their places with out being told, no begging or 'rudeness'........ they just know their place in the pack


 
:notworthy:


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

wohic said:


> to assume that all RFUK members are rather novice in their ownership where as people that frequent dog specific forums are far superior in there knowledge is patronizing.
> 
> I am sure that there are truly awful owners on there, on here and across the board, there will also be amazing owners with rounded balanced dogs , a great owner does not have to have owned a million dogs or have watched 50 reruns of 'its me or the dog' good ownership will be reflected in the animals they own,
> It really annoys me that so many people are so narrow minded as to think there is only one way to do things right, you would probably hate my mother as her out look seems akin to fenwomans, her dogs are truely a sight to behold when they hoon across the orchard playing together, then when we sit for dinner, 6 dogs take their places with out being told, no begging or 'rudeness'........ they just know their place in the pack


 
I'm pretty certain that I didn't make any assumptions about all RFUK members, but more of a general observation from using different, and different types of, forums.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

KathyM said:


> Why does not agreeing with CM's awful techniques mean that someone would put a dog or other animals in this situation? Even to people with no training experience at all, there's such a thing as a lead. :lol2:


I find it rather hard to carry feed buckets, hay, open gates, collect eggs, weed the veggies, milk the goats, feed the pigs, split logs, muck out and the myriad other jobs on a smallholding, while holding a dog on the lead.
I prefer to have my dogs following me about on my land while I get things done. I like CM. I don't find the majority of his methods to be 'awful'. Only a complete sentimental bunny hugger would IMO. The sort who watches their pet chase another dog in the park and simper "awww look, he's made a likkle fwend".
I'm fine with most of CM's methods, even shock collars as an absolute last resort in an extreme case. If that makes me a terrible person, so be it, I'm a terrible person. I still have brilliant happy dogs which I love and which love me and certainly don't fear me.
Personally I find some of the anti CM rantings on here to be bordering on the fanatical.Certainly they are very narrow minded and want to believe that he is a cruel human being who tortures dogs into submission, whilst never wanting to admit that he ever gets anything right or helps a dog.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

Mrs Mental said:


> You cant help yourself can you - you are a very miserable bitter sounding woman. No-one is obviously anywhere near as wonderful at dog training as you are all hail to you then


 I am miserable and bitter because I asked about your experience in training an untrained adult rescue?If you say so.:lol2:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

ceasar is not god... he understands how a dog's mind works... that's the key.

as with anything, you take the good and leave the bad... ceasar has many sound principles... not everything i agree with either... working with your dog is an intensely personal thing... at least it is to me.. it's our private time... like quality time with your kids maybe... it's your own business and no one else's.

... we can all find faults with what one another does...

it's not about that... CM may be 10% full of crap... maybe 80%... crap... that still leaves 20% good stuff.


... you have to understand how the canine mind works... their instincts... and how they understand naturally socializing... they are innate pack animals... they do follow a program when it comes to bonding and being a part of a pack....

... it's incumbent that one understands how the dog sees the world... how they interpret things and filter it through their instincts...

also the various breeds have innate tendencies that they were bred for... many parts of the hunt for example have been emphasised and other parts have been de-emphasised... they have been modified as we all know...

... dogs aren't pets to me...


... training-smaining... i feel that you develope a working and personal relationship with a dog... you bond.... i mean really bond... a dog is your brother, your son... your family... that's only fair because that's what a dog considers us... his family... his pack... we're a team... we know one another...we grow older together...


... you should play with your dog... do things with him... have a life together... you teach a dog all of it's life and it teaches you...

... you don't think about how to train a dog after a while... lessons happen every day... both parties learn.


... my dogs and i meet somewhere in the middle... the human and dog mesh at some point... you become a little dog like and the dog becomes a little human like...

... it's the bond that is paramount... it's the affection and trust you share with one another... you'll risk your life for each other...

it may sound silly... but i give back what my dogs have always given freely to me... loyalty and affection... it's only fair.


... techniques... ha!

they have their place... it's all good. but my doberman habu for example... i could stop him dead in his tracks on comand... mid stride...

like when we'd work out with a tennis ball... i could hurl that ball way down the field and tell habu to "get it"... and he'd run like the wind and get that ball... i say "drop it" and and he'd spit it out... and come to me...

completely forget about the ball... we could take a walk and come back and i could say... "get that ball"... and he'd run straight to where that ball was that i have told him to drop was and bring it back...

... i could send him running full hilt for a ball and say "NO" or "aaah!" and he would stop mid stride and look back at me for his next comand... i could say "here" and he'd come back at heel or i could say "ok" and he'd continue for the ball...


he pleased me and i pleased him... a fun team...

total control... i could put him on anyone if i wanted and he'd kill them if i said "get 'em!"... or i could have him intimidate and focus on someone if i said "watch him!"...

no one could lay a hand on me... and i could call him off instantly... everytime...


i could go to a store and say stay and he'd sit there till i was done... like a statue... leashed or unleashed... he'd not move till i came back...


reward and praise... be a wonderful pack leader in your dogs eyes and most of the training takes care of itself... teaching the basic stuff to a puppy helps it to bond with you... that's where it starts... the puppy brain isn't done growing and wiring itself... working the sit, stay and come here stuff exercises your dogs mind... increases the connections in it's developing brain... it will be smarter a dog and the bond and trust will start with that stuff...


... you raise a dog... total trust, obedience and control... that's a good dog...

and they get better with each year... learning is life long...

a good breed of dog is so intelligent... few ever know just how smart they are... few see a dog that isn't mentally messed up in some way... either damaged or just arrested developement... like a kid that was denied something during their formative years... they tend to be lacking in some department... and rarely recover... like a kid not getting language as a child, the window for learning language is small... if a kid isn't exposed to languge at a certain age... he'll miss that boat and the window will effectively close... almost completely... same with a dog... you can't make up for lost time... they must be raised and socialized properly... taught when the time is right for various things... not too early and not too late... with different lessons and experiences...

demand excellence from a good dog breed and that's what you'll get... but be prepare to work and work hard... it's an investment... like quality time with your kids and raiseing them right... it's tough... but so rewarding to raise a smart, well balanced adult who is disciplined, tough, learned, even tempered and kind... a fine human being...

... fine dogs are rare... most I see have lost their minds or are stunted emotionally... most I see are damaged to one degree or another...

if all dogs were like that... i'd never get near them let alone own one...

ceasar knows his stuff... he understands dogs well... he's no god... 

maybe i just think differently about dogs than is typical... but i know first hand what a good dog can be... 

then again, i may be way off here...:lol2:


----------



## Mrs Mental (May 5, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> I am miserable and bitter because I asked about your experience in training an untrained adult rescue?If you say so.:lol2:


No I thought your response was rude actually - you tried to belittle my initial response. I initially said that although I'd not seen a lot of the Cesar guys programmes I didnt feel he needed to jerk & prod the dogs - I tried to explain that both my dogs are pretty well trained without having to resort to prodding or jerking them.

In my opinion you didnt like what I said and so tried to belittle me in your answer. 

One of my dogs I have had since he was a puppy yes and the other I have had for 2 years as a rescue rehomer - she initially had all sorts of awful problems after being abused and badly mistreated by her previous owners (they've now been prosecuted) I did not state that I had any experience at all except that my two dogs are very good.


----------



## Charlottie (Oct 4, 2008)

If really think that your attidue is not needed!!!



fenwoman said:


> It's obvious I use harsh methods to train him isn't it?:lol2:


I might of missed this.. but when did anyone say you were using harsh methods people just asked how you did it?




fenwoman said:


> Luckily I don't have to read any of zooman's silly posts. However, I want to comment on the bit you quoted. I assume that he has no livestock and no determined terriers to chase them. In other words he has zero experience, yet still he feels he is qualified to not only make judgements, but spout his opinion. It might be a good idea to get himself an adult untrained hunting dog, and set it among a flock of chickens, or let it see a rabbit etc, and try yelling to get it's attention. I hope he'll cry and feel sorry when he cleans up the gory mess left by the dog.Dogs in predator mode, do not respond to yells or loud noises, or tugging on the led. They get totally fixated on the prey and nothing will stop them. But he wouldn't have any experience of that would he with his caged chihuahua.:bash:


Of course he has the right to share his opinion he has the same right as anyone one this forum.. and why are you making it sound so bad about placing a chicuahua in a cage!! i have seen his dogs and they are in good health and they use the cage as a safe place which i think is good as it means the dog has somewhere to go if it wants to get away from something! i dsiagree with cage being used as a punishment but thats ont what it is used for in this case!!



Mrs Mental said:


> You cant help yourself can you - you are a very miserable bitter sounding woman. No-one is obviously anywhere near as wonderful at dog training as you are all hail to you then


Well said :notworthy:


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

wohic said:


> It really annoys me that so many people are so narrow minded as to think there is only one way to do things right


 
Noone has said there aren't many right ways to train dogs. There are many positive reward based methods that are right. I've only seen people disputing what is obviously wrong. To me there is no reason on this earth to do to animals what CM does. I have yet to see an argument that proves otherwise, I've only seen excuses. Thankfully all good trainers feel the same way.


----------



## Charlottie (Oct 4, 2008)

Im not going to quote HABU as its too long :lol2: but may i say your psots have been brillant, well said and i have learnt a lot from them! :notworthy:


----------



## Emmaj (Dec 3, 2007)

Mrs Mental said:


> Yes you are quite right - it was rather childish of me. But quite why does Fenwoman need to be quite so rude in her replies?


you will find she isnt being rude just straight to the point 

i can assure you that you would definately know if she was being rude lol

and i havent seen her being rude just answering posts in her straight to the point manner


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

fenwoman said:


> Luckily I don't have to read any of zooman's silly posts. However, I want to comment on the bit you quoted. I assume that he has no livestock and no determined terriers to chase them. In other words he has zero experience, yet still he feels he is qualified to not only make judgements, but spout his opinion. It might be a good idea to get himself an adult untrained hunting dog, and set it among a flock of chickens, or let it see a rabbit etc, and try yelling to get it's attention. I hope he'll cry and feel sorry when he cleans up the gory mess left by the dog.Dogs in predator mode, do not respond to yells or loud noises, or tugging on the led. They get totally fixated on the prey and nothing will stop them. But he wouldn't have any experience of that would he with his caged chihuahua.:bash:


I have a 16 year old JRT who I rescued when he was 2 years old. He is absolutely fine with our rabbits & guinea pigs.

I do not have poultry, but I have common sense to know that if a dog is wanting to chase & attack poultry, then leave the dog in the house whilst you tend to the poultry, or have the poultry in a secure pen! Simple! I would certainly not resort to electric shock collars! 

And as for my 'caged chihuahua', if you come & take a look at my house, you will not see a dog cage, as it is actually at the shop as I used it to transport 2 macaws at the weekend Jen & Jonny (Mrs Dirtydozen & Dirtydozen) can vouch for that as they visited today.

And whats this about me making judgements? Pot...kettle...:whistling2:


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

Emmaj said:


> you will find she isnt being rude just straight to the point
> 
> i can assure you that you would definately know if she was being rude lol
> 
> and i havent seen her being rude just answering posts in her straight to the point manner


I disagree!


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Charlottie said:


> Im not going to quote HABU as its too long :lol2: but may i say your psots have been brillant, well said and i have learnt a lot from them! :notworthy:


 thanks... i was afraid that i might ruffle some feathers


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

HABU said:


> thanks... *i was afraid that i might ruffle some feathers*


No, thats the terrier chasing chickens thats doing that :lol2:


----------



## Charlottie (Oct 4, 2008)

HABU said:


> thanks... i was afraid that i might ruffle some feathers


No worries you seem to be a knowledge person & thanks for sharing =D



Zoo-Man said:


> No, thats the terrier chasing chickens thats doing that :lol2:


 :lol2:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

dogs seen things in black and white... right and wrong... acceptable and unacceptable... there are no shades of grey when it concerns dogs...

and what many deem as harsh isn't at all... and what many deem as kind isn't anything less than cruel...

... the dog should never be in charge... the dog wants to serve his master and pack leader... being and obedient, submissive follower gives the dog fulfillment... he is delighted when his master is delighted... there is a time to play and have fun and there is a time to work and be serious...

... a dog wants to be a good team member... whatever that entails... not be independent... what would be harsh or mean to do to a human isn't necessarily that way to a dog... dogs don't get insulted... dogs don't worry about the fairness of things...

dogs aren't humans... they crave order.
it's an instinct. the pack to succeed must have order and discipline. the pack leader is the boss. he must not tolerate misbehaviors from his submissives... he must be a dictator and a powerful one. a master/pack leader can't be weak or disorganised... everything is black and white.

... dogs will judge you... they respect strength and power... they respect authority... uncompromising authority... not brutal authority but consistent and strong authority.

when your dog perceives you as weak then he'll loose respect for you... begin pushing you around to get his way... because he knows you are a pushover... he'll find your buttons and push them.

...
a well raised dog never pushes you once he is grown... all puppies will and the pack is tolerant of them... but then they must get serious and become a full fledged pack member and step up...

being strict isn't mean. being strict is being solid and balanced... it's consistency that they desire... be consistent and a dog sees you as weak... pack leaders take no crap... inappropriate behaviors, whatever they are will not be tolerated in a pack. it breaks down the unit cohesion of a dog pack... dogs just want to know the rules...

you can be displeased with your dog... he will feel badly because he let you down... show your disappointment when it is needed and then move on... all is forgiven in a dog's world... they don't dwell in the past at all... they never forget but they don't dwell on past things...

... you guys can argue all you want about stuff... people do those things... dogs do not.

i am hard but i am fair, you all are equally worthless... as the gunny once said... dogs eat that stuff up fairness here being balanced.. not changing the rules all the time.... it's called discipline. be a disiplined master and you'll have a disciplined dog.

the pack only has disciplined members... others are driven out if they don't follow the program.

dogs can be happy with a weak leader... a stupidly unfulfilled, confused excuses for a dog that is...


... i may be put on ingore now by some folks for spouting my mouth off... no problem!:lol2:

i may have a valid point or two here...: victory::lol2:

it's all good... we dog people should work together, not beat one another up










pardon any typos i may have made here...


----------



## Antw23uk (Jan 12, 2009)

Charlottie said:


> No worries you seem to be a knowledge person & thanks for sharing =D
> 
> 
> :lol2:


Jeez you come across as a hypocrite! .. Habu and Fenowoman are pretty much singing off the same hyme sheet and yet one offends you! :crazy:


----------



## Sam'n'Droo (May 31, 2008)

Habu.. you are a fountain of knowledge. How refreshing to find someone with such a clear and understanding view of our canine companions. I salute you. I myself do not have a problem with CM. I believe he understands dogs and how the dog mind works. I believe it is people that ruin dogs.

Sam


----------



## Mrs Mental (May 5, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> indeed it is.
> a very wise dog trainer with dogs which behaved perfectly, said to me when I commented on how obedient they were "I would be an idiot if I didn't expect even my dogs to let me down when I least expect them to. They are dogs after all"
> 
> 
> ...


 
I thought the above was rather rude. And presumptious (sp) as one of my dogs is from our local rescue centre and her previous owners have been prosecuted for their abuse of her. I did not state I worked miracles or infact say anything about myself merely stated I had two well behaved dogs and that training I felt was an ongoing thing.






Emmaj said:


> you will find she isnt being rude just straight to the point
> 
> i can assure you that you would definately know if she was being rude lol
> 
> and i havent seen her being rude just answering posts in her straight to the point manner


I see the above post from Fenwoman as rude, you don't so it's merely a matter of opinion. 

In my view you can be very direct and very to the point without being rude, argumentative, belittling or presumptious of the initial poster.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Antw23uk said:


> Jeez you come across as a hypocrite! .. Habu and Fenowoman are pretty much singing off the same hyme sheet and yet one offends you! :crazy:


 all i can say is that i thought we were talking dogs... oh and thank you for those nice words... 

... but anyway... what exactly is the topic here now?


... what's all this talk?... are we old bitty's at the hairdressers complaining and bickering about nonsense or are we talking about dogs here... the 4 legged variety?

... dogs and rescues are two different things in some ways.

rescues so often need rehabilitation... special needs and issues are there.

our dog hopers was from the dog pound... spca here... on death row till we got her... i saw potential there. rescues can be the best dogs ever or be hoplessly damaged...

... it takes more to help a dinged-up rescue than i have... depending on how bad they are and what happened before.

... maybe we should drop the dumb stuff and try to be adults here... i believe i have...

... maybe accept the points of others as they are... a reflection of them rather than take offence... whatever people deem that reflection to be.

but if you'd rather...:whistling2:



lighten up folks... we're just talking here... keep a perspective.

people that are wrapped a little too tight lack the disposition to be good with dogs. you can't succumb to your emotions.


----------



## Charlottie (Oct 4, 2008)

Antw23uk said:


> Jeez you come across as a hypocrite! .. Habu and Fenowoman are pretty much singing off the same hyme sheet and yet one offends you! :crazy:


HABU puts it nicely and doesn't offedn people but i think Fenwoman syas it in a way that belittles people and offends people while giving out advice HABU on the other hand has said it nicely without - in my opinion offending anyone! thats what i meant and they are not singing off the same brush HABU has said that his dogs are trained and will drop food while fenwomen hasnt said this at all!!


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Charlottie said:


> HABU puts it nicely and doesn't offedn people but i think Fenwoman syas it in a way that belittles people and offends people while giving out advice HABU on the other hand has said it nicely without - in my opinion offending anyone! thats what i meant and they are not singing off the same brush HABU has said that his dogs are trained and will drop food while fenwomen hasnt said this at all!!


 i have to defend fenwoman... she's alright in my book...












hopers agrees











gotta run!!:lol2:


----------



## Charlottie (Oct 4, 2008)

Antw23uk said:


> Jeez you come across as a hypocrite! .. Habu and Fenowoman are pretty much singing off the same hyme sheet and yet one offends you! :crazy:


HABU puts it nicely and doesn't offedn people but i think Fenwoman syas it in a way that belittles people and offends people while giving out advice HABU on the other hand has said it nicely without - in my opinion offending anyone! thats what i meant and they are not singing off the same brush HABU has said that his dogs are trained and will drop food while fenwomen hasnt said this at all!!


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

i can offend... boy can i offend!!... half the time without really knowing or intending it...

... oh yeah... i can get stuck on stupid myself... after all,, this is joe six-pack-himself talking...

... oh yeah... my foot fits well in my mouth... it's been there many, many times...:blush:


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

Antw23uk said:


> Jeez you come across as a hypocrite! .. Habu and Fenowoman are pretty much singing off the same hyme sheet and yet one offends you! :crazy:


:no1:


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

HABU said:


> dogs seen things in black and white... right and wrong... acceptable and unacceptable... there are no shades of grey when it concerns dogs...


I've got to be honest and I don't mean this rudely at all but I see these long posts and I am disinclined to bother reading them, so haven't read any of yours fully. For that I apologise and because of the shame of it (lol) I will finally answer one of them. Before I begin though I am answering this as if answering someone who follows punishment techniques such as CM's and if that is not you, it doesn't apply but these seem to be the common and refutable arguments put forward by his cult. 



> and what many deem as harsh isn't at all... and what many deem as kind isn't anything less than cruel...


One can't say positive methods are cruel and not acknowledge that physical abuse such as asphyxiating dogs, hitting, kicking and poking them, rolling them, yanking them and causing fear is cruel. Having tested an electric collar myself to test for myself in an unbiased fashion, it is painful and had I not had the manner of it explained to me I would've been terrified. CM fans might like to wash it over as "saving a dog" but when you can save a dog by positive methods then why use them? I still don't understand this. I suppose to some it is control/power, to others it is ignorance of other kinder and better options, but there are sensible people who have gone into a cult like trance over this where they won't even consider the physical and emotional pain they cause their supposedly loved pets to suffer. I can't imagine any situation under which I would even consider using a shock collar or hanging a dog by it's lead in the air to choke to near death. I can imagine it happening out of frustration but it still just can't be condoned and certainly not as regular training methods. 



> ... the dog should never be in charge... the dog wants to serve his master and pack leader


I'll ignore the pack leader bit as I believe dogs are not thick enough to believe we're dogs but you are right that dogs need to be led efficiently and productively to promote a good relationship and good behaviour. What I do not understand is why you consider this impossible with positive methods? I just find it all really sad, these people are missing out on so much with their dogs and if their problems are (theoretically - as most aren't) so bad that positive methods "just won't work" one has to wonder why that would mean putting your dog in the position of being zapped and poked and yanked and hit for the rest of their lives. Sometimes quality is better than quantity and I know I've said it before and been slated for it but I'd rather PTS my dogs than ever make them suffer. 



> ... being and obedient, submissive follower gives the dog fulfillment...


Submission does not in itself bring fulfilment. Performing behaviours that are rewarding to a dog fulfil them. Decision making, and the subsequent actions bring fulfilment. It is much quicker and more productive to set a dog up for success not punish for failure. If someone who uses physical or emotional bullying on a dog thinks their dog is somehow grateful, they're deluded. I don't believe any caring and loving owner truly thinks this is a good way to treat animals, I do think some believe it's the only way (they are wrong).



> he is delighted when his master is delighted... there is a time to play and have fun and there is a time to work and be serious...


Spot on - which is why positive methods are so good! I like that we agree on this. When a dog wants to perform not because it means they won't get beat but because they genuinely want to, it's like an epiphany. Call me crazy but I can think of nothing better as a pet owner than a dog who wants to please out of genuine enjoyment of what they do and of getting something right, not fear of what they will get if they do wrong.



> what would be harsh or mean to do to a human isn't necessarily that way to a dog... dogs don't get insulted... dogs don't worry about the fairness of things...


Dogs feel pain, they feel fear and confusion, no matter what you think about whether they bond with us emotionally. While dogs lack the ability to think to the level we do, or to vocalise this in language, they are not inanimate objects and abuse is just that, abuse. This argument is often used by those who need to justify causing pain and suffering to animals (like CM does) and I truly believe it's more often used to stave their supressed guilt. 



> dogs aren't humans... they crave order.
> it's an instinct. the pack to succeed must have order and discipline. the pack leader is the boss.


You can lead a pack effectively with positive methods (although I dislike the terminology as we're not dogs and dogs know that lol).



> he must not tolerate misbehaviors from his submissives... he must be a dictator and a powerful one. a master/pack leader can't be weak or disorganised... everything is black and white.


Heil Habu, dictator of animals lol. Seriously? I prefer to have a good relationship with my dogs, not one based on fear, but that's just me. 



> ... dogs will judge you... they respect strength and power... they respect authority... uncompromising authority... not brutal authority but consistent and strong authority.


Achievable without resorting to bullying.



> when your dog perceives you as weak then he'll loose respect for you... begin pushing you around to get his way... because he knows you are a pushover... he'll find your buttons and push them.


As above, one can lead without resorting to abuse. Who would you rather work for, a "dictator" who treats you like dirt, or someone you respect and who praises you and rewards you for really good work? I hate to humanise but I do wonder sometimes. 



> ...
> a well raised dog never pushes you once he is grown... all puppies will and the pack is tolerant of them... but then they must get serious and become a full fledged pack member and step up...


Maybe a dogbot. Or a dog worn down from abuse. Hierarchies aren't set in stone (no matter what some old trainers would have said ten years ago), they shift and change depending on the task at hand, the status of the "pack", etc. Daily dogs push and test these limits, not necessarily by behaviours deemed as "bad" but it happens. Wouldn't it be awful if they didn't, if they were just empty drones. 



> being strict isn't mean. being strict is being solid and balanced...


Again, absolutely agree but achievable with positive methods - turning away from abusing animals doesn't mean not being productive and a good leader.



> you can be displeased with your dog... he will feel badly because he let you down... show your disappointment when it is needed and then move on... all is forgiven in a dog's world... they don't dwell in the past at all... they never forget but they don't dwell on past things...


Tell that to Sidney who cowers when anyone raises a hand because his owners showed their displeasure in similar ways to Cesar Millan! Dogs can read your mood without you having to lay a finger on them, it's just not necessary and is purely for easing the owner's frustration rather than productively changing behaviours. 

Thanks, sorry for waffling but seems I'm in good company there!


----------



## Emmaj (Dec 3, 2007)

Mrs Mental said:


> I thought the above was rather rude. And presumptious (sp) as one of my dogs is from our local rescue centre and her previous owners have been prosecuted for their abuse of her. I did not state I worked miracles or infact say anything about myself merely stated I had two well behaved dogs and that training I felt was an ongoing thing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
if you think she is rude an gets up your nose then put her on ignore then 

but tbh that wasnt fenwoman being rude lol 


so yeah well all have our opinions but if you dont like what you read ignore it fenwoman does :Na_Na_Na_Na::lol2:


----------



## Emmaj (Dec 3, 2007)

HABU said:


> i can offend... boy can i offend!!... half the time without really knowing or intending it...
> 
> ... oh yeah... i can get stuck on stupid myself... after all,, this is joe six-pack-himself talking...
> 
> ... oh yeah... my foot fits well in my mouth... it's been there many, many times...:blush:


 
habu you offend me all the time hun :Na_Na_Na_Na::lol2:


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

HABU said:


> i have to defend fenwoman... she's alright in my book...
> 
> 
> image
> ...



I know you. You are trying to get yer 'ands on me chutney :lol2:

That is one fine dog you have there.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

fenwoman said:


> I know you. You are trying to get yer 'ands on me chutney :lol2:
> 
> That is one fine dog you have there.


 birds and stones... birds and stones...:whistling2:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Emmaj said:


> habu you offend me all the time hun :Na_Na_Na_Na::lol2:


 
i apologise in advanced... cause you know it'll happen again... don't we??: victory::lol2:


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

> I just find it all really sad, these people are missing out on so much with their dogs and if their problems are (theoretically - as most aren't) so bad that positive methods "just won't work" one has to wonder why that would mean putting your dog in the position of being zapped and poked and yanked and hit for the rest of their lives. Sometimes quality is better than quantity and I know I've said it before and been slated for it but I'd rather PTS my dogs than ever make them suffer.


 Kathy I'm sorry but you really sound quite hysterical. You seem to be fixated on cruelty, convinced that everone is cruel to their dogs every day and they live in abject terror every day of their lives if anyone subscribes to the pack theory. You keep bringing up the notion that you believe that pack theory is about violence and that we want the dogs to think we are dogs. I have put you right on these points before now on several occasions, but it seems to have gone right over your head. To say that you would rather your dog was dead, than let someone like myself care for it, is the ranting of an unstable person IMO. I can assure you that all 25 of my dogs are happy and well balanced, mannerly dogs who are most definately not afraid of me, nor do I beat, hang, kick, poke or do anything else to them on a regular basis. I never offer them violence at all. I'm sorry if this has destroyed your misconceptions of what dominance or pack theory is about. (I doubt it though as no doubt you'll disbelieve me in your fixation.) You remind me of some mad social worker who becomes obsessed with the idea that all fathers molest their daughters, like the one who ended up getting dozens of children removed from their parents in the 1980's.
You have your method of training and it works for you and your dogs in your environment. I have mine and it works for me, my dogs and my environment and all I can say is that for my part, I'm pleased with it. My dogs are safe around my livestock and I can be outside all day long, pottering about and trust that the dogs know how I expect them to behave. No need to keep them locked in the house, or on leads.I would almost rather kill my dogs than have the poor beggars locked up inside the house all day while I'm outside. They are country dogs and spend the whole day sleeping and playing, digging holes, running about, chasing loose feathers blowing in the wind, chewing bones,climbing the straw stack, making dens under the sheds, snoozing etc. I can potter and they can play and the livestock is safe. Incidentally I have no idea which collar you tried but the petsafe one gives no more than a shock like I get regularly off my car door. Certainly less than the pigs (and I) get off their electric fence. Please don't tell me that you also think electric fences to keep livestock in is also cruel.


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> Kathy I'm sorry but you really sound quite hysterical. You seem to be fixated on cruelty, convinced that everone is cruel to their dogs every day and they live in abject terror every day of their lives if anyone subscribes to the pack theory. *You keep bringing up the notion that you believe that pack theory is about violence* and that we want the dogs to think we are dogs. I have put you right on these points before now on several occasions, but it seems to have gone right over your head. To say that you would rather your dog was dead, than let someone like myself care for it, is the ranting of an unstable person IMO. I can assure you that all 25 of my dogs are happy and well balanced, mannerly dogs who are most definately not afraid of me, *nor do I beat, hang, kick, poke or do anything else to them on a regular basis*.


<My emphasis>

Whoooooa, hang on, my post was about people using CM's methods of abuse, not your methods? I don't go in for pack ranking but I was talking about people who use the CM methods I described (shock collars, asphyxiation and beatings), and I made that very clear, so you have the wrong end of an imaginary stick lol. You are responding to a post that doesn't exist, noone said anything about your dogs. Your reaction is completely unwarranted as you say yourself you don't use those methods. Who sounds hysterical now, jumping to conclusions? :lol2:


----------



## Emmaj (Dec 3, 2007)

HABU said:


> i apologise in advanced... cause you know it'll happen again... don't we??: victory::lol2:


lol of course i would be lost without it :Na_Na_Na_Na::lol2::flrt:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

KathyM said:


> I've got to be honest and I don't mean this rudely at all but I see these long posts and I am disinclined to bother reading them, so haven't read any of yours fully. For that I apologise and because of the shame of it (lol) I will finally answer one of them. Before I begin though I am answering this as if answering someone who follows punishment techniques such as CM's and if that is not you, it doesn't apply but these seem to be the common and refutable arguments put forward by his cult.
> 
> *i don't care about ceasar, nor his supposed cult... he has some validity in most of his methods... and by the way, i enjoy your candidness*
> 
> ...


