Coronation Street and Alpha Dog - yes there is a connection

borderlinemeath

dogluver wrote: »

I actually like the principles that Cesar carries out. I actually don't think he is cruel and just because he doesn't have qualifications to say what he is able to do why does that make him a bad person. He has said he has grown up with dogs all his life and knows what makes them what they are. Doesn't that count for anything? There are qualified dog trainers everywhere who have done lots of qualified training but when it comes to practical work know nothing.:rolleyes:

Would you bring your dog to a vet with no qualifications? Somebody that just sets up a practice and says "hey I'm a vet, look at my youtube clips of me performing surgery or administering drugs to your dog! I've grown up with dogs all my life, I KNOW how to do it!!"

Sometimes practical experience counts for nothing, particularly when that experience is completely at odds with what every ethically qualified trainer and behaviourist practices. His methods are outdated, cruel and no good for the mental welfare of the animal. But seemingly it makes good tv and sells some books, particularly when you include his rags to riches story as well.:rolleyes:

corsav6

borderlinemeath wrote: »

What benefit is your dog entering the house before you? Do you actually think your dog has the mental ability to understand that 'my human needs me to be hierarchically inferior to him so by doing that I am acknowledging him as the alpha?' Dogs just don't have that cognative reasoning. Same for food, there is no benefit to feeding the dogs after you, and as for staring them down before giving food, that's just insane, eye contact will make the dog go on the defensive, it's something that is absolutely the wrong thing to do when feeding. One serious behavioural issue that dogs can suffer from is resource guarding, food can be a very possessive thing to a dog, and you are basically challenging the dog, as another dog would when you are giving him something that it is very easy for him to get defensive about. Madness. Your wrecking the dogs heads.

Dogs are not actually directly descended from wolves either. Their immediate predecessor was the 'village dog' which was descended from the wolf. They share similar dna but they are not wolves, nor do they live in the same environment so have dissimilar needs.

www.k9dna.org/learn-about-dog-genetics/evolution-domestic-dog/life-village-dog

I enter before the dogs because I'm the master so i lead the pack. I never once said I eat before our dogs, I said they must look me in the eye before their allowed to eat. Dogs certainly are aware who is the alpha male. We have 3 dogs, 1 of those is the master when I don't intervene. He leads the way when their off leads and always meets other dogs 1st. He will take his toy before the other 2 are allowed. I'm sorry but I don't believe that dogs don't see an alpha male.

ShaShaBear

corsav6 wrote: »

I enter before the dogs because I'm the master so i lead the pack. I never once said I eat before our dogs, I said they must look me in the eye before their allowed to eat. Dogs certainly are aware who is the alpha male. We have 3 dogs, 1 of those is the master when I don't intervene. He leads the way when their off leads and always meets other dogs 1st. He will take his toy before the other 2 are allowed. I'm sorry but I don't believe that dogs don't see an alpha male.

How do you suppose they know who is the alpha male if there is no such thing?

I do what my mother tells me, but that doesn't make her an alpha anything. And I'll still go against her wishes if I believe I know better.

corsav6

ShaShaBear wrote: »

How do you suppose they know who is the alpha male if there is no such thing?

I do what my mother tells me, but that doesn't make her an alpha anything. And I'll still go against her wishes if I believe I know better.

What? I said I believe there is an alpha male, did you read what I posted correctly?

Mince Pie

corsav6 wrote: »

What? I said I believe there is an alpha male, did you read what I posted correctly?

You can believe what you want, I would imagine the dogs are just scratching their heads wondering why you are staring at them and making them feel uncomfortable when all they want is some grub.

borderlinemeath

corsav6 wrote: »

What? I said I believe there is an alpha male, did you read what I posted correctly?

So you believe what a tv 'personality' tells you rather than what experts in the field of canine behaviour and training have been saying for years? That's there's no such thing as 'dominance' or 'alpha male' concerning dogs or wolves?

