# Demanding Puppy, exhausted owner



## fundamentalnail (Oct 20, 2010)

Hi Everyone,
I've only just created a profile on here, so bear with me if I'm not 100% familiar with the way things run (rest assured, I've read the introductory thread )

The reason I decided to join these forums is, in actual fact, to try to help out my girlfriend. She is the owner of a Rottweiler puppy (about 3 months old). Now, my girlfriend has a very busy schedule with college classes, assignments and various extra curricular activities and getting a puppy to take care of on top of all of this may not have been the wisest of ideas. But the dog and her have grown very fond of one another, and there is a definite bond there.
The problem is, Riley (that's the dog) is very very demanding of attention. Granted he gets attention when he barks for it 
He gets wound up by noise, particularly squeaky toys and noises from the computer (I've tried to talk on Skype with her several times but have had to have the sound muted because it excited Riley too much). The only times, it seems, that he stops barking is when my girlfriend is right next to him, hugging him etc. And even then he starts to be very rowdy and overly playful.
This is all standard puppy care, and I remember it from when my dog was only little.
The problem is, when Riley begins to bark and whine at late hours of the night, and throughout the day it irritates both my girlfriend and her parents. My girlfriend has before expressed how annoyed and frustrated her parents get with her for 'not controlling her dog' or 'not being a good mother.'

As I mentioned before, the behaviour is exactly what a young puppy typically displays. What I'm asking for, though, is if anyone knows of any ways that Riley can be calmed down, my girlfriend can be a bit less stressed and not get yelled at for something she can't really control (or can she ;p)

Your advice is valuable,
Thanks
Fundamentalnail


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

fundamentalnail said:


> Granted he gets attention when he barks for it


Dog performs a behaviour
Dog is rewarded for the behaviour
Dog repeats behaviour


----------



## Leah84 (Jun 22, 2009)

best thing she can do is ignore him when he`s playing up and reward when he`s quiet. if she keeps giving into him whilst he`s barking then he`ll see that as a way to get attention and continue to do it.

it`s best to start now as it can prove hard to train them out of a learned behaviour like that once they`re older


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

When you do stop rewarding the barking at first he will bark more and louder because he doesn't understand why that doesn't work any more. Just like when the batteries are flat on the remote control you press the button harder. It's called an extintion burst.


----------



## Helbo (Sep 15, 2010)

When the dog is barking associate a word with it like "speak" and praise the dog verbally. Then use a different word and hand signal like "enough" when you want quiet. Then reward the dog with a nice tasty treat once quiet.

Its a similar technique to bite inhibition. Might take the dog a while to get it. 

But although I don't want to blame your girlfriend because it's obviously a tough situation, but if the dog gets his own way when he barks, why would he ever stop? She needs to exert her dominance and make sure the affection etc is on her own terms, and not the dogs. 

Welcome to the forum and Good luck!


----------



## keirk (Aug 9, 2010)

Helbo said:


> When the dog is barking associate a word with it like "speak" and praise the dog verbally. Then use a different word and hand signal like "enough" when you want quiet. Then reward the dog with a nice tasty treat once quiet.
> 
> But although I don't want to blame your girlfriend because it's obviously a tough situation, but if the dog gets his own way when he barks, why would he ever stop? *She needs to exert her dominance* and make sure the affection etc is on her own terms, and not the dogs.


This advice is ill explained, and the bit I've highlighted is potentially dangerous, especially to an inexperienced handler and young excitable rottweiler.

To the OP - firstly stop rewarding undesired behaviour. More information (plus loads more) can be found in this book: The Perfect Puppy: Amazon.co.uk: Gwen Bailey: Books

It sounds very much like a puppy without enough mental stimulation and exercise. Make sure the puppy is walked everyday (tho remember the 5mins per month old rule = 15 mins max at 3 months old - more than this can risk joint development).

Secondly find a local, positive reinforcement based, training class. The puppy will benefit massively from the socialisation, mental stimulation, and obedience skills.

I really hope your GF follows some of this advice as its sounds like another shelter case at the moment.


----------



## Starlite (Sep 9, 2009)

Helbo said:


> When the dog is barking associate a word with it like "speak" and praise the dog verbally. Then use a different word and hand signal like "enough" when you want quiet. Then reward the dog with a nice tasty treat once quiet.
> 
> Its a similar technique to bite inhibition. Might take the dog a while to get it.
> 
> ...


an inexperienced owner playing dominance games with a rottweiller will end very badly. Rotts are very demanding and need structure and limitations, i grew up with one as a baby.

Go with Keirks suggestion of a good book to help.
My girl barks alot when my OH gets home as he always responds to her by telling her to be qiet, so im trying to train my OH at the mo


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

It is of paramount importance that you, your girlfriend and her family understand what it is to have a dog, how to train and socialise him at this young age and put the dedication and time in. Rottweilers should only be for experienced owners.

The reason why I say everyone should be a part of the socialising and training of the dog is that everyone will be around the dog and owes it to him to practice outlining the boundaries and rules. Get a good puppy book and read as much as you can about how to raise a puppy, particularly a strong-minded, working breed such as a Rottweiler. Devise a good, solid, daily routine, consisting of set meal times (with a good diet), set walk times, set play time and a set training time. Your girlfriend needs to realise that, with a Rottweiler especially, she can't leave him at home when she goes gallavanting off- things can end very badly in deed and this can be a huge factor in creating misdirected aggression cases, as well as other forms of aggression. Start now and do it properly.

Do not fall folly to any of the dominance/pack leader bull sh*t that is around. Use positive reinforcement/negative punishment techniques (i.e. reward for good behaviour to increase the frequency of a desired behaviour/remove a stimulus or ignore your dog to decrease the frequency of an undesired behaviour) and stay away from Cesar Millan.

This all may sound harsh, but I work in one of the largest rescue centres and see too many dogs coming in. You sound like you already think this was a bad idea and on the face it, you would be right. However, with the dog still young, following the above, going to a training class, getting in touch with a trainer advocating positive reinforcement techniques and *all* making an effort to socialise your Riley with loads of different people, dogs, noises (TVs, fireworks, pots banging etc.), smells, scenery, Riley can grow up to be a fantastic companion and a true blessing on your life.

Hope it works out! And never hesitate to ask this forum anything, or PM me for any info


----------



## Guest (Oct 20, 2010)

I don't mean to come across harsh here, because I am not. But why has she got the pup if she has such a busy schedule?


----------



## fundamentalnail (Oct 20, 2010)

Hi everyone!
Thankyou all so much for your advice, I'll be sure to pass it on to my girlfriend!
You've all been very helpful!

@Oddball - not sure of the logistics or reasoning of it all....in the end though, there is mutual love between the two


----------



## Helbo (Sep 15, 2010)

Can I say that *I said exert her dominance - I never suggested in my post to play any dominance games*. That is an assumption some readers have made. If you had read what I actually put then you will see I only meant to say that she needs to exert her dominance in that the cuddles etc need to he on her terms and not the dogs (i.e not giving the puppy cuddles when it barks). She needs to be the one who decides when the cuddles are, when playtime is, when walkies is etc.

i.e. dominance/leadership = seeing to be the one in control of resources

This advice is from Gwen Bailey's book. But I'm sorry if that was not clear. Anyone playing dominance games with any type of puppy is potentially dangerous. The Perfect Puppy book has a good section about being the leader and in control in order to show dominance and gain respect not using 'games' (which is a word I never used in my post) but controlling resources and making sure the puppy is content by having everything they need. You as pack leader must provide this for them.