 
*i'm not telling anyone how to do... i stating my veiws here... i'm contributing to the tread... my dogs have always been happy big babies... always... but they know when play time is over and they know the rules... there is no confusion... i play and have a good time and then say OK, and playtime is over... no brutality there... rules make life simple and not confusing... dogs want structure... they want to know what to expect... they like routines andf predictability...*

*i hope this sits well with most folks... i'm not mean or cruel... i expect certain things and my dogs have learned to expect certain things from me... it's a two way street but they never own anything and they never decide or vote on what we do... no, all dogs have to be subserviant to humans... all humans... otherwise some bad stuff happens... it sees a baby as a threat...or challenges one of your kids for position in the pack... that won't do.*


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

KathyM said:


> <My emphasis>
> 
> Whoooooa, hang on, my post was about people using CM's methods of abuse, not your methods? I don't go in for pack ranking but I was talking about people who use the CM methods I described (shock collars, asphyxiation and beatings), and I made that very clear, so you have the wrong end of an imaginary stick lol. You are responding to a post that doesn't exist, noone said anything about your dogs. Your reaction is completely unwarranted as you say yourself you don't use those methods. Who sounds hysterical now, jumping to conclusions? :lol2:


 But not all of his methods use shock collars and I have certainly never seen asphyxation nor beatings on any of his programmes. I do believe he does a lot of good generally. However since I don't have problems dogs, I'm not likely to use his methods. I have in a the past used an electric shock collar, on the advice and under the guidance of a rather famous behaviourist. I spent rather a lot of money at his farm for an afternoon with a dog of mine who was beyond all help and I'd tried everything with and was about to be put to sleep. It sorted the problem in one session and she lived a further 10 years a happy, calm, well balanced bitch who was my 'right hand man', my protector, my friend, and the one who helped me to 'discipline dogs who were 'playing up'. I was alpha bitch and she was Beta, a dominant bitch who cocked her leg and scent marked like a dog all her life.I don't regret having the collar used on her as it totally changed her mind set.Nothing else would have worked. 
So I guess I do fit the sort of person you were describing, and my dogs still aren't afraid of me.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

collar and leash... that's all anyone needs for a dog... besides toys of course.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

HABU said:


> collar and leash... that's all anyone needs for a dog... besides toys of course.


 Don't even need a leash for big Ursa. He's so big I simply hold his collar.:lol2:


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

fenwoman said:


> But not all of his methods use shock collars and I have certainly never seen asphyxation nor beatings on any of his programmes. I do believe he does a lot of good generally. However since I don't have problems dogs, I'm not likely to use his methods. *I have in a the past used an electric shock collar*, on the advice and under the guidance of a rather famous behaviourist. I spent rather a lot of money at his farm for an afternoon with a dog of mine who was beyond all help and I'd tried everything with and was about to be put to sleep. It sorted the problem in one session and she lived a further 10 years a happy, calm, well balanced bitch who was my 'right hand man', my protector, my friend, and the one who helped me to 'discipline dogs who were 'playing up'. I was alpha bitch and she was Beta, a dominant bitch who cocked her leg and scent marked like a dog all her life.I don't regret having the collar used on her as it totally changed her mind set.Nothing else would have worked.
> So I guess I do fit the sort of person you were describing, and my dogs still aren't afraid of me.


Wasn't this for a dog Giant Schnauzer that chased chickens too? :whistling2:


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

fenwoman said:


> Luckily I don't have to read any of zooman's silly posts. However, I want to comment on the bit you quoted. I assume that he has no livestock and no determined terriers to chase them. *In other words he has zero experience, yet still he feels he is qualified to not only make judgements, but spout his opinion*. It might be a good idea to get himself an adult untrained hunting dog, and set it among a flock of chickens, or let it see a rabbit etc, and try yelling to get it's attention. I hope he'll cry and feel sorry when he cleans up the gory mess left by the dog.Dogs in predator mode, do not respond to yells or loud noises, or tugging on the led. They get totally fixated on the prey and nothing will stop them. But he wouldn't have any experience of that would he with his caged chihuahua.:bash:


As said earlier, pot - kettle....

Anyone else seen this & what Fenwoman thinks of any of you who eats fat food?
http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/off-topic-chat/381807-mcdonalds-big-tasty.html


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

Zoo-Man said:


> As said earlier, pot - kettle....
> 
> Anyone else seen this & what Fenwoman thinks of any of you who eats fat food?
> http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/off-topic-chat/381807-mcdonalds-big-tasty.html


:lol2:

Not rude, direct, my backside....


----------



## diamondlil (May 7, 2008)

Zoo-Man said:


> As said earlier, pot - kettle....
> 
> Anyone else seen this & what Fenwoman thinks of any of you who eats fat food?
> http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/off-topic-chat/381807-mcdonalds-big-tasty.html


Hilarious reading, thank you for the link.


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> But not all of his methods use shock collars and I have certainly never seen asphyxation nor beatings on any of his programmes. I do believe he does a lot of good generally. However since I don't have problems dogs, I'm not likely to use his methods. I have in a the past used an electric shock collar, on the advice and under the guidance of a rather famous behaviourist. I spent rather a lot of money at his farm for an afternoon with a dog of mine who was beyond all help and I'd tried everything with and was about to be put to sleep. It sorted the problem in one session and she lived a further 10 years a happy, calm, well balanced bitch who was my 'right hand man', my protector, my friend, and the one who helped me to 'discipline dogs who were 'playing up'. I was alpha bitch and she was Beta, a dominant bitch who cocked her leg and scent marked like a dog all her life.I don't regret having the collar used on her as it totally changed her mind set.Nothing else would have worked.
> So I guess I do fit the sort of person you were describing, and my dogs still aren't afraid of me.


No, you do not fit the type of person I described, if you did I would've enjoyed saying so, you know me! I was talking about CM's cruel methods, not the ones that aren't worth getting riled over (not with you currently at least). Of course all of his programs aren't filled with abuse, but it IS there in his work and it's that, and the false impression of quick fixes that bothers me. If people believe problem dogs are "dominant" and need rank reduction methods, that's crap but it's not what I was talking about and trying to draw offence where none was due is OTT and unecessary. :2thumb:


----------



## eve2611 (Jul 28, 2009)

ok im gonna stick my neck out here:

i have watched it for a while but i must admit i was very dubious at first, some of the techniques did seem bit heavy handed and there was a lot of bad press about the treatment of some of the dogs in Cesar's care but over time of watching and understanding more about his method, with his approach based upon animal psychology and the pack leader i noticed i actually do a lot of the techniques or methods he does and some of those really can have effects as quick as they appear to on his show...

I am a bit dubious about the alligations made against Cesar for abuse to peoples pets as the few cases I have seen that have resulted in law suits been taken out have been settled out of court and the owners who brought these cases took money rather than continue the case and get Cesar prosecuted, money which more than likely came from the owners of the National Geographic Channel that the programs are made for rather than Cesar himself as TV companies dont like there name dragged through the courts.

If someone had seriously abused my dog I would wish to have them prosecuted and if I recieved compensation as a result of that prosecution then i wouldnt turn it down but to say someone has abused my dog then forget it because they got a backhander makes you wonder did their pet really get abused or was it they just didnt like techniques used and for the blame on their dogs behaviour to be placed upon them and wanted to make some money out of it.

I dont totally agree with all his methods as i have seen prongue collars used in some shows and I don't agree with them but in the overall picture, considering how many dogs and their owners he has helped he can't be doing bad to all dogs he works with as their would be complete uproar and the program would be pulled off air.

I would also like to add that people shouldn't try certain techniques he employs without the advice and help of someone with the training and the ability to ensure they are performed correctly and safely for both dog and owner.


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

I completely agree that allegations are just that unless proven, and that anyone should be considered innocent until proven guilty. The measures I was talking about in my posts, which I personally consider abuse, were filmed as part of the show and undeniable (and considered acceptable training techniques to share with the world). I wouldn't pass comment on what happens off screen or I'd mention his court cases, which sound very worrying but are a whole other thread.


----------



## sarahc (Jan 7, 2009)

*shock collar*

here is what he says in his book about the collars.
'perhaps no behavioral tool invented by man has been vilified more than the e-collar or as its opponents call it ,the shock collar.I absolutely positively agree with critics of this tool that,used incorrectly or put in the wrong hands,it can not only traumatize your dog,but permanently damage the trust you desire to build with him.However,when used by a proper handler,under proper circumstances,I believe this tool can truly mean the difference between life and death for some' 

Theres a whole chapter and some case histories.The books are an interesting read even if they aren't your thing.


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

sarahc said:


> here is what he says in his book about the collars.
> 'perhaps no behavioral tool invented by man has been vilified more than the e-collar or as its opponents call it ,the shock collar.I absolutely positively agree with critics of this tool that,used incorrectly or put in the wrong hands,it can not only traumatize your dog,but permanently damage the trust you desire to build with him.However,when used by a proper handler,under proper circumstances,I believe this tool can truly mean the difference between life and death for some'
> 
> Theres a whole chapter and some case histories.*The books are an interesting read even if they aren't your thing.*


I haven't read any of CM's books, but I agree that this is probably correct. I read all sorts of books by behaviourists and trainers, even the ones who's methods and theories I don't agree with ont he face of it. otherwise, how do people ensure a balanced view, with everything taken into account. 

I have to say though, I have never known of an instance where a shock collar has been used that there was no alternative other than putting the dog to sleep. 

As time goes on, less and less pople are subscribing to rank reduction methods of training or pack theory and more people are finding reward based training methods work and are less stressful for the dog. I don't doubt there is more than one way to do things. Didn't people used to think rubbing a dog's nose in it if it had an accident in the house was a good way to toilet train them? Of course, now most of us know that it is cruel and not effective.


----------



## Mrs Mental (May 5, 2009)

I'm sorry but I cannot see that giving any animal an electric shock is anything but cruel. 

I know absolutely nothing on a professional level about animal training although I do have 2 well behaved dogs. Neither of them have been taught with being prodded, poked, scruffed or shocked. 

Personally I feel that dogs, like children, learn through patience, understanding and love. For me its worked.


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

fenwoman said:


> Don't even need a leash for big Ursa. He's so big I simply hold his collar.:lol2:


I've got visions of Ursa looking like a pony now :lol2:


----------



## sarahc (Jan 7, 2009)

*shock collars*

I can't see any circumstances where I would use one.On the other hand I can't see Cesar as a baddy.He does a tremendous amount for rescue dogs that pounds can do nothing for.He has the real no hopers that are considered dangerous and at the end of the road.Forgetting the hollywood stuff,he has devoted himself to helping these animals along with animal pounds and the overstretched rescuers .You don't see all those good things on the telly.For that I applaud him and on a less dramatic thread I have found the general tips he gives very heplful.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

all one needs...


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

... what types of dogs do people have here on this thread or have had in the years past?

what levels of training were they at?

what could their dogs do and not do?

... how obedient or disciplined were they?

were they fifi dogs?... hunting dogs?... guard dogs?...

how ones dog behaves and how it performs tells a lot about the owner...


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

HABU said:


> ... what types of dogs do people have here on this thread or have had in the years past?


Personally including long term fosters - crossbreeds, bearded collie, greyhounds, lurchers, SBT, Boxers. Currently Bullmastiff and JRT x SBT.



> what levels of training were they at?


Initially whatever they came with, it was having a problematic greyhound and subsequently an aggressive lurcher (who I completely ruined with pack ranking methods taught to me by a behaviourist) that turned me towards training. Currently Dharma the bullmastiff has level 3 obedience training (which probably equates to about KC silver), has done some agility for fun as a youngster and is well socialised. The classes collapsed so we haven't taken it further formally, mainly as I don't drive. I did help run the classes for a while when the trainer in charge and the club she worked for fell out, but the club ceased it's classes as they wanted to become a closed social group rather than an open class. Sidney the JRT x has only been here a week or so and is in beginner mode with the clicker. 



> what could their dogs do and not do?


Do you mean what cues do they know? God I forget....I'll try and list Dharma's.

Sit
Down
Stand 
(all above are "sit/stand/down til I release you" so "stay" was never necessary)
Roll over (not currently used, but was my first introduction to stages in clicker training and was really rewarding at the time)
Wait (not the same as stay, it means "stop" and I haven't succeeded with this at a distance or in a drop yet, mainly because I haven't needed to teach them)
Wee
Eeeeempties (poo lol)
Heel
Come
Ball (equivalent of "fetch")
Drop
Leave 

There are probably more but that's a starter. It's so easy to put things on cue with a clicker so I got a bit carried away pmsl. I have done some target stick work with her too with door handles and light switches, but again these aren't done as often since her back injury. 



> ... how obedient or disciplined were they?


Do you mean how reliable? She's the most reliable dog I've had here, it took a lot of work, but I would say she's as reliable as I need her to be, more than most dogs I've met and probably less than some working dogs (which is down to me being happy with the way she is and therefore not needing to take it further). She has character and she is wilful and cheeky, and I absolutely love it. I love that she tries to get away with a really crap messy "sit" that's rushed to get a treat. I also love that she self-corrects this "sit". She is not disobedient, but she will test boundaries which I feel is perfectly healthy. As for "disciplined", I am not sure what that implies and don't want to assume. 



> were they fifi dogs?... hunting dogs?... guard dogs?...


What is a "fifi dog"? My dogs are my companions. 



> how ones dog behaves and how it performs tells a lot about the owner...


Depends on how long they've had the dog and the dog's previous history surely? I've had a foster dog here that was a potential liability, that wasn't down to me, it was down to the way he was treated previously. I think it's quite presumptious to suggest how a dog behaves is a fair reflection on their owner when so many things contribute to a dog's temperament, personality, choices and behaviour.


----------



## mattm (Jul 18, 2008)

> Personally I feel that dogs, like children, learn through patience, understanding and love. For me its worked.


Well at least someone said it. *Best statement I have read so far.*

The dominance theory is overrated and should not be pushed as much as some people seem to think. Not all dogs react well to it. It is not good to assume a problem is down to a dominant dog - it can be a number of things and this has to be established BEFORE taking action. Some of the things I have read people talking about on here...are NOT a way to assert yourself as a pack leader. They are just down right cruel and will result in a problem-dog. It may seem well behaved and do what it is told but it is not a happy dog. Don't get me wrong, you should always be the "leader" but reinforcing this is only rarely necessary if you are doing things properly.

As for the last question, I have been bought up with both bull breeds & terriers. Currently we own a Staffordshire Bull Terrier and a West Highland Terrier. Both are extremely well behaved dogs. They don't do anything special i.e. guard or take part in agility. But that doesn't mean anything - that is through choice. 

And I have to say, what pretty little tricks a dog does does not tell you a thing about the owner or how well the dog is trained.


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

Completely agree Matt - too many believe the one size fits all theory of bad dog = dominant dog that needs to be put back in its place. Truly dominant dogs have absolutely no need for problem behaviours as they are already high ranking, relaxed and sociable animals. Problem dogs rarely need putting down a rank, many problems assigned to "dominance" are actually fear related and rank reduction techniques can and will ruin them. I know, I made the mistake of listening to them.


----------



## Reaper941 (Mar 21, 2008)

I'm glad I didn't discover this thread sooner. Some people are delusional.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

sounds good... i'm all for saving dogs from the pound here... breaks my heart there...

rescues are a whole thing unto itself...

..not normal dog handling... each one is different... some have issues, some aren't so bad... some are train wrecks...

i have not issue with someone that rescues mistreated and abandoned dogs... it's such a huge problem here in the states.

you do whatever you have to to rehabilitate a rescue... some are so happy to be rescued and out of those prisons we call dog pounds that they love you to death for saving them and getting them out of there...

... and giving them a new lease on life.

when we got hope, the dog here, she was sitting in the back alone and calm, while all the other pups were going berserk!... i knew that was the one... i saw intelligence and a calm manner about her.

too bad they require that the adopted dogs be neutered... i'd have liked to breed her... maybe one day i'll breed those kinds of dogs... people everywhere adore her... few ever realize that she's a cross.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

dominant dogs are good... so long as they aren't believeing that they can dominate people...


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

alright then... i guess it's all been settled!: victory:


:lol2::lol2::lol2:


----------



## Mirf (May 22, 2008)

fenwoman said:


> I can assure you that all 25 of my dogs are happy and well balanced, mannerly dogs who are most definately not afraid of me, nor do I beat, hang, kick, poke or do anything else to them on a regular basis. I never offer them violence at all.


Yet in your 'musings and general twittering' you state:




> Then, this afternoon, I went out to feed the goats and found feathers scattered all over the yard and 'Chalky' the terrier in one of the cochin runs mauling a cochin hen with 'Ursa' getting very excited. In the yard were one dead Welsummer, one maran bantam cockerel and one young cochin pullet which I'd been admiring only this morning thinking how she was coming along well. I was furious. Chalky had his training collar on but took no notice of the buzz he was getting, so entrenched in his killing frenzy was he. This is not the first time he has killed a bird, hence the training collar. It looks very much like he will have to be rehomed as I simply can't keep a dog who kills my chickens.





> Both he and Ursa *have been smacked before* for the last bird they mauled and know that live chickens are sacrosanct. Altogether a real shitty end to the day.





> Then there were the roses. I bought a job lot of roses very cheaply, and spent hours this week planting them all around the poultry pens to make the place look pretty in the summer, only to find that every morning, they are laying about on the ground where they've been pulled up. Why? Why would dogs do that? As a deterrant, I spent the morning putting them back, watering them in, then smearing each one with dog shit in the hope that whichever dog is doing it, won't want to put his mouth around the shitty rose bush. I know Ursa won't touch the ball I throw if it lands near a turd so I hope it'll work with the roses.
> Sometimes, I get really fed up with the dogs and today is one of those times. They have a good diet, plenty of toys, plenty of fresh bones to gnaw (got a huge box full fresh from the slaughterhouse yesterday afternoon) and nearly an acre of land to run about and play on and still they do bad things.





> Instead of being able to use all my breath for a big lift, I used it to scream at the dogs to get out of it and wave one leg about at the chickens to get them to move.


Not quite the perfect dog owner you claim to be.....


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

Mirf said:


> Yet in your 'musings and general twittering' you state:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Bloody hell youve been busy today:gasp:


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

Mrs Mental said:


> I'm sorry but I cannot see that giving any animal an electric shock is anything but cruel.
> 
> I know absolutely nothing on a professional level about animal training although I do have 2 well behaved dogs. Neither of them have been taught with being prodded, poked, scruffed or shocked.
> 
> Personally I feel that dogs, like children, learn through patience, understanding and love. For me its worked.


 I am glad neither of your dogs is a problem nor have they ever been a problem. You are lucky.
If you have no actual personal experience with a dog which is a real problem, perhaps you might change your mind if you ever did have one?
So, how would you apply patience, understanding and love, to a dog which mauled livestock?
Would you ignore the bad, turn your back while the sheep/poultry or whatever was screaming as she chewed it's legs off while it was still alive? And immediately offer praise when she left it, still alive but with no legs?
I am interested what method you would use to train a dog like this.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

LoveForLizards said:


> I've got visions of Ursa looking like a pony now :lol2:


he's only medium size. I'm the size of a garden gnome..................................................... no, I have to tell the truth, he is the size of a small pony. Lol.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

Mirf said:


> Yet in your 'musings and general twittering' you state:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


:notworthy: bravo that man (or woman)!


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

it looks to me that dog people fall into two camps more or less...


----------



## weeble (Sep 29, 2007)

fenwoman said:


> I am glad neither of your dogs is a problem nor have they ever been a problem. You are lucky.
> If you have no actual personal experience with a dog which is a real problem, perhaps you might change your mind if you ever did have one?
> So, how would you apply patience, understanding and love, to a dog which mauled livestock?
> Would you ignore the bad, turn your back while the sheep/poultry or whatever was screaming as she chewed it's legs off while it was still alive? And immediately offer praise when she left it, still alive but with no legs?
> I am interested what method you would use to train a dog like this.


You are a loon....Have you ever used hunting dogs ( saw your comment about once a dog is in hunting mode it wont stop....Rubbish, mine stop to their name called, as do 99% of people i hunt with)...ever trained one...stopped them hunting sheep instead of rabbits?
Ill tell you now, only some sort of sadistic sod would use electric shocks to deter them...All that is needed is a 30 mtr rope and a bit of disipline...And yes, it can be used with older problem dogs...I, nor the Farms i hunt have any problems with my Dogs being free roaming as they have been trained, not electrocuted and screamed at.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

Mirf said:


> Yet in your 'musings and general twittering' you state:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 I've never claimed to be perfect. Do you realise just how stalkerish you make yourself look when you scour the internet looking for something I might have posted?
For another thing, how dare you take material from my blog and copy it without my permission. You are breaking copyright laws.
To answer the paragraphs you think will do something to me (not sure what)
The first part you copied and pasted without my permission was:
_Then, this afternoon, I went out to feed the goats and found feathers scattered all over the yard and 'Chalky' the terrier in one of the cochin runs mauling a cochin hen with 'Ursa' getting very excited. In the yard were one dead Welsummer, one maran bantam cockerel and one young cochin pullet which I'd been admiring only this morning thinking how she was coming along well. I was furious. Chalky had his training collar on but took no notice of the buzz he was getting, so entrenched in his killing frenzy was he. This is not the first time he has killed a bird, hence the training collar. It looks very much like he will have to be rehomed as I simply can't keep a dog who kills my chickens._
I have always said about Chalkys problems. After he got thrown out of a car outside my cottage and I took him in, I had laods of problems with him. I have spoken often about those problems on here including his chicken killing. And the collar he had on was a 'humane' one which emitted either a high pitched noise, or a vibration. So what is the problem with that? And yes, a few eeks after he was dunmped on me and he killed several birds, I did indeed think that he was toomuch for me to cope with and that I would have to rehome him. Especially as his poultry killing was causing excitement in a very young Ursa and I didn't want him to see this activity as an exciting game and copy Chalky.
Now perhaps you can explain what is so terrible about any of that?

_The next part you copied in an attempt to prove some point was:
Both he and Ursa *have been smacked before* for the last bird they mauled and know that live chickens are sacrosanct. Altogether a real shitty end to the day. _

Yes, they had both been smacked before. That doesn't mean I take a piece of 3 by 2 and beat the living crap out of them while they are tied to a pole and can't escape. It means exactly what it says, I caught them mauling a bird, and after yelling didn't get their attention, with my small hand (which is riddled with osteoarthritis) I smacked each on the rump. No bones were broken, nobody yelped, in fact I imagine anything other than a quick slap probably would have caused damage and pain to my hand before it had hurt them. So do tell, had they been your dogs, and you caught them, and neither had heard you shout because they were concentrating on what they were doing, what would you have done is a slapped rump is so terrible. Are you really insinuating that I abuse my dogs? One slap on the rump and they leave what they are doing. 
When my son was little I caught him with a screwdriver in one of the electric sockets, I ran over and slapped his hand. Was I wrong? Should I have turned my back to ignore the bad, and rewarded him with praise when the shock threw him across the room away from the socket?
What exactly are you trying to say?

And this bit is funny. 
_Then there were the roses. I bought a job lot of roses very cheaply, and spent hours this week planting them all around the poultry pens to make the place look pretty in the summer, only to find that every morning, they are laying about on the ground where they've been pulled up. Why? Why would dogs do that? As a deterrant, I spent the morning putting them back, watering them in, then smearing each one with dog shit in the hope that whichever dog is doing it, won't want to put his mouth around the shitty rose bush. I know Ursa won't touch the ball I throw if it lands near a turd so I hope it'll work with the roses.
Sometimes, I get really fed up with the dogs and today is one of those times. They have a good diet, plenty of toys, plenty of fresh bones to gnaw (got a huge box full fresh from the slaughterhouse yesterday afternoon) and nearly an acre of land to run about and play on and still they do bad things._

(I'm surprised you didn't edit out the last paragraph as it implies that I care for my dogs really well :lol2:

Are you really trying to say that because I put dog poo on my newly planted roses in an effort to stop the dogs uprooting them, that I am some kind of a monster?

And lastly
_Instead of being able to use all my breath for a big lift, I used it to scream at the dogs to get out of it and wave one leg about at the chickens to get them to move._
If you are going to quote what I wrote, at least do it in context.
I was explaining about lifting something heavy. I have 25 dogs who walk with me when I walk. If I have to lift say a feed sack weighing 25kg it takes a lot of effort and a dose of my opiates in order to do it. With my scheurmanns disease there is always a risk that my spine moves, pinches a nerve and I fall. If I fall while holding 25kgs, I will likey injure the bigger dogs and kill the tiny ones and certainly 25kg fallin gonto one of the chickens will kill it so, I lift the sack, and bellow "all dogs get out now" in order for them to move away from me. The mere fact that I have shouted loud, imparts the fact that it is a matter of some urgency. And by waving a leg about as I take a step, the chickens can see that I am about to make a step and hopeuffly move away. If they still stand there, the waving leg, pushes them out of the way.
So, what is the problem with that? Am I some kind of animal torturing monster because I shout at the dogs to get away from me in case I drop 25kg of wheat on them? Perhaps I'm a chicken monster for making sure I don't step on them because I can't see where I'm putting my feet because of the large sack I have gripped to my front.
Please explain what exactly in the paragraphs you quoted, indicates that I am a vile human being who daily abuses her dogs which are obviously terrified of me?


----------



## Charlottie (Oct 4, 2008)

Mirf said:


> Yet in your 'musings and general twittering' you state:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


May I say time well spent =) and said very well :2thumbs:


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

weeble said:


> You are a loon....Have you ever used hunting dogs ( saw your comment about once a dog is in hunting mode it wont stop....Rubbish, mine stop to their name called, as do 99% of people i hunt with)...ever trained one...stopped them hunting sheep instead of rabbits?
> Ill tell you now, only some sort of sadistic sod would use electric shocks to deter them...All that is needed is a 30 mtr rope and a bit of disipline...And yes, it can be used with older problem dogs...I, nor the Farms i hunt have any problems with my Dogs being free roaming as they have been trained, not electrocuted and screamed at.


 I don't hunt and have never hunted so no, I have never used hunting dogs. Hunting dogs are trained differently to my pet dogs. They get trained to different commands and different behaviours. If I call any of my dogs by name it is always as a means to get their attention so that they look at me for the command. So "Bronnie,sit".
A name is just a name, not a command.
So please tell me about this rope and discipline. I'm fascinated. You have one high prey drive dog, you do all the normal training, rattle tins, water hose, long line etc but the problem is that she never mauls when you are present. When you are present she is perfectly behaved. However, when you are not present, if a bird or lamb or horse, wanders onto the land, she will attack it. How would you sort this one out then? Not with a 'hunting' dog, but a large high prey drive German guarding breed who was high status and dominant. In your idealistic world, when all else had failed, you would simply put 30 metres of rope on her and use some sort of unspecified 'discipline'. Explain exactly what 'discipline'? She was a perfect dog in all other ways. Well mannered, brilliant with children, confident and friendly around other humans, walked to heel. I could take her anywhere and know she would make me proud. But without me there, she would kill livestock. So what 'discipline' would prevent this and how would 30 metres of rope help?
You see the real issue I have with armchair behaviourists like yourself is that you have a very narrow idea of dogs since you have never owned a problem dog and as such have no idea about what they can do, what can be tried with them and what results you get. If I had another dog like Harley, I would probably do exactly as I did with her. After peaking to Roger Mugford at crufts one year and explaining in tears about my lovely bitch and how dangerous she was to other animals, and telling him about all the different things I had tried to stop her he suggested I go down to Surrey for a training session with him. He met her, long lined her in the sheep field, saw how she was, and suggested the collar. Like many others with zero experience of such collars, I wasn't very keen until he told me to hold one while he activated it. Hmmm, it was nothing worse than the static shock I get off the car. So I agreed.He talked me through what was going to happen, said I was to remain silent until the collar was activated, and I was to immediately call her too me and praise her. I had to stay silent because she had to think that what happened, happened as a result of her chasing a sheep and not to do with me punishing her in any way. A bit like a child learns that if they put a finger in a candle flame it hurts so they don't do it again.
Collar was put on, lead was taken off and she ran for the flock of sheep. I put my hands over my eyes and couldn't watch as I knew she'd pull one down and maul it. Mr Mugford pressed the button and................nothing. She didn't slow or stop or hesitate.So he increaded the correction level and pressed again. This time she gave a surprised yelp and stopped so I called her and praised her like mad. The reason she never stopped at the first activation was that she was as hard as nails and it simply didn't register. The yelp wasn't a scream, even though I know you'd like to think it was, nor was it loud. It was sort of shocked surprise as this had never happened before.
She got one single shock and took her for a walk in the sheep field, the cattle field, among his flock of geese and among the ducks and chickens. Off lead, and she not only showed zero interest in them, she wasn't afraid of them either. One small static shock. She was 2 years old. From that day, to the day she died aged 12 years, she never mauled nor killed another living animal and was 100% trustworthy around any livestock.
I live in a very rural area and keep livestock myself. How on earth can I keep a dog like her unless she is stock steady. I had spent 2 years trying all the fluffy bunny methods of training, to try to stop her killing things when I wasn't around, and in the space of half an hours training, it broke the cycle. She (and Chalky) were both highly intelligent. She knew to look to see if I was about. If I was, she was perfectly behaved. If I wasn't, she could kill and she did. Since I lived next to someone who bred very expensive hunters and had tiny foals afoot in the field next to my land I had to find a way to make Harley think that her own actions caused an unpleasant feeling.
No doubt you will now come back with some sort of fanciful, methods which you swear would work, but having never had a dog like Harley you can't really be sure but you so want to think that you are so much better than I am. Go ahead, fill your boots. I'm sure you'll be able to tell me that what I did with Harley was awful and you could have done it all so much better.
I have never in my life had a bitch as dominant as Harley. Add to that her breed, which is notoriously strong willed and it could have been a disater. In fact a woman who shows and judges giant schnauzers, and who I had gone to for advice about her problems, saw the difference in her after I'd been to see Roger Mugford, and she said to me "if this bitch had belonged to anyone else, she'd have been a dangerous dog".
So before you think you can do it all better, think on, you didn't know Harley, you don't know me. You have no idea how bad she was nor what steps I'd taken prior to taking her to see Mr Mugford.
Out of interest, if you work farmland with livestock, do you ever come across electric fencing? Do you berate the farmer for giving his livestock 'electric shocks' and tell him he is an animal abuser? If not, why not?


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

> =KathyM;4765386 bad dog = dominant dog that needs to be put back in its place.


 Who says this?


----------



## Charlottie (Oct 4, 2008)

fenwoman said:


> No doubt you will now come back with some sort of fanciful, methods which you swear would work, *but having never had a dog like Harley* you can't really be sure but you so want to think that *you are so much better than I am*. Go ahead, fill your boots. I'm sure you'll be able to tell me that what I did with Harley was awful and you could have done it all so much better.
> I have never in my life had a bitch as dominant as Harley. Add to that her breed, which is notoriously strong willed and it could have been a disater. In fact a woman who shows and judges giant schnauzers, and who I had gone to for advice about her problems, saw the difference in her after I'd been to see Roger Mugford, and she said to me "if this bitch had belonged to anyone else, she'd have been a dangerous dog".
> So before you think you can do it all better, think on, you didn't know Harley,* you don't know me*. You have no idea how bad she was nor what steps I'd taken prior to taking her to see Mr Mugford.
> Out of interest, if you work farmland with livestock, do you ever come across electric fencing? Do you berate the farmer for giving his livestock 'electric shocks' and tell him he is an animal abuser? If not, why not?