Seriously, you may as well believe what goes on in Coronation St is real as to believe the rubbish CM spouts. You said in your previous posts that you were interested in dogs and would like to understand them better - but honestly, you're heading the complete wrong way about it by thinking of your human/dog relationship as an 'alpha/pack leader' scenario. Have a read of some of the links below. Even google yourself about how the whole theory has been scientifically disproven. The original scientists, all ethical trainers and behaviourists, even CM himself has rolled back and said he was wrong.


http://www.apdt.com/about/ps/dominance.aspx

http://www.whole-dog-journal.com/issues/14_12/features/Alpha-Dogs_20416-1.html

http://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2012/06/06/dogs-dominance-aggression.aspx

muddypaws

corsav6 wrote: »

I enter before the dogs because I'm the master so i lead the pack. I never once said I eat before our dogs, I said they must look me in the eye before their allowed to eat. Dogs certainly are aware who is the alpha male. We have 3 dogs, 1 of those is the master when I don't intervene. He leads the way when their off leads and always meets other dogs 1st. He will take his toy before the other 2 are allowed. I'm sorry but I don't believe that dogs don't see an alpha male.

Think about what you've typed logically. Lets just suppose there is a pack of dogs, who live in a cave for shelter and protection, and they go outside, to go hunting. There is an alpha male and female, the only two that are allowed to breed. Why would the alpha go out first, and put himself in danger? Surely as it is all about survival, another one of the 'pack' would go out first, in case there is a predator out there, and so the alpha would stay safe, and could ensure the continuation of the pack? In true pack situations, different members have different roles, and the alphas don't lead from the front.

Wolves and wild dogs don't live in packs with alphas, they live in family groups with parents and older and younger siblings. Dogs have no concept whatsoever of alphas, there may well be stronger and weaker members of a family, there are within my own dog family, and there is a male that some would consider the alpha male. But he isn't, he is the male that has been with me for the longest, and he is the one with the most attitude with other dogs. But, in certain situations, he has 'submitted' to another dog, i.e., let them take something that he had. He is very obedient, so even though he may boss the other dogs around, he listens to me, not because he thinks I'm the alpha, he knows I'm not a dog, but because he knows good things happen when he does.

corsav6

borderlinemeath wrote: »

So you believe what a tv 'personality' tells you rather than what experts in the field of canine behaviour and training have been saying for years? That's there's no such thing as 'dominance' or 'alpha male' concerning dogs or wolves?

Seriously, you may as well believe what goes on in Coronation St is real as to believe the rubbish CM spouts. You said in your previous posts that you were interested in dogs and would like to understand them better - but honestly, you're heading the complete wrong way about it by thinking of your human/dog relationship as an 'alpha/pack leader' scenario. Have a read of some of the links below. Even google yourself about how the whole theory has been scientifically disproven. The original scientists, all ethical trainers and behaviourists, even CM himself has rolled back and said he was wrong.


http://www.apdt.com/about/ps/dominance.aspx

http://www.whole-dog-journal.com/issues/14_12/features/Alpha-Dogs_20416-1.html

http://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2012/06/06/dogs-dominance-aggression.aspx

No, I believe what I see, which is an alpha male amongst 2 other dogs.

DBB

corsav6 wrote: »

Its the way I chose to train our dogs and it worked for all 3. I never pinned them to the ground or anything like that but I made sure they knew I was boss at all times.

How do you do that though? Not letting them rush through the door is just good manners. Asking them to sit before they have their lead put on is just good manners. Getting down off your chair when asked is just good manners.
I would do any of these things if my parents asked me to. Are they dominant to me? Are they my pack leaders? No. They're my parents, and they taught me to be polite.
Can you see the difference? Dogs and wolves don't have doors in the wild. They do not have a system whereby one always goes out ahead (although they do have a system in hunting, not based on a dominance hierarchy, but based on who's good at what parts of the hunt). Asking them to do stuff for us is just good manners, they do it because they're taught to in order to get access to something they want, not because they would do it naturally. And they certainly don't do it out of being motivated to observe a hierarchy.

Simple things like me entering the house before them, no food until they make eye contact with me.

As above, these have nothing to do with dogs seeing their place in a pack, or in a hierarchy. They're doing it because you taught them they don't get to go out the door, or have their dinner before they carry out a certain behaviour. It's simple learning theory, completely unrelated to anything to do with social status. Methinks you're confusing the two, but then again, that's what Cesar does too, due to having no formal training in it all. By the way, he was offered to be taught all this stuff by those at the very top of their game in the recognised, qualified industry, but he turned them down.