As for my advice being ill explained, *you'll be surprised to know that I got this advice from a positive rewards trainer!!* It rewards the dogs barking, allows him to bark for a moment without negative consequences and associates a word to his barking so that you can also get him to be quiet by associating a word, handsignal and reward to the end of the barking. At first the end of the barking might be a fluke but if you can get the reward timing right it'll pay off.


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

Helbo said:


> Can I say that *I said exert her dominance - I never suggested in my post to play any dominance games*. That is an assumption some readers have made. If you had read what I actually put then you will see I only meant to say that she needs to exert her dominance in that the cuddles etc need to he on her terms and not the dogs (i.e not giving the puppy cuddles when it barks). She needs to be the one who decides when the cuddles are, when playtime is, when walkies is etc.
> 
> i.e. dominance/leadership = seeing to be the one in control of resources
> 
> ...


Not to go off topic (much ) but I find the terms 'dominance' and 'leadership' very vague and misleading nowadays, due to the connotations in the dog training world connected to them (as you were targeted for in your last post!).

I agree that an owner needs to give rules and boundaries for their dogs, but I do not try and be dominant or the leader with any of my dogs...I see every dog I'm with on a par with me. I am simply a friend with authority. The better friend I am, the more the dog will listen and cooperate with me- if the dog doesn't, I need to build a better bond with the dog and make the dog want to do what I want him/her to do. I don't need to dominate any dog in any shape or form.


----------



## Helbo (Sep 15, 2010)

Rottiefan said:


> I agree that an owner needs to give rules and boundaries for their dogs, but I do not try and be dominant or the leader with any of my dogs...(snip)I need to build a better bond with the dog and make the dog want to do what I want him/her to do. I don't need to dominate any dog in any shape or form.


So you are the one who gives rules and boundaries, and request them to comply with your commands. I'm sure you also take good care of your dogs, give them an enjoyable fulfilling life and give them everything they need.

This, in my definition, is being their pack leader.

You are responsible for their health and happiness, most of the time by treating them nicely and taking care of their needs, sometimes instilling rules and asking for compliance.

Being the leader doesn't mean anything aggressive (well not to me it doesn't). It means being a loving responsible owner and taking care of everything your dog needs (just as a puppy's mummy would, or a wolf pack leader), and if you do this successfully your dog will naturally look up to you (and love you lots!!).

I understand the confusion though - dominance and leadership are words thrown around, but I'm taking the gwen bailey stance where she talks about being the leader by taking care of your dog's list of needs.


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

Helbo said:


> So you are the one who gives rules and boundaries, and request them to comply with your commands. I'm sure you also take good care of your dogs, give them an enjoyable fulfilling life and give them everything they need.
> 
> This, in my definition, is being their pack leader.
> 
> ...


I agree with everything you say, I was just making the point of the terms like 'dominance' and 'pack leader', as I think they should be made obsolete now. These have been proven wrong and, even though there are many good behaviourists who use these terms, they are out-dated. Wolves live in packs; dogs don't. Dogs don't view themselves as being in a social hierarchy- they are opportunists and look for resources.

Me being a good owner and caring for my dogs is me being...a good owner and a good friend. Not a 'pack leader'.

I'm not having a go in any way, shape or form, I just wanted to raise the issues of these terms. :thumbup:


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

To him being a dog the outcome of "a friend with authority" and dominance are the same. Both mean you are above him, authoritative of him, dominant over him.

I can't understand why dominant is such a bad word - it doesn't mean anything to the dog, just people think it seems to mean cruelty for some reason - which it doesn't! :confused1:


----------



## Starlite (Sep 9, 2009)

Malmum said:


> To him being a dog the outcome of "a friend with authority" and dominance are the same. Both mean you are above him, authoritative of him, dominant over him.
> 
> I can't understand why dominant is such a bad word - it doesn't mean anything to the dog, just people think it seems to mean cruelty for some reason - which it doesn't! :confused1:


i think alot of people are wary to use the term dominance nowadays due to the many programmes which equal dominance with physical force which i dont agree with, y'know?

ive heard people saying "well i did what CM did and my dog went mental" because they dont really know what they are doing and ignore warnings on the programmes rather than go to training classes or ask an experienced behaviourist


----------



## mitch4 (Oct 31, 2009)

To dominate means to exhurt extreme authority over some one something

Leadership is to encourage and motivate a team or pack as we are talking here about dogs, to meet common goals, safely and effectively, it doesnt mean any one leader is more in authority than one of its pack members just that they have different skills, a good leader uses all the skills of the pack to get the best outcome. To dominate means that a person feels they are more in extreme authority and that thier way is the only way, no other pack member has any real say. All teams or packs need to have leaders but leaders who respect and listen to thier team. The word Dominate cunjours up a picture of someone pushing thier opinions on to someone and there is also a fear eliment to the word, no team member should fear whats possibly coming next 

Now when living in a multi dog house hold you can see thier is a heirachy but the top dog never shows extreme authority, our top dog will leave the lowwer rankings to get on with things until she feels there is a danger, she then steps in using only her body language no dominence or aggression, she uses her leadership skills to get the junior members to calm down 

Hope iv made sence there


----------



## Helbo (Sep 15, 2010)

Rottiefan said:


> Wolves live in packs; dogs don't.


I think they would if they were wild.

But I understand what you're saying. We're all agreeing just in different ways.

To me these are just words. Like someone said, they don't mean anything to a dog. If you want to view it as a friend with authority then thats fine, I like the word leader. But it's all the same.

We're all talking about being the one responsible for taking care of our dogs needs, most of the time in a friendly nice positive way, sometimes correcting their behaviour (but not with physical violence).


----------



## ClaireandDaisy (Jul 4, 2010)

If she doesn`t have the time to train a young Rottie I`d be advising a rehome. Sorry.


----------



## Guest (Oct 24, 2010)

ClaireandDaisy said:


> If she doesn`t have the time to train a young Rottie I`d be advising a rehome. Sorry.


I totally agree with you. I have a three year old Rottie and she has been hard work from the very beginning. She was my first dog and i have three young children also. If i could turn back the time i would definatly of waited untill the kids were much older. Rottweilers need firm but kind training. They wont tolerate being bullied/dominated into what you want them to do. Training is an ongoing thing. You say there is alot of love between her and the dog, Thats great but isnt enough. A lot of love and the wrong training could be disasterous. If the pup aint in a training class, sign up now to one. if you dont have the time to do this you dont have the time for any pup.


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

It seems that CM has taken some words out of our English language.

I see on this and other forums when someone says the word "leader" it's okay but put the word "pack" in front of it and it's a def - no no!