Hmm.. interesting you again assume your self higher than other people!!
And yes they may not know you but same can be said for you, you constanly are judging people on the forum (the McDonalds thread being a good example). Also how would you know the person hasn't had a dog the same or worse than Harley -unless they have unready mentioned it if so i appoligse!


----------



## SuperTed (Apr 19, 2007)

25 doggggys??? :flrt: if only!!! i demand you post pics of all of em.... individually!


----------



## Mrs Mental (May 5, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> I am glad neither of your dogs is a problem nor have they ever been a problem. You are lucky.
> If you have no actual personal experience with a dog which is a real problem, perhaps you might change your mind if you ever did have one?
> So, how would you apply patience, understanding and love, to a dog which mauled livestock?
> Would you ignore the bad, turn your back while the sheep/poultry or whatever was screaming as she chewed it's legs off while it was still alive? And immediately offer praise when she left it, still alive but with no legs?
> I am interested what method you would use to train a dog like this.


 
Actually if you had read properly what I had posted you would now know that one of my dogs is from a rescue centre - she was abused and neglected so badly that her previous owners have been prosecuted for their treatment of her. When she first came to us she'd not go to the toilet out anywhere, would wee in fright at anything and everything, was afraid of the wind, the rain, the dark, infact anything and everything. She has come on brilliantly bless her and is now a very loyal and trusting little thing.

Both my dogs are collies, so are hunters by instinct but both respond immediately to one word commands. Where I walk the dogs rabbits roam free in the fields - if either of the dogs go to chase the rabbit they are recalled and respond instantly. So no I wouldn't turn my back to my dog mauling a chicken I'd recall him/her before they got to the chicken.

So in answer to your presumptions and questions raised, yes I have had a very difficult dog to work with who has responded very well to the patience, love and understanding that we've shown her. 

I dont know whether we've been very lucky with her or what methods I would use if what I've already done hadn't worked but I do know that I would not ever use an electric shock collar for any reason. 

This thread was not a competition to see whose dog is/was the most difficult to train. All rehomers wil come with some problems I'm sure and every dog is totally different to the last/next. 

I posted originally to say that I did not believe in the majority of Ceaser's methods that I had seen and that I felt you could achieve the same results with patience, love and understanding. 

I have tortoises and I have dogs - the two do not mix the same as chickens and dogs don't mix so my tortoises live in purpose brick built enclosures which have mesh tops on them ensuring their safety. If I choose to have dogs and chickens I would ensure that the chickens had a safe large wire fenced enclosure to live in rather than taking repeated chances with their lives.


----------



## Mrs Mental (May 5, 2009)

SuperTed said:


> 25 doggggys??? :flrt: if only!!! i demand you post pics of all of em.... individually!


Wish I could afford it!


----------



## weeble (Sep 29, 2007)

How the hell do you know i have never owned a Problem Dog?
So I never owned a Greyhound/collie that used, yes USED, to love killing sheep...It got trained, it was a hunting dog and a house dog, it loved kids, was house trained and it never attacked ANY livestock again...and what bit of free roaming don't you understand??
The dog could be a few fields away while i would be sat in the farm having a brew or helping lug bails about....i didn't need to watch it, it didn't kill again....and i never once used an electric shock collar.
My methods aint fanciful, involve tin cans nor are they from some so called "behavior expert"...they were got from friends who happen to own Farms, have Dogs and train them well. The rope method is just one way...you want to know...I don't think i could explain to someone as narrow minded as you, nor have the inclination to try as you seem to have more wisdom than God, or so you think.
And why would i like to think your dog screamed? I don't think its funny you electrocute your Dog for your inability to control it. Nor do i think its funny you admit letting a dog you know kills wander free to kill while you hide in your bedroom so you can shock it before it kills...That just didn't work did it.

Oh, the Farms i hunt dont have Electric fences...Just nice big limestone walls and sheep mesh...


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

Mrs Mental said:


> Actually if you had read properly what I had posted you would now know that one of my dogs is from a rescue centre - she was abused and neglected so badly that her previous owners have been prosecuted for their treatment of her. When she first came to us she'd not go to the toilet out anywhere, would wee in fright at anything and everything, was afraid of the wind, the rain, the dark, infact anything and everything. She has come on brilliantly bless her and is now a very loyal and trusting little thing.
> 
> Both my dogs are collies, so are hunters by instinct but both respond immediately to one word commands. Where I walk the dogs rabbits roam free in the fields - if either of the dogs go to chase the rabbit they are recalled and respond instantly. So no I wouldn't turn my back to my dog mauling a chicken I'd recall him/her before they got to the chicken.
> 
> ...


Exactly! It isn't rocket science is it? :notworthy: x


----------



## SuperTed (Apr 19, 2007)

Haha! Yea i think i will stop at 2 when i find the right "friend" for my baby boxer! :flrt:


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

Mrs Mental said:


> Actually if you had read properly what I had posted you would now know that one of my dogs is from a rescue centre - she was abused and neglected so badly that her previous owners have been prosecuted for their treatment of her. When she first came to us she'd not go to the toilet out anywhere, would wee in fright at anything and everything, was afraid of the wind, the rain, the dark, infact anything and everything. She has come on brilliantly bless her and is now a very loyal and trusting little thing.


 Well since neither of the above would I consider a problem, more of some small 'issues', have you had a real problem dog? I mean dominant large guarding type with high prey drive. What you have described about the abuse and fear etc of one of the dogs, to me is not a problem dog. The yorkie I have here is probably very similar and was the most terrified broken dog I have ever come across, but not a problem dog as I knew she could be fixed with simply kindness and time, which is how it happened. But most definately not what I would call a problem dog.



> Both my dogs are collies, so are hunters by instinct but both respond immediately to one word commands. Where I walk the dogs rabbits roam free in the fields - if either of the dogs go to chase the rabbit they are recalled and respond instantly. So no I wouldn't turn my back to my dog mauling a chicken I'd recall him/her before they got to the chicken.


 ahh collies, inherently obedient. Again, different kettle of fish to a gaint schnauzer and the fact that they respond immediately to one word command, shows that they are not problem dogs.



> So in answer to your presumptions and questions raised, yes I have had a very difficult dog to work with who has responded very well to the patience, love and understanding that we've shown her.


and if your definition of a 'difficult' dog is one who was abused and displays fear issues, it tells me that you haven't any concept of a really difficult dog, and until and if ever you do, you will understand exactly what I am talking about. 



> I dont know whether we've been very lucky with her or what methods I would use if what I've already done hadn't worked but I do know that I would not ever use an electric shock collar for any reason.


 you see, the trouble I am having is that everyone is saying how terrible I am and that they would never consider using a shock collar. However, the same people have never really had a problem dog. And I am not talking about a dog who maybe woofs at people, or who has fear based issues. All of the people who tell me that they'd never use such a collar, have not been able to explain to me exactly what they would have done to stop her killing and mauling livestock, given that all the more normal methods had been used and failed over the previous 2 years.



> This thread was not a competition to see whose dog is/was the most difficult to train. All rehomers wil come with some problems I'm sure and every dog is totally different to the last/next.


 Did I say it was a competition? I was merely trying to make absolutely clear, just how much of a problem she was. In 30 years keeping, breeding, showing, grooming and doing rescue, I have never come across a dog like Harley. She was the first of the breed I'd ever owned and was pretty typical of the breed apparently. They are not common for a reason, they are bloody hard work. So I had a large, high prey drive, guarding breed who was also dominant. She challenged me almost to the day she died. There was nothing I could not deal with though, apart from her killing livestock. She was perfectly capable of pulling a large foal down and killing it. Seriously, if you ever meet a large giant schnauzer, ask if you can go over it and you'll feel just how poerful they are and I swear their skull is solid bone. Think 'hairy rottweiler'.
Surely, if I have owned a large number of dogs in all the years I have owned dogs, and only one has ever stood out as being a problem, you would think that there must have been something about this one particular dog which made me name her so?



> I posted originally to say that I did not believe in the majority of Ceaser's methods that I had seen and that I felt you could achieve the same results with patience, love and understanding.


fair enough. If you have watched a lot of his shows, and think that on balance, he is cruel, then you are entitled to your opinion. However, if you have watched only a few of the more extreme ones, and your experience of 'problem' dogs equates to one which had fear issues, then I have to conclude that you are not speaking from and real experience, but more an idealised idea. That's just my opinion. You don't agree with the way CM handles things, fair enough, I respect your opinion on that subject, but when you give an opinion based on a dog you didn't know, a breed you may have no experience of, and tell me that I did it all wrong, based on your own experience of one dog with a fear issue, then I'm afraid I simply don't accept that. You may not like that but that's tough.



> I have tortoises and I have dogs - the two do not mix the same as chickens and dogs don't mix so my tortoises live in purpose brick built enclosures which have mesh tops on them ensuring their safety. If I choose to have dogs and chickens I would ensure that the chickens had a safe large wire fenced enclosure to live in rather than taking repeated chances with their lives.


 My chickens are in large secure breeding pens. However, I have some semi feral birds here which fly over the top of the pens and get out. However, since all my current dogs are safe around them, it isn't a problem. In the last house, my neighbours birds would come over the fence, my own turkeys would fly over the fence and the neighbours horses in the field ajoining my land were also at risk. Should I have insisted that the neighbours penned their birds up and removed the horses from the field and stabled them and how would I stop turkeys flying? IN an ideal world, with a small garden and half a dozen chickens, they'd be in a neat shop bought ark or pen, getting no excersize, not free ranging and not eating bugs, scratching about, roosting in the trees etc, while my dogs were shut in the house all day while I was outside on the land. In real life, I expect a problem dog to be eventually sorted out and trained to be stock steady. Shutting dogs and chcikens away won't do that and while my own birds might be safe inside small pens, I have no control of the neighbours birds, nor any wild animal which enters the land. I don't lead a suburban life. You know that. I have land and livestock and my dogs are my companions who are about on the land with me as I do chores. I like it that way and if I have to train a dog to stop it killing livestock, that's what happens. Apart from Harley, and more recently, Chalky, none of my dogs has ever shown an interest in killing anything. The fact that he went nuts in one day and killed several chickens, is hardly my fault is it? How was I to know he wasn't safe? He was dumped out of a car in front of my house after all.
Happily, he too is completely safe around the livestock and birds.
As for shutting birds away for Harley, unless I go back in time 16 years, it isn't relevant. Again, you seem to have an idealistic view of a perfect life with a few chickens in a small pen, and a couple of nice well behaved dogs in another pen and nice magnolia paint on your walls and everything 'nice'. That might be your life. It isn't mine. Mine is a working smallholding and dogs which will have good manners and do as I tell them.
You carry on with your 2 nice well behaved dogs and your unchallenging life, and I'll carry on with mine and no doubt we both look at each other's lives with complete abhorrance. Each to their own.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

weeble said:


> How the hell do you know i have never owned a Problem Dog?
> So I never owned a Greyhound/collie that used, yes USED, to love killing sheep...It got trained, it was a hunting dog and a house dog, it loved kids, was house trained and it never attacked ANY livestock again...and what bit of free roaming don't you understand??


 so I'll ask again. How did you train it. How would you have trained HArley? I asked before but you never gave an answer.



> The dog could be a few fields away while i would be sat in the farm having a brew or helping lug bails about....i didn't need to watch it, it didn't kill again


so a fairly easy dog then. What would you have done if it had behaved when you were around, but started hunting and killing if you were not. I asked before but you didn't tell me anything.



> ....and i never once used an electric shock collar.


 I know you didn't. You used 30 metres of rope but I'm still not sure how you used it.Nor how you think I could have used it given that she didn't kill anything while I was there holding the end of the rope.



> My methods aint fanciful, involve tin cans nor are they from some so called "behavior expert"...they were got from friends who happen to own Farms, have Dogs and train them well. The rope method is just one way...you want to know...I don't think i could explain to someone as narrow minded as you, nor have the inclination to try as you seem to have more wisdom than God, or so you think.


 So you have these vague wonderful methods which would have worked but, you aren't able to explain the methods......er.........right.



> And why would i like to think your dog screamed?


 because so far you have had an opinion about Harley, what she did, how she killed and how I trained her, so I just figured that you would also have a preconcieved idea about the shock collar and prefer to imagine it is cruel because it means you can jomp into the fray and tell me about your superior methods, but not actually explain them.



> I don't think its funny you electrocute your Dog for your inability to control it


 did I say you'd find it funny? Did I? I was able to control HArley. She was a perfectly behaved dog...............as long as she was with me.



> Nor do i think its funny you admit letting a dog you know kills wander free to kill while you hide in your bedroom so you can shock it before it kills...That just didn't work did it


Are you on drugs? What has my bedroom got to do with anything? If I had hidden in my bedroom, in the last house, that bedroom face the road in front and I wouldn't have been able to see what Harley was doing in the field at the back, so I'm afraid you'll have to explain your reasoning there as I can't grasp what it is you are trying to accuse me of. Harley was not alowwed to 'wander' free to kill but I have no control over neighbours birds flying over the hedge, or is that somehow another example of my negligence. Are you saying that she should never have been allowed out into my garden or that I should berate the neighbours for having birds which flew over the hedge.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say at all in this paragraph. None of the bit about my bedroom, nor the garden, nor the neighbours birds (or horses) and what didn't work? The shock collar worked 100% since she never killed another animal again as long as she lived.



> Oh, the Farms i hunt dont have Electric fences...Just nice big limestone walls and sheep mesh...


 ahhh so they don't have livestock which needs confining them. I mean, sheep get over walls don't they? and sheep mesh won't keep cattle in. I hope they don't use barbed wire as that is terribly cruel stuff.
Have you ever had a shock off an electric fence or a shock collar?
Please please please actually answer my questions in your next rant...er.....post as you keep making statements and suppositions and when I ask you to clarify some grandiose statement, you never do which makes it look like you are talking out of a hole in your hat.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

fenwoman said:


> because so far you have had an opinion about Harley, what she did, how she killed and how I trained her, so I just figured that you would also have a preconcieved idea about the shock collar and prefer to imagine it is cruel because it means *you can jomp into the fray and tell me about your superior methods, but not actually explain them*.


Mmm, sounds familiar! :whistling2:


----------



## Mrs Mental (May 5, 2009)

I dont remember mentioning 'shutting' birds away or putting them into little pens or locking dogs up. It is possible to high fence a huge large free roaming area for the chickens thereby keeping them safe, which is infact what I suggested - as its not an issue now for you then you dont need to so thats okay then isn't it.

As for my 'nice' life.........yes I do have a nice life thank you because I am not a bitter sounding, judgemental person like you. I am infact very happy. Why you need to judge me and presume things about me I dont know. 

There is nothing idealistic about my view of life, I have a very realistic view of life infact being disabled myself and having two special needs children ensures that my feet are very firmly on the ground. 

At the end of the day I aren't going to justify myself or defend myself to you or anyone else because I dont need to.


Edit - your signature totally suits you because that is exactly what you have done in your last post to me - you know nothing about me or my life so you wrongly presume personal things about me. In all seriousness I honestly do wonder if you are right in the head.


----------



## LincsReps (Jul 2, 2009)

Mrs Mental said:


> yes I do have a nice life thank you because I am not a bitter sounding, judgemental person like you.


:lol2:

Spot on.

She can't handle the happiness of others, shame, but every streets' got one


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

fenwoman said:


> IShe got one single shock and took her for a walk in the sheep field, the cattle field, among his flock of geese and among the ducks and chickens. Off lead, and she not only showed zero interest in them, she wasn't afraid of them either. One small static shock. She was 2 years old. From that day, to the day she died aged 12 years, she never mauled nor killed another living animal and was 100% trustworthy around any livestock.


Interesting, Fenny, that you've used a shock collar but express that you wouldn't know how to train a dog to avoid copperheads/rattlers.

I would argue that teaching dogs to avoid snakes is one case where a shock collar CAN be very, very useful - because you can present a snake (a live rattler/copperhead/etc in a container, a dead snake or a harmless species) for the dog to find, and when they approach it you make "the wrath of God" appear. The correction is quite clearly "because I got near the snake" instead of "Because mum says I shouldn't do something". And when you're talking about saving your dog from a fatal envenomation in a country where there are extremely dangerous snakes, training them quickly and without any ambiguity about what the dog is being trained about is crucial.

I wouldn't be surprised if my parents used a shock collar to train their field-trial dogs to avoid snakes.


----------



## wohic (Jun 19, 2006)

I do find it sad that people resort to using insults to try and score points ?
Tin can method ? is that the idea that you put a handful of gravel in a can, tape it up , then shake it hard or throw it down to cause a distraction ?


----------



## weeble (Sep 29, 2007)

fenwoman said:


> ahhh so they don't have livestock which needs confining them. I mean, sheep get over walls don't they? and sheep mesh won't keep cattle in. I hope they don't use barbed wire as that is terribly cruel stuff.
> Have you ever had a shock off an electric fence or a shock collar?
> Please please please actually answer my questions in your next rant...er.....post as you keep making statements and suppositions and when I ask you to clarify some grandiose statement, you never do which makes it look like you are talking out of a hole in your hat.


1st..I may be vague, but that is because i DONT WANT TO TELL YOU...Why, because you consider yourself above everyone else and your way is right. Say what you want about that, and think I'm am "talking from the hole in my hat" but my Dogs, which are Hunting Dogs by Nature and Nurture will not take Livestock while I'm not there. I doubt i would have as much Hunting permission as i do if they did.

2nd...No, they don't have Electric fences....why is that so hard to understand?
The cattle stop on the lower pastures where 5ft limestone walls, built many, many decades ago are maintained so they do the job they were ment to do, and the Mountain climbing sheep are put out in the higher, mainly unfenced higher moorland, and where fencing is needed it is Sheep mesh or sheep mesh stooped on top of previously mentioned walls.

You see, the Farms i hunt are pretty big, and well maintained...Now please feel free to prattle away...
One final question though...Why kill white Boxer pups incase they may be deaf??


----------



## Antw23uk (Jan 12, 2009)

adlock:

this thread has just turned into a pathetic slanging match. I vote it gets locked.


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

fenwoman said:


> *ahh collies, inherently obedient. Again, different kettle of fish to a gaint schnauzer and the fact that they respond immediately to one word command, shows that they are not problem dogs.*
> 
> Anyone who knows collies knows they are highly driven dogs that if not trained properly become everyone's worst nightmare. They very easily become obsessed with the wrong thing. Did it occur to you that the reason these dogs respond immediately to a one word command is because they have been trained well to do so?!
> 
> ...


It seems to me that you are extremely quick to critiscise others, but when others do the same back, or point out your failings, you resort to saying they are 'stalking' you. The fact is, if you had nothing to hide, you wouldn't be so defensive. 

You lecture people at every opportunity about health testing dogs and irresponsible breeding, but it seems to me that you are no better. You yourself have bred from dogs without the correct health testing (the cavs you bred were too young to have been tested for SM, an extremely serious condition, which cannot be cured) 

You rant about animals abuse, but feel it is ok to use a shock collar, if the circumstances suit you, an dyou admit to hitting your dogs. 

Also, why on earth would someone with such vast experience be shocked at a dog digging up roses?! You have said yourself before you rarely walk you dogs, and don't give them proper walk as such. Running about, even if all day, on 3/4 acre of land is not sufficient for most dogs. Dogs do dig stuff up, especially fi they do not get enough stimulation or exercise. 

The words, glass houses and stones spring to mind....


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> Who says this?


In my experience most people who use rank reduction methods. 

As for the rest of the last two pages, I find it quite upsetting, and not for the reasons I would've expected. It's like watching the downfall of King Kong - you know he's scary and needs taking down, but you still don't want to see him get sorted. I think I'll start looking away now.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

Mrs Mental said:


> I dont remember mentioning 'shutting' birds away or putting them into little pens or locking dogs up. It is possible to high fence a huge large free roaming area for the chickens thereby keeping them safe, which is infact what I suggested - as its not an issue now for you then you dont need to so thats okay then isn't it.
> 
> As for my 'nice' life.........yes I do have a nice life thank you because I am not a bitter sounding, judgemental person like you. I am infact very happy. Why you need to judge me and presume things about me I dont know.
> 
> ...


 Elsewhere on this thread, someone mentioned penning my birds up or keeping the dog shut in the house while I was outside. Not you personally, but then I never said it was you who said it. I was responding genrally. Since I am outside most of the day just pottering, working or simply sitting watching the animals, my poor dogs would end up shut in the house all day. Yes the fencing is a briliant idea. Indeed my breeding pens all have 6 foot high heras panels around them. The Hamburghs fly right over them even with clipped wings. How much higher should I make them. Then there is the problem with next door's birds. I notice you didn't comment about how to prevent those from flying over. Since the law says an adjoining fence or hedge is not allowed to be higher than 2 metres, what do you suggest I do. It's all very well jumping on the bandwagon to have a go, but when I raise valid point which get passed over and ignored it becomes less of a debate and more of a witch hunt frankly.
Of seen bitch fights like it where one bitch starts on another, then all the attacking bitches little cronies dive in for a sly nip here and there.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

KathyM said:


> In my experience most people who use rank reduction methods.
> 
> As for the rest of the last two pages, I find it quite upsetting, and not for the reasons I would've expected. It's like watching the downfall of King Kong - you know he's scary and needs taking down, but you still don't want to see him get sorted. I think I'll start looking away now.


 I asked because nobody I know who practices pack heirachy would even think that way. I don't personally. If one of my dogs is 'bad' then it's bad because either it is unwell and acting out of character, or because (like Chalky) it is an adult newcomer and doesn't yet know the rules here. Otherwise, the dogs find their own position within the pack and I have to respect it. As long as they see me as the boss and the one who makes decisions, that's fine and is probably why all of my dogs live harmoniously which is very fortunate for me because a pack of 25 dogs who are constantly fighting and squabbling would do my head in.
Keep watching, it's fun :2thumb:
There's nothing I enjoy more than heated debate, as long as, after I've responded to the questions put to me, and I ask some myself, the person actually has the manners to answer me. Otherwise it becomes nothing more than a crowd of yobs firing questions like stones and not wanting a response because they are only asking them in order to feel as though they have scored a point.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

LincsReps said:


> :lol2:
> 
> Spot on.
> 
> She can't handle the happiness of others, shame, but every streets' got one


 may I refer you to my signature?


----------



## Mrs Mental (May 5, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> Elsewhere on this thread, someone mentioned penning my birds up or keeping the dog shut in the house while I was outside. Not you personally, but then I never said it was you who said it. I was responding genrally. Since I am outside most of the day just pottering, working or simply sitting watching the animals, my poor dogs would end up shut in the house all day. Yes the fencing is a briliant idea. Indeed my breeding pens all have 6 foot high heras panels around them. The Hamburghs fly right over them even with clipped wings. How much higher should I make them. Then there is the problem with next door's birds. I notice you didn't comment about how to prevent those from flying over. Since the law says an adjoining fence or hedge is not allowed to be higher than 2 metres, what do you suggest I do. It's all very well jumping on the bandwagon to have a go, but when I raise valid point which get passed over and ignored it becomes less of a debate and more of a witch hunt frankly.
> Of seen bitch fights like it where one bitch starts on another, then all the attacking bitches little cronies dive in for a sly nip here and there.


First off I am not a bitch - I have been responding to you politely and stating my opinion. I have called you bitter sounding and judgemental - you sound bitter when you type and you are a judgemental person.

As for the birds I didnt ignore the flying over bit I simply missed it - I'd suggest that you either have a ceiling on your penn or dont keep the birds if you cannot guarantee their safety.

I can assure you I do not jump on anyone elses bandwagon. I have never been one to hide behind others and I've always made my own mind up about people. I treat everyone the same way they treat me and will respond to anyone in the tone they use to respond to me.

Personally I think you have a problem with me as I have disagreed with you on certain issue regarding your tortoise (pellet feeding & allowing it free roam in your home, which I feel is a dangerous environment for it to live in) 

I simply do not agree with your methods of training your dogs. If I ever had a dog in the future that I couldn't do anything with or I got to the point where I had to resort to using shock colar methods personally I would give the dog up as I'd not feel up to the job - having to resort to those methods in my opinion shows you didnt have the correct experience or knowlege to deal with that particular dog. Sorry if you dont like that but that is my view.


----------



## mattm (Jul 18, 2008)

The way in which fenwoman described the shock collar was used, I actually have to ask myself, what else should she have done instead at that point in the dogs' life? It seems the behaviour had already got to a point where nothing else was working and I think what was done is much better than putting the animal to sleep or rehoming it!!

Also, I might be a bit confused here as i've not read every single post, but using a shock collar has nothing do with the dominance theory...they are two seperate debates. The idea here was that chasing the livesock was associated with an unpleasant and shocking occurance, and in that case it worked. It is not supposed to have any association to the owner.

Obviously it is extremely rare that such action needs to be taken and it does make me question if this dog had socialization and training with such animals as a pup - how did this behaviour get to that point? Fenwoman, did you have this dog from a pup? I'm not judging or trying to "question" anything, i'm just trying to see both sides to the argument.

I know dogs will naturally hunt and go after a prey animal, but in most cases with a young dog it is easy enough to train them (in your presence) to leave them well alone. Dogs should never be trusted with such animals without supervision in my opinion. But a certain level of trust has to be established when you own livestock - even if those animals are fully secure a dog will still be tempted to bark, dig around the caging and generally scare the animals and make life difficult.

Again i'm not taking sides and i've not read the *whole* thread (I cannot be bothered to filter genuine opinions and statements from bitching is the reason).


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

Mrs Mental said:


> First off I am not a bitch - I have been responding to you politely and stating my opinion. I have called you bitter sounding and judgemental - you sound bitter when you type and you are a judgemental person.
> 
> As for the birds I didnt ignore the flying over bit I simply missed it - I'd suggest that you either have a ceiling on your penn or dont keep the birds if you cannot guarantee their safety.
> 
> ...


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)




----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)




----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

Mrs Mental said:


> First off I am not a bitch - I have been responding to you politely and stating my opinion. I have called you bitter sounding and judgemental - you sound bitter when you type and you are a judgemental person.
> 
> As for the birds I didnt ignore the flying over bit I simply missed it - I'd suggest that you either have a ceiling on your penn or dont keep the birds if you cannot guarantee their safety.
> 
> ...


 I despair, I truly do.
Could you please copy and paste the bit where I called you a bitch???

as for a ceiling on the pen, should I insist my neighbours put one on their own birds pen? Since their birds are completely free in their garden, should I insist that they roof their garden over?
As regards Horatio roaming free in my home, how can you have an opinion as to the safety or otherwise since you have never been here, never seen my home, no idea of the layout or floor plan or anything. Given that fact, how can you say that it is dangerous. Be specific. Where exactly do any dangers lie?
As for the pellet feeding, again, you don't know him, nor his health, nor my vet (who breeds tortoises) and have no idea what led to the vet recommending I feed pellets as part of his diet.
If you are however privy to this knowledge, feel free to post what you know, be specific and indicate where the vet was wrong and what else he could have suggested for the specific health issues which led to the recommendation at the time.
as for my training methods, please elucidate as to what my 'training methods' are. I wasn't aware that I had any hard and fast 'methods'. All these years I simply thought I lived happily with my dogs, who loved and respected me and grew up understanding me.
I'm sure you would rather give away your dog, to allow it to suffer when it was sent away from it's home and family to an uncertain future, to perhaps end up being bounced from home to home as each owner who couldn't correct the extreme behaviour, simply gave up and passed the problem on until perhaps it ended up on death row or in rescue as 'unrehomeable' due to sever behavioural issues which a number of owners could not correct.
However, I prefer to keep the dog and sort the problem out. 30 minutes intensive training, one 1 second static electric shock and Harley spent 12 fantastic, happy, busy and fulfilling years with me as a much loved and appreciated member of my family. But you think it would have been better to pass this problem bitch on, knowing that if I couldn't fix it, she might end up a 'boomerang' dog, or worse. How odd. And I thought you were an intelligent woman and a dog lover.
If you are ever over this way, why not call in and actually find out for yourself about me and my dogs and other animals? I am proud of all of them and proud of myself at the way that I keep them. Everyone who visits me, whether dog lover or no, is amazed at not only how well and happy the dogs all are, but how well mannered they are. In fact, 3 people who came on the weekend to collect 2 poultry houses, were stunned when one of my bantams insisted on sitting on one chap's shoulder and pecking his hair as he tried to work and then sat calmly on the woman's finger like a parrot while she stroked it's back. 
Come and see for yourself.
Here is my poor cruelly treated (joke) giant schnauzer Harley aged 12 years, only 2 weeks before she was pts because of her cancer.









and with Urian the lurcher who I still have, now aged 12.She was about 6 in the picture.









with a very baby Kip the same week he came to be, the victim of severe abuse my his drug addict owner with *** burns in hismouth, on his tongue on his ear flaps and bruised from the kicking he had had (which led to his epilepsy which killed him aged only 5, 2 weeks before Harley also died. In fact I swear, Kip's death made her lose the will to live as she adored him)









and playing 'king of the castle' on a load of sand I'd had delivered.
Harley, Kip and Urian were always together and Urian grieved terribly when they both died within 2 weeks of each other.









Now in which picture does she look cowed, unhappy or dejected?
Where can you see her subdued and afraid of me?
Look at the pictures and tell me that she'd have been better off being put into rescue or rehomed time and time again.
I take it you did see the bit in a different post where I said that a giant schnauzer breeder and judge told me that if I hadn't had Harley, she'd have ended up in rescue or worst. This person knew the bitch as I'd asked for their advice , and the conclusion was that she was the most dominant bitch she'd ever come across. Harley didn't squat to pee, she raised a leg exactly like a male dog and scent marked. I'm not talking about a squat with one leg lifted a bit, I am talking standing up against something and peeing.
So before you start making accusations and assumptions, ask me why and wherefore.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

mattm said:


> The way in which fenwoman described the shock collar was used, I actually have to ask myself, what else should she have done instead at that point in the dogs' life? It seems the behaviour had already got to a point where nothing else was working and I think what was done is much better than putting the animal to sleep or rehoming it!!
> 
> Also, I might be a bit confused here as i've not read every single post, but using a shock collar has nothing do with the dominance theory...they are two seperate debates. The idea here was that chasing the livesock was associated with an unpleasant and shocking occurance, and in that case it worked. It is not supposed to have any association to the owner.
> 
> ...


