Quote:
Being a volunteer at a rescue shelter, I know that if a pit bull comes in from rescue, it has some issues, that’s a fact you can’t deny unfortunately.
On a somewhat random but relevant note, can I just remind you that I use positive reinforcement all the time (seriously) but I cannot use it when it is simply not possible to quote by gtmanning .
We have had many APBT's come in from SPCA and rescue sources and they have turned out to be wonderful pets. Also, some behavioral motor patterns seen in many purebred dogs are lost when not selectively bred for which happens with many. One of the Vet tech's and the head Vet rescued APBT's and used positive only training on them and had lovely dogs. Even in the old AKC books it states that Staff's, APBT's and other bull breeds are the easiest breeds to rehome.
Quote:
Another one that boggles my mind. I have heard so many cases of people who try and use positive methods on ultra-dominant or ultra-aggressive dogs, and as nobody has been able to snap the dog out of it, the dog has managed to attack or maim another dog or person. Quote by gtmanning
I have used positive methods on my ultra dominant ultra aggressive (human and dog) Rottweiler with GREAT success. I have however seen many people using corrective forced based training that the dogs have gone on to attack. Your typical cowboy trainer who likes to impress others with his skills of taming the wild beast :rolleyes:
Quote:
I study feral and wild dogs, and I know for a fact that in every pack there is one leader (+alpha female) and that leader does not hesitate show that he is at the top, and the followers accept it, it's in their instincts to, just as domestic dogs are, who share over 99% of the same genes as the wolf - that's something that you just can't deny. Wolves were domesticated to be adjusted to humans 15,000 years ago, and renamed the "domestic dog", that's just fact. Not only do I study the wolf, but I compare and contrast their behaviors with domestic dogs, domestic dog packs and feral packs, the similarities are endless, the only differences tend to be that most domestic dogs are just ill-equipped for survival, and of course, are fully adjusted to humans. Quote by gtmanning
What kind of studies are you doing feral and wild dogs, what resources are you basing your studies. I disagree with what you have say. Our domestic dog (Canis familiaris) evolved to be an opportunistic scavenger, humans did not capture a few Wolf pups and domesticate them :eek: Heck if that were the case with our modern ways we should be able to domesticate wolves now a day. Humans way back in time would not have had the means nor the time/interest to domesticate a wolf. Canis familiaris (you'll find them still living as they have for centuries in 3rd world countries, you'll see them living in dumps etc but always living around human activity and human waste areas). Also domestic dogs do not mate with one superior dog, they can be bred by multiple dogs when in heat. The males do not stick around to help raise the litter, which is what a pack is all about. When our 6 dogs first started living together we had one female and one male which were intact, the breeder wanted a litter. They were the breeding pair which in a pack would have made them the so called alpha's...correct me if I'm wrong. These 2 are so far from being dominant it's not funny. Even while the female was in the prime of her heat cycle there were no issues with our dogs, we never had to seperate them.
Many biologists call domestic feral dogs groups and not packs. Plus dogs are very well equipped for survival they have in fact made a very unique niche in the world that has made them prime to survive and would survive better than wolves. As long as there are humans dogs will scavenge off us :) Coyotes as well have adjusted and differ a great deal from wolves as well. Which brings up another item about the genes and mtDNA studies, they are for the most part inaccurate.
Quote:
Dogs naturally and instinctually follow behind or beside leaders, so nothing else is necessary. Quote by gtmanning
Really? I have owned dogs for 40 years and had have multi dog households for that time frame. My dogs are well trained...but, my dogs have fun on their hikes with me. I depend on hikes to get the energy out. My dogs run ahead, play, run back to me, play in the water etc they do not walk behind or beside me all the time.
When I was growing up Positive training was our natural way of training dogs...that's how my grandfather trained all his dogs and the wild life he rescued as well. When I tried using correction based training I had people who were "experts" in that kind of training help me with my Rottie..it didn't work for her. My personality and corrections do not mix. I've also seen many dogs ruined by correction based training. It seems the people who talk the most about alpha this, alpha that I am the leader, my dogs know their place etc have the most screwed up dogs :(. I see it often as I work in a dog related field of work. When we were growing up dogs were dogs and they grew up with us kids and they went every where with us. They were good dogs as they were social from day one and had the opportunities during the critical period of sociliazation. We had a Shepherd/Husky mix, border collie mix and we always had the neighbors Shepherd and husky with us and other neighborhood dogs would hang around us kids and our dogs. They all got along, there were no fights and they loved hanging out with us kids, they went to the beach with us every day etc. Our dogs were never confused, a confused dog is a dangerous dog and that is what I see a lot of is people confusing the heck out of their dogs. We never gave much thought to how well behaved our dogs were back then but we certainly got a lot of compliments.;) Our dogs slept with us kids, when we ate meals they sat under the table and patiently waited for hand outs, came to my friends houses and were very good...they were such a part of my childhood and we did not go to extremes training them...they naturally learned from example. I think sometimes that our dogs were so well behaved and we didn't put much thought into it we did not use corrections etc. We never over thought it. Now we have people who are trying to make dogs seem a mystery, wolves that are trying to adjust to living in a human family...silly really. When my mom was growing up dogs were used for everything from baby sitters, going to the store to fetch groceries...Newf's were used for that a great deal, hook up a cart and send the Newf off to the local grocery to pick up food by itself. No pack leader to walk with it, the dog did it out of routine. I have a book written by locals of dogs when they were growing up and how much dogs did for them.
Quote:
As a studier of canids and wild canids I can honestly say yes. Most of the time all the animal needs to project is a dominant energy and the other animal will roll over and show their neck to the dominant animal, the neck biting is rarely required, and if it is, it does not puncture the skin. Truth is, a pack of wild dogs or wolfpack would never become as instable as a lot of the domestic dogs owned by people today, so to forcefully alpha roll a pack member is actually very rare and pointless in a normal-functioning pack of canids.
Alpha rolls etc never have the intent to kill or maim etc as you keep repeating, they only help to reinforce the rankings that will keep the pack at total relaxation with one another, and with wild canids, to survive (domestic dogs still have this instinct). Quote by gtmanning"
OK lets take a livestock guardian dog, when a livestock guardian pup begins to show dog social motor patterns toward sheep the pup will roll on its' back and expose their belly to the sheep. For a farmer this means the pup has successfully bonded with the sheep. The dog is being submissive to the sheep but will go on to be a wonderful guard dog for these very same sheep. So, are the sheep dominant over the dog? The reason a wolf pack would not become unstable like many dogs owned by humans is most times wolves leave packs and go form their own pack...they rehome themselves LOL I've seen my very highly dominant Rottweiler roll on her back in front of puppies, for her its showing the pup that she basically means no harm and intices play - this is what she learned. My dogs also will roll on their back for any human they think may rub their belly. For them rolling on their back for humans is not being submissive it's for a positive action they have come to expect from it. Who can resist a belly rub. Our male Newf Dylan which is a dominant male will lay around the grooming shop on his back for hours while other dogs walk by etc. He likes this position as it's comfortable and he likes to show off the goods. He is not showing any sort of submissive behaviors towards anyone etc. I've seen my dogs when they are playing rolling around on the ground together, for them it's not rolling over to show submissive they are playing and having a blast. I think it's very good to be able to read dogs body language, it has helped me out a great deal working with dogs to read their body language. But at times some people really over do it and read too much into it...or try to bring up wolves and pack behaviors...to be a dog is not to be a wolf.