There's so much political correctness about these days that it would be sad to see it spill over into the dog world. Words describing an action mean nothing to a dog it's the action that counts, so it really doesn't matter what you use to describe how you want to train your dog, as long as it's not done with cruelty.

I think some people get the wrong impression with dominance and leadership - in order to ba a leader you have to be a bit dominant - don't you?

There are so many uruly kids about now which i'm sure is partly down to too much PC, just hope dogs don't go the same way!


----------



## mitch4 (Oct 31, 2009)

No i dont think a good leader is in any way dominent, to dominate means to in effect bully, a good leader shows direction, instills confidence and treats team membres as equals a leader will hold a lot of confidence be good at problem solveing and social skills. To dominate a person takes away confidence, instills fear and prevents positive progress


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

For those who obviously were unable to understand what I was saying in my post, not once did I say 'dominance' or 'pack leader' implied using forceful techniques with a dog. In the dog world, these terms are often used to imply that you need to be forceful (not necessarily physical) and that a dog fits in with a family as a member of a pack. Which is complete nonsense. If dogs don't live in packs, and we are humans, not dogs, then how are we, as owners, the pack leaders. There's no justification for that term. 

Dominance implies that you are stronger and better than something/someone else whereas a friend with authority is someone who is worth listening to and who you like to be around and respect. All our friends have some form of authority in our lives. People don't go through life not listening to their friends. However, I agree, 'authority' may be a bad choice of words too in this respect. 

I also don't understand the term 'leader' full stop :confused1: It also seems completely misleading- how do we 'lead' our dogs? Apart from in a very metaphorical sense. But do we 'lead' our children? No. I'm not saying we're our dog's parents either, however, we are much closer to that than a leader, in my opinion. 

To the OP: Sorry about this. Hopefully, it's all healthy debate and was kind of useful 

If your girlfriend is still having troubles, as much as I hate to say it in some regards, rehoming is a worthy option. This is a living animal, it deserves the best it can get.


----------



## mitch4 (Oct 31, 2009)

I think it is a healthy debate and when you re read what we are all saying, we are all saying the same sentiments but have different uses for words such as dominence, leadership pack leader etc..

Im sure we are all spinning in our heads now, i dont like the word dominate/dominence but this is im sure due to the fact iv worked in the care industry for years and have had much training on social skills, team building communication etc.. and has humans rightly or wrongly i think we take on ideas we use with humans and adapt them to our training/living with our dogs, i can see how being dominent with your dog in some peoples cases means excatly the same as me saying i lead my dogs :eek6:

good thread


----------



## shazalhasa (Jul 21, 2009)

What I don't understand is why someone with such a heavy workload already would want to take on a working breed dog  They need such a lot of exercise and mental stimulation that without it they can go a bit stir crazy :frown: 

If your girlfriend is tired and exhibiting any weakness, the dog... even though it's still only a young pup, will quickly pick up on and jump into the top spot. A rottweiler is not the kind of dog you want out of control


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

shazalhasa said:


> What I don't understand is why someone with such a heavy workload already would want to take on a working breed dog  They need such a lot of exercise and mental stimulation that without it they can go a bit stir crazy :frown:
> 
> If your girlfriend is tired and exhibiting any weakness, the dog... even though it's still only a young pup, will quickly pick up on and jump into the top spot. A rottweiler is not the kind of dog you want out of control


I think the salient issue is that she didn't know the requirements of a breed like a Rottweiler!

Also, I don't think the dog would 'jump into the top spot', this is going back to the pack leader debate above. I reiterate, dogs don't live in packs and have no perception of self in a hierarchical social system. I don't mean to go on about this, but I think it's a very contemporarily important point to bring up.

The issue is this: if the dog doesn't get the required stimulation and exercise, it becomes bored and frustrated (as everyone knows). So the dog will begin to redirect his frustration and stress into other, most likely problem, behaviours. Also, if the dog doesn't have any rules or guidelines to follow and becomes unmannerly, it is not that he is trying to be a 'dominant' dog or top of this so-called 'pack', but that the dog simply hasn't learnt any manners and doesn't know how you want him to act. And we can't blame the dog for this- he isn't human and we aren't dogs, so if there's no training involved, it's going to a inharmonious relationship...


----------



## ddb (Oct 16, 2010)

Rottiefan said:


> I think the salient issue is that she didn't know the requirements of a breed like a Rottweiler!
> 
> Also, I don't think the dog would 'jump into the top spot', this is going back to the pack leader debate above. I reiterate, dogs don't live in packs and have no perception of self in a hierarchical social system. I don't mean to go on about this, but I think it's a very contemporarily important point to bring up.
> 
> did read on the net the other night about how some dogs have been known to form pack, was from a well known trainer


----------



## shazalhasa (Jul 21, 2009)

Rottiefan said:


> I think the salient issue is that she didn't know the requirements of a breed like a Rottweiler!
> 
> Also, I don't think the dog would 'jump into the top spot', this is going back to the pack leader debate above. I reiterate, *dogs don't live in packs* and have no perception of self in a hierarchical social system. I don't mean to go on about this, but I think it's a very contemporarily important point to bring up.
> 
> The issue is this: if the dog doesn't get the required stimulation and exercise, it becomes bored and frustrated (as everyone knows). So the dog will begin to redirect his frustration and stress into other, most likely problem, behaviours. Also, if the dog doesn't have any rules or guidelines to follow and becomes unmannerly, it is not that he is trying to be a 'dominant' dog or top of this so-called 'pack', but that the dog simply hasn't learnt any manners and doesn't know how you want him to act. And we can't blame the dog for this- he isn't human and we aren't dogs, so if there's no training involved, it's going to a inharmonious relationship...


The only reason that dogs don't live in packs is that we have them inside our homes and we are the ones in control.

If you have more than one dog in your home and really watch... sorry observe them then you'd see that there is one clear leader between them.

Have you ever seen dogs running in packs ? I'm guessing not


----------



## mitch4 (Oct 31, 2009)

There is definitely a dog in our lets call it group of dogs that is in charge, most definitely, she holds law and order but will never use force to get this, she uses body language and will sometimes use her body in a physical way by pushing the other dogs away from a situation but is never aggressive in her manner. The other dogs hold respect for each other but act more refined for want of a better word around her, she looks out for any visiting dog we have stay with us, although she doesnt allow them the same privilidges as our other dogs and any puppy coming in to the fold has to earn her approval in as much she will not play with or let a puppy in her bed for a good few days but if the pup squeels as pups do, shes right there ready to protect 

so i do think they form a type of pack when more than one or two dogs live together, our group of dogs accept other dogs in to the home very readily and quickly become at ease with them being part of this group 

its all very interesting stuff and watching several dogs interact and communicate fascinates me


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

shazalhasa said:


> The only reason that dogs don't live in packs is that we have them inside our homes and we are the ones in control.
> 
> If you have more than one dog in your home and really watch... sorry observe them then you'd see that there is one clear leader between them.
> 
> Have you ever seen dogs running in packs ? I'm guessing not


Before you get all obnoxious here, with you're 'roll eyes' and what not, just look above and see that we're all discussing this in a polite and healthy manner- it'd be nice if you did too.