 I am ore than happy to answer questions. I had had Harley from an 8 week old puppy. From day one, she went everywhere with me and met adults, kids, and the like. I have always kept livestock so from the minute she came into my home, she met the goats, pigs, geese, chickens, turkeys and the horses in the field next to my land plus my driving pony.
I have no idea exactly what set her off. There was anever a clue that she was anything other than totally relaxed around the animals. The only time this wasn't so was when she actually came to my aid when I was being attacked by my stud billy (the size of a shetland pony and weighing several hindreds of lbs). He had knocked me down and was kneeling on my chest and trying to grind his horns into my face when I screamed for Harley who flew over the 6 foot goat pen fence and sank her teeth into his arse and then danced about in front of him to distract him while I got out of the gate.
(he was slaughtered the next day)
But even after than, she was fine around the milking nannys. I suspect that what happened is that the turkey stag actually flew over the top of the pen one day and made her jump and her first instinct was to turn and bite him, as he was the first bird she killed. I was ssiped off as they were rare lavenders. I suspect that killing him was at fun, so she wanted to repeat the game. She never ever even looked sideways at any animal while I was with her, but after that turkey, nothing was safe from her if they got out of of their enclosure, or over the fence, into the garden. Note, my garden and my land are not the same. Garden is pretty for leisure. Land is where the livestock is kept and veggies are grown. I don't keep livestock in my garden either then or now.
Just in case people are confused, as I know some town dwellers keep cickens in gardens.
Harley never made any attempt to get into an animal pen or enclosure. As far as she was concerned, unless they came into the garden, I suppose they didn't exist for her. She only ever killed anything which came into the garden. The worry was that once, one of the young hunter foals got onto my land. Never really figured out how, but we had to dismantle a whole section of fence, in order to get him back with his dam, who was fretting and trying to come over the fence to be with him. Had he come over the fence near the garden bit, I'm not sure she would not have had him. In all, I figured that it was better for her, for me, for other animals, if the problem could be sorted.
Incidentally, from the day of the training with the collar, to the day she died, not only was she completely stock safe, she actively tried to care for and protect all other animals. She'd attempt to suckle baby chciks, and if I took in a cat with kittens, she would come into milk and allow the kittens to suckle. When I got poor abused and afraid Kip, I gave him to her immediately and said "this is Harley's baby, love him" and she treated him as though he was indeed one of her puppies. I firmly believe that because of her, he grew up a normal, confident dog.


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

Shell195 said:


> But surely Chalky would have ended up dead in a dog pound. I have never used an electric collar and would never want to but I do know someone who trained a potential sheep killer using one and it worked. I think sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind or the only other option would be to euthanise.


I can see the reaction I'm likely to get considering the last time I said this but there are worse things than euthanasia. I am not going to make judgements on anyone else's decision as it just gets hurtful, but if Dharma had a problem where it was a case of using an electric shock collar or euthanising her, I would choose the latter. I do not say that in hysteria over a product I know nothing about, I say that having looked into them in an unbiased form and knowing that if it came to a choice between causing her fear and pain, and euthanasia, I know which would be kinder. 

Luckily I don't know of any reason at all for an electric shock collar to be necessary. Lots of people seem to be using livestock as a reason, simple control methods of keeping a dog away from livestock is an answer without resorting to cruelty. Rehoming also isn't cruel, sometimes it's a greater thing as an owner to admit you are not the right home for a dog and that if you cannot provide a safe environment that doesn't mean noone else can. I do sometimes think the use of shock collars in entirely selfish as there's always an alternative, it's just the owners don't want to do it.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

boy!

... dog people can be rough!


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

HABU said:


> boy!
> 
> ... dog people can be rough!


 
Maybe they need a holiday in HABU land where they can sit on your porch with a smoke, watch the world go by and learn to chill


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

BUMP!:lol2:


----------



## Emmaj (Dec 3, 2007)

Shell195 said:


> Maybe they need a holiday in HABU land where they can sit on your porch with a smoke, watch the world go by and learn to chill


 
shell shall i book our tickets now :lol2::2thumb::lol2:


----------



## Emmaj (Dec 3, 2007)

HABU said:


> image
> 
> 
> BUMP!:lol2:


:gasp: you didnt just trip over your step did you ?:lol2::lol2:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Shell195 said:


> Maybe they need a holiday in HABU land where they can sit on your porch with a smoke, watch the world go by and learn to chill


 










...or take their dogs for a walk... even better!:2thumb:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

in fairness, for equal time's sake... here's our other dog... angel... the fifi dog... 1/2 min. poodle/ 1/2 shih tzu...


thanks for bearing with me on that...

..just to show that i am not biased as to different breeds and sizes of dogs...:whistling2:: victory:


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

KathyM said:


> I can see the reaction I'm likely to get considering the last time I said this but there are worse things than euthanasia. I am not going to make judgements on anyone else's decision as it just gets hurtful, but if Dharma had a problem where it was a case of using an electric shock collar or euthanising her, I would choose the latter. I do not say that in hysteria over a product I know nothing about, I say that having looked into them in an unbiased form and knowing that if it came to a choice between causing her fear and pain, and euthanasia, I know which would be kinder.
> 
> Luckily I don't know of any reason at all for an electric shock collar to be necessary. Lots of people seem to be using livestock as a reason, simple control methods of keeping a dog away from livestock is an answer without resorting to cruelty. Rehoming also isn't cruel, sometimes it's a greater thing as an owner to admit you are not the right home for a dog and that if you cannot provide a safe environment that doesn't mean noone else can. I do sometimes think the use of shock collars in entirely selfish as there's always an alternative, it's just the owners don't want to do it.


 I find it sad that you would kill your dog rather than use a shock collar. You seem to imagine that the use of one means 5000 volts passing through the dog causing it to scream and writhe as the shock lasts for minutes on end of terrible agony.
Do you drive? Have kids?
Would you rather they had to walk everywhere in case they got a static electric jolt off the car door? How about put them in care because you couldn't bear to cope with the fear, the agony of it all?
There is zero fear involved, there is little to no pain involved. It's a shock.asurprise and unpleasant, but certainly nothing like what you appear to imagine. Have you ever seen one used?
Do you keep missing the bit about Harley being a particularly problem dog, as recognised by a specialist in the breed? Do you not see the bits where I keep saying that had I chosen to abandon my dog instead of dealing with her, that she would most definately not have lived a further 10 very happy years? Or perhaps you really do believe that she wasn't really a problem dog at all, and a little kindness would have sorted her out, or letting her go to more kind people in a town where she'd never meet livestock, but would spend 10 years getting an amble about on a lead a couple of times a day as the new owners were aware of the issues and didn't dare let her off to run. If only we could ask Harley herself. 10 years not being able to do what a large active dog needs to do and being molly coddled and doted on and treated like a laop dog, or have one small millisecond static electric shock and spending 10 years as free as the wind, in the company of loads of other animals, bneing able to run, leap, swim, gallop across the fens, carry my milking pail down to the goat yard, gnaw bones, help me care for mentally damaged dogs like Kip and generally living a full 10 years.
Hmmm I wonder which I'd chose if I was her.
I liken it to toothcare. Do you avoid the dentist because some of it is unpleasant for a short time, then end up with raging toothache and losing all your teeth, or do you put up with a little discomfort and know that you'll have healthy strong teeth.
Perhaps you would simply have the dentist take all your teeth out because you couldn't imagine putting up with a check up every year in case it causes any pain.








:lol2:


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

HABU said:


> image
> 
> 
> ...or take their dogs for a walk... even better!:2thumb:


 I'll see your thumb and I'll bite it !:lol2:


----------



## Mrs Mental (May 5, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> It's all very well jumping on the bandwagon to have a go, but when I raise valid point which get passed over and ignored it becomes less of a debate and more of a witch hunt frankly.
> Of seen bitch fights like it where one bitch starts on another, then all the attacking bitches little cronies dive in for a sly nip here and there.


*Well as far as I can tell this was written in reply to me so I am presuming that you are talking to me & therefore referring to me. *


I despair, I truly do.
Could you please copy and paste the bit where I called you a bitch???

*as above *

as for a ceiling on the pen, should I insist my neighbours put one on their own birds pen? Since their birds are completely free in their garden, should I insist that they roof their garden over?

*My mistake I thought they were your birds. Maybe the neighbours should review how they keep them as Im sure they're upset if they've been killed/mauled*

As regards Horatio roaming free in my home, how can you have an opinion as to the safety or otherwise since you have never been here, never seen my home, no idea of the layout or floor plan or anything. Given that fact, how can you say that it is dangerous. Be specific. Where exactly do any dangers lie?

*In my opinion its not a natural environment for a tortoise to live in and of course there are dangers everywhere, wires, hairs on the floors etc etc., Also obviously the dogs are a worry with a tortoise. Infact I have seen a short video which featured part of your house but I am presuming that the tortoise wouldn't be walking around in that area.*

As for the pellet feeding, again, you don't know him, nor his health, nor my vet (who breeds tortoises) and have no idea what led to the vet recommending I feed pellets as part of his diet. If you are however privy to this knowledge, feel free to post what you know, be specific and indicate where the vet was wrong and what else he could have suggested for the specific health issues which led to the recommendation at the time.

*You've never mentioned before that it was the vet who recommended pellets and yes I do find this rather strange.*

as for my training methods, please elucidate as to what my 'training methods' are. I wasn't aware that I had any hard and fast 'methods'. All these years I simply thought I lived happily with my dogs, who loved and respected me and grew up understanding me.
I'm sure you would rather give away your dog, to allow it to suffer when it was sent away from it's home and family to an uncertain future, to perhaps end up being bounced from home to home as each owner who couldn't correct the extreme behaviour, simply gave up and passed the problem on until perhaps it ended up on death row or in rescue as 'unrehomeable' due to sever behavioural issues which a number of owners could not correct.
However, I prefer to keep the dog and sort the problem out. 30 minutes intensive training, one 1 second static electric shock and Harley spent 12 fantastic, happy, busy and fulfilling years with me as a much loved and appreciated member of my family. But you think it would have been better to pass this problem bitch on, knowing that if I couldn't fix it, she might end up a 'boomerang' dog, or worse. How odd. And I thought you were an intelligent woman and a dog lover.

*When I have said training methods I am referring to the shock collar - I am sorry but you need to accept that I do not like it and would never use one. And yes I would rehome my dog to a suitably more experienced home if I couldn't handle it. I accept the fact that you use one so just accept the fact that I wouldnt. There is really no point to us going round and round and round. We have a difference of opinion to which we are both entitled.*


If you are ever over this way, why not call in and actually find out for yourself about me and my dogs and other animals? I am proud of all of them and proud of myself at the way that I keep them. Everyone who visits me, whether dog lover or no, is amazed at not only how well and happy the dogs all are, but how well mannered they are. In fact, 3 people who came on the weekend to collect 2 poultry houses, were stunned when one of my bantams insisted on sitting on one chap's shoulder and pecking his hair as he tried to work and then sat calmly on the woman's finger like a parrot while she stroked it's back. 
Come and see for yourself.

*Thank you but no I wont be calling in. I am disabled and couldn't travel that far. *

*Cant you see I am simply saying I do not agree with you. *

*Can we please just leave it there I really am finding this very tiring. *

*I answered this post in the very first instance about a million years ago to say that I didn't like the way that Cesar guy treated some of the dogs in the few programmes I had seen. *

*I would like you to understand please that if you hadn't answered my initial post in such a rude, argumentative way none of our conversation would evn have taken place. Maybe you dont see your response as rude but I did hence I will come back with things too, like us all.*

*We have different opinions end of really.*


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v291/fenwoman/kingofthecastle.jpg


----------



## Charlottie (Oct 4, 2008)

ooohh.. i missed quite a bit being at college .... but anyway..



fenwoman said:


> did I say you'd find it funny? Did I? I was able to control HArley. She was a perfectly behaved dog..............._*as long as she was with me*_.


I thought the point of the you staying quite during the shock was so she didn't associate(sp) the pain with you! but this seems to be the case, as you seem to suggest that if she was with another person she would gladly go after the livestock! I do realise that some dogs do prefer their owners and may misbehave for other people as they become emtionally attached but surely if the collar was meant to help the dog think that chasing livestock would give her a nasty shock then she would be like this with all people??


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

fenwoman said:


> I'll see your thumb and I'll bite it !:lol2:


 








UH-OH!!!

... now you done gone and did it!... angel heard you!!:lol2:

she says, "bring it on!!" haha!!!

my protector!


----------



## Charlottie (Oct 4, 2008)

Well... i have been inform on what fenwomens has put on her blog (google it) that Chalky had a training collar please will you explain what type this is ? is it another shock collar so something else?


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

Mrs Mental said:


> *Well as far as I can tell this was written in reply to me so I am presuming that you are talking to me & therefore referring to me. *


you mean the bit where I talked about bitches.i.e.lady doggies, fighting? How is that calling you personally a bitch? Should I refer to them as lady doggies and gentleman doggies in future to avoid confusion?






> as for a ceiling on the pen, should I insist my neighbours put one on their own birds pen? Since their birds are completely free in their garden, should I insist that they roof their garden over?
> 
> *My mistake I thought they were your birds. Maybe the neighbours should review how they keep them as Im sure they're upset if they've been killed/mauled*


 some were mine, sometimes my neighbours birds came over. No they weren't upset. Perhaps they are simply down to earth country folk who understand that iof they have their fowl completely free, and those fowl come over to a place where dogs are, and the dogs get them, nobody is to blame. It's simply life and death just as if a fox had taken one.



> As regards Horatio roaming free in my home, how can you have an opinion as to the safety or otherwise since you have never been here, never seen my home, no idea of the layout or floor plan or anything. Given that fact, how can you say that it is dangerous. Be specific. Where exactly do any dangers lie?
> 
> *In my opinion its not a natural environment for a tortoise to live in and of course there are dangers everywhere, wires, hairs on the floors etc etc., Also obviously the dogs are a worry with a tortoise. Infact I have seen a short video which featured part of your house but I am presuming that the tortoise wouldn't be walking around in that area.*


 Ahh so in your opinion, my home and all the space, is not a natural environment but a tortoise table is? er...riiiight :lol2:
There are no wires. When I had the place rewired when I moved in, I had all the plug sockets put 4 feet up the wall because I have animals in my house and wouldn't want to risk a cable getting chewed. no hairs on the floors either.Sorry. All tiled downstairs, swept and swabbed daily, no dogs allowed into the main house during the day in order to keep it clean and tidy. Upstairs floorboards all swept and swabbed daily and definately no dogs allowed upstairs, until I go to bed with 6 little dogs who get straight onto my bed and don't get off again until the next morning. Sorry to dash your image of a filthy house full of hair and dangerous cables.
As I type, Horatio is sleeping in front of the warm rayburn. He spent several hours outside today in his garden just wandering about and eating, and I fetched him in at around 3pm as it was getting cooler. He likes wandering about the house. It may not fit your image of how animals should be kept, all in nice neat small cages and compartments, but it suits mine.



> As for the pellet feeding, again, you don't know him, nor his health, nor my vet (who breeds tortoises) and have no idea what led to the vet recommending I feed pellets as part of his diet. If you are however privy to this knowledge, feel free to post what you know, be specific and indicate where the vet was wrong and what else he could have suggested for the specific health issues which led to the recommendation at the time.
> 
> *You've never mentioned before that it was the vet who recommended pellets and yes I do find this rather strange*


yes I have actually. Several times in the past.I have mentioned my tortoise breeding vet and the fact that he recommended I use pellets as part of his diet. I'll leave it to you to go back and find all my posts on the subject. Would it make you happier if IPM'd you my vet's details so you can phone him up and berate him and tell him how in your opinion, he is doing it all wrong?




*



When I have said training methods I am referring to the shock collar - I am sorry but you need to accept that I do not like it and would never use one. And yes I would rehome my dog to a suitably more experienced home if I couldn't handle it. I accept the fact that you use one so just accept the fact that I wouldnt. There is really no point to us going round and round and round. We have a difference of opinion to which we are both entitled.

Click to expand...

 *I do accept that you don't like the idea of a shock collar, having had no experience of one. And you will have to accept that It would take a lot for me to give up on a dog with a problem and pass him and the problem on in the hope that the new owner could fix it and keep the dog for the rest of it's life. How would you be able to ensure his next home was his last though?


*



Thank you but no I wont be calling in. I am disabled and couldn't travel that far.

Click to expand...

*that's a shame. I would have enjoyed showing you around.

*



Cant you see I am simply saying I do not agree with you

Click to expand...

. *
I can indeed and I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with me if they just disagree with me. However, if they not only disagree, but make out that I am some kind of monster who is cruel to animals, then that isn't just a matter of disagreeing is it?
We'll have to agree to disagree. I would never get rid of a dog to an uncertain future, you would never keep it and work through the problem using every possible means of doing so.

*



Can we please just leave it there I really am finding this very tiring.

Click to expand...

*


> {/quote]
> not a problem.
> 
> *
> ...


----------



## Mrs Mental (May 5, 2009)

I really cannot be bothered to reply further. 

I really do believe you are talking out of a seperate orifice to your mouth.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

Mrs Mental said:


> I really cannot be bothered to reply further.
> 
> I really do believe you are talking out of a seperate orifice to your mouth.


:lol2:


----------



## LincsReps (Jul 2, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> may I refer you to my signature?


Indeed, but what I said was a factual statement.

Let me explain...it was a statement based on factual events. 

We all just want to give you a hug, but first you have to let us in fenwoman, let down the barriers and embrace our love :flrt:


----------



## sarahc (Jan 7, 2009)

*painful?*

how did a tortoise get in on the act?Anyway just to bring the debate back to E-Collars.On a regular basis on radio one they use these collars and various other electric gadgets to administor shocks to the DJs for getting a question wrong in a quiz or similar.The individuals getting the shock are not hurt as such,it's the anticipation of the shock that is the stimulus to get the question or perform the task right.Does this then make it a useful tool .I think my main objection would be that anyone can get one and we all know there are some rotten people about.If I had taken on a dog that was dangerous and a professional person could help by using one of these and save the dog from destruction,then I think I would accept this as the ends justifying the means.I'm lucky my dogs are all good but who knows what dog I might cross paths with next.Euthanasia to me would be the ultimate failure.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

some folks are just fixated on the cruelty thing...

everything is cruel to some people... thye make it sound like someone is taseing their dogs for fun...


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

sarahc said:


> how did a tortoise get in on the act?Anyway just to bring the debate back to E-Collars.On a regular basis on radio one they use these collars and various other electric gadgets to administor shocks to the DJs for getting a question wrong in a quiz or similar.The individuals getting the shock are not hurt as such,it's the anticipation of the shock that is the stimulus to get the question or perform the task right.Does this then make it a useful tool .I think my main objection would be that anyone can get one and we all know there are some rotten people about.If I had taken on a dog that was dangerous and a professional person could help by using one of these and save the dog from destruction,then I think I would accept this as the ends justifying the means.I'm lucky my dogs are all good but who knows what dog I might cross paths with next.Euthanasia to me would be the ultimate failure.


 
Someone who talks sense at last : victory:


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

HABU said:


> some folks are just fixated on the cruelty thing...
> 
> everything is cruel to some people... thye make it sound like someone is taseing their dogs for fun...
> 
> ...


Well said:2thumb:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

i bet some people think choke chains are cruel...


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

Wow - I've just got back online and I'm already headed for divorce as I've spent the afternoon scanning this and not waiting on the hubby :lol2:

JMO - but if I couldn't keep 25 dogs under control without a shock collar, I would perhaps consider that it was an unreasonable amount of dogs to keep. Perhaps had it been a smaller group, there would have been more time for regular training and exercise.

As a fellow disabled lady, I do wonder how on earth you walk 25 dogs adequately. Free ranging is all well and good, but dogs need to work up their heart rate. If they're not getting walked, they are going to be more likely to molest those chucks. Perhaps a dog walker might help?


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

HABU said:


> i bet some people think choke chains are cruel...


I dont do choke chains I use Half check training collars instead


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

Me too - the half check is more than adequate, you dont need a full choke collar.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Shell195 said:


> I dont do choke chains I use Half check training collars instead


 
what are those?


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

HABU said:


> what are those?


Like these ones on here Half Check Collars


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Shell195 said:


> Like these ones on here Half Check Collars


 
thanks for that... never have seen one myself...

i 've always used the choke chain... there's nothing wrong with them but those half-check thingamabobs look like they'd work well to... especially with new owners that might not know how to use a regular choke collar properly... and i've seen plenty of those people.. around here where i come from at least...

... i would reccomend those half-chokers from the looks of them to people... they look effective enough and pretty much fool-proof...

.. and am i correct in that you can use them as a regular collar too?... you know, leave them on as the dog's normal collar?

or are they just used for working with your dog like choke chains are?


... i'm just trying to learn a little here... they must be new... either that or i just never have spotted them on those rare occasions where i get to a pet shop...


yeah, they look fine.


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

HABU said:


> thanks for that... never have seen one myself...
> 
> i 've always used the choke chain... there's nothing wrong with them but those half-check thingamabobs look like they'd work well to... especially with new owners that might not know how to use a regular choke collar properly... and i've seen plenty of those people.. around here where i come from at least...
> 
> ...


They arent new in the UK maybe you just havent been looking for them. The problem with chokers is they can damage a dogs throat if they are used incorrectly which is why I dont like them. Im not sure I would use them as a regular collar as the chain loop could get caught on things. You can clip a lead on though so the check chain doesnt tighten. A lot of training classes in the UK use these


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Shell195 said:


> They arent new in the UK maybe you just havent been looking for them. The problem with chokers is they can damage a dogs throat if they are used incorrectly which is why I dont like them. Im not sure I would use them as a regular collar as the chain loop could get caught on things. You can clip a lead on though so the check chain doesnt tighten. A lot of training classes in the UK use these


 
choke collars are just for working your young dog... they should never be left on... for instruction only in my book... but you know, i see that all the time... and people with them on wrong... using them wrong... all kinds of crap.

... dog's need a regular collar... and often a choke chain isn't needed at all because the dog is either a quick study or it's a fifi dog... a lap-dog i call them...

... it so rarely go to a shop...


----------



## Evie (Jan 28, 2008)

I haven't used a choke chain for about 20 years, all mine have flat collars for training and day to day wear. 
Shell - good to see your doing well with that li'l baby :no1:

I know of at least 3 training classes local to me that don't allow dogs to wear chokers but are happy with half checks. When I did my canine studies course about 9 years ago, we were all told before we started the course that no dogs would be allowed to take part wearing a choker.
I see a collar as nothing other than a safety system to stop the dog from making a fatal mistake ie running under a car. 

If you use positive reward based training which doesn't involve jerking the lead, it doesn't make an iota of difference what the dog is wearing for training really.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Evie said:


> I haven't used a choke chain for about 20 years, all mine have flat collars for training and day to day wear.
> Shell - good to see your doing well with that li'l baby :no1:
> 
> I know of at least 3 training classes local to me that don't allow dogs to wear chokers but are happy with half checks. When I did my canine studies course about 9 years ago, we were all told before we started the course that no dogs would be allowed to take part wearing a choker.
> ...


 
who goes to training classes?...is it some law there?


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

Training classes should be the law IMO!

Well, at least for new owners. Plus they're a really good way of socialising your dog and learning how to train it at the same time.

Half checks are supposed to be fitted so that they cant choke an animal, only tighten if they try to back out of it (eg like a martingale collar - only made with chain). If people are tightening them to the point of them being a detterrent for pulling, they have got them too tight. Blu has a fabric martingale collar, but tbh he could walk without one. I just prefer martingales to regular collars as I'm used to greys/lurchers (who need them).


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

LisaLQ said:


> Training classes should be the law IMO!
> 
> Well, at least for new owners. Plus they're a really good way of socialising your dog and learning how to train it at the same time.
> 
> Half checks are supposed to be fitted so that they cant choke an animal, only tighten if they try to back out of it (eg like a martingale collar - only made with chain). If people are tightening them to the point of them being a detterrent for pulling, they have got them too tight. Blu has a fabric martingale collar, but tbh he could walk without one. I just prefer martingales to regular collars as I'm used to greys/lurchers (who need them).


 
yeah, noobs should go to them maybe... i know lots of people here that haven't a clue...or way worse.

maybe, but then... you could never get a law like that here... let alone enforce it.


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

HABU said:


> who goes to training classes?...is it some law there?


:lol2: I wish it was law. Its common here to take a new puppy to training classes and a lot have a Good dog citizen scheme were you are awarded Bronze,Silver and gold certificates as you pass each level. Once you pass gold you have a well mannered and socialised dog with a high level of obedience


----------



## Evie (Jan 28, 2008)

HABU said:


> yeah, noobs should go to them maybe... i know lots of people here that haven't a clue...or way worse.
> 
> maybe, but then... you could never get a law like that here... let alone enforce it.


Lots of people go to training classes - I've been going for 25 years (not been for the last 12 months though) - its a fun social thing which the dogs enjoy. People who compete in obedience, agility and trials etc. go to practice in a more competition like place. New people go to learn, they make friends, the dogs make friends and it just leads into the hobby.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

LincsReps said:


> Indeed, but what I said was a factual statement.
> 
> Let me explain...it was a statement based on factual events.
> 
> We all just want to give you a hug, but first you have to let us in fenwoman, let down the barriers and embrace our love :flrt:


:lol2: and then she'll wake up!


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

sarahc said:


> how did a tortoise get in on the act?Anyway just to bring the debate back to E-Collars.On a regular basis on radio one they use these collars and various other electric gadgets to administor shocks to the DJs for getting a question wrong in a quiz or similar.The individuals getting the shock are not hurt as such,it's the anticipation of the shock that is the stimulus to get the question or perform the task right.Does this then make it a useful tool .I think my main objection would be that anyone can get one and we all know there are some rotten people about.If I had taken on a dog that was dangerous and a professional person could help by using one of these and save the dog from destruction,then I think I would accept this as the ends justifying the means.I'm lucky my dogs are all good but who knows what dog I might cross paths with next.Euthanasia to me would be the ultimate failure.


I haven't read the rest of the thread, that came after this bit, but it has been provent hat dogs do not learn at their best when under pressure, such as that they are under when attemtping to avoid an 'electric shock' or yank from a choke chain etc. After all, if you were in a room and someone was going to zap you every time you answered a question wrong, would you be thinking about the question, or the potential 'zap' you might get if you were incorrect?! However, if someone said they would give you £1000 for every question you answered correctly, would you be worrying about the £1000, or maybe just thinking you really wanted it, and so therefore do your utmost to find the right answer? 

Aside from that, these collar can and do malfunction, and the injuries when they do are horrendous. Then there is also the fact that some dogs will take an intense dislike to them, and if they are focused on the wrong thing when the shock is administered, they can decide they do not like that person/animal very much and then bite or maul them. Be that the sheep you are trying to stop them chasing, or the owner. In fact, in one of CM's shows, he is using a shock collar. He administers the 'shock'', the dog happens to be paying attention to the owner in that split second, and bites the owner.


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

I for one am not against Choke Chains, I believe they have their place just the same as slip leads. But as with Halti's, half-checks, E-collars (be that electric *or* vibration), slip leads, prong collars, pinch collars, strip collars and invisible fencing, I don't believe they should be available over-the-counter. 



Shell195 said:


> The problem with chokers is they can damage a dogs throat if they are used incorrectly which is why I dont like them.


Surely this can go either way? I do see your point however considerable damage can be made to a dogs throat using even a flat buckle collar because of the point of pressure, for instance if your dog is pulling ahead of you there is a great chance the collar could damage the wind pipe (possibly even the Thyroid gland) in doing so? Or if a half-check is incorrectly fitted then the same could happen as with a choke chain. Obviously this all boils down to irresponsible or ignorant owners, which we could do without altogether. :lol2:



LisaLQ said:


> If people are tightening them to the point of them being a detterrent for pulling, they have got them too tight.


How so? The collar is made so it tightens on the neck and the two rings either side of the fabric shouldn't make contact (or if they are fitted to do so then this should be as tight on the neck as if they didn't) when it does tighten, so what is "too tight" anyway? Wouldn't this mean even properly fitted half-check collars are "too tight"?



midori said:


> I haven't read the rest of the thread, that came after this bit, but it has been provent hat dogs do not learn at their best when under pressure, such as that they are under when attemtping to avoid an 'electric shock' or yank from a choke chain etc.


That's not the point. The choke chain isn't used for _punishment_, it's used purely to divert the dogs attention elsewhere, for instance if the dog is dog aggressive and is "eyeing up" another dog or barking/snarling/growling over at it, a quick and firm but gentle jerk of the choke chain is enough to make them pay attention to you. That said most people do believe that they are to stop a dog pulling and drag the poor thing about on one. _That_ is incorrect use, and can happen with any collar.



> After all, if you were in a room and someone was going to zap you every time you answered a question wrong, would you be thinking about the question, or the potential 'zap' you might get if you were incorrect?! However, if someone said they would give you £1000 for every question you answered correctly, would you be worrying about the £1000, or maybe just thinking you really wanted it, and so therefore do your utmost to find the right answer?


Unfortunately enough the ignore the bad and treat the good doesn't always work. In cases of livestock worrying, dog, food, toy etc aggression the dog should be disciplined/punished for this surely, because ignoring it will only make things worse for both the dog and the owner. Or should we not let the dog near live stock? not let them eat? play with toys? keep them in solitary confinement? I'm not saying use an E-collar, but I don't think people should push for the ignore the bad reward the good thing all of the time. If I'm walking a dog that is jumping up at cars going by on the roadside should I ignore the behaviour and wait until the dog is too tired to do it and then reward them for finally stopping? Ignore the bad reward the good either way, it's like people who treat dogs when they stop barking. 



> Aside from that, these collar can and do malfunction, and the injuries when they do are horrendous. Then there is also the fact that some dogs will take an intense dislike to them, and if they are focused on the wrong thing when the shock is administered, they can decide they do not like that person/animal very much and then bite or maul them. Be that the sheep you are trying to stop them chasing, or the owner. In fact, in one of CM's shows, he is using a shock collar. He administers the 'shock'', the dog happens to be paying attention to the owner in that split second, and bites the owner.


:no1:


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> I find it sad that you would kill your dog rather than use a shock collar. You seem to imagine that the use of one means 5000 volts passing through the dog causing it to scream and writhe as the shock lasts for minutes on end of terrible agony.
> Do you drive? Have kids?
> Would you rather they had to walk everywhere in case they got a static electric jolt off the car door? How about put them in care because you couldn't bear to cope with the fear, the agony of it all?


 
I really am beginning to wonder if you can read. I have already said I have not made the decisions nor the comments I made without having actually used a collar on myself to judge it rationally for myself. I was lucky enough to get to try one at Bishop Burton college, along with many other people. We only tried it on ourselves obviously. However, it hurts, it hurts a LOT. It contracted the muscles in my hand forcing it to curl into a painful ball. Afterwards, I couldn't use my fingers or squeeze my hand for some time after (with some level of weakness remaining for over an hour) - can you imagine that feeling on your throat? I personally couldn't bear the idea of a dog I love having to have that kind of treatment potentially for the rest of its life. As for saying a dog getting abused every day is better than it dying humanely, I personally disagree. 

Don't care what you say about static shocks, they're accidental and you wouldn't sit there rubbing your sodding dog on the door to make sure it got one, would you? Maybe you would lol.


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

LoveForLizards said:


> Unfortunately enough the ignore the bad and treat the good doesn't always work. In cases of livestock worrying, dog, food, toy etc aggression the dog should be disciplined/punished for this surely, because ignoring it will only make things worse for both the dog and the owner. Or should we not let the dog near live stock? not let them eat? play with toys? keep them in solitary confinement? I'm not saying use an E-collar, but I don't think people should push for the ignore the bad reward the good thing all of the time. If I'm walking a dog that is jumping up at cars going by on the roadside should I ignore the behaviour and wait until the dog is too tired to do it and then reward them for finally stopping? Ignore the bad reward the good either way, it's like people who treat dogs when they stop barking.
> 
> 
> 
> :no1:


I am not saying it is all about ignoring the bad and rewarding the good. It is about understanding why dogs do things and how to train them out of it in the best and most effective way possible. 

The following article explains a bit about why dogs chase, and gives an excellent method for stopping or controlling, if you like, the chasing behaviour. It works very well indeed, just require a bit more effort on the part of the owner. 

How Do I Stop My Dog Chasing? | Behaviour & Training

Edited to say, I have also used a different method to prevent chasing behaviour, which is also not about 'rewarding the good and ignoring the bad' but about getting the dog to think it can only get access to chase if you give 'permission', so in my case I would ensure the dog thinks that in order to gain access to whatever it wants to chase, it first has to come to me and sit, or it will not be able to get to whatever it wanted. it's pretty lengthy to explain though, so I won't bore you with it.....


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

> How so? The collar is made so it tightens on the neck and the two rings either side of the fabric shouldn't make contact (or if they are fitted to do so then this should be as tight on the neck as if they didn't) when it does tighten, so what is "too tight" anyway? Wouldn't this mean even properly fitted half-check collars are "too tight"?


L4L, I dont think you understood my post. IF the collar was fitted so that it _choked_ the dog when it tightened, it was fitted incorrectly - too tight.

Check does not equal choke. The half check should only tighten to the size of the neck, not squeeze it or choke it in any way. If people use it as such, they are using it incorrectly. It is not supposed to be a choke collar, or a deterrent against pulling, it is supposed to be an escape proof collar in that it tightens and doesn't slip off when they pull one way or the other!


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

LincsReps said:


> Indeed, but what I said was a factual statement.
> 
> Let me explain...it was a statement based on factual events.
> 
> We all just want to give you a hug, but first you have to let us in fenwoman, let down the barriers and embrace our love :flrt:


 I'm sorry but I don't understand this at all. Are you on some kind of illegal herbal substance? Or since you seem to be feeling unnaturally affectionate, I'd guess more towards illegal chemical substance which comes in the form of a pill with a smiley face on.

I want no hugs either real or metaphorical. I'm not interested in whether anyone likes me or dislikes me on here. It's nice if they do, obviously, but if they don't, it's a matter of indifference to me. I don't mean this in an insulting way when I say that I don't feel obliged or emotionally attached to any RFUK member.
I have no barriers, and if I did have any, I wouldn't see why I should 'let them down' for anyone on here. 
I have real life friends, who mean a lot for me and vice versa. For those friends, I will put myself out and defend to the last, but why would I invest any kind of emotion for people I have never met and do not know, and who don't know me?
I have some affection for certain members whom I feel a kinship with, obviously. And any of them which I've met and enjoyed meeting. But even then, I don't really know them and can't class them as friends.
To me, friends are people who know you and understands your life and what makes you tick and that you can call on in an emergency and who feel they can call on you in one without having to feel obliged in any way.
I have very few 'friends' and none are on a forum. On a forum I have 'aquaintances'.
So please, no hugs as I would view them as having my space invaded by someone I barely know.


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

As for punishing for livestock worrying - has no-one here heard of the "leave it" command? And yes, I think if you cant get a good recall or leave it with your dog you shouldn't have it around livestock, or keep it on a lead.

If you let a dog roam around livestock and dont have the time or inclination to train it properly, and it kills/harms other animals, that is the humans fault and they should receive the punishment, not the dog.

It is not hard to keep animal seperate. There is no law saying that person must have a dog either. If they cannot keep their animals under control around other animals, be it with training, correct restraint (eg lead and muzzle) or a fence (lord there's an idea), then perhaps they shouldn't be keeping either livestock or the dog.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

as LOVEFORLIZARDS noted, choke ckains are just to get a dog's attention... snap his mind out of where ever it is......

not to hurt your dog... who would want to hurt their dog?


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

sarahc said:


> how did a tortoise get in on the act?


 he helps to train the dogs and is a right barsteward. I have to distract him with dandelions as he is far too harsh and insists on yanking on a choke chain to get them to behave.:lol2:



> Anyway just to bring the debate back to E-Collars.On a regular basis on radio one they use these collars and various other electric gadgets to administor shocks to the DJs for getting a question wrong in a quiz or similar.The individuals getting the shock are not hurt as such,it's the anticipation of the shock that is the stimulus to get the question or perform the task right


 Don't be silly. All the detractors know that the collars are wired to the mains and administer a jolt strong enough to cause 3rd degree burns, deep coma and throw a dog right up in the air.:lol2:




> .I think my main objection would be that anyone can get one and we all know there are some rotten people about.


 I agree with you 100% on that bit. While I have had a collar used, and might even use one in the future if all else failed, I do think that they should not be easily available. One would only hope that the cost of them might put people off. However, I aslo have to add, that if someone was inclined to brutalise their dog, they would not need to pay £150 or more on a collar to do so when a stick, whip, riding crop or even steel toecap boots are more easily available and cheap.



> If I had taken on a dog that was dangerous and a professional person could help by using one of these and save the dog from destruction,then I think I would accept this as the ends justifying the means


 Thank you. The voice of sanity at last. However, I feel you will now have left yourself wide open to the sort of name calling and vindictiveness that gets directed towards me by a select band of people on here (all of whom are on my ignore list).
If you put them on your ignore list, they'll still direct posts at you and demand answers, and then make up reasons why you don't answer and imply that you have something to hide:lol2:



> I'm lucky my dogs are all good but who knows what dog I might cross paths with next.Euthanasia to me would be the ultimate failure.


 I agree. I prefer to exhaust every possible avenue before I would snuff out the life of a higher mammal with potential to have a full and happy life.
Given the choice of a milli-second's discomfort, over oblivion, I wonder what a dog would choose if it was given the choice?


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

dogs aren't these delicate little flowers...

all i ever see are these dogs pulling their masters when they go for a walk... who's walking who?

and besides... a normal collar is all a dog needs after he's taught right...

get a pup used to pulling against a collar and when it grows into a big horse-necked critter, it will continue to pull... 

just depends on the kind of dog you want... a dog must walk well with me... i own the walk.... it belongs to me... the dog should feel privilaged that i am sharing my walk with him...


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> However, I feel you will now have left yourself wide open to the sort of name calling and vindictiveness that gets directed towards me by a select band of people on here (all of whom are on my ignore list).
> If you put them on your ignore list, they'll still direct posts at you and demand answers, and then make up reasons why you don't answer and imply that you have something to hide:lol2:


And doing exactly the same by talking about them while they're on ignore is achieving what? Your post could come across as quite hypocritical. Both sides seem to be as bad as each other winding each other up childishly and distracting from the real topic? Disappointing really from both sides. ETA: You can't really use the "I can't see them" excuse not to answer their questions either when it's clear you know what they've asked lol. If you want to use ignore as a reason not to answer, perhaps you shouldn't be letting on to being able to read them?


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

LisaLQ said:


> L4L, I dont think you understood my post. IF the collar was fitted so that it _choked_ the dog when it tightened, it was fitted incorrectly - too tight.
> 
> Check does not equal choke. The half check should only tighten to the size of the neck, not squeeze it or choke it in any way. If people use it as such, they are using it incorrectly. It is not supposed to be a choke collar, or a deterrent against pulling, it is supposed to be an escape proof collar in that it tightens and doesn't slip off when they pull one way or the other!


But as the half-check (or rather, the martingale) is supposed to be used on sight hounds who's head is often the same, if not smaller then the neck this means when it closes up to stop the dog reversing out of it, it must be tight as not to allow it. Get what I'm saying yet?



LisaLQ said:


> As for punishing for livestock worrying - has no-one here heard of the "leave it" command? And yes, I think if you cant get a good recall or leave it with your dog you shouldn't have it around livestock, or keep it on a lead.
> 
> If you let a dog roam around livestock and dont have the time or inclination to train it properly, and it kills/harms other animals, that is the humans fault and they should receive the punishment, not the dog.
> 
> It is not hard to keep animal seperate. There is no law saying that person must have a dog either. If they cannot keep their animals under control around other animals, be it with training, correct restraint (eg lead and muzzle) or a fence (lord there's an idea), then perhaps they shouldn't be keeping either livestock or the dog.


:lol2:
When a dog is chasing livestock out of predatory instinct (Yes, some dogs do have *predatory instinct* :gasp or nature instead of nurture, no amount of you calling "here boy, here boy, leave it! leave it! come back" is going to stop the dog.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

can't we all just get along?:lol2:


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

HABU said:


> image
> 
> can't we all just get along?:lol2:


A nice idea but somehow I cant see it happening:whistling2:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Shell195 said:


> A nice idea but somehow I cant see it happening:whistling2:


 
train 'em right! ??: victory::lol2:


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

HABU said:


> image
> 
> can't we all just get along?:lol2:


:lol2: For the record I'm not arguing or anything, I'm just putting a point across. I've used a whole range of collars and harnesses on different dogs so feel I can at least have a little input from an experienced point of view? Instead of spitting my dummy out and saying "dangerous, awful, cruel abusive collars - not that I've ever used one I just don't like the look of it. Imagine somebody putting that on you" :whistling2:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

LoveForLizards said:


> :lol2: For the record I'm not arguing or anything, I'm just putting a point across. I've used a whole range of collars and harnesses on different dogs so feel I can at least have a little input from an experienced point of view? Instead of spitting my dummy out and saying "dangerous, awful, cruel abusive collars - not that I've ever used one I just don't like the look of it. Imagine somebody putting that on you" :whistling2:


 
imagine...

it's all good. some folks just seem a little too into the cruelty thing... i hear that folks there don't like cropped ears or docked tails... anything can seem cruel to someone somewhere...

... my opinion is that any fool that doesn't know what he's doing or worse... thinks brutality is necessary for a proper dog... is bad.

most things are fine in the right hands and with an experienced person...

remember, i live in pit bull country... in cincinnati, they are all over... and you should see how these idiots treat them, abuse them... wanting them mean so the brutilize them and all manner of weird things...

like putting gun powder in their food or starving them... crap like that... they end up with psycho pits and they must be destroyed..

a person with a choke chain or whatever is nothing by comparison...

... maybe my point of veiw comes from somewhere that others there haven't been...

... yes, there's bad... and then there's *BAD!!*

as dog people, we shouldn't be pitted against one another on some issues... our commonalities should be remembered...


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

HABU said:


> imagine...
> 
> it's all good. some folks just seem a little too into the cruelty thing... i hear that folks there don't like cropped ears or docked tails... anything can seem cruel to someone somewhere...
> 
> ...


:no1::2thumb:


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

LisaLQ said:


> JMO - but if I couldn't keep 25 dogs under control without a shock collar, I would perhaps consider that it was an unreasonable amount of dogs to keep. Perhaps had it been a smaller group, there would have been more time for regular training and exercise.


Could you do me a favour and read my posts again please as you appear to have misread or misunderstood. As it happens, when I had Harley (the one dog I had used an e-collar on (well not me actually but Roger Mugford on my behalf) I only had 3 dogs. This was some 15 years ago.
If I couldn't keep 25 dogs not only under control but happy too, I would also kill several of them.Well not me personally, but the vet.



> As a fellow disabled lady, I do wonder how on earth you walk 25 dogs adequately. Free ranging is all well and good, but dogs need to work up their heart rate. If they're not getting walked, they are going to be more likely to molest those chucks. Perhaps a dog walker might help?


 Are you stupid? Or perhaps you read my posts without comprehending? Or perhaps you read my posts and ignore things because you prefer to be awkward?
What would they get from walking, that they don't get from running about like crazy things on my land or chasing a ball chucked from the cottage, to the bottom of the land.
How would on lead walking, increase their heart rate? How comes galloping across the fens or along the banks of the 40 foot drain (river to townie and non fen folks), not increase the heart rate as much as lead walking?
Are you really saying that the majority of my dogs (bearing in mind that you have no idea what breeds, ages or sizes they are) would be better off walked up the lane and back on a lead, than they are playing, digging, chasing each other etc, on my land.
Please do me the courtesy of responding to the questions I have aksed, otherwise I will think that you are just another who thinks they know me and mine better than I do, and who prefers to spout their (imagined) wisdom whether it is factual or not and not really be interested in the truth of it.
I await your response in anticipation.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

HABU said:


> yeah, noobs should go to them maybe... i know lots of people here that haven't a clue...or way worse.
> 
> maybe, but then... you could never get a law like that here... let alone enforce it.


 You wouldn't get a law like that over there because you live in a democracy. Sadly this country is not a democracy and is governed by know nothing do gooder's who bring in daft laws which cannot be enforced and punish people for things which aren't truly criminal and who live in cities, have no real life experience, but presume to pontificate on how people should live.:bash:


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

LisaLQ said:


> As for punishing for livestock worrying - has no-one here heard of the "leave it" command? And yes, I think if you cant get a good recall or leave it with your dog you shouldn't have it around livestock, or keep it on a lead.
> 
> If you let a dog roam around livestock and dont have the time or inclination to train it properly, and it kills/harms other animals, that is the humans fault and they should receive the punishment, not the dog.
> 
> It is not hard to keep animal seperate. There is no law saying that person must have a dog either. If they cannot keep their animals under control around other animals, be it with training, correct restraint (eg lead and muzzle) or a fence (lord there's an idea), then perhaps they shouldn't be keeping either livestock or the dog.


 You live in a city?
You live in an ideal world obviously where there is a simple solution for every situation.
I note that just as the others in their city dwelling bubble, you have no given any hint as to what you would have done with Harley.
I mean, you did read the bit where I said that if I was around, she was perfectly behaved. She would leave anything immediately I told her to. However, if I was not in sight (and she checked to ensure I wasn't before hunting) she would kill anything which came over the fence. Errr. did you read the bit about neighbour's livestock and fowls? I have no control over those.
And how many famrers have farm dogs which they have permanently clipped on a lead while they work.
Your solution would be great with someone who had a little semi on an estate in town and one or two dogs which weren't likely to ever come across livestock in any case.
If you have no experience of living in the countryside on a smallholding, why presume to offer advice or criticise something which is beyond your comprehension?


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

HABU said:


> train 'em right! ??: victory::lol2:


I'd train 'em but only if I can use an e-collar on some of the more hard headed, stubborn and downright stupid of 'em.


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

LoveForLizards said:


> :lol2:
> When a dog is chasing livestock out of predatory instinct (Yes, some dogs do have *predatory instinct* :gasp or nature instead of nurture, no amount of you calling "here boy, here boy, leave it! leave it! come back" is going to stop the dog.


Which is why it should be kept on the lead or away from livestock. You can put smileys next to it, but having had many ex racers and lurchers, I do know what keen dogs are like. If you cant train them out of it, you need to be responsible and keep them muzzled and on lead.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

LisaLQ said:


> Which is why it should be kept on the lead or away from livestock. You can put smileys next to it, but having had many ex racers and lurchers, I do know what keen dogs are like. If you cant train them out of it, you need to be responsible and keep them muzzled and on lead.


 How do you do this if you live on a farm?


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

fenwoman said:


> How do you do this if you live on a farm?


Build an 8 foot wall between them, silly! :whistling2:


It's also pretty damn difficult to get away from every form of livestock around here, and we're not exactly in the country side.


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> Could you do me a favour and read my posts again please as you appear to have misread or misunderstood. As it happens, when I had Harley (the one dog I had used an e-collar on (well not me actually but Roger Mugford on my behalf) I only had 3 dogs. This was some 15 years ago.
> If I couldn't keep 25 dogs not only under control but happy too, I would also kill several of them.Well not me personally, but the vet.


Hang on - so Kathy is evil for saying she'd rather put a dog to sleep than abuse it, but you'd put yours to sleep just if you couldn't be bothered training them or rehoming them to someone who could? And that's better, how?!




> Are you stupid? Or perhaps you read my posts without comprehending? Or perhaps you read my posts and ignore things because you prefer to be awkward?
> What would they get from walking, that they don't get from running about like crazy things on my land or chasing a ball chucked from the cottage, to the bottom of the land.
> How would on lead walking, increase their heart rate? How comes galloping across the fens or along the banks of the 40 foot drain (river to townie and non fen folks), not increase the heart rate as much as lead walking?
> Are you really saying that the majority of my dogs (bearing in mind that you have no idea what breeds, ages or sizes they are) would be better off walked up the lane and back on a lead, than they are playing, digging, chasing each other etc, on my land.
> ...


As you're so keen - yes I do think dogs benefit from on lead walking. Of course they get some exercise free roaming, but are you telling me your dogs spend hours running around, or do they come inside for a lie down (or indeed outside if you keep them outdoors)? You cant guarantee that all those dogs will be as well trained, well socialised and obedient as a dog that gets regular on lead exercise and training? Essentially your dogs are like those of the chavs who boot theirs out every day, roaming wherever, killing whatever, am I right?

I would love to hear how you've trained all 25, how often they do training, how often they go on the lead, etc. I'm saddened you'd stoop to calling me stupid when I am a fellow disabled lady who cant walk her dog because of real pain and disabilities - I would love to get suggestions as to how to adequately exercise one lazy dog, let alone 25 of them!

I dont know how you cope. All those animals, all that land to look after, and with disabilities. You're an inspiration to those of us who cant have that kind of life because our pain dictates what we can and cant do.

I'd love 25 dogs. No actually, I'd love a small group. But because of my disability I can only have one, as that is all I can reasonably expect other people to look after for me! God knows how you manage...


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> How do you do this if you live on a farm?


Simple. If you cant provide adequate care or suitable alterations, you dont get the dog.

It's not rocket science. If more people were less selfish and didn't collect animals like stamps, there'd be lots more happier dogs in the world.


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

So in your opinion, if the dog chases livestock you shouldn't have it instead of training it?


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

If, as you say, they are untrainable, they should be in a home where they wont come into contact with the livestock. If that means a different home, that is what's best for the animal.

I think far too few people on here think of that when they add another ten to their household.


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

LisaLQ said:


> If, as you say, they are untrainable, they should be in a home where they wont come into contact with the livestock. If that means a different home, that is what's best for the animal.
> 
> I think far too few people on here think of that when they add another ten to their household.


Untrainable? I said? hmmm...


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

​ 
​


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

> When a dog is chasing livestock out of predatory instinct (Yes, some dogs do have *predatory instinct* :gasp or nature instead of nurture, no amount of you calling "here boy, here boy, leave it! leave it! come back" is going to stop the dog.


That is what you said. If no amount of training could stop a dog attacking livestock, then he/she shouldn't be allowed near it off lead and un muzzled. And if keeping him on lead and muzzled wasnt an option, then yes, he/she should be rehomed to someone who can provide what he needs.

It's not all about the owner, it's the dog that's important.


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

I said no amount of you *calling* will stop the dog, I never even so much as _mentioned_ training.


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

Ok, well word it however, you gave the distinct impression that training, calling, or even stopping a dog from going near livestock was impossible.

And I answered as if that were the case (which it isnt - you cant tell me that a person cannot keep a dog away from livestock).

I cant put it any simpler, so you'll just have to re-read what I've said.


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

LisaLQ said:


> That is what you said. If no amount of training could stop a dog attacking livestock, then he/she shouldn't be allowed near it off lead and un muzzled. And if keeping him on lead and muzzled wasnt an option, then yes, he/she should be rehomed to someone who can provide what he needs.
> 
> *It's not all about the owner, it's the dog that's important*.


 
I agree entirely and if only more people thought like that the world would be a much better place for dogs.


----------



## LincsReps (Jul 2, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> I'm sorry but I don't understand this at all. Are you on some kind of illegal herbal substance? Or since you seem to be feeling unnaturally affectionate, I'd guess more towards illegal chemical substance which comes in the form of a pill with a smiley face on.
> 
> I want no hugs either real or metaphorical. I'm not interested in whether anyone likes me or dislikes me on here. It's nice if they do, obviously, but if they don't, it's a matter of indifference to me. I don't mean this in an insulting way when I say that I don't feel obliged or emotionally attached to any RFUK member.
> I have no barriers, and if I did have any, I wouldn't see why I should 'let them down' for anyone on here.
> ...


Huggy wuggy? :flrt:


----------



## sarahc (Jan 7, 2009)

*how to stop your dog chasing*

Ive read the thread and obviously I'm all for the positive training.Aren't things sometimes a bit more urgent than this would allow for though?I had a pet chicken for 14 years,had total freedom and made herself at home in the kitchen,including the dog bed.My four original dogs who were between 3 and 5 years accepted easily that chicken chasing was a no no.As they have passed on and been replaced by pups things have not been so simple.Young pups have all been easy enough.Come the age of 6 or 7 months they've all thought it great fun to chase the chicken when they think no one is around.The chicken was here first and its my opinion that the dogs had to slot in with her and sooner rather than later.The last two dogs I had were pups from the same litter and definately egged each other on.The chicken has passed away now but I still have parrots that come out. any new dog will need to accept the parrots pretty fast.


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

LisaLQ said:


> Ok, well word it however, you gave the distinct impression that training, calling, or even stopping a dog from going near livestock was impossible.
> 
> And I answered as if that were the case (which it isnt - you cant tell me that a person cannot keep a dog away from livestock).
> 
> I cant put it any simpler, so you'll just have to re-read what I've said.


What exactly can't you put any simpler?!



midori said:


> I agree entirely and if only more people thought like that the world would be a much better place for dogs.


You both seem to be under the impression that the needs (and happiness) of the animal/s (livestock and dog/s) must be neglected in order for them to live alongside each other/on the same property?


----------



## Mirf (May 22, 2008)

LoveForLizards said:


> I said no amount of you *calling* will stop the dog, I never even so much as _mentioned_ training.


Surely, if the dog is well trained, it will respond to it's owners verbal command? That's the whole point of training is it not? :?

I know mine do.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)




----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Mirf said:


> Surely, if the dog is well trained, it will respond to it's owners verbal command? That's the whole point of training is it not? :?
> 
> I know mine do.


 total control... what i've been sayin....


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

You seem to be under the impression that you can twist words to suit your own argument.

I think the needs of the dead chicken(s) might come before whether that person wanted their dog to be friends with it or not. I think the needs of the dog to be free from stress and pain (eg training collars) come before that of the owner who wanted them to get along. Sometimes things dont happen, and the dog would be better off in a home that could look after it properly.

It's not always about what the owner wants to happen - you cant always get what you want, to quote the 'Stones. :lol2:

I think if I was given a dog, or adopted a dog, that I couldn't train without using aversives, that I couldn't keep seperate from livestock (which IMO is not an argument as had there been a reasonable amount of animals they could have been kept seperate) I would admit defeat and consider homing him/her to someone who could. I would rather put the dog's needs before my own - if there was a chance of a home without livestock about who could give him more one on one time and training, then I would have chosen that rather than keep letting him out, zapping him and praying for the best.

At what point does someone say "hang on, I might have too many animals to cope with"? When that person is allegedly disabled - and I say that tongue in cheek as I feel it must be impossible to be in so much pain and yet run a small holding and "care" for 25 dogs.

I just would love to know how Fenny copes. And why she feels that her home is better for the dog than one where he could be kept under control and seperate from livestock, with more one on one.


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

Mirf said:


> Surely, if the dog is well trained, it will respond to it's owners verbal command? That's the whole point of training is it not? :?
> 
> I know mine do.


A dog is a living thing with a brain of its own.

No matter how well trained a dog might be... there MAY be a situation where your training does not take precedence over the dog's decision.

And as far as it goes, I don't WANT a robot shaped like a dog... (and if someone does, they should get an AIBO) I want my dog to be able to think for itself rather than relying on me to do the thinking for it all the time. But asking the dog to think rather than just obey commands DOES mean your dog could decide that what it wants to do is more important than what you want it to do.

Aversives have their place in training.
Rewards have their place in training.

Some dogs work amazingly well with 100% reward-based training.
Some dogs do not, and may need aversive or restrictive (i.e. muzzling/always on lead) methods.

The word "NO!" or "LEAVE IT" is an aversive - you teach the dog to fear the word happening, even if you reward it immediately afterwards for desisting in whatever behaviour got you to say it.


----------



## LincsReps (Jul 2, 2009)

I couldn't find one of the preson I wanted to see wearing it, but I can pretend.

Hugs :flrt:

YouTube - Dog shock collar


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Ssthisto said:


> A dog is a living thing with a brain of its own.
> 
> No matter how well trained a dog might be... there MAY be a situation where your training does not take precedence over the dog's decision.
> 
> ...


 

* halleujah!*


----------



## Evie (Jan 28, 2008)

I've never used an e-collar and never needed to BUT I haven't met every dog in the world or been in every situation either. There are far too many quick fix gadgets on the market for anyone to get their hands on and abuse. My main beef with CM is that he uses potentially dangerous methods that shouldn't be shown on TV because inexperienced people pick up half a tale and try to imitate his methods, which is dangerous. 

I trained my older collie to play with a football when he was a pup (for a HTM routine involving a football song :blush. It turned out to be the stupidest thing I ever did; I live close to a football ground and walk my dogs on a park where there is always some football team or several football teams training. Raf was so obsessed with footballs I had to keep him on a lead near the games or he would go and join in. He never touched the ball - just stalked it, but the players never seemed to want him in the team (silly really 'cos he was a top goalie - Beckham couldn't put a ball past our Rafiki :whistling2. He even tried to catch footbals on the telly!! 
It took 2 years to completely undo the training using diversion techniques, but we got there in the end and he doesn't interfere with matches anymore thank goodness!


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

Mirf said:


> Surely, if the dog is well trained, it will respond to it's owners verbal command? That's the whole point of training is it not? :?
> 
> I know mine do.


If the dog is set on chasing something, it will take chase. If you divert attention from said object (or in this case, animal) in the first place, then there wont be a problem.



LisaLQ said:


> You seem to be under the impression that you can twist words to suit your own argument.
> 
> I think the needs of the dead chicken(s) might come before whether that person wanted their dog to be friends with it or not. I think the needs of the dog to be free from stress and pain (eg training collars) come before that of the owner who wanted them to get along. Sometimes things dont happen, and the dog would be better off in a home that could look after it properly.
> 
> ...


Pot, kettle. I never twisted words at all, I simply said that "You both seem to be under the impression that the needs (and happiness) of the animal/s (livestock and dog/s) must be neglected in order for them to live alongside each other/on the same property?", which is exactly how it was from my PVO. I'm not even talking about Fenwoman so I don't understand how her chickens, dogs or 'methods' came into the equation. As I don't know the exact circumstances and for that matter, I don't personally know Fenwoman, I don't think it's my place to talk about her and her ways. I agree, it's not about the owners wants and I am the first to stick my hand up if I can't cope with any animal and I have no problems addmitting that if it comes to it, I took on too much to cope with. If I had a dog that was a livestock chaser and I lived on a small holding (I wish...) then I would divert the dogs attention and punish chasing/worrying, if it didn't work out I would rehome the dog to someone who had a fenced off area for the dog to run free or in a home who was lucky enough to have the space to long-leash the dog. Simple. I just wouldn't rehome the dog straight away without trying to train it.



Ssthisto said:


> A dog is a living thing with a brain of its own.
> 
> No matter how well trained a dog might be... there MAY be a situation where your training does not take precedence over the dog's decision.
> 
> ...


:no1:


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

> The word "NO!" or "LEAVE IT" is an aversive - you teach the dog to fear the word happening


I think there's a difference between aversives, which aren't necessarily pain or fear inducing, and punishment, behaviourally speaking. The word aversive to me says any stimulus that reduces the likelihood of a behaviour. That stimulus can be pleasant or unpleasant. I don't believe for a second that a good "leave it" command taught with positive methods is fear inducing. It all depends on the way you have trained it. I have trained it with positive reinforcement, so there is no fear at all of what will come if they don't perform it. So my "leave it" cue and its effects other than the dog "leaving it" would be far different to the same cue taught with positive or negative punishment. 

I have taught Dharma (and others) the "leave it" with clicker/positive to much better effect (and with more reliable results) than when I used the angry "Ah ah!" without positive reinforcement which served a similar purpose previously. :2thumb:


----------



## Mirf (May 22, 2008)

HABU said:


> total control... what i've been sayin....


Indeed habu, you are the voice of reason on this thread:flrt:



Ssthisto said:


> A dog is a living thing with a brain of its own.
> 
> No matter how well trained a dog might be... there MAY be a situation where your training does not take precedence over the dog's decision.
> 
> ...


I'm really not sure what you're trying to say here? My dogs most definately have their own brains and none of them are robots. 

However, you have to be able to assert control over them at certain times for their own safety and other animals around them.....I admit that when they are in the house it can be a bit chaotic at times, but when out I can be safe in the knowledge they will respond to a verbal command. 

There are plenty of farmers in the area who would shoot a dog if they thought it was even a risk to their livestock, they have enough signs warning that any dogs on their land will be shot on sight.

Shame they don't look after their sheep as well as I do my pups. I recently let the dogs into the back garden to find 3 sheep halfway down the garden, happily munching on my lizard's weeds:lol2:


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

LoveForLizards said:


> If the dog is set on chasing something, it will take chase. If you divert attention from said object (or in this case, animal) in the first place, then there wont be a problem.


In theory I completely agree with this. However, putting aside my ethical issues with electric shock collars, I don't believe they provide protection against this. I have read on pro-collar sites cases of lots of cases where dogs are so hyped up that they carry on chasing/attacking during and after the shock (in many cases aggression being heightened by them) and of similar cases with electric fences where the dog is so excited that it runs through the pain to get to the cat or car it was chasing, only to not be able to get back when it is no longer as aroused. I also know of a dog who wore an electric collar to prevent it chasing and running off, who when not wearing the collar escaped, ran after something and was killed on the road, so even if one believes they are ethical, they are not something that reliably trains a dog much of use unless you're happy to zap it for life.