I agree that when dogs live together with *other* dogs in the house, they work together in a way that can be very primal. However, they are very different from a wolf pack or a pack of wild dogs...when was the last time you saw your dogs go off on a hunt? Because of domestication, I think it's wrong to relate the two circumstances of wild dogs/wolves' packs and a group of domestic dogs.

Secondly, the point I'm trying to make is that, as humans, we can not be part of a 'pack', if you want to use that word, as it is incredibly unlikely that we are perceived as other dogs in dogs' eyes. That's why words such as 'pack leader' irritate me so much and which I find incredibly misleading for those people wanting answers to common, predictable problems with their dog/dogs.

Also, a big point that I think we're all guilty of here is that none of us has done any research into this! I've read quite a lot on contemporary view points and research, but I've never done any research into in myself.


----------



## HWAR (Jul 19, 2010)

shazalhasa said:


> If you have more than one dog in your home and really watch... sorry observe them then you'd see that there is one clear leader between them.
> :


That's not true for my dogs (Rotties) they have different strengths and weaknesses and as such one will be more of a 'leader' in certain activities and another will be more inclined to lead other things. There is no one dog who is 'top dog'.

Regarding dogs sensing weakness from their handler and jumping into the top spot, they are dogs, they aren't pinky and the brain trying to take over the world, they just don't think like that. If you give an inch they will take a mile but they aren't looking for weakness so they can be your pack leader.

My dogs are part of my family and I don't need to be dominant with them, or be their leaders or be top dog. They choose to work with me and we have a mutual love and respect. That's all I can ask of them.


----------



## Colette (Jan 2, 2010)

Dominance is a funny word - some people use it simply meaning leadership, others use it as a poor excuse for bullying and violence. Personally, I don't use the term because of the negative connotations - especially these days now that Jo Public just believe the mumbo jumbo spouted by CM.

As for "pack leader". Dogs don't form packs. That is a fact of life. There have been studies done on groups of stray and feral dogs - and these have shown that dogs do NOT form packs. Of course, you will get groups of dogs that congregate around a food source or shelter - but they are not a cohesive pack, they do not have a hierarchy or a leader. 

Wolves, from which dogs are descended also do not form packs in the way many people believe - they are simply families. The "leaders" are the parents - of course they are in control! The "subordinate" animals do not try to take over - why would they? Breeding rights to their own parents? Er, no.

Finally, in pet dogs. Yes some people will say they see an obvious "top dog" in their multi-dog houseold - but many will say as HWAR did that it depends on the situation. If you have one very food-motivated dog that will probably be the "dominant" one at dinner time. But it may be the other dog that prefers to sleep higher up, or walk in front, or control toys. 
I believe Terry has explained in a previous thread that dominance actually refers to an event - not an overal personality. So one dog may be dominant when it comes to food, another regarding toys, another regarding protection, etc.

What I think we can all agree on is that dogs need ruules, boundaries and training to become acceptable members of human society. They also need the appropriate exercise, mental stimulation etc to keep them occupied and prevent boredom.

What we don't need to do is encourage people to abuse their dogs because they have been fed the BS that every dog is a megalomaniac intent on world domination!!


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

I have never seen any dominant personality in my two. Ferdie is food orientated; in fact he is a pig! But he is not a guarder, always goes to his own bowl, never steals Joshua's. They will also protect each other, I have noticed. If another dog starts on Ferdie, he is a wimp and will run back to me while Joshua will approach the other dog, barking at him. But, when another dog started on both of them only the first time Joshua was out after having his operation, Ferdie did threaten the other dog as he must have known that Joshua was in a weakened state.

They are fascinating to watch!


----------



## shazalhasa (Jul 21, 2009)

Colette said:


> Dominance is a funny word - some people use it simply meaning leadership, others use it as a poor excuse for bullying and violence. Personally, I don't use the term because of the negative connotations - especially these days now that Jo Public just believe the *mumbo jumbo spouted by CM*.


I'll come to this later



Colette said:


> As for "pack leader". *Dogs don't form packs*. That is a fact of life. There have been studies done on groups of stray and feral dogs - and these have shown that dogs do NOT form packs. Of course, *you will get groups of dogs that congregate* around a food source or shelter - but they are not a cohesive pack, they do not have a hierarchy or a leader.


There are 2 collective terms for dogs and they are Pack and kennel (hardly used) !



Colette said:


> Wolves, from which dogs are descended also do not form packs in the way many people believe - they are simply families. The "leaders" are the parents - of course they are in control! The "subordinate" animals do not try to take over - why would they? Breeding rights to their own parents? Er, no.


Do you not watch Discovery channel ?? I do and love it. A while back I was thoroughly engrossed in a documentary about a pack of wolves (this was the term used by the narrator). One of the female offspring seemed like a bit of a runt as a youngster but as she matured she took the 'top spot' and she took it by force 



Colette said:


> What I think we can all agree on is that dogs need ruules, boundaries and training to become acceptable members of human society. They also need the appropriate exercise, mental stimulation etc to keep them occupied and prevent boredom.


this sounds very similar to the* mumbo jumbo spouted by CM *



Colette said:


> What we don't need to do is encourage people to abuse their dogs because they have been fed the BS that every dog is a megalomaniac intent on world domination!!


Why would anyone need to abuse their dog in order to control it... Rules, boundaries and limitations is all it takes  I don't recall anyone claiming that dogs are intent on world domination, all that's been pointed out is that a dog can spot a weakness in it's owner and will react to it.


----------



## Colette (Jan 2, 2010)

Certainly, if you want to call a group of dogs a "pack" then by all means. But this type of pack is not a rigid, cohesive group, run by an alpha in a strict linear hierarchy. It's just a loosely formed group of animals that happen to share the same space. So talk of a "pack leader" is still completely inaccurate.



> this sounds very similar to the mumbo jumbo spouted by CM


And by pretty much EVERY trainer, behaviourist and responsible owner the world over. I never said that CM said nothing good - just that a lot of what he talks is nonsense.

I do agree that dogs need exercise, discipline and affection. I do NOT agree that forcing a dog to run on a treadmill to the point of exhaustion is appropriate exercise, nor do I believe that physically manhandling dogs in order to cause fear and pain is appropraite discipline.



> Why would anyone need to abuse their dog in order to control it...


I don't know - ask CM????

Physically grabbing handfuls of flesh, liftig the dog off the ground by that flesh, slamming it into the floor, and pinning it there by its throat is abuse. Putting a thin choke chain around the highest part of the dogs neck and suspending the dog off the ground until it passes out is abuse. Giving electric shocks is abuse. Dragging a young giant breed up the stairs on a choke chain is abuse.



> I don't recall anyone claiming that dogs are intent on world domination, all that's been pointed out is that a dog can spot a weakness in it's owner and will react to it.


But that is not true.... not in the sense of dominance or taking over as pack leader as CM and his followers claim.

Dogs follow their own rules. They behave like dogs. Some of these normal behaviours are not acceptable in human society, eg resource guarding. Equally, there are things the dogs does need to learn to be acceptable that are not natural to them, eg walking on a lead or coming when called.