ETA: I wonder how people who use these "tools" would feel if they were taser-ed to do as they were told day in day out. I'd rather be shot by the farmer personally, at least I'd be out of my misery then!


----------



## Mirf (May 22, 2008)

LoveForLizards said:


> If the dog is set on chasing something, it will take chase. If you divert attention from said object (or in this case, animal) in the first place, then there wont be a problem.


 Isn't that (technically) what I said in the first place? Obviously the ideal would be distraction before they see whatever it is they want to chase but, in reality, my dogs have better peepers than I do and tend to clock bunnies and the like waaay before I do. Thus the need for the command 'come', or with my lot 'baby'. They associate that word with something fluffy and defenceless and it instigates them slamming the brakes on whilst wagging tails like idiots. Hardly a negative/aversive command.


----------



## sarahc (Jan 7, 2009)

*clicker training*



KathyM said:


> I have taught Dharma (and others) the "leave it" with clicker/positive to much better effect (and with more reliable results) than when I used the angry "Ah ah!" without positive reinforcement which served a similar purpose previously. :2thumb:
> 
> I find this one genuinely interesting as I have found the opposite.I have found the clicker good for teaching specific commands in a one to one situation and excellent for teaching tricks.All out the window though with more than one dog when something more exciting presents in which case the AH AH has for me been invaluable.


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

I don't have a problem using the Ah Ah as a loud distraction when necessary, it doesn't scare Dharma because she has never had any reason for it to scare her (eg. previous punishment). I just think the "leave it" cue works better because she has high incentive to perform it. Newby Sidney is another kettle of fish though, I imagine it would scare the pants off him. 

I do find it more time consuming to train 2 dogs as opposed to one (as one would with any method), but once the cues are learned it seems to be just as effective here whether they're alone or together. It is proving harder with Sidney, the newbie, as he has been trained harshly in the past and is therefore sensitive, coupled with low motivation from food, so we are using high reward play as his reward for clicker, something new to me (all my other dogs have been governed by their guts lol). :lol2:


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

LisaLQ said:


> Hang on - so Kathy is evil for saying she'd rather put a dog to sleep than abuse it, but you'd put yours to sleep just if you couldn't be bothered training them or rehoming them to someone who could? And that's better, how?!


 I never said it would be better but several of mine are unrehomeable due to illness or age and it would not be fair on them to take them from the home they know and feel safe in, to go to live with strangers.



> As you're so keen - yes I do think dogs benefit from on lead walking.


 Mine get lead walking when I take them into town occasionally but only occasionally. What benefits do you think they get? At least if you make a statement, back it up with reasons.



> Of course they get some exercise free roaming, but are you telling me your dogs spend hours running around, or do they come inside for a lie down (or indeed outside if you keep them outdoors)?


 They play, then rest, then eat, then play more, and maybe rest some more. So what is wrong with that? How is that different from someone with a town house who takes the dog for a lead walk twice a day and then goes home again to sleep in it's bed, or on the sofa?



> You cant guarantee that all those dogs will be as well trained, well socialised and obedient as a dog that gets regular on lead exercise and training?


 I'm not guaranteeing anything. Nor am I saying that a dog getting 2 walks a day is better. I'm saying nothing other than my dogs get plenty of excersize on my land. And that was in response to your claim that lead walking is far superior and would provide better excersize and increase the heart rate far better than playing as and when they choose to play on my land. I still don't know why a lead walk would increase the heart rate more than a good gallop on my land would and you haven't explained this to me so I'm none the wiser.

Essentially your dogs are like those of the chavs who boot theirs out every day, roaming wherever, killing whatever, am I right?



> I would love to hear how you've trained all 25, how often they do training, how often they go on the lead, etc.


 Why would you love to hear this? I can't see that it has any relevance to you. You seem to have a very narrow idea of what dog ownership should be and in your mind if a dog doesn't get walked a couple of times on a lead and go to X amount of formal training sessions per week, followed by X amount of formal training every day, they can't be obedient. Do you think this way because you have no experience of how someone with land and a lot of dogs could be? I can assure you that maybe in towns people live and think as you do but I know at least 12 other people in my immediate area (4 in my village) who keep large numbers of dogs.



> I'm saddened you'd stoop to calling me stupid when I am a fellow disabled lady who cant walk her dog because of real pain and disabilities


 For a start I wasn't insulting you personally but more voicing an opinion that you must be stupid (i.e. low intelligence) when you appear not to have been able to understand any of my previous posts despite my effort to make them legible and lucid. Why on earth do you keep banging on about your disbility as though it makes you some kind of special person? I am not a 'fellow disabled'. I am me. A human being, who has some physical issues involving pain. Don't be enrolling me in your ' oh poor me' club.



> - I would love to get suggestions as to how to adequately exercise one lazy dog, let alone 25 of them!


you want to know how to get a lazy dog to shift it's backside? Simple, get another dog. One dog on a walk is an amble and a plod. 2 dogs on a walk is a gallop and the 'running fast shoulder barging' game.Hardly rocket science.



> I dont know how you cope. All those animals, all that land to look after, and with disabilities. You're an inspiration to those of us who cant have that kind of life because our pain dictates what we can and cant do.


I 'cope' because I know no other life. I take opiates on a regular basis so that I am rarely in any pain. Life isn't about 'coping' and complaining and moaning about how poor, how sick, how disabled we are.
You can either decide to live life to the fullest and enjoy every single minute of it,develop strategies to enable you to live life as you choose. Or you can sit on your @rse and moan and complain about how awful life is and how everything is such a terrible effort and poor poor pity me.
My specialist told me I'd be in a wheelchair 5 years ago and I said "beggar that, I will not" and I'm not.
My late father died 2 months after his 60th birthday from a massive heart attack. The first he ever had, which literally blew his heart into bits in his chest. He knew it might happen one day, he had problems way back in his 40's, but he lived life to the fullest also, building walls, building a swimming pool in the garden of his villa in Spain, digging his veggie patch, going fishing. As he said to me, "the day you stop wanting to live, and you start taking things easy because someone tells you that you shouldn't be doing things, that's the day you start to die".
You carry on being 'disabled'. Meanwhile, I want to live!



> I'd love 25 dogs. No actually, I'd love a small group. But because of my disability I can only have one, as that is all I can reasonably expect other people to look after for me! God knows how you manage...


 I don't expect people to look after me. I'm made differently to you not just physically but mentally. The day I have to stop living the way I do, and concentrate on being 'disabled' is the day I take a razor to my wrists. There is no life if you cannot live it to the fullest. If I can't, then I may aswell be dead.
My dogs are fit, sleek, happy. They adore me and strangers. Anyone can come to my home and be greeted by 25 wagging tails and confident dogs. There is no major effort to owning them other than mental. The kibble comes from a large hopper which gets filled as it needs to be. Water buckets and bowls get cleaned and refilled once a day, they lay down calmly for me to brush and comb them every couple of days (hardly a terribly difficult task) and those which need clipping stand on a table while I sit. So how is all that so very arduous for a 'fellow disabled' person?
There are various degrees of disability. Someone who is wheelchair bound or paralysed will be different to me. Disability and the ability to do something is as much mental as physical
There are plenty of disabled achievers all over the world. Disabled, does not been unabled.
Your attitude frankly, depresses me.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

LisaLQ said:


> Simple. If you cant provide adequate care or suitable alterations, you dont get the dog.
> 
> It's not rocket science. If more people were less selfish and didn't collect animals like stamps, there'd be lots more happier dogs in the world.


 Is the air very thin high up there? Are you implying or saying that you think my dogs are not happy? You think a single dog, taken for a plod on a lead a couple of times a day is happier than 25 dogs able to play all day long and be with me?
Just what is your problem Lisa? You seem to have a violent objection to the fact that I have 25 dogs and keep livestock. At least, it sounds like you do.
Is it because you are a 'townie' and don't understand country folk?


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

LincsReps said:


> Huggy wuggy? :flrt:


I so want to scowl but, that made me giggle.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

Mirf said:


> Surely, if the dog is well trained, it will respond to it's owners verbal command? That's the whole point of training is it not? :?
> 
> I know mine do.


 Harley would return to me immediately I called her and drop anything immediately the "leave it" command was issued.As do my present dogs.It's one of the most important commands my lot know cos I have to put the milk pail on the floor so as to close the goat yard gate and if they ignored the command, I'd have 6 pints of milk gon in a second and nothing to mix with the barley meal for the pigs which would really ssip them off.


----------



## wohic (Jun 19, 2006)

my mum HAS A PACK (ALL BE IT A SMALL ONE OF 6 ) that run round the farm all day, crashing in and out of the pond, drying out by the Rayburn the going and doing it all over again, how anyone can imply that a life like that is not a fulfilled life is way beyond my understanding. The dogs are well behaved, social and respectful, there is a staffy ridgeback mix, a jack russle mix, a Belgian shepherd, and 3 complete mongrels ...... they have the most wonderful life you can imagine, I wish I could scoop you all up and take you to see them play, how they interact with my mum, (and she is very stern with them if the need arises) and how fab their general manners are. Mum has a big old 3 seater sofa in the kitchen and late afternoons will find mother and 6 dogs sprawled on there, if you look closely there will often be a cat or two in the equation as well, look on the window sill and there will probably be a chicken trying to come in to pinch the cat food, glance outside and the ponies will be gazing over the gate waiting for tea........

my Idea of heaven that place :flrt:


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

God she gets worse! "Blackpool is full of fat people", "don't group me with your 'oh poor me' club", & all this crap about townies. 

And if Fenwoman is not in pain most of the time, then why can't she work?


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

LisaLQ said:


> You seem to be under the impression that you can twist words to suit your own argument.
> 
> I think the needs of the dead chicken(s) might come before whether that person wanted their dog to be friends with it or not. I think the needs of the dog to be free from stress and pain (eg training collars) come before that of the owner who wanted them to get along. Sometimes things dont happen, and the dog would be better off in a home that could look after it properly.
> 
> ...


 So far you keep asking the questions but not offering any answers. Have you ever lived in the country Lisa? Or are you a townie born and bred?



> At what point does someone say "hang on, I might have too many animals to cope with"?


 when they cannot cope, one would presume. When the animals welfare and care is not being met. When they are not in good physical or mental health? When all their needs cannot be met? That has nothing at all to do with numbers, more to do with an individual. There are plenty of cases where owners of a single animal have been prosecuted because they have not cared for the animal properly. I had a phone call this week from a man who was looking after his brother's yorkie which was a year old, stick thin, matted to the eyeballs and infested with fleas. It was the only dog his brother had and he was caring for it while the brother was on holiday. There isn't a single flea between any of my animals and they are wormed every 3-4 months.


> When that person is allegedly disabled - and I say that tongue in cheek as I feel it must be impossible to be in so much pain and yet run a small holding and "care" for 25 dogs.


 Most of the time I'm not in pain. There are these wonderful things called 'painkillers' and a fantastic machine called a t.e.n.s. You should learn about them. Brilliant they are.
Don't be saying that you think I'm making my disability up or lying about it or I'll have your disabled backside in court. How dare you presume to know more than my specialist does.
You may consider it impossible to do anything more than sit on your backside and moan about how difficult life is. Should I ever get like that, I will hope to die quickly. You keep banging on about your disability but so far have not actually mentioned what that is. I have been open about my osteoarthritis (which is diagnosed by blood tests by a rheumatologist) and my Scheurmanns' disease, again discovered by the rheumatologist. The former I have suffered from since my late 20's and the latter since I was in my teens.
There are people who have a problem who immediately sign up to the 'pity me' club. People like my mother who has whinged and complained and moaned most of her adult life and told people that she is too sore to cook, or clean, or garden or do anything she didn't want to do. She's been mentally dead for years. 



> I just would love to know how Fenny copes.


 Don't tell lies. You have no interest at all in how I cope. You simply want more ammunition so that you can tell everyone how you don't believe it because after all, you are the expert on being disabled and if you can't cope with more than one dog, then nobody else should be able to if they have a disability.



> And why she feels that her home is better for the dog than one where he could be kept under control and seperate from livestock, with more one on one.


 If I had a dog which wasn't safe with livestock, then that question would be relevant. But since I don't have such a dog, Harley having been dead for the last 5 years after all, I cannot see why you ask.And Harley was a 'she'.
I keep going over the same old stuff again and again, repeating myself about Harley, posting pictures of her. And that's why I called you stupid. What else can I surmise since you appear to have not comprehended the posts.
Otherwise I have to assume that you do read them, do understand that I no longer have her and that none of my present dogs has a problem with the livestock, but simply want to repeat your daft statements in order to be annoying, in which case, you are doing really well.


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> Is it because you are a 'townie' and don't understand country folk?


Not getting involved with the "I'm more disabled" competition being able-bodied myself, but I live two doors away from Lisa and it's fields and secluded forest less than 5 minutes walk away. We were both raised in rural North Yorkshire too. :2thumb:

Edited to add: On a side note, those who are disabled and made able-bodied by the use of therapies and medicines should be soon pushed back into work, whether voluntary unpaid or otherwise, with the change of the benefits system. And to think my partner receives a pittance and no other help for being blind, as that isn't a "physical disability". However, I believe Fenwoman is past the age of retirement if I recall from previous posts?


----------



## Mischievous_Mark (Mar 16, 2008)

Seems this is another thread thats gone off topic


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

Tbh I find the lot of you a bunch of ignorant peopele who have nothing better to do, I think you will find that Fenny is Self Sufficient which is harder work than most of you will ever experiance. Why do you all feel the need to try and belittle others and get very personal in your posts. I think you will find its called internet bullying. My suggestion to you all is to grow up and get yourselves a real life instead of hiding behind your computer screens:devil:


----------



## LincsReps (Jul 2, 2009)

Shell195 said:


> Tbh I find the lot of you a bunch of ignorant peopele who have nothing better to do, I think you will find that Fenny is Self Sufficient which is harder work than most of you will ever experiance. Why do you all feel the need to try and belittle others and get very personal in your posts. I think you will find its called internet bullying. My suggestion to you all is to grow up and get yourselves a real life instead of hiding behind your computer screens:devil:


I'm sorry, and I'm sure Shell that you're a lovely person but you're quite misguided by the infamous fenwoman, if you don't want to believe or listen to me then can you really argue with the vast number of people that she has upset?, there are many, and most only started posts to ask for advice and found themselfs under attack by the outspoken lovely, she ruins this forum plain and simple, she attacks everyone that doesn't share her view on things, sorry Shell but she is jsut a constant problem, if you wish to prove otherwise then I'd love to see it. She needs to be banned,


----------



## LincsReps (Jul 2, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> I so want to scowl but, that made me giggle.


That's because you love me and I love you, you old bitter piece of furniture :flrt::flrt:


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

Shell195 said:


> Tbh I find the lot of you a bunch of ignorant peopele who have nothing better to do, I think you will find that Fenny is Self Sufficient which is harder work than most of you will ever experiance. Why do you all feel the need to try and belittle others and get very personal in your posts. I think you will find its called internet bullying. My suggestion to you all is to grow up and get yourselves a real life instead of hiding behind your computer screens:devil:


I'm not sure what your worry is? On this thread there is an eclectic mix of people that for the most part are discussing something in an adult fashion. I'm sure you're a wonderful online "aquaintance" to Fenny but I don't believe for a second she needs anyone to protect her (she gives far more than she'll ever get back), so don't worry. :2thumb:


----------



## Fixx (May 6, 2006)

Shell195 said:


> Tbh I find the lot of you a bunch of ignorant peopele who have nothing better to do, *I think you will find that Fenny is Self Sufficient which is harder work than most of you will ever experiance. *Why do you all feel the need to try and belittle others and get very personal in your posts. I think you will find its called internet bullying. My suggestion to you all is to grow up and get yourselves a real life instead of hiding behind your computer screens:devil:


Perhaps she could get a job then instead of scrounging off the state. I'd love to have the time to do what she does but I have to work to put food on our table and keep a roof over our heads.


----------



## LincsReps (Jul 2, 2009)

Oh dear Shell, I know you had the best intentions but surely this little extract of posts will make you realise that the list of people ready to support her being banned is far greater than her little online fan club, maybe we're just all sick of her treating us like shite and we'd like to see her gone? is that so hard to see?


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

LincsReps said:


> I'm sorry, and I'm sure Shell that you're a lovely person but you're quite misguided by the infamous fenwoman, if you don't want to believe or listen to me then can you really argue with the vast number of people that she has upset?, there are many, and most only started posts to ask for advice and found themselfs under attack by the outspoken lovely, she ruins this forum plain and simple, she attacks everyone that doesn't share her view on things, sorry Shell but she is jsut a constant problem, if you wish to prove otherwise then I'd love to see it. She needs to be banned,


 Shell has been a forum member for a long time, as have I. There are a few people who have problems with me. Some of those used to be friends of mine but turned against me if I wxpressed an opinion that wasn't the same as theirs or disagreed with them. What sort of friend is it that turns against you simply because you disagree with them? Shell has disagreed with me, and I have disagreed with Shell but we still get on fine. The trouble is that the little clique who don't like me are vocoferous in their dislike and occasionally form a little pack to yap and snap at my heels. I have always been honest about my life, the animals I keep and my disability. Never hidden anything. The little clique who back each other up and yap and snap try to catch me out by firing the same old questions again and again, this month, last month last year. The same old questions and get the same answers.
Now I could just not mention anything about myself. Hide it all, hide the fact that a dog of mine once had an e-collar used on her 15 years ago. Even on that I was open and honest and posted the why's and wherefore's and explained every little detail about what led to it and how it worked. It is never enough, still they yap and snap and try to drive me out. It'll die down for a bit, then start up again in a few months.
It isn't me who needs banning. Why should I be banned? Because I speak my mind and voice my opinion? What sort of forum would this be if it banned people for doing that?
I have detractors on here. I have also many supporters. However many of those who like me have been asked by me not to jump to my defence lest the spiteful yappers turn their spleen and spite on them too.
Before you start demanding that I get banned, I suggest you stick around for a bit. You might even change your opinion of me.
You might not believe it but Shell and Feorag had the same opinion as you do when I first joined. However as time went on, they got to know me and realise that I'm not all bad.It's natural for someone, if I disagree forcefully with them, to dislike it. I understand that. But to dislike me as a person, then make up all kinds of stories which make me seem like Herod's sister, is nothing more than spite.I rarely get personal and start throwing insults at a person which are nothing to do with the argument, but the clique do on a regular basis as you might have noticed. Apparently, not only am I cruel and have neglected dogs, but I am not really disabled at all, according to them.
If you are in South Lincs, come and visit and have a coffee with me and see my animals. You might change your opinion of me. I'm a friendly sort in real life as are my dogs.


----------



## LincsReps (Jul 2, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> Shell has been a forum member for a long time, as have I. There are a few people who have problems with me. Some of those used to be friends of mine but turned against me if I wxpressed an opinion that wasn't the same as theirs or disagreed with them. What sort of friend is it that turns against you simply because you disagree with them? Shell has disagreed with me, and I have disagreed with Shell but we still get on fine. The trouble is that the little clique who don't like me are vocoferous in their dislike and occasionally form a little pack to yap and snap at my heels. I have always been honest about my life, the animals I keep and my disability. Never hidden anything. The little clique who back each other up and yap and snap try to catch me out by firing the same old questions again and again, this month, last month last year. The same old questions and get the same answers.
> Now I could just not mention anything about myself. Hide it all, hide the fact that a dog of mine once had an e-collar used on her 15 years ago. Even on that I was open and honest and posted the why's and wherefore's and explained every little detail about what led to it and how it worked. It is never enough, still they yap and snap and try to drive me out. It'll die down for a bit, then start up again in a few months.
> It isn't me who needs banning. Why should I be banned? Because I speak my mind and voice my opinion? What sort of forum would this be if it banned people for doing that?
> I have detractors on here. I have also many supporters. However many of those who like me have been asked by me not to jump to my defence lest the spiteful yappers turn their spleen and spite on them too.
> ...


 
Hug? :flrt: I love you :flrt:


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

LincsReps said:


> Oh dear Shell, I know you had the best intentions but surely this little extract of posts will make you realise that the list of people ready to support her being banned is far greater than her little online fan club, maybe we're just all sick of her treating us like shite and we'd like to see her gone? is that so hard to see?


With all due respect, I've never said I want *anyone* banning, with the exception of someone who caused one of my loved pets a lot of pain and lifethreatening illness. I disagree with most, but not all, of what Fenwoman posts. Sometimes I feel like patting her on the back, particularly when I am in a low or black mood with the world or feeling particularly rebellious. I do wish that sometimes she would post without the real bitching she does, but I'm not immune to that criticism myself by a very long shot and for that reason as well as loving diversity in opinion within groups, I would hope she's never banned.


----------



## LincsReps (Jul 2, 2009)

KathyM said:


> With all due respect, I've never said I want *anyone* banning, with the exception of someone who caused one of my loved pets a lot of pain and lifethreatening illness. I disagree with most, but not all, of what Fenwoman posts. Sometimes I feel like patting her on the back, particularly when I am in a low or black mood with the world or feeling particularly rebellious. I do wish that sometimes she would post without the real bitching she does, but I'm not immune to that criticism myself and for that reason as well as loving diversity in opinion within groups, I would hope she's never banned.


er, yeah, alright? wait till she ruins every post you ever make, you'll change your mind then, think I'm joking don't you :lol2:?

we can all get on posting nicely after she's gone


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

LincsReps said:


> Hug? :flrt: I love you :flrt:


but you can only come for a coffee if you promise not to hug me. I'm not really a hugs sort of person.


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

Im not misguided or trying to fight Fenny`s battles for her. I am voicing MY opinion. Yes as has already been said I never got on with Pam and we had a few heated arguments but as time passes you begin to realise that Fenny is one of the good ones and has a lot of knowledge to share with a great sense of humour. I just get sick of the same people stalking certain members and questioning everything they say and do, I do wonder why some memebrs are so petty and fragile to remarks made.
It is no business of anyones how Fenny spends her life or what methods she uses or where she gets her money but none of you know when to stop do you?? You all nitpick and nag constantly, its like some kind of Japanese torture. It really is time you all grew up and found something worthwhile to do with your lives and stop making others lives a misery


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

LincsReps said:


> er, yeah, alright? wait till she ruins every post you ever make, you'll change your mind then, think I'm joking don't you :lol2:?
> 
> we can all get on posting nicely after she's gone


You say that as if I have no experience with Fenwoman - we go WAY back at least 4 or 5 years from TFF lol. I don't agree with much of what she says, and she pretty much despises me, but life would be bla without someone to argue with that doesn't take it like a knife and who can handle herself (unlike me who takes everything to heart like a personal insult). :2thumb:


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

Shell195 said:


> Tbh I find the lot of you a bunch of ignorant peopele who have nothing better to do, I think you will find that Fenny is Self Sufficient which is harder work than most of you will ever experiance. Why do you all feel the need to try and belittle others and get very personal in your posts. I think you will find its called internet bullying. My suggestion to you all is to grow up and get yourselves a real life instead of hiding behind your computer screens:devil:


Hey Shell, as you know, me & Fenwoman were at one point friends, but due to her calling me a cruel dog owner for using a dog crate for my chihuahua puppy, out of the blue without knowing how big the crate was or how long she was in it at a time, etc, I came to realise that she was not the person I thought she was. Then I started to see the many many abrasive posts she made, many to new members who simply asked for advice & needed guidance. They recieved harsh unnecessary replies from Fenwoman. 

As you might have seen in the Off Topic thread titled MacTasty (or something similar) there are many members that have come into this section (many of whom do not frequent this part like us) to ask for help, & they have been made to feel cruel, stupid & belittled by her posts. This has put most off entering this section to post. I know people say she is just straight to the point & isn't being harsh, but manners cost nothing & I find her rude posts very annoying & un-needed. If other regulars posted in the same way as her, I would feel the same about them.

I know for a fact that Fenwoman suspected me of reporting her to the RSPCA when she was visited by them, & of course myself & a couple of other members were accused of killing one of her runty puppies with negative thoughts. Obviously she has upset plenty of forum members, & they, like me, aren't happy. I think its a case that this many people can't be wrong!


----------



## LincsReps (Jul 2, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> but you can only come for a coffee if you promise not to hug me. I'm not really a hugs sort of person.


That almost, and may almost, seem to people reading these posts that you're slightly backing down to somone who has stood up to you after you've ruined every post in this section they've made? So, is that the secret fenwoman? is that all everyone who's membership lives you've made a misery needs to do, stand up to you? Because everyone can do that, no one needs a bully on the boards and I think most people (except Shell) are getting slightly annoyed now with your antics, so, that's fine, is that a form of apology from you? (I'm not holding my breath)

Oh and please remember that no matter what happens I love you :flrt:


----------



## LincsReps (Jul 2, 2009)

KathyM said:


> You say that as if I have no experience with Fenwoman - we go WAY back at least 4 or 5 years from TFF lol. I don't agree with much of what she says, and she pretty much despises me, but life would be bla without someone to argue with that doesn't take it like a knife and who can handle herself (unlike me who takes everything to heart like a personal insult). :2thumb:


That's ok, I know it's hard to stand up to people like her, but if more people did then she'd stop doing it, you must be really scared of her to make the last 2 posts, but hey. none of my business :2thumb:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

we take ourselves way too seriously here. words... how can they harm anyone here...


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)




----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

LincsReps said:


> That's ok, I know it's hard to stand up to people like her, but if more people did then she'd stop doing it, you must be really scared of her to make the last 2 posts, but hey. none of my business :2thumb:


LOL nice try, but no cigar. I'm not scared of people online, that's half my problem as I'm sure even Shell and Fen would testify to. You don't *have* to get on with everyone and agree with them - life would be so dull if you did! I did express my distaste at the way Fenwoman was getting slated earlier in the thread. Not everyone believes two wrongs make a right, and just because people don't agree with your way doesn't meant they agree with the opposite or are chicken. :lol2:


----------



## LincsReps (Jul 2, 2009)

KathyM said:


> LOL nice try, but no cigar. I'm not scared of people online, that's half my problem as I'm sure even Shell and Fen would testify to. You don't *have* to get on with everyone and agree with them - life would be so dull if you did! I did express my distaste at the way Fenwoman was getting slated earlier in the thread. Not everyone believes two wrongs make a right, and just because people don't agree with your way doesn't meant they agree with the opposite or are chicken. :lol2:


So why feel the need to mention fenwoman or shell?


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

LincsReps said:


> So why feel the need to mention fenwoman or shell?


 
Because me and Fenny have had runnings with Kathy that is why. I dont feel the need to get on with people just for the sake of it if I feel strongly about something I have to have my say just like Kathy and Fenny do. Kathy and I quite often argue but maybe that is because we are both strong minded people and just because I argue with people it doesnt mean I stalk them or disagree with everything they say. I have posted some good things on her rat threads as she does a great job but I have also posted very strongly in reply to some posts she has made.
It would be a very boring place if everyone agreed with everything wouldnt it


----------



## LincsReps (Jul 2, 2009)

Shell195 said:


> Because me and Fenny have had runnings with Kathy that is why. I dont feel the need to get on with people just for the sake of it if I feel strongly about something I have to have my say just like Kathy and Fenny do. Kathy and I quite often argue but maybe that is because we are both strong minded people and just because I argue with people it doesnt mean I stalk them or disagree with everything they say. I have posted some good things on her rat threads as she does a great job but I have also posted very strongly in reply to some posts she has made.
> It would be a very boring place if everyone agreed with everything wouldnt it


Thanks? I wasn't really asking though? but as you replied, that's great, way to go :2thumb:


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

LincsReps said:


> That almost, and may almost, seem to people reading these posts that you're slightly backing down to somone who has stood up to you after you've ruined every post in this section they've made? So, is that the secret fenwoman? is that all everyone who's membership lives you've made a misery needs to do, stand up to you? Because everyone can do that, no one needs a bully on the boards and I think most people (except Shell) are getting slightly annoyed now with your antics, so, that's fine, is that a form of apology from you? (I'm not holding my breath)
> 
> Oh and please remember that no matter what happens I love you :flrt:


 Nothing to do with backing down. I didn't realise I was squaring up. Who has ruined the threads? Not me. The clique has with the sniping and bitching. I have just defended myself. You will have noticed that I was completely open and honest about my previous use of an e-collar on my giant schnauzer. I hid nothing and defended myself politely, explained why I used it, how it worked, and all the while I was being verbally attacked and accused of stuff which was nonsense.
You are a relative newcomer on here and took great exception to my commenting on your thread about selling kittens too young to leave the mother. Since then, you followed me about stirring up trouble and gaining support from members who you saw didn't much like me. You are causing dissent on the forum not me.
You'd make a great politician. I stand by what I (and others) said about selling kittens at 7 weeks. I will always defend myself when subjected to unfair personal attacks, accusations and name calling. However, since I am a friendly person in real life, I still extend the offer of a coffee if you are ever passing. The offer would be extended to anyone.
I don't agree about the kittens, I don't much admire your apparent attempt to drum up support from easily led folks who don't like me, I abhor your attempt to try to get me banned off this forum. In fact I'd go so far as to say, if anyone is a bully, it is you.
Back down? It'd be a first.:lol2:


----------



## LincsReps (Jul 2, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> Nothing to do with backing down. I didn't realise I was squaring up. Who has ruined the threads? Not me. The clique has with the sniping and bitching. I have just defended myself. You will have noticed that I was completely open and honest about my previous use of an e-collar on my giant schnauzer. I hid nothing and defended myself politely, explained why I used it, how it worked, and all the while I was being verbally attacked and accused of stuff which was nonsense.
> You are a relative newcomer on here and took great exception to my commenting on your thread about selling kittens too young to leave the mother. Since then, you followed me about stirring up trouble and gaining support from members who you saw didn't much like me. You are causing dissent on the forum not me.
> You'd make a great politician. I stand by what I (and others) said about selling kittens at 7 weeks. I will always defend myself when subjected to unfair personal attacks, accusations and name calling. However, since I am a friendly person in real life, I still extend the offer of a coffee if you are ever passing. The offer would be extended to anyone.
> I don't agree about the kittens, I don't much admire your apparent attempt to drum up support from easily led folks who don't like me, I abhor your attempt to try to get me banned off this forum. In fact I'd go so far as to say, if anyone is a bully, it is you.
> Back down? It'd be a first.:lol2:


milk and 2 sugars babe :flrt::flrt:


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

fenwoman said:


> Is the air very thin high up there? Are you implying or saying that you think my dogs are not happy? You think a single dog, taken for a plod on a lead a couple of times a day is happier than 25 dogs able to play all day long and be with me?
> Just what is your problem Lisa? You seem to have a violent objection to the fact that I have 25 dogs and keep livestock. At least, it sounds like you do.
> Is it because you are a 'townie' and don't understand country folk?