If an owner does not bother to do any training, or enforce any rules, then the dog will simply do as it pleases. It will obey the laws of learning, and repeat behaviours that it finds pleasurable or effective or otherwise rewarding. Nothing to do with "dominance" or "spotting weakness". Dogs don't have human morals or ideas of right and wrong, they do what they do because of instinct and learning. Hierarchy has sod all to do with it.

One of the many problems with CM is that he blames everything on dominance. Dog has been encouraged to chase moving lights? Dominance! Dog is scared of strangers / stairs / slippery floors? Dominance! Dog resource guards? Dominance!
He doesn't stop to consider that the dog might be behaving normally, or that the behaviour may be motivated by fear, lack of self confidence, previous bad experiences, behaviour previously rewarded, or behaviour simply fun for the dog. Nope. Every time he insists that the dog want to be in charge - god forbid the dog just wants to be a dog!


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

Before this breaks into a huge Cesar Millan debate (for which my itchy fingers are ready for...), I think we should all agree to disagree. People still use the terms 'pack' for describing wolves in the wild and groups of domestic dogs. Scientific research is telling us new things all the time, and it's all down the line of: dogs don't form packs in the same way wolves or wild dogs do, even though the pack dynamics for wild dogs and wolves are incredibly different to the normal perception of them.

I'd be careful of anything we see on TV nowadays too, even if it is The Discovery Channel. There's plenty of editing and cajoling that goes on to make things seem very dramatic in the animal kingdom, most of the time missing out the realities and, in my opinion, missing out the *most* interesting parts!

In one study, captive wolves were observed and compared to wild wolves. What was found? That captive wolves used dominance and techniques such as the 'alpha roll' to get their way and preserve the 'top spot', whereas wild wolves did nothing of the sort. A family of wolves/wild dogs are opportunistic and will use the family's plethora of abilities to survive- some individuals may be better at taking down prey, others may be better at sniffing and tracking and others may be more suited to preventing troubles in the family.

Here's one nice video from the world renown veterinarian and animal behaviourist Dr. Ian Dunbar. It's people like him that make Cesar Millan such a joke in my opinion. 
YouTube - The Alpha Fallacy

It's more focused on training rather than natural behaviour, but I think it's very relevant all the same.


----------



## shazalhasa (Jul 21, 2009)

Rottiefan said:


> I'd be careful of anything we see on TV nowadays too, even if it is The Discovery Channel. There's plenty of editing and cajoling that goes on to make things seem very dramatic in the animal kingdom, most of the time missing out the realities and, in my opinion, missing out the *most* interesting parts!
> 
> In one study, captive wolves were observed and compared to wild wolves. What was found? That *captive wolves used dominance and techniques such as the 'alpha roll' to get their way and preserve the 'top spot', whereas wild wolves did nothing of the sort.* A family of wolves/wild dogs are opportunistic and will use the family's plethora of abilities to survive- some individuals may be better at taking down prey, others may be better at sniffing and tracking and others may be more suited to preventing troubles in the family.


The programme that I watched was most definately wild dogs and the bitch I mentioned most definately took top spot by force. She fought with what was the alpha and won.



Rottiefan said:


> Here's one nice video from the world renown veterinarian and animal behaviourist Dr. Ian Dunbar. It's people like him that make Cesar Millan such a joke in my opinion.
> YouTube - The Alpha Fallacy
> 
> It's more focused on training rather than natural behaviour, but I think it's very relevant all the same.


lol I've just watched as much as I needed to of that video... enough to know that what he was saying was utter crap... maybe his views were formed from reading rather than actual experience 
Go back and listen to the part where he says about puppies coming into a pack as the worm and do nothing... the lowest ranking. lmao, our Tux was just 7 weeks old when he came here, we already had 3 adults and Tipsy was 6 months old. Tux had no qualms about going straight in with them and pretty much bossing them around... not in a nasty way, just using his body language, what's more, the adults let him and before you go off on one and tell me that an adult wouldn't hurt a puppy, Tipsy tried it too and she was quickly put in her place by all 3 adults.


----------



## mitch4 (Oct 31, 2009)

I sadly had to re home one of my girls, above i told of Ella who appears to be our dog who takes charge, our girl who we had to re home became fixated on Ella and then began to what appeared to be intollorent of her and the rest of the group, this then turned to aggression from the girl we had to re home, Ella only had to go near our puppy or a toy and shed be attacked by Molly the attackes got severe and the 2 girls could never be left together, Ella would fight back something shes never done, the fights were horendous, up to this point if molly had gotten out of her box as she could be willful, never aggressive until this point Ella would always go over and calm her down. If we had not intervened i think molly would have over powered Ella in strength and things could have ended terribly, wev always though that Molly wanted to be in charge and wanted Ellas place in the group, Molly could never have carried this off she was too hot headed, now on the last fight they had i was on my own with them when it started and i struggled this time and could not seperate them it was then that the other dogs we have stepped in, not one sided with molly who was the aggressor all started to pounce at her but what i found interesting was that theother dogs did not fight, they merely punced and pounded molly, this was enough to have her break her hold on Ella and then thankfully my hubby was there and we could then seperate the dogs.

This is a bit of a mish mash of the event as it happened so quickly and was awful to witness but Molly had always as said seemed to be very much with Ella on a level, so for the fights to happen and it be molly who instigated them was a suprise and thought of as her trying to topple ella from her prime position 

As someone earlier said, its difficult to make an accurate statement as to what is going on if youv not done actual research or read intesively on this subject, iv read about canine communication and calming signals but am in no way expert enough to say what actually happens truly in my group of dogs but i go on what i see and it does appear there is one dog that holds court so to speak but she gives total respect to the others and its like they are working together, something like a team of people with a manager, senior staff and support workers, all different grades but all one team working together


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

shazalhasa said:


> The programme that I watched was most definately wild dogs and the bitch I mentioned most definately took top spot by force. She fought with what was the alpha and won.
> 
> lol I've just watched as much as I needed to of that video... enough to know that what he was saying was utter crap... maybe his views were formed from reading rather than actual experience
> Go back and listen to the part where he says about puppies coming into a pack as the worm and do nothing... the lowest ranking. lmao, our Tux was just 7 weeks old when he came here, we already had 3 adults and Tipsy was 6 months old. Tux had no qualms about going straight in with them and pretty much bossing them around... not in a nasty way, just using his body language, what's more, the adults let him and before you go off on one and tell me that an adult wouldn't hurt a puppy, Tipsy tried it too and she was quickly put in her place by all 3 adults.


Haha! Ok, the fact that you don't even _know_ of Dr. Ian Dunbar and don't believe his credentials is enough to me to back out of this debate for good. Dunbar has, quite possibly, done more research in the field of dog behaviour and training than anyone and is a forerunner in the methods of positive training methods. Saying his words are 'utter crap' has shown you up tenfold and I think you'll find you've embarrassed yourself if you read up about him and his work. Here: http://www.dogstardaily.com/blogger/4

Cesar Millan's next book (it might already be out) looks at his 'contemporaries'- one of them being Dr Ian Dunbar. Here's the link to the book's trailer:
YouTube - Cesar's Rules by Cesar Millan - Book Trailer

It's a shame that Cesar has nothing original to offer himself, however...