Yes of course it is. I wasn't raised in the country at all. Dearie me woman, what is your problem with people who dont agree with you? We're all either fat chavs or "townies". Thank god the village I was raised in wasn't filled with people like you. I'm lucky that we never heard or used the word "townie", but then I guess you have a problem with most people (having seen your fat chav comments).

I find your comments about disability depressing also. I'm sure your DLA comes in very handy for all your animals, but there must be more deserving people out there who are genuinely in need of it. Hands up who pays taxes so that Fenny can have 25 foofoos?


----------



## diamondlil (May 7, 2008)

LisaLQ said:


> Yes of course it is. I wasn't raised in the country at all. Dearie me woman, what is your problem with people who dont agree with you? We're all either fat chavs or "townies". Thank god the village I was raised in wasn't filled with people like you. I'm lucky that we never heard or used the word "townie", but then I guess you have a problem with most people (having seen your fat chav comments).
> 
> I find your comments about disability depressing also. I'm sure your DLA comes in very handy for all your animals, but there must be more deserving people out there who are genuinely in need of it. Hands up who pays taxes so that Fenny can have 25 foofoos?


I darn well do, I'd love to know how someone with disabilities so severe they cannot work in gainful employment can be at the same time physically capable of running a smallholding. If the painkillers work well enough to hump hay bales around they surely work well enough for paid employment?


----------



## Fixx (May 6, 2006)

fenwoman said:


> Is the air very thin high up there? Are you implying or saying that you think my dogs are not happy? You think a single dog, taken for a plod on a lead a couple of times a day is happier than 25 dogs able to play all day long and be with me?
> Just what is your problem Lisa? You seem to have a violent objection to the fact that I have 25 dogs and keep livestock. At least, it sounds like you do.
> *Is it because you are a 'townie' and don't understand country folk?*


Country folk? What makes you think you are "country folk", you were born in Bristol, from St Georges to be exact, which is hardly rural. You really are full of it, you're just a 'Townie'.


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

KathyM said:


> In theory I completely agree with this. However, putting aside my ethical issues with electric shock collars, I don't believe they provide protection against this. I have read on pro-collar sites cases of lots of cases where dogs are so hyped up that they carry on chasing/attacking during and after the shock (in many cases aggression being heightened by them) and of similar cases with electric fences where the dog is so excited that it runs through the pain to get to the cat or car it was chasing, only to not be able to get back when it is no longer as aroused. I also know of a dog who wore an electric collar to prevent it chasing and running off, who when not wearing the collar escaped, ran after something and was killed on the road, so even if one believes they are ethical, they are not something that reliably trains a dog much of use unless you're happy to zap it for life.


Oh I wasn't saying I agree with E-collars, or the use of them, I was just saying that if a dog wants to chase, the dog will chase. E-collars are not fool proof, they don't always work and often times can make things worse by negative association.




Mirf said:


> Isn't that (technically) what I said in the first place? Obviously the ideal would be distraction before they see whatever it is they want to chase but, in reality, my dogs have better peepers than I do and tend to clock bunnies and the like waaay before I do. Thus the need for the command 'come', or with my lot 'baby'. They associate that word with something fluffy and defenceless and it instigates them slamming the brakes on whilst wagging tails like idiots. Hardly a negative/aversive command.


But if the dog wants to give chase, no amount of calling will get the dog back once it's started so diverting attention and keeping the dogs attention on you at all times is important when training and walking...



LincsReps said:


> Because everyone can do that, no one needs a bully on the boards and I think most people (except Shell


And me....I don't see anything wrong with Fenwomans posts, I must be reading them wrong!


----------



## butterfingersbimbo (Jan 26, 2008)

Zoo-Man said:


> Hey Shell, as you know, me & Fenwoman were at one point friends, but due to her calling me a cruel dog owner for using a dog crate for my chihuahua puppy, out of the blue without knowing how big the crate was or how long she was in it at a time, etc, *I came to realise that she was not the person I thought she was. Then I started to see the many many abrasive posts she made, many to new members who simply asked for advice & needed guidance. They recieved harsh unnecessary replies from Fenwoman.
> 
> As you might have seen in the Off Topic thread titled MacTasty (or something similar) there are many members that have come into this section (many of whom do not frequent this part like us) to ask for help, & they have been made to feel cruel, stupid & belittled by her posts. This has put most off entering this section to post. I know people say she is just straight to the point & isn't being harsh, but manners cost nothing & I find her rude posts very annoying & un-needed. If other regulars posted in the same way as her, I would feel the same about them.*
> 
> I know for a fact that Fenwoman suspected me of reporting her to the RSPCA when she was visited by them, & of course myself & a couple of other members were accused of killing one of her runty puppies with negative thoughts. Obviously she has upset plenty of forum members, & they, like me, aren't happy. I think its a case that this many people can't be wrong!


I completely agree, and couldn't have said it any better. This section has become quite depressing, it's impossible to ignore the nasty comments and rudeness when it's so widespread. My mother taught me if you have nothing nice to say then don't say anything. There are ways of disagreeing with people that don't include belittling and being patronising. It's a shame that Fenwoman does have some very sound advice to offer at times, but it will be lost in the sarcasm that surrounds it.

I don't understand either how anyone could think that Fenwoman doesn't make personal comments, she has done this several times to me, with no justification, I have made remarks and been shot down for no apparent reason other than to make herself feel better and far superior perhaps.


----------



## mask-of-sanity (Dec 27, 2006)

what the hell is wrong with some people ..........fenwoman speaks her mind there is nothing wrong with that ....she has personal knowledge that can help people with there animals ...yeah maybe blunt but tbh i prefer that to someone that just makes snide comments ...........but her personal life and health is nothing to do with anyone ..........


----------



## butterfingersbimbo (Jan 26, 2008)

I agree that her personal life and health are no-body's business but hers. But there's no need to be as blunt as she is, two excellent examples of people being honest and giving good advice are Eileen (Foerag) and Shell, they manage to do it without resorting to being offensive, it's not that difficult.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

i'm used to blunt... it's very common for me to have a normal conversation with people here that you know and do all manner of things that would be considered rude there in the u.k. i would imagine..

we call each other names and insult each other... yeah we're blunt here ... and way too nosey.

if this was +18 i'd do a little conversation our style...:lol2:

we know though that it's just talk... not serious or insulting... we're often laughing as we talk...


... i was course when i first joined here... i had just bought a used computer and was teaching myself... i thought a forum would be helpful.

but i was blunt and things didn't always translate well... but i learned... which was the whole point really...

now i can type a little and i have a better handle on how to do this forum stuff...

... still things sometimes hit me wrong... and i'm guilty of allowing my moods to influence me at times.

... but my perspectives are better now...

... i now try to be bigger than my emotions... not let anger or frustration do my talking.

... IMO, too many members here lack maturity and too often they are quick to anger or feel insulted... and, i might add, much too talented at making enemies...

... why not put an effort into making friends rather than taking the easier path of making presumed enemies?
... friends are much better than enemies... and i know that people get their feelings hurt and feel offended many times by others but believe me, knowing how to make the best of a situation and focusing on the good of others instead of the bad is much is a valuable life-skill.

getting beyond the pettiness of casual conversation and the imperfections of yourself and others takes you places in life... very good places.

... sometimes i felt that the supposed mean people are less mean than the ones that were slighted. their innate ugliness comes out at those times... we all say and do mean and hurtful things at times... purposely and inadvertently... we are all imperfect in some way.

some have hard shells, they appear crusty and evil... but beneath that hard exterior is the good stuff. getting to that is the challenge.

what i've noticed about people in general is that when it comes to strangers or people that they are not close to, they are very often defensive. not overtly but unconsciously and covertly ready to defend themselves if the feel abused or insulted.... i like to think that i work on my resiliency better than i feed my rigidity and defensiveness...

... i often fail, but i keep at it. our instincts to protect ourselves and counter attack others when we feel slighted or attacked are difficult to rise above, but well worth it.


... when you are wronged or feel insulted, maybe you should try to prevent yourself from being sucked into a fight... Internet forum fights are as common as they are pointless... everyone seems to want to win... no matter what it is... winning is all that matters apparently to some.

but i say, every time we make an enemy, we loose. that relationship has been broken and nothing can be gained by either party.

... squabbling, bickering and fighting are the junk food of a forum i tend to believe, it affects the overall health of a forum and it's members. we loose members, fine knowledgeable members... and we loose potential members... our collective wisdom is degraded... we are all lesser for it.


... let's be bigger than what we do maybe. why not we reach out and disarm the volatility instead of circling our wagons and loading of verbal rifles for the usual retaliation that quickly ensues?

... why not we take the effort to climb the hill of community rather than roll down the slope of pettiness and hate?

... forgive each other and let bygones be bygones if we can. it seems to me that most members here are amazingly good at grudges here... alright, you have mastered the grudge thing and suffer well the toxicity of it... why not work on our weaker areas?... like maybe the ability to ignore the dumb-stuff?

... there are too few apologies here... and too many who are quick to draw their swords... too many folks including myself, sometimes feel that they are right... right as rain... uncompromising and afraid to admit the other may have a point or a grain of truth that we have possibly overlook... we wear our exoskeletons of stubbornness and protect our underbellies of vulnerability...


... with each passing day i better grasp the sheer immensity of my own ignorance... my fallibility... i'm now longer afraid of being wrong or looking stupid or ignorant... i want my flaws and shortcomings exposed to the light of day, so that they may be corrected and refined.

... we so often censor ourselves with out vanities and stunt our growth intellectually with our fears of how others will judge us...

"free your mind and the rest will follow".. is how the song went... good words there.


forgive my ramblings... i sometimes need to get things out of my system... purge a little... it's cathartic for me.: victory:


almost forgot... a picture....


----------



## sarahc (Jan 7, 2009)

*cesar millan*

I'm not interested in the tittle tattle but I am in peoples opinions on the training methods.From the mentioned solutions:
A; patience & positive reinforcement
B;euthanasia
C;re homing
D;Cesar Millan

A ;fantastic overall but for a situation that might need addressing urgently I personally will opt for D; a Cesar Millan teqhnique any day over C and I wouldn't entertain B unless the dog was an outright untreatable dangerous dog.


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

I think QOL of the dog influences my choices. Option A would be my number 1 choice obviously. I would pick A, B and possibly C over D, although I wouldn't ever rehome a "dangerous" dog. I would however consider C over B and D if the problem were solvable in another environment (eg. livestock chasing/killing). If there was no other option but to use D (and by D I mean extreme punishment based systems like some but not all of CM's) I would definitely pick B, but those cases are few and far between and I can't see that choice ever having to be made. There is of course also "E", and that would be management/control. Ie. maybe not being able to "fix" a dog's problems and therefore sorting the environment/situation to suit, whether through control around animals or rehoming.


----------



## sarahc (Jan 7, 2009)

*option e*

Ah yes ,a good addition.


----------



## Charlottie (Oct 4, 2008)

Well, i am fully aware that fenwoman may have a lot of knowledge but i think that she puts her opinion across in a manner which is un-needed in the forum yes not everyones perfect and we can all do this _sometimes _but i have only seen 1 or 2 post of fenwomans -addmittadly i dont read all of her posts not going to waste my time - that have been kind towards the person she is talking to! Im sure that if someone new came and acted she way she has they _may_ end up with a few infractions. 
I agree with the fact that when she does insult people not many people pick up on it and she keeps on doing this -some to new members which in turn puts them off using the forum -which i personally think is wrong! If more people would correct her manner she may just calm her posts down - but hey she would just proberly put us all on ingore!
And will people stop referring to people as 'townies' i have been born and raised in a city (well it has been for 9 years now) and i see nothing wrong with it! yes it may not have the open space and all that lark of the countryside but there are great places and several fields for dogs to walk/run/play and have good excersise! I dont see how where you live matters how you treat your dog. My gran lives in a little village which yes is by a main road but it isnt exactly rural there are still people there who treat thier digs badly IMO one of these being a farmer on a small farm who has his dog locked in a little room most of the day and is taken for walks down his drive -which may be quite long but cetainly not long enogh! 
Many people have been complaining on how people assume things about them like for example fenwoman saying how people assume her dogs are being treated badly. so why are people now sterotyping people by where they live! :bash:

Sorry about rant haha!!


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

butterfingersbimbo said:


> I completely agree, and couldn't have said it any better. This section has become quite depressing, it's impossible to ignore the nasty comments and rudeness when it's so widespread. My mother taught me if you have nothing nice to say then don't say anything. There are ways of disagreeing with people that don't include belittling and being patronising. It's a shame that Fenwoman does have some very sound advice to offer at times, but it will be lost in the sarcasm that surrounds it.
> 
> I don't understand either how anyone could think that Fenwoman doesn't make personal comments, she has done this several times to me, with no justification, I have made remarks and been shot down for no apparent reason other than to make herself feel better and far superior perhaps.


Thanks hun


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

Charlottie said:


> I dont see how where you live matters how you treat your dog.


That's not what fenny was/is getting at. : victory:


----------



## Charlottie (Oct 4, 2008)

LoveForLizards said:


> That's not what fenny was/is getting at. : victory:


I know that it is proberly not the intention but it does come across like that in some of her posts! =/


----------



## rach666 (Dec 12, 2006)

i like the guy end of.


----------



## Cleospudtanshi (Aug 11, 2009)

Hi all, I dont know if this has already been covered BUT when i was studying at college for a Canine Degree, we looked at a range of canine trainers from Cesar to Barbara Woodhouse.

All have faults however what we heard about Cesar was truely appaulling.

He apparantly uses electric shock collars and the 'sccchh' noise he makes is associated with a shock of the collar. In the same way a dog can be condidtioned to a clicker with a food reward, the dog is conditioned to think that when he hears this noise he will be shocked, hence why theres a break in the chain of behaviour.

Another was he uses treadmills to wear the dogs out before the shoot for the final scenes where the dog has been reformed into the lovable pet that no longer bites people. Its no wonder when the dog has been ran for 2 hours before hand. A dog died from exhaustion due to this treatment.

I am not a believer of positive punishment and hear is a prime example. He's not a dog trainer, hes someone thats read a lot of books and believes that he can cheat his way to curing dog behavioural problems. The man should be locked up


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

I am guessing you did the same course as I started - at BB college? I wish I could have continued it, but went into human psychology instead of canine in the end. If you're still in touch, say hi to Pauline for me!


----------



## Cleospudtanshi (Aug 11, 2009)

Yeah i dropped out too, my dog joey wasnt enjoying it bless him, but going to start a similar course at myerscough where it is all done online with three block weekends, but no need to take a dog so its ideal. As far as i'm aware Pauline has either left or is on reduced hous


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

Cleospudtanshi said:


> Hi all, I dont know if this has already been covered BUT when i was studying at college for a Canine Degree, we looked at a range of canine trainers from Cesar to Barbara Woodhouse.
> 
> All have faults however what we heard about Cesar was truely appaulling.
> 
> He apparantly uses electric shock collars and the 'sccchh' noise he makes is associated with a shock of the collar. In the same way a dog can be condidtioned to a clicker with a food reward, the dog is conditioned to think that when he hears this noise he will be shocked, hence why theres a break in the chain of behaviour.


I wonder if you could PM me the name of the course and the tutor which told you that the "shhh" sound was only used in order to make the dog think he was about to get a shock? This is absolute and utter nonsense. I note you used the word "apparently" this would imply that someone told you that this is how he trains dogs but you weren't sure that this is the truth.
Have you watched any of his programmes? It might be an idea if you watched a random selection of them to get a more balanced idea as to how he operates.
For the record CM does not routinely use a shock collar. If and when he uses one (rarely) he does not make the "shhhh" noise at the same time. He uses the noise during any normal training session in order to get the dog's attention away from whatever the problem behavious is just as Victoria Stillwell uses "Bahbah".
The whole point with a shock collar is that you only need to use it once or twice. It's not a continual thing and when the shock occurs, you the trainer, make no sound. The whole point is that the dog should think that the shock happens as a result of the wrong or dangerous behaviour. The only programme I can recall the collar being used was a farm dog who chased and tried to bite the tyres of moving vehicles like the tractors and combine harvesters. The dog had already been run over once and the owners were frantic to try to prevent the dog doing this before it got killed.
The collar was put on and the owner told to drive the tractor and when the dog was about to rush in and bite, it was shcked. I can't remember exactly how many times it happened but have a feeling it was only once or twice more in the course of the afternoon. It worries me that you did a coursae which presumably was approved by some educational body which was actually giving you wrong information.



> Another was he uses treadmills to wear the dogs out before the shoot for the final scenes where the dog has been reformed into the lovable pet that no longer bites people. Its no wonder when the dog has been ran for 2 hours before hand. A dog died from exhaustion due to this treatment.


For Americans who lead busy lives and live in flats, he offers the treadmill as an alternative to taking the dog out daily for a walk. From what I read about the case of the dog which collapsed (it didn't die) was that a chap called Flody Suarez asked if his trainer could use CM's facilities which CM said yes to as a favour.It was nothing to do with CM and Flody Suarez's trainer was the one who put the labrador onto the treadmill and was supposed to have been with it the whole time.
So CM lets someone else use his facilities, then it gets turned into "he put a dog on a treadmill and it died".



> I am not a believer of positive punishment and hear is a prime example. He's not a dog trainer, hes someone thats read a lot of books and believes that he can cheat his way to curing dog behavioural problems. The man should be locked up


 How many of his programmes have you watched in order to have this opinion?
Just out of interest, what were you taught about Barbara Woodhouse on this course?


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

fenwoman said:


> Just out of interest, what were you taught about Barbara Woodhouse on this course?


Re-read her post - yes she was!


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

fenwoman said:


> I.
> 
> 
> *For Americans who lead busy lives and live in flats, he offers the treadmill as an alternative to taking the dog out daily for a walk*. From what I read about the case of the dog which collapsed (it didn't die) was that a chap called Flody Suarez asked if his trainer could use CM's facilities which CM said yes to as a favour.It was nothing to do with CM and Flody Suarez's trainer was the one who put the labrador onto the treadmill and was supposed to have been with it the whole time.
> So CM lets someone else use his facilities, then it gets turned into "he put a dog on a treadmill and it died".


Maybe Americans who lead busy lives and live in flats shouldn't own dogs in the first place? A typical example of the fact that people think they have a right to have what they want. A walk gives the dog much more than exercise, it is mental stimulation aswell, not really something a dog would get ona treadmill.


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

fenwoman said:


> Just out of interest, *what were you taught* about Barbara Woodhouse on this course?


 



Zoo-Man said:


> *Re-read her post - yes she was![/*QUOTE]
> 
> 
> Come along Colin pay attention Fenny asked *what* they were taught about her not *if *they were taught about her:lol2:


----------



## Cleospudtanshi (Aug 11, 2009)

At the end of the day if americans routinely use treadmills to exercise their dogs they shouldnt have dogs in the first place - which has already been stated.

You say he uses electric shock collars 'once or twice'. If he has to resort to these methods in any case it just shows how poor a dog trainer he is!
Americans are proven to show only what they want you to see. Just because they dont show it doesnt mean it never happens!

If you google Cesar Milan or go on youtube, many of his techniques are evaluated and it proves how crap a dog trainer he is. Never let a dog walk through the door before you - it makes him dominant over you - what a loads of codswallop as far as im aware there arent any doors in the wild! They wont argue over who walks through a doorway first! We have a dog and he eats before us, he walks through doorways, he sleeps on the sofa, on beds, he does everything that Cesar would claim is teaching him to be domninat dog...yet hes content, knows his place and we have NO problems with him what-so-ever, and thats through being trained wih positive reward techniques. Not punishment.

As far as the Woodhouse coment goes...we had to learn a variety of training techniques and she uses 'modelling' - physically forcing the dog into a position. Back when she was popular or before the likes of Karen Pryor were popularised this was probably the only form of training people knew. Now, there are proven more humane ways to train your dog.

I use 'probably' 'apparantly' 'assume' because yes i am only going on what i have read, seen or heard. But you are only 'assuming' that Cesar Milan doesnt do it, you 'assume' his techniques work, you 'assume' that everything you see on the programme is what actually happens - you are extremely naive


----------



## Cleospudtanshi (Aug 11, 2009)

And I have watched enough of this 'experts' programmes to come to the conclusion that hes an absolute t**t


----------



## Cleospudtanshi (Aug 11, 2009)

Cesar Millan: The Dog Whisperer? The history, background and reputation of Cesar Millan. and before you claim that this article backs him, read the rest of it


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

why is it there that everyone wants to follow a technique?

know your dog... raise it and be it's friend... everyone needs a method there it seems and argue over what is best... use your own judgement and raise a fine dog... learn from the dog and not a ceasar or a method... bright people don't need a book or video... they know their dog and if they listen, it will teach them the way that works best... being mean is because they don't understand how a dog's mind works... go with the flow... don't bend the dog to conform to what it doesn't understand...

let the dog train you... learn dog. don't read a recipe.


----------



## Cleospudtanshi (Aug 11, 2009)

I agree, the point i am trying to get across is that this man in enforcing techniques that are either cruel or if tried in uncontrolled situations - either the dog or the handler - would end up seriously injured.

Dog training should be enjoyed by both handler and dog, its got nothing to do with telling the animal what to do its about understanding each other. Dogs do not look at us and think we're dogs. We have to live together and just like they have to accomodate themselves to live with us we have to do the same with them. All this pack nonesense doesnt work in the majority of cases. Try and subdue a dominant dog...enjoy your stay in hospital


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Cleospudtanshi said:


> I agree, the point i am trying to get across is that this man in enforcing techniques that are either cruel or if tried in uncontrolled situations - either the dog or the handler - would end up seriously injured.
> 
> Dog training should be enjoyed by both handler and dog, its got nothing to do with telling the animal what to do its about understanding each other. Dogs do not look at us and think we're dogs. We have to live together and just like they have to accomodate themselves to live with us we have to do the same with them. All this pack nonesense doesnt work in the majority of cases. Try and subdue a dominant dog...enjoy your stay in hospital


 
right... it's a relationship... maybe i'm weird but a dog of mine is my kin... i'm devoted and she's devoted... i mean you are their mother and father... it's trust, a dog wants to be great to it's master... to please and make them proud of them... they crave your approval... when you have that there is no talk of methods... your dog sleeps with you and eats with you and goes places with you... what's all this methodology about?

... my dogs can read me and i them... i don't get the turmoil here... unless i must have a better relationship than others do...


... every dog is a little different... like every child, horse or what have you... a dog is family... what method do folks use for their kids i ask?


----------



## butterfingersbimbo (Jan 26, 2008)

Cleospudtanshi said:


> At the end of the day if americans routinely use treadmills to exercise their dogs they shouldnt have dogs in the first place - which has already been stated.
> 
> You say he uses electric shock collars 'once or twice'. If he has to resort to these methods in any case it just shows how poor a dog trainer he is!
> Americans are proven to show only what they want you to see. Just because they dont show it doesnt mean it never happens!
> ...


:notworthy:


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

HABU said:


> right... it's a relationship... maybe i'm weird but a dog of mine is my kin... i'm devoted and she's devoted... i mean you are their mother and father... it's trust, a dog wants to be great to it's master... to please and make them proud of them... they crave your approval... when you have that there is no talk of methods... your dog sleeps with you and eats with you and goes places with you... what's all this methodology about?
> 
> ... my dogs can read me and i them... i don't get the turmoil here... unless i must have a better relationship than others do...
> 
> ...


 
Of course, we like to think our dogs love and adore us, and are devoted to us, hence they follow us around all day... Heck, I'd like to think that's why mine follow my every move... 

Sadly, (or not) dogs are in it for themselves. They are inherantly selfish creatures, and opportunists by nature, and it makes much more sense to me, that the reason they follow us around is on the off chance there is something in it for them. We are their provider, we hold all their resources, and wherever we go, maybe we are about to throw them a scrap, or perhaps we're about to play 'fetch' with them, or take them for a walk... they'd hate to miss out on that (especially if there is more than one of them!) so they follow us about, just in case... 

Just food for thought...


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

Cleospudtanshi said:


> Cesar Millan: The Dog Whisperer? The history, background and reputation of Cesar Millan. and before you claim that this article backs him, read the rest of it


 
Yes, but no-one wants to read that article, because it has quotes from actual behaviourists (of course, all unsuccessful, jealous ones, like Jean Donaldson, and the ever polite Ian Dunbar...) suggesting that CM might be less than perfect... 

:lol2:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

folks... what are Americans?... 300,000,000 people from all over the world?... which Americans may i ask?.. the Spanish speaking ones?... the Irish ones?... the African American ones or the African ones/... the Japanese ones or the Russian ones?.... which ones are the Americans?... the Arab ones?... the Korean ones?.... the Apache an Navajo ones?


... the new England or the Midwestern ones?... the Californians or those from new york?... the poles or the Vietnamese???


who are THE AMERICANS i ask you? the former slaves or slave owners... the immigrants or the natural born ones...???


who are you labeling as Americans?... i'm Appalachian... does anyone there know what that means???


please... don't lump 300 million people from every corner of the globe into one sensibility...: victory::lol2::lol2:


haha!! i'm laughing here... I don't know what an american is entirely!:2thumb:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

midori said:


> Of course, we like to think our dogs love and adore us, and are devoted to us, hence they follow us around all day... Heck, I'd like to think that's why mine follow my every move...
> 
> Sadly, (or not) dogs are in it for themselves. They are inherently selfish creatures, and opportunists by nature, and it makes much more sense to me, that the reason they follow us around is on the off chance there is something in it for them. We are their provider, we hold all their resources, and wherever we go, maybe we are about to throw them a scrap, or perhaps we're about to play 'fetch' with them, or take them for a walk... they'd hate to miss out on that (especially if there is more than one of them!) so they follow us about, just in case...
> 
> Just food for thought...


 
that's why a master must own everything... no compromise... firm and consistant right?... i own the walk... the furniture... it's my food... i believe that you can't empower a dog... it must not be in competition with any human... humans always outrank a dog... they will push it if you give them rank.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Cleospudtanshi said:


> At the end of the day if americans routinely use treadmills to exercise their dogs they shouldnt have dogs in the first place - which has already been stated.
> 
> You say he uses electric shock collars 'once or twice'. If he has to resort to these methods in any case it just shows how poor a dog trainer he is!
> Americans are proven to show only what they want you to see. Just because they dont show it doesnt mean it never happens!
> ...


 
you never allow a dog to walk in front of you unless that's for a certain job... never let a dog lead a human... never. the leader walks ahead.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Cleospudtanshi said:


> At the end of the day if americans routinely use treadmills to exercise their dogs they shouldnt have dogs in the first place - which has already been stated.
> 
> You say he uses electric shock collars 'once or twice'. If he has to resort to these methods in any case it just shows how poor a dog trainer he is!
> Americans are proven to show only what they want you to see. Just because they dont show it doesnt mean it never happens!
> ...


 how much does your doberman or rot weigh?


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

let a doberman think it owns the sofa... and have a neighborhood kid try to take it away...

then send me the pictures of the crime scene..


----------



## ladyboid (Nov 25, 2007)

I belive Cm methods work, I also belive other methods work....
Its like bringing up kids... non of us will agree 100% of the time what is the best way to do it and some if us will do a brilliant job using one method and others a brillaint job using other methods ..

Then there is a whole load of us that cant get ether methods to work for our dogs so use our own methods and do a grand job OR just mess the dog up using any of the methods above because it just doesnt work for the situation or the Dog.


I personally follow CM methods to some extent because the dogs i live with are very stong in mind and body and one is a very keen guard dog and the other is very much into pack leadership and will constantly challange... both have these traits bred into them or not bred out??

Mine dont react to treats for some behavour ( oh its easy to get them to sit and lay with a treat in my hand and or praise) but when it comes to there built in behavours I need to step up and be pack leader and dominate them.. no treat will stop them from dominating each other or doing unexeptable natural dog behavour and like a pack would treat them i will treat them. 

some dogs may do anything for a treat but NOT all dogs are the same. I was bought up with labs and these were very well trained and would do there job well and very easy to train with treats and praise... Some dogs are just very different in mind and we need to put more thought into it than just" that method is right" or "that method is wrong.".:lol2:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

ladyboid said:


> I belive Cm methods work, I also belive other methods work....
> Its like bringing up kids... non of us will agree 100% of the time what is the best way to do it and some if us will do a brilliant job using one method and others a brillaint job using other methods ..
> 
> Then there is a whole load of us that cant get ether methods to work for our dogs so use our own methods and do a grand job OR just mess the dog up using any of the methods above because it just doesnt work for the situation or the Dog.
> ...


 
thank you.











hope and i see common sense there in your post... dogs and owners... situations and all are dynamic... the variables are tremendous...


... as i said... take the good and leave the bad with any advice.

very fine post...:no1:


----------



## diamondlil (May 7, 2008)

Cleospudtanshi said:


> Cesar Millan: The Dog Whisperer? The history, background and reputation of Cesar Millan. and before you claim that this article backs him, read the rest of it


Great article, and the embedded link showing Millan shocking the GSD that then bites its owner and choking the shiba inu are very interesting to say the least.


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

HABU said:


> that's why a master must own everything... no compromise... firm and consistant right?... i own the walk... the furniture... it's my food... i believe that you can't empower a dog... it must not be in competition with any human... humans always outrank a dog... they will push it if you give them rank.





HABU said:


> you never allow a dog to walk in front of you unless that's for a certain job... never let a dog lead a human... never. the leader walks ahead.


I do believe in consistency, and that maybe 'firm' comes under that. I don't really believe that I have to do anything special in order to 'outrank' my dogs though. I already hold all the resources the dog wants. 

My dogs always walk in front of me. They don't pull. In our household 'heel' means to keep the lead loose. They will also walk vaguely to heel off lead. (as in, I don't insist their head is right at my heel) They go through doors first always, are quite often fed before me, and are sometimes allowed to demand attention. However, if I am not in the mood to give them attention, a simple 'in your bed' will suffice, and they don't 'hassle' me. They dont' steal things, even food, and are great with my kids and other animals. 