With your dogs, I'm not going to say anything. I didn't observe that encounter, only you did. Perhaps there's more explanations to it than you originally thought, though?


----------



## HWAR (Jul 19, 2010)

shazalhasa said:


> lol I've just watched as much as I needed to of that video... enough to know that what he was saying was utter crap... maybe his views were formed from reading rather than actual experience


 Which bit was 'utter crap'??

Puppies don't yet understand the concept of body language and haven't yet learn't which body langauges to use and when (that's what the adult dogs teach them) so I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that your pup was being bossy with its body lanaguage 

Mr Dunbar is one of the most respected people in his field.


----------



## Colette (Jan 2, 2010)

We are talking about the same Dunbar here right? 

The Dr Dunbar with a phd in dog behaviour? Who is also a fully qualified vet? The Dunbar who brought puppy training to the public (when everyone else held off until dogs were 6 months)? That highly qualified, highly experienced professional Dunbar?

Of course, this little upstart can't possibly know any more than the great and powerful dog whisperer whose only credentials are "grew up with some dogs" and "knowledge he was born with".


----------



## shazalhasa (Jul 21, 2009)

HWAR said:


> Which bit was 'utter crap'??
> 
> *Puppies don't yet understand the concept of body language and haven't yet learn't which body langauges to use and when (that's what the adult dogs teach them)* so I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that your pup was being bossy with its body lanaguage
> 
> Mr Dunbar is one of the most respected people in his field.


lmao so ignorant :lol:


----------



## shazalhasa (Jul 21, 2009)

Colette said:


> We are talking about the same Dunbar here right?
> 
> The Dr Dunbar with a phd in dog behaviour? Who is also a fully qualified vet? The Dunbar who brought puppy training to the public (when everyone else held off until dogs were 6 months)? That highly qualified, highly experienced professional Dunbar?
> 
> Of course, this little upstart can't possibly know any more than the great and powerful dog whisperer whose only credentials are "grew up with some dogs" and "knowledge he was born with".


experience counts for a lot more than a stamp on a bit of paper... any academic fool can pass an exam, doesn't necessarily follow that they will automatically be as good with the hands on stuff


----------



## ddb (Oct 16, 2010)

found this on the web .............makes interesting reading

There was an interesting discussion in the last few editions of Animal Behavior Magazine. The topic was if dogs are naturally pack animals, and leading names in the dog world, like Jean Donaldson, chimed in.

The best input, in my opinion, came from Ian Dunbar with his statement that most dogs don't form packs, but they can make awesome pack animals. In other words, either generalization is incorrect because it depends on the environment if dogs live in a pack, or if they don't.

In nature, the individual that best adapts to the environment and its changes survives and thrives. And that is true for every organism, regardless of species. If the environment demands to work as, or be attached to, or follow a group, individuals able to do that survive best.

Wild wolves have to work together to hunt large prey because nobody feeds them, so they form cohesive and structured family units.

Captive wolves are forced to live in groups that are not always compatible. If fed, there is no need for cohesion. Quite the opposite, incompatibility and competition for a resource lays the ground for confrontation.

Most feral (I refer to as "feral" a dog that does not belong to humans) dogs don't hunt, but scavenge on human waste. During my travels through Spain and Greece, I encountered intimidating groups of dogs around garbage dumps, who appeared to have formed groups to keep interlopers away, but also calm "loner" dogs, usually males, that befriended every tourist who'd feed them, and mom-dogs with a bunch of puppies trailing behind. Like the loner dogs, they were friendly and non-confrontational with humans or other dogs.

I observed the same when I lived in a Canadian province that has many feral dogs. Some lived in loose groups that changed with circumstances. I remember a couple of females that nursed each other's puppies and denned together. Once the pups were weaned, not only did they split, but they also fought, one inflicting a nasty injury to the other.
Some were solitary, and some belonged to groups that seemed more structured and resembled more what most people believe a pack is; had a consistent leader dog, a group of middle-management dogs and a scapegoat omega everyone beat up on. Unlike a wild wolf family, most members of the structured feral dog groups were males.

Our domestic dogs depend on humans to care for them. Ideally, they should belong to a close knit, harmonious social group = the family they live with. The happiest dogs are the ones that have a job; a common purpose with their owner. That ideal scenario is as close a "pack" as possible, if one wants to choose that word. In reality though, this is not the case for many dogs, who are separated from mom and litter mates at a young age and sold to people who are at work all day. In addition, prominent "alpha" trainers advice against letting the dog sleep or eat with the owner(s), segregating the pooch into solitary existence even more.

The environment dictates a solitary life for today's urban dog. He is expected to act like a pack animal whenever the human "alpha" demands obedience and submission, and expected to be a content solitary animal at all other times. The ones that adapt to that, survive. The ones that don't, end up in shelters.

shows the pack theory is not complete rubbish but its not the the be all either


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

shazalhasa said:


> experience counts for a lot more than a stamp on a bit of paper... any academic fool can pass an exam, doesn't necessarily follow that they will automatically be as good with the hands on stuff


"Dr. Ian Dunbar is a veterinarian, animal behaviorist, and writer. He received his veterinary degree and a Special Honors degree in Physiology & Biochemistry from the Royal Veterinary College (London University) and a doctorate in animal behavior from the Psychology Department at the University of California in Berkeley, where he spent ten years researching olfactory communication, the development of hierarchical social behavior, and aggression in domestic dogs"

More than just a stamp on a piece of paper. Why are you being so ignorant? What have you got to defend?


----------



## shazalhasa (Jul 21, 2009)

Rottiefan said:


> "Dr. Ian Dunbar is a veterinarian, animal behaviorist, and writer. He received his veterinary degree and a Special Honors degree in Physiology & Biochemistry from the Royal Veterinary College (London University) and a doctorate in animal behavior from the Psychology Department at the University of California in Berkeley, where he spent ten years researching olfactory communication, the development of hierarchical social behavior, and aggression in domestic dogs"
> 
> More than just a stamp on a piece of paper. Why are you being so ignorant? What have you got to defend?


I'm not defending anything, I've not defended CM in this thread anywhere although you seem to have assumed that I have. I merely disagreed with a statement made in that videolink where Ian Dunbar states that puppies are nothing and do nothing. I made the judgement that the statement was crap due to having quite the opposite experience with our youngest... btw, to whoever claimed that pups have no body language... cowering is body language, walking tall is body language, wagging tail is body language, holding head high is body language... 

Seems that you are over defending this pencil pusher who was bright enough to pass a few exams, oh and he's researched, what is research ??? isn't it just reading and listening to a whole bunch of different opinions ?? So this guy has done what exactly ? Uses someone else's methods or a combination of others methods and passes them off as his own.


----------



## shazalhasa (Jul 21, 2009)

Rottiefan said:


> Haha! Ok, the fact that you don't even _know_ of Dr. Ian Dunbar and don't believe his credentials is enough to me to back out of this debate for good.


hmmmm  :lol:


----------



## HWAR (Jul 19, 2010)

shazalhasa said:


> btw, to whoever claimed that pups have no body language... cowering is body language, walking tall is body language, wagging tail is body language, holding head high is body language...
> 
> .


Please read my post thoroughly I said pup's dont yet _understand_ the use of body language not that they don't have any.

Calling me ignorant is completely unjustifed, if you are unable to have a debate without resorting to being insulting that says a lot more about your level of intelligence than the person whom you are calling ignorant.

Calling a man, who has done more for dogs and dog training in his lifetime than you can shake a stick at, a 'pencil pusher' actually implies that you are are infact the one who is ignorant.


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

I didn't say that you are defending Cesar Millan. And, yes, I am defending people Dr Ian Dunbar because it is him, and people like him, that are the forerunners in animal behaviour and training. In what way is Dr Ian Dunbar a pencil pusher? Do you have any idea of the level of intelligence, dedication, hard work and validating it takes to get to his level of qualification? He's researched, through *observation*, countless dog scenarios to come to his conclusions and is a highly acclaimed academic and dog trainer/behaviourist.

All your knowledge is based on is your dogs, and you most probably misinterpret their behaviour to come to your conclusions. I take enjoyment in reading new things and finding that my ideas are actually not as accurate as I thought they were.


----------



## shazalhasa (Jul 21, 2009)

I've colour coded this so you can follow what I'm saying 


HWAR said:


> Which bit was 'utter crap'??
> 
> Puppies don't yet understand the concept of body language and haven't yet learn't which body langauges to use and when (that's what the adult dogs teach them) so I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that your pup was being bossy with its body lanaguage
> 
> Mr Dunbar is one of the most respected people in his field.





HWAR said:


> Please read my post thoroughly I said pup's dont yet _understand_ the use of body language not that they don't have any.
> 
> Calling me ignorant is completely unjustifed, if you are unable to have a debate without resorting to being insulting that says a lot more about your level of intelligence than the person whom you are calling ignorant.
> 
> Calling a man, who has done more for dogs and dog training in his lifetime than you can shake a stick at, a 'pencil pusher' actually implies that you are are infact the one who is ignorant.


Can you tell me what experience you have personally to back up your claims that puppies don't understand the concept of body language ? 


I didn't come to the conclusion that my pup was using body language when bossing my adults around, I've actually seen it with my own two eyes. Some of the body language that he was exhibiting included keeping his tail over his back and holding his head high whilst going over to the adult dogs bed, nudging them out of the way and basically 'owning' the bed... you do understand what 'owning' means I take it ? btw, this is just one example, at 7 weeks old he was also taking toys, chew toys and pretty much whatever he wanted without any fuss just body language 


hmmm, I must not insult you but it's ok for you to have an unjustified pop at my level of intelligence... I find that quite insulting


----------



## shazalhasa (Jul 21, 2009)

Rottiefan said:


> I didn't say that you are defending Cesar Millan. And, yes, I am defending people Dr Ian Dunbar because it is him, and people like him, that are the forerunners in animal behaviour and training. In what way is Dr Ian Dunbar a pencil pusher? Do you have any idea of the level of intelligence, dedication, hard work and validating it takes to get to his level of qualification? He's researched, through *observation*, countless dog scenarios to come to his conclusions and is a highly acclaimed academic and dog trainer/behaviourist.
> 
> All your knowledge is based on is your dogs, and you most probably misinterpret their behaviour to come to your conclusions. I take enjoyment in reading new things and finding that my ideas are actually not as accurate as I thought they were.


My knowledge is not based soley on my own dogs, I have had a very keen interest in dogs all of my life whether they were my own, neighbours, friends, family members dogs or the dogs that were at the various dog training schools that I went to either with a dog or just to watch and help out.

I watched the clip for CM's book promotion, not sure if you were the one that posted it  The way Dr Ian Duncan got junior to sit is the very same way that I trained all of mine to sit yet I'd never heard of this guy before today... so how come we have the same method for this ??? Did he come up with it ??? I think not  Did I ?? Most definately not lol The difference is, I don't pretend that I did, I don't pretend that it's unique. When I've picked bits up here and there, if I can remember where then I will say where.

There are some things that I've figured out for myself just from observation. I also know that not all dogs are the same, one training method doesn't fit all.


----------



## HWAR (Jul 19, 2010)

Me personally? Numerous foster pups, pup's whom I have had throughout my life and studying canine behaviour 

Are you then suggesting that dogs are born knowing how to behave without any direction from parents/siblings/humans? 

From what you have said you have merely come to your own conclusions about what you interpret your dogs/pups to be doing. They are your dogs and you interpret them how you see fit, we are all individuals after all but I, personally, believe that things are slightly more complex and less black and white when it comes to dog behaviour and I am learning each and every day with an open mind.


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

Dr Ian Dunbar doesn't profess to come up with that method. His main area is bringing up a puppy and he's been very influential, using classical conditioning techniques with positive reinforcement and systematic desensitisation to help with fears and phobias. Read up about him and you'll see what he's done. He's very important.


----------



## shazalhasa (Jul 21, 2009)

HWAR said:


> Me personally? Numerous foster pups, pup's whom I have had throughout my life and studying canine behaviour
> 
> Are you then suggesting that dogs are born knowing how to behave without any direction from parents/siblings/humans?
> 
> From what you have said you have merely come to your own conclusions about what you interpret your dogs/pups to be doing. They are your dogs and you interpret them how you see fit, we are all individuals after all but I, personally, believe that things are slightly more complex and less black and white when it comes to dog behaviour and I am learning each and every day with an open mind.


oh dear... you didn't see therefore you don't believe  how are you going to study canine behaviour if you don't believe what you don't see ??? most of your work will come from books !


----------



## shazalhasa (Jul 21, 2009)

Rottiefan said:


> Dr Ian Dunbar doesn't profess to come up with that method. His main area is bringing up a puppy and he's been very influential, using classical conditioning techniques with positive reinforcement and systematic desensitisation. Read up about him and you'll see what he's done. He's very important.


I most certainly will look him up and see what I can find on him. My mind is never closed off but I when I hear crap being spouted I will say 

It's quite funny really, how many of you jump on the things that you don't agree with in CM's methods only to go off on one just because I've said I didn't agree or believe one thing that this guy has said... maybe you ought to consider things more carefully before making your posts


----------



## HWAR (Jul 19, 2010)

shazalhasa said:


> oh dear... you didn't see therefore you don't believe  how are you going to study canine behaviour if you don't believe what you don't see ??? most of your work will come from books !


:lol: What on earth are you talking about?