My dogs are well behaved, a pleasure to have around, and do as I ask. Do I outrank them? Do I even care? Do they care? Do they even think about it?! Do they do as I ask because they think I outrank them, or because they know I mean what I say and the only way to get what they want is to do what I want? The why's aren't important, and lets face it, we can never really know what a dog is thinking. The important thing is, they do what I ask and are easy to have around.


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

fenwoman said:


> The only programme I can recall the collar being used was a farm dog who chased and tried to bite the tyres of moving vehicles like the tractors and combine harvesters. The dog had already been run over once and the owners were frantic to try to prevent the dog doing this before it got killed.


Not that I am defending Cesar, but wasn't this a vibrating collar, not a shock collar? :hmm:



HABU said:


> why is it there that everyone wants to follow a technique?
> 
> know your dog... raise it and be it's friend... everyone needs a method there it seems and argue over what is best... use your own judgement and raise a fine dog... learn from the dog and not a ceasar or a method... bright people don't need a book or video... they know their dog and if they listen, it will teach them the way that works best... being mean is because they don't understand how a dog's mind works... go with the flow... don't bend the dog to conform to what it doesn't understand...
> 
> let the dog train you... learn dog. don't read a recipe.


:notworthy:


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

Cleospudtanshi said:


> At the end of the day if americans routinely use treadmills to exercise their dogs they shouldnt have dogs in the first place - which has already been stated.
> 
> You say he uses electric shock collars 'once or twice'. If he has to resort to these methods in any case it just shows how poor a dog trainer he is!
> Americans are proven to show only what they want you to see. Just because they dont show it doesnt mean it never happens!
> ...


 I made no comment about him or his use of collars. You are once again assuming things, like assuming that I think his techniques work or don't work or that I assume that the telly programme shows every aspect of the training fromstart to finish. Don't assume. It'll stop you making worn assumptions.
The reason I asked about whether you watched the programmes is that I wodnered if you had a balanced view of him or what he does. I could do a google on any subject you care to name, and then hone in on only the negative aspects in order to quantify what I wanted to believe.In fact, several years ago, I was just as derogatory about the man as many are on here. Then I go a freeview set top box and was able to actually watch his programmes which I did avidly, and changed my opinion. Sure he does some things I don't agree with as I could say for all trainers. But on balance, I think he's 'good people'.
I suppose it is natural to think that those who are most vociferous in their hatred of him, won't have watched any more than a token clips on youtube and may even have searched for clips showing the most difficult dogs. After all, if they don't like the idea of the man, why would they want to watch all his programmes? The problem is that you are not derogatory about him, from a point of knowledge. You hate him because you have concentrated on finding things about him to hate.
It makes no difference to me, nor to CM, nor to anyone else with an open mind, whether a few closed minded folks decided they don't want to like him. The facts speak for themselves, he is popular, he is successful, he successfully has a large pack of 'difficult' breed dogs and he works all over the United states, helping thousands of dogs to live happy lives with owners who have been taught how to care properly for their pets. Nothing that you or his detractors can say, will alter this fact I'm afraid.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

HABU said:


> let a doberman think it owns the sofa... and have a neighborhood kid try to take it away...
> 
> then send me the pictures of the crime scene..


 don't need to be a Dobe either. I ended up with my arms and hands bitten to beggary by a very beautiful and totally pampered cocker spaniel bitch 12 years ago. I took her in when she was nearly a year old, from a lady with 2 little girls who had told her every day that she was a princess. When she tried to tell them that she was a princess and they were her servants, and servants weren't allowed in the kitchen, near the food, near her bed, on their beds, on the sofa etc, they gave her to me.
Day one, she says to me "I am a princess, you are my slave, this is my sofa"...............................
Once we'd reached an understanding she said "you are god, I am your slave, I love you and want to be with you, I own nothing and you own everything".
She was a very beautiful cocker spaniel who was a total joy to own.


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

LoveForLizards said:


> Not that I am defending Cesar, but wasn't this a vibrating collar, not a shock collar? :hmm:
> 
> 
> :notworthy:


perhaps there were 2 similar cases? The one I watched was definately a shock collar.


----------



## Andy (Jul 27, 2005)

fenwoman said:


> I made no comment about him or his use of collars. You are once again assuming things, like assuming that I think his techniques work or don't work or that I assume that the telly programme shows every aspect of the training fromstart to finish. Don't assume. It'll stop you making worn assumptions.
> The reason I asked about whether you watched the programmes is that I wodnered if you had a balanced view of him or what he does. I could do a google on any subject you care to name, and then hone in on only the negative aspects in order to quantify what I wanted to believe.In fact, several years ago, I was just as derogatory about the man as many are on here. Then I go a freeview set top box and was able to actually watch his programmes which I did avidly, and changed my opinion. Sure he does some things I don't agree with as I could say for all trainers. But on balance, I think he's 'good people'.
> I suppose it is natural to think that those who are most vociferous in their hatred of him, won't have watched any more than a token clips on youtube and may even have searched for clips showing the most difficult dogs. After all, if they don't like the idea of the man, why would they want to watch all his programmes? The problem is that you are not derogatory about him, from a point of knowledge. You hate him because you have concentrated on finding things about him to hate.
> It makes no difference to me, nor to CM, nor to anyone else with an open mind, whether a few closed minded folks decided they don't want to like him. The facts speak for themselves, he is popular, he is successful, he successfully has a large pack of 'difficult' breed dogs and he works all over the United states, helping thousands of dogs to live happy lives with owners who have been taught how to care properly for their pets. Nothing that you or his detractors can say, will alter this fact I'm afraid.


 :iamwithstupid:


----------



## fenwoman (Apr 15, 2008)

Cleospudtanshi said:


> At the end of the day if americans routinely use treadmills to exercise their dogs they shouldnt have dogs in the first place - which has already been stated.


 Well, it's their right to own a dog, just as it is the right for people over here who go out to work for 9 hours a day, to own a dog and for people with tiny children who maul the dog. It's their right too. All kinds of people get dogs despite their home life not being suitable. At least flat dwelling Americans were prepared to try to make the dog's life better. Since they already had the dog, what else should they have done?



> You say he uses electric shock collars 'once or twice'.


 No I don't say that at all. I said, in the particular case I was referring to, he administered the shock either once, or twice. That does not equate to him only using a shock collar once or twice. Simply that in this particular case, it too either one, or two shocks for the dog to learn that large moving tyres are bad things to mess with. And it learned this before one over them crushed the life from its body.



> If he has to resort to these methods in any case it just shows how poor a dog trainer he is![/qote]
> It shows nothing of the sort. It shows that in an extreme case, where all else had been tried and failed, and in order to stop dangerous behvaiour quickly, in order to prevent death or injury, a short sharp shock was needed in his assessment. Since none of us knows the dog, knows how long the behaviour had been going on, nor what else had been tried, how can any of his make a judgement on his training method in this particular case. I know several pretty good trainers, who will occasionally and on certain dogs, for certain behaviours, use shock collars. However because of the AR brigade, they won't publicise the fact. I notice that none of the other 'gentler' trainers ever goes on television to show us lesser mortals how else to correct mad, bad or dangerous dogs. The only programmes I've ever seen are the likes of Victoria Stillwell teaching yappy dogs not to yap and dogs which run off, not to run off.
> I'd like to see her face an out of control and dangerous rottie or mastiff as CM has done.
> On dog borstal a couple of years ago there was a dominant American bulldog who was aggressive to it's (weak) owners. On the advice of the dog borstal trainers, the dog was put to sleep.
> ...


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

fenwoman said:


> Well, it's their right to own a dog, just as it is the right for people over here who go out to work for 9 hours a day, to own a dog and for people with tiny children who maul the dog. It's their right too. All kinds of people get dogs despite their home life not being suitable. At least flat dwelling Americans were prepared to try to make the dog's life better. Since they already had the dog, what else should they have done?
> 
> 
> No I don't say that at all. I said, in the particular case I was referring to, he administered the shock either once, or twice. That does not equate to him only using a shock collar once or twice. Simply that in this particular case, it too either one, or two shocks for the dog to learn that large moving tyres are bad things to mess with. And it learned this before one over them crushed the life from its body.
> ...


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

I think when it comes down to it, unbiased opinions won't even count, there'll be some reason that it's wrong unless that biased opinion is backing CM, then bias is great, isn't it? Several pages back I said I went out to get an unbiased experience for myself of electric shock collars, and I did get that experience and it wasn't pleasant, proved to me that electric collars were unecessarily painful and therefore in my opinion cruel. That unbiased opinion was ignored conveniently lol. Of course I'm biased now against electric shock collars, because I had one on me and it bloody hurt like hell. :lol:

You won't find a panel of trainers that are unbiased. Just as CM isn't unbiased. It's strange how you would take the edited and glitzed up TV program as gospel over the majority of trainers who disagree with his cruel methods. That's biased! Taking the opinion of one over many that resolves one of guilt over the use of cruel methods is biased! :lol2::whistling2:


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

My dogs are allowed on the sofa when invited and will get down when asked (by anyone, including toddlers) - not sure what the theory is behind not letting them up unless they maul people lmao. I'll have to read Baz that one, lol. 

I don't believe that "alpha always leads" stuff when it comes to the pack ranking argument (forgive me if that's not the motivation with you HABU). Natural pack wolf behaviour is not to send the most valuable member of a pack through a narrow gap first when a lesser ranking dog could test the way. Same with eating. From what I have read, alpha wolves do not eat first either. When you reevaluate what most pack ranking training is based on, you realise it's mostly pants. Dogs need a leader, they don't need to see someone pretend to eat before they do, they don't have to sleep lower than the human, they don't have to go through doors last (although it's polite for them not to pull you out of the door lol).


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

Victoria Stilwell - View topic - Dominance: Dog V Human - taking over the world?

Best article about "dominance". Ever.

And before someone says "Oh that bloody Victoria Stilwell...grumble", it wasn't written by her just happens to be on her forum.

I've posted this link many times on the forum, but no-one's taken any notice of it lol.


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

LisaLQ said:


> Victoria Stilwell - View topic - Dominance: Dog V Human - taking over the world?
> 
> Best article about "dominance". Ever.
> 
> ...


 
no-one does take notice of links in general, because mostly they have pre-formed opinions in their mind, and aren't open to both sides of the 'arguement'.


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

I just read it :lol2:

It is written by my very good mate. I heart Ems.


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

Damnit Kathy, now it doesn't look unbiased for me to post it. :lol2:


----------



## butterfingersbimbo (Jan 26, 2008)

LisaLQ said:


> Victoria Stilwell - View topic - Dominance: Dog V Human - taking over the world?
> 
> Best article about "dominance". Ever.
> 
> ...


I read it ages ago actually and thought it was very good! :whistling2:


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

KathyM said:


> I just read it :lol2:
> 
> It is written by my very good mate. I heart Ems.





LisaLQ said:


> Damnit Kathy, now it doesn't look unbiased for me to post it. :lol2:





butterfingersbimbo said:


> I read it ages ago actually and thought it was very good! :whistling2:


 
Ok, what I should have said was 'no-one who disagrees with yuo will read it, because.... ' :lol2:


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

LOL yes - and I should have said "no-one who repeatedly recommends "pack rank" theory takes any notice of it".

Either that or they just say "wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong!" when they read it. Because, of course, they're right. :whistling2:


----------



## Mirf (May 22, 2008)

Andy said:


> :iamwithstupid:


:lol2:


----------



## Cleospudtanshi (Aug 11, 2009)

Fenwoman (however you spell it), it would seem that I have touched a nerve with the old Cesar topic seeing as you dissected everything that I posted. 

I work with dogs, ive trained dogs, ive owned dogs..I am not saying i'm an expert but I have a better idea than most.

We have prison dogs boarded at our kennels. They are incredibly dominant and can be dangerous in the wrong hands, one inparticular. You cant check him because he'll turn round and bite you, cant discipline him because he will bite back. He is not an aggressive dog however you just need to know how to handle him, infact he's a big teddy bear if treated with respect. He could be compared to pretty much every dog that milan has 'reformed', but personally if i tried the 'pin him down to show him who's boss' move he would take my face off. 
At least Victoria Stillwell shows techniques that are safe to use regaurdless of your experience. Dogs are dangerous animals, any dog can turn, and Cesar's methods are a stairway to disaster.

Its the silly people who think that by reading a few books or seeing a few programmes 'makes them dog trainers' that are dangerous. Milan basically gives out the vibe that his techniques are safe to use by everyone...I am not stupid enough to think that throwing a dog to the floor will show him im more dominant because if you choose the wrong dog to mess with, they could potentially kill you. 

Of course the dog will growl if you throw him off the sofa - he was comfortable! He was happy & relaxed, then you come along and shove him off - I bet you wouldnt like being dragged out of bed in the morning would you?

And what makes you think that I own a rottie or a dobe? Or were being clever? I own a springer x collie - both notoriously difficult dogs to keep, both can become aggressive if not trained properly or allowed to become bored.

America as a nation also paint their dog's nails, dye the animals hair, and dress them up or put them in handbags...if a nation is that mad, they will listen to anything thats why Mr. 'i'm a dog therapist' Milan is so popular.

And the shock collar to stop them from being run over by a tractor? Well now anything with wheels will remind the dog of their electrocution...so standing by the roadside and the dog bolts - well done Cesar i applaud you! 

:censor: head


----------



## butterfingersbimbo (Jan 26, 2008)

Cleospudtanshi said:


> Fenwoman (however you spell it), it would seem that I have touched a nerve with the old Cesar topic seeing as you dissected everything that I posted.
> 
> I work with dogs, ive trained dogs, ive owned dogs..I am not saying i'm an expert but I have a better idea than most.
> 
> ...


Excellent :notworthy:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

.... two things i know for certain... all dogs are not created equal... all breeds are not created equal... some have been bred to alter their base behaviors... like the hunt... the hunt is composed of specific parts... some parts have been bred out and other parts have been emphasized... some breeds have been bred for appearence with little regard for the behaviors...


the two things are:


1. as with people, some dogs are extremely intelligent... almost frighteningly so... that can amaze you sometimes... and some dogs are as stupid as a bag of hammers... nearly retarded...


2. some people on this forum are hell bent on having an argument over something... even if that entails splitting hairs multiple times...


... i call 'em as i see them... no offence intended...:lol2:


----------



## mask-of-sanity (Dec 27, 2006)

Cleospudtanshi said:


> Fenwoman (however you spell it), it would seem that I have touched a nerve with the old Cesar topic seeing as you dissected everything that I posted.
> 
> I work with dogs, ive trained dogs, ive owned dogs..I am not saying i'm an expert but I have a better idea than most.
> 
> ...


 
are you saying its ok for a dog to growl when removed from a sofa ? and i cant agree on a spaniel x collie being difficult my 8 yr old bitch is a dream to own, never showed an ounce of aggresion , all my dogs no there place in my house and do as they are told...i will not tolerate them growling at anyone who lives in my house or is invited in


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

mask-of-sanity said:


> are you saying its ok for a dog to growl when removed from a sofa ? and i cant agree on a spaniel x collie being difficult my 8 yr old bitch is a dream to own, never showed an ounce of aggresion , all my dogs no there place in my house and do as they are told...i will not tolerate them growling at anyone who lives in my house or is invited in


 
ditto!:2thumb:


double ditto with a snap!:lol2:


----------



## Cleospudtanshi (Aug 11, 2009)

_Quote "_2. some people on this forum are hell bent on having an argument over something... even if that entails splitting hairs multiple times...


... i call 'em as i see them... no offence intended" _Quote_

I dont know how you do it properly!

Non taken i like a good debate anyway! And if said person is going to give me hell over everything I say then we're going to be in for a looooong night! 

Only problem is everyone is an expert! 

Everyone is entitled to an opinion and to give it, i just dont like people who think they know nothing about eveything, trying to tell me what im saying is wrong. 

The techniques i use at home and at work, work for me and the dogs everyone is happy. I would not be happy using HIS techniques on any dog i came into contact with - said and done! 

Said person can nitpick all they want they wont change my view


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

I would agree that it is not acceptable for a dog to growl when you ask him to get off the sofa. I think that has less to do with the method used than the dog itself - I've never experienced that here, even with a potentially pushy bullmastiff. 

On a side note though I think some dogs are more vocal than others. I've had two boxers here that talked to me (not in the schizophrenic way like Jesus does lol) and people could've misread them as growls. They were chirps though not growls. Often pleasure and play related. That's quite common in Boxers, I don't know of any other breed that makes that noise lol. You know that elephant trumpeting noise a cat makes when it meets another cat it doesn't know/like? It was like that. I miss having a Boxer, they were so daft.


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

mask-of-sanity said:


> are you saying its ok for a dog to growl when removed from a sofa ? and i cant agree on a spaniel x collie being difficult my 8 yr old bitch is a dream to own, never showed an ounce of aggresion , all my dogs no there place in my house and do as they are told...i will not tolerate them growling at anyone who lives in my house or is invited in


 
I am not the person that was directed at, but _of course_ it is OK for dogs to growl, just like it is OK for them to wag their tails. Growling is merely a form of communication for a dog, just like wagging it's tail says 'I like that/I'm happy', growling says 'I don't like that/I'm unhappy'. 

Dogs that are told off for growling are potentially the most dangerous. I don't doubt that most people get lucky, because dogs are so inherantly good natured, they never progress to a bite. But some dogs, will stop growling, and start biting.


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

HABU said:


> .... two things i know for certain... all dogs are not created equal... all breeds are not created equal... some have been bred to alter their base behaviors... like the hunt... the hunt is composed of specific parts... some parts have been bred out and other parts have been emphasized... some breeds have been bred for appearence with little regard for the behaviors...
> 
> 
> the two things are:
> ...


 
Well said:2thumb:
When I have trained my dogs I do it freestyle, I follow no particular method and adjust training methods to suit the individual dog
As you have said not all dogs are the same and not all things that dog trainers do are right whether that is Cesar Milan,Victoria Stilwell or any of the many others that are or have been about
I dont understand why people cant just take the good parts from all these people and ignore the bad parts, maybe as you say they just like to argue...........................................................


----------



## Fixx (May 6, 2006)

mask-of-sanity said:


> *are you saying its ok for a dog to growl when removed from a sofa ?* and i cant agree on a spaniel x collie being difficult my 8 yr old bitch is a dream to own, never showed an ounce of aggresion , all my dogs no there place in my house and do as they are told...i will not tolerate them growling at anyone who lives in my house or is invited in


I think it depends on the definition of 'growl' being used, Stinky (aka Blaze) growls when I boot him out of his comfy spot, but it's more of a grumble at being moved than aggression, a bit like having the last word when I tell him to shut up when he's barking for no reason, we both get quieter and quieter but he still has the last word.


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

When I said it wasn't acceptable I didn't mean I would punish, shout at or any other action for the growling itself other than remedial work to re-ascertain some sort of control over the sofa. I wouldn't have a dog on the sofa here if he/she was warning people off it. That would be setting them up for failure, but then I have children and haven't been in that position myself.


----------



## Cleospudtanshi (Aug 11, 2009)

i am not condoning any growling but the situation mentioned explains why a dog would growl. Tell you what, i'll come round yours and throw you off the sofa...see it from the dogs point of view. 

The dog is used to sitting on the sofa, whether that be your desicion or any owner previous. You coming in and yelling at it for being on the sofa are giving the dog mixed signals - mixed signals = confused unhappy dog - unhappy dogs growl - whos at fault? the owner. why? read the above. A dog that is used to doing something and previously not been repremanded will continue doing this behaviour. To turn around and change that desicion is unfair on the dog and incredibly stupid. If you want to change the behaviour that has been routine for a long time expect an unhappy dog

Dogs are rarely aggressive for the sake of it, they have a reason and the reason 90% of the time is down to the owner and lack of communication


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

But you didn't say he was being shouted at when he growled - it's perfectly normal for a dog to react when threatened.

ETA: I don't throw my dogs off the sofa or shout, maybe that's why my dogs get down off the sofa when asked without answering back lol


----------



## Cleospudtanshi (Aug 11, 2009)

Fixx said:


> I think it depends on the definition of 'growl' being used, Stinky (aka Blaze) growls when I boot him out of his comfy spot, but it's more of a grumble at being moved than aggression, a bit like having the last word when I tell him to shut up when he's barking for no reason, we both get quieter and quieter but he still has the last word.


play growls are another example then people wonder why the dog wont play with them - duh!


----------



## midori (Aug 27, 2006)

Shell195 said:


> Well said:2thumb:
> When I have trained my dogs I do it freestyle, I follow no particular method and adjust training methods to suit the individual dog
> As you have said not all dogs are the same and not all things that dog trainers do are right whether that is Cesar Milan,Victoria Stilwell or any of the many others that are or have been about
> I dont understand why people cant just take the good parts from all these people and ignore the bad parts, maybe as you say they just like to argue...........................................................


I think the general problem people have with CM (and this is what my problem is) is that the majority of people who watch it cannot pick out the 'good and 'bad' parts. They watch the show, they see an apparent improvement in behaviour, do not have the first clue themselves, and despite what is written across the screen, they do try this at home... 

So, people try alpha rolling their puppies, pinning down puppies, all thinsg which those who are experienced know are likely to either a) frighten the puppy or b) make the puppy think it's a game and worsen the problem. At worst case scenario they will try something with the wrong dog and get bitten, or a child will get bitten, and then the dog may be destroyed.


----------



## KathyM (Jan 17, 2009)

Shell195 said:


> I dont understand why people cant just take the good parts from all these people and ignore the bad parts, maybe as you say they just like to argue...........................................................


Ooo I could get done under Godwin's Law but I'm dying to ask what would've happened if we'd said the same about you know who. :lol2:

I can train how I want to, I can use what I find acceptable and so can anyone else. However, it is normal for internet debate to share and contrast views when posed with a thread such as this and personally I find it hard to ignore dogs being nearly killed. It's just so unecessary. I don't follow any one trainer and I think you're right that we should take what we can use and forget the rest when it comes to training, but when it comes to internet debates on what is right and wrong, then I think it's fair for someone to stand up for what they believe in - I personally don't believe in lynching, zapping or otherwise bullying and terrifying dogs.


----------



## Cleospudtanshi (Aug 11, 2009)

KathyM said:


> Ooo I could get done under Godwin's Law but I'm dying to ask what would've happened if we'd said the same about you know who. :lol2:
> 
> I can train how I want to, I can use what I find acceptable and so can anyone else. However, it is normal for internet debate to share and contrast views when posed with a thread such as this and personally I find it hard to ignore dogs being nearly killed. It's just so unecessary. I don't follow any one trainer and I think you're right that we should take what we can use and forget the rest when it comes to training, but when it comes to internet debates on what is right and wrong, then I think it's fair for someone to stand up for what they believe in - I personally don't believe in lynching, zapping or otherwise bullying and terrifying dogs.


:2thumb:


----------



## mask-of-sanity (Dec 27, 2006)

Fixx said:


> I think it depends on the definition of 'growl' being used, Stinky (aka Blaze) growls when I boot him out of his comfy spot, but it's more of a grumble at being moved than aggression, a bit like having the last word when I tell him to shut up when he's barking for no reason, we both get quieter and quieter but he still has the last word.


maybe my 3 dogs are odd then , if they are asked to move or told to get down if they have managed to creep on to the sofa or bed none of them wil growl or moan about it ...they no they are not allowed and just give the puppy dog eye look 



Cleospudtanshi said:


> i am not condoning any growling but the situation mentioned explains why a dog would growl. Tell you what, i'll come round yours and throw you off the sofa...see it from the dogs point of view.
> 
> The dog is used to sitting on the sofa, whether that be your desicion or any owner previous. You coming in and yelling at it for being on the sofa are giving the dog mixed signals - mixed signals = confused unhappy dog - unhappy dogs growl - whos at fault? the owner. why? read the above. A dog that is used to doing something and previously not been repremanded will continue doing this behaviour. To turn around and change that desicion is unfair on the dog and incredibly stupid. If you want to change the behaviour that has been routine for a long time expect an unhappy dog
> 
> Dogs are rarely aggressive for the sake of it, they have a reason and the reason 90% of the time is down to the owner and lack of communication


i must of miised that the dog was peviously allowed to do this...none of mine have ever been allowed on the sofa's they have there own beds ..obviously they do try there luck but will soon get down if told to with out a grumble 



Cleospudtanshi said:


> play growls are another example then people wonder why the dog wont play with them - duh!


play growls are a different kettle of fish , my retriever sounds so nasty when he is playing either with the other dogs or one of us , friends do look scared when they hear him for the first time and quickly drop the toy they are using to play with him ...they dont get scolded for play growling or putting one of the other dogs in its place


----------



## mask-of-sanity (Dec 27, 2006)

midori said:


> I am not the person that was directed at, but _of course_ it is OK for dogs to growl, just like it is OK for them to wag their tails. Growling is merely a form of communication for a dog, just like wagging it's tail says 'I like that/I'm happy', growling says 'I don't like that/I'm unhappy'.
> 
> Dogs that are told off for growling are potentially the most dangerous. I don't doubt that most people get lucky, because dogs are so inherantly good natured, they never progress to a bite. But some dogs, will stop growling, and start biting.


growling has its place i agree....but not if its directed at me or my family or visitors ...mine grumble if unsure of a noise ect and obviously if they are in pain and i touch the area ..........i ment i will not tolerate them growling just because they have been told to get down or asked to move ect , maybe i am lucky with mine that they have not felt the need to grumble at us ,they are just laid back dogs


----------



## Fixx (May 6, 2006)

mask-of-sanity said:


> maybe my 3 dogs are odd then , if they are asked to move or told to get down if they have managed to creep on to the sofa or bed none of them wil growl or moan about it ...they no they are not allowed and just give the puppy dog eye look


I never said my dog was 'normal' (apparently he's depressed according to someone on here :crazy: ). Perhaps 'growl' is the wrong word to use, 'grumble' was better, if he was human I'd say he was mumbling under his breath "oh for Dog's sake, I've just got comfortable", especially when combined with the big 'sigh' he does when he ends up on his own bed...anthropomorphising I know...:blush:


----------



## mask-of-sanity (Dec 27, 2006)

Fixx said:


> I never said my dog was 'normal' (apparently he's depressed according to someone on here :crazy: ). Perhaps 'growl' is the wrong word to use, 'grumble' was better, if he was human I'd say he was mumbling under his breath "oh for Dog's sake, I've just got comfortable", especially when combined with the big 'sigh' he does when he ends up on his own bed...anthropomorphising I know...:blush:


:lol2: i no you didnt .........dont think any dog is normal they all have own quirky ways dont they


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

fenwoman said:


> *I've ever seen are the likes of Victoria Stillwell teaching yappy dogs not to yap and dogs which run off, not to run off.*
> *I'd like to see her face an out of control and dangerous rottie or mastiff as CM has done.*


I have! She dealt with a large white German Shepard in one episode!


----------



## daikenkai (May 24, 2007)

I couldnt tell you what method i used to train my last boy, Blue. All i know is that it worked and he was the best dog i ever had the pleasure of sharing my life with. 
I have never followed any trainers methods, ive gone with my own instinct and treated the dog as an individual. Ive never used physical restraint, shock collars or anything else. Maybe Blue wasnt perfectly trained but we had a good agreement and i never ever got angry at him in his 4 short years. 
Everyones different...why is that so hard to accept?


----------



## diamondlil (May 7, 2008)

daikenkai said:


> I couldnt tell you what method i used to train my last boy, Blue. All i know is that it worked and he was the best dog i ever had the pleasure of sharing my life with.
> I have never followed any trainers methods, ive gone with my own instinct and treated the dog as an individual. Ive never used physical restraint, shock collars or anything else. Maybe Blue wasnt perfectly trained but we had a good agreement and i never ever got angry at him in his 4 short years.
> Everyones different...why is that so hard to accept?


Do you know, summing that up as a good agreement is exactly how I feel it should be. Everyone has different expectations and circumstances which will affect the relationship with their dogs. Apart from out and out cruelty, no-one really can say another owner's way of keeping and training a dog is wrong! We all like to think we are perfect but any adult should be able to accept that there's more than one way to have a happy dog.
I'm sure some people would be horrified seeing my little lurcher enjoying her raw chicken portions, I think giving processed food is nowhere near as healthy, but being rude about other people's ways that work for them is pointless IMO.


----------



## daikenkai (May 24, 2007)

diamondlil said:


> Do you know, summing that up as a good agreement is exactly how I feel it should be. Everyone has different expectations and circumstances which will affect the relationship with their dogs. Apart from out and out cruelty, no-one really can say another owner's way of keeping and training a dog is wrong! We all like to think we are perfect but any adult should be able to accept that there's more than one way to have a happy dog.
> I'm sure some people would be horrified seeing my little lurcher enjoying her raw chicken portions, I think giving processed food is nowhere near as healthy, but being rude about other people's ways that work for them is pointless IMO.


Exactly, as long as no-one is beating the dog into doing what its told, whats the problem? Im guessing everyone has happy healthy dogs, so whats the point in going round in circles?


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

Zoo-Man said:


> I have! She dealt with a large white German Shepard in one episode!


I'm sure she dealt with a Doberman at one point also? Then there was the 2 Inuits.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

LoveForLizards said:


> I'm sure she dealt with a Doberman at one point also? Then there was the 2 Inuits.


Yes, I think you're right! Why Fenwoman seems to think Victoria Stilwell only deals with small yappy toy dogs I do not know. I have seen Ceasar Milan deal with many chihuahuas, dachshunds, pomeranians, etc!


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

Yes, I remember the dog he threw on the floor and pinned was something tiny like that. He's not much bigger himself :whistling2::lol2:


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

LisaLQ said:


> Yes, I remember the dog he threw on the floor and pinned was something tiny like that. He's not much bigger himself :whistling2::lol2:


Yes, I've seen him fling & pin many a tiny dog. Small man syndrome anyone? :whistling2::lol2:


----------



## butterfingersbimbo (Jan 26, 2008)

I knew someone who alpha rolled her terrier one day and it nearly had her hand off, she thought it would be a good idea after watching DW......she ended up having to re-home him. :censor:


----------



## Sam'n'Droo (May 31, 2008)

I tried to alpha roll and pin droo the other day.. he was whining at me for one reason or another.. but since then he's been good as gold :whistling2:


( for those who dont know i am sam, droo is my OH..)


----------



## mrsfluff (Jul 15, 2007)

Sam'n'Droo said:


> I tried to alpha roll and pin droo the other day.. he was whining at me for one reason or another.. but since then he's been good as gold :whistling2:
> 
> 
> ( for those who dont know i am sam, droo is my OH..)


See, I'd try that on my OH.........but I think he'd like it :whistling2: :lol2:

Jo


----------