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

shazalhasa said:


> I most certainly will look him up and see what I can find on him. My mind is never closed off but I when I hear crap being spouted I will say
> 
> It's quite funny really, how many of you jump on the things that you don't agree with in CM's methods only to go off on one just because I've said I didn't agree or believe one thing that this guy has said... maybe you ought to consider things more carefully before making your posts


There's a huge difference between believing CM and believing Dunbar. The main one being that Dunbar can back up his claims with countless pieces of contemporary evidence, where all CM's evidence has been proven wrong. Also, Dunbar looks at all angles of behaviour when he's diagnosing whereas Cesar always says it's to do with dominance and we, as the owner, have the be 'in charge', 'dominant' etc., which is completely unfounded.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

shazalhasa said:


> I most certainly will look him up and see what I can find on him. My mind is never closed off but I when I hear crap being spouted I will say
> 
> It's quite funny really, how many of you jump on the things that you don't agree with in CM's methods only to go off on one just because I've said I didn't agree or believe one thing that this guy has said... maybe you ought to consider things more carefully before making your posts


I don't think it was the fact that you disagreed with something that Dr Dunbar had to say, but that you called it crap. Being as he is the leading expert of dog behaviour and positive reward training, that is bound to get people's backs up. And you admitted yourself that you didn't bother to watch all of the video.

There are such things as very confident puppies and yours very likely fit into that category and came into the group very sure of himself. My little Joshua was very sure of himself as well, but he only had one adult dog to deal with, and that adult dog adored him from the word go.

You were lucky that your pup fitted in so well, but it is not always the case. You can never say "never" when talking about dog behaviour.


----------



## shazalhasa (Jul 21, 2009)

HWAR said:


> Me personally? Numerous foster pups, pup's whom I have had throughout my life and *studying canine behaviour*
> 
> Are you then suggesting that dogs are born knowing how to behave without any direction from parents/siblings/humans?
> 
> From what you have said you have merely come to your own conclusions about what you interpret your dogs/pups to be doing. They are your dogs and you interpret them how you see fit, we are all individuals after all but I, personally, believe that things are slightly more complex and less black and white when it comes to dog behaviour and I am learning each and every day with an open mind.





HWAR said:


> :lol: What on earth are you talking about?


I am talking about you claiming that you are studying canine behaviour, if your knowledge isn't coming from books, other people or internet then where is it coming from ???



Rottiefan said:


> There's a huge difference between believing CM and believing Dunbar. The main one being that Dunbar can back up his claims with countless pieces of contemporary evidence, where all CM's evidence has been proven wrong. Also, Dunbar looks at all angles of behaviour when he's diagnosing whereas Cesar always says it's to do with dominance and we, as the owner, have the be 'in charge', 'dominant' etc., which is completely unfounded.


NOT every problem is seen as stemming from dominance, I don't know where you get that from :confused1: He never says that the owner has to be dominant, he says they should be calm assertive which is a far cry from dominant. Please make sure you have your facts right before preaching something or you just come across as being a bit... dare I say it... ignorant  I have agreed to look into this Dr Ian Dunbar guy, maybe you could really look at CM



newfiesmum said:


> I don't think it was the fact that you disagreed with something that Dr Dunbar had to say, but that you called it crap. Being as he is the leading expert of dog behaviour and positive reward training, that is bound to get people's backs up. And you admitted yourself that you didn't bother to watch all of the video.
> 
> There are such things as very confident puppies and yours very likely fit into that category and came into the group very sure of himself. My little Joshua was very sure of himself as well, but he only had one adult dog to deal with, and that adult dog adored him from the word go.
> 
> You were lucky that your pup fitted in so well, but it is not always the case. You can never say "never" when talking about dog behaviour.


I only said the statement was crap because it was. It's very unwise to make such a sweeping statement about puppies, they are not all the same. If there had been something in his statement to cover this then fair enough but there wasn't.

I agree that we were very lucky with Tux although I admit to not being too pleased at the way he came in and just seemed to take over and my adults were just letting him lol. The first day he came here, we put him down on the floor in the garden and he seemed to just throw his head up, shoulders back and went straight in with the adults. 
Just because things like this aren't the norm, nobody should claim that it can't and doesn't happen.


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

shazalhasa said:


> NOT every problem is seen as stemming from dominance, I don't know where you get that from :confused1: He never says that the owner has to be dominant, he says they should be calm assertive which is a far cry from dominant. Please make sure you have your facts right before preaching something or you just come across as being a bit... dare I say it... ignorant  I have agreed to look into this Dr Ian Dunbar guy, maybe you could really look at CM
> 
> .


Of course he does! He says the owner is not being the 'pack leader' and changing their behaviour to being the dominant one in the pack (which he claims consists of being calm and assertive) is the only way that dogs will learn to respect and behave correctly for their owners. It's all too simplistic.


----------



## HWAR (Jul 19, 2010)

shazalhasa said:


> I am talking about you claiming that you are studying canine behaviour, if your knowledge isn't coming from books, other people or internet then where is it coming from ???


 Good lord.

I'm not claiming anything, I am studying - if you honestly believe that studying for qualifications in dog behaviour consists of just reading print on the internet or in a book then this is a futile conversation  Not that how/why/what I am doing bears any relevance to this thread at all anyway.

If you wish to continue please feel free to PM me but the Op's topic is now way off and I dont wish to derail it any further.


----------



## ddb (Oct 16, 2010)

Rottiefan said:


> Of course he does! He says the owner is not being the 'pack leader' and changing their behaviour to being the dominant one in the pack (which he claims consists of being calm and assertive) is the only way that dogs will learn to respect and behave correctly for their owners. It's all too simplistic.


In defence of CM, he does not say calm AND assertive he says calm assertive which is totally different.
I have seen him with a client whose career was nursing and his advice to her was to adopt her nursing attitude to the dog so that she gives off a calm confident energy to the animal rather than worried and flustered one she had at present, the dog respects the confident non stressed environment and is therefore more settled and calm itself. 
Maybe some of his ways are outdated, but someone who takes in and homes dogs that would otherwise be destroyed can't be all that bad.........:thumbup:


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

ddb said:


> In defence of CM, he does not say calm AND assertive he says calm assertive which is totally different.
> I have seen him with a client whose career was nursing and his advice to her was to adopt her nursing attitude to the dog so that she gives off a calm confident energy to the animal rather than worried and flustered one she had at present, the dog respects the confident non stressed environment and is therefore more settled and calm itself.
> Maybe some of his ways are outdated, but someone who takes in and homes dogs that would otherwise be destroyed can't be all that bad.........:thumbup:


Being calm around dogs is a very basic rule though, that every method of dog training outlines...it's nothing new, and with CM's other methods, it does turn into being dominant rather than just calm and relaxed.

I agree, he does a great thing for the dogs in his care, but for him to be preaching about being the 'pack leader' and using force as a method of correcting behavioural problems, I think it's a very naive position.


----------



## ddb (Oct 16, 2010)

i think with cm people love him or hate him ............i dont agree with all that he does but do find that the people who hate him seem to do so with a vengance so i try not to get in to arguments about him . i do think some of his stuff is good and have seen him use treats some times 

love to see him with some of his dogs when he has his Rollerblades on and think daddie(his pit bull) is such a fab dog

have not seen much of dr ian dunbar's work but what i have read about him and seen i think he is very good to, and i think a lot of pups are having better lives because of his work :thumbup:


----------