Also as someone pointed out his methods are for wild dogs and wolves, all dogs are descendant from wolves, so some of his theory's will still be applicable to the domestic dog.

Emmm, I don't get this statement. If Cesar's methods are for wild dogs and wolves, why's he using them on domesticated dogs?
Allow me to dispel the myth. Wolves don't do dominance hierarchies either. As I have explained here many times before, the original theory of wolves obeying a dominance hierarchy was developed by David Mech, an American scientist. He studied captive wolves in a zoo, which were unrelated to one another. Years later, having had the opportunity to study wolves in the wild, he realised what a mistake he had made. HE could see that wolves in this natural setting did not, and do not observe a dominance hierarchy. They actually observe a social structure very, very similar to a human family. It is a benevolent, kindly, educational structure in which aggression is rarely used. He realised that using unrelated wolves in captivity as a model for explaining wolf society in general was akin to studying humans in prison, and applying everything learned about them as a general model for all human beings. He recanted everything he had said about dominance hierarchies as they apply to wolves and dogs. But too much time had gone by, and dog trainers had seized this seemingly neat explanation for why dogs misbehave, and run with it... and many still have not let go despite overwhelming evidence that it does not exist.... and THAT'S the difference between a qualified behaviourist and Cesar Milan's ilk.... qualified people read the research and evidence, and base their advice and methods on it. Cesar and his ilk don't. They blindly stumble on with a hocus-pocus model which often appears to work because their methods rely on suppressing emotional issues, rather than addressing emotional issues at their core, as qualified behaviourists do.
David Mech also realised that wolves never, ever, ever perform alpha rolls on one another. These are utterly a human construct. As is the belief that going through doors first, feeding the dog first etc as a way to maintain a (non-existent) hierarchy are completely human constructs.

dogluver wrote: »

I actually like the principles that Cesar carries out. I actually don't think he is cruel and just because he doesn't have qualifications to say what he is able to do why does that make him a bad person.

I'm not terribly concerned whether he's a nice person. I'm ore concerned about his adherence to a disproven theory despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and no evidence at all to support what he bases his approaches on.

He has said he has grown up with dogs all his life and knows what makes them what they are. Doesn't that count for anything?

I've had a fanny all my life. It doesn't make me a gynaecologist

There are qualified dog trainers everywhere who have done lots of qualified training but when it comes to practical work know nothing.:rolleyes:

Can't argue with you there. It is vital for dog trainers to get a LOT of experience once they're qualified. Therefore, whilst qualifications are great because at least you know they've got the theory right, professional accreditation, where their actual experience and application of the theory are assessed, is an important element in making a qualified dog trainer a good dog trainer.

corsav6 wrote: »

I enter before the dogs because I'm the master so i lead the pack. I never once said I eat before our dogs, I said they must look me in the eye before their allowed to eat. Dogs certainly are aware who is the alpha male. We have 3 dogs, 1 of those is the master when I don't intervene. He leads the way when their off leads and always meets other dogs 1st. He will take his toy before the other 2 are allowed. I'm sorry but I don't believe that dogs don't see an alpha male.

That dog of yours is not an alpha male. He's simply a confident dog. And he has probably learned that going ahead gets him what he wants faster, whilst the other dogs are not the type that could be arsed caring... they're very like us that way... some people want to get there first, others just don't care. Or, they've learned that the confident dog is so determined to get what he wants that he's prepared to bully them to get it, so they don't challenge him because they're just not arsed enough to bother. But that is certainly not the same thing as observing a dominance hierarchy, no more than when kids argue over a toy in the playground. It's just that simple. Why complicate it? Good science always looks at the most likely explanation first.... belief in a dominance hierarchy just put sin so many curved balls and complications that just aren't there... and have been proven not to be there.

Might I ask that you busy yourself for a little while in reading this website:
www.dogwelfarecampaign.org
This is an old enough site, it was developed in around 2008 or so to explain to people what the problem is with thinking that dominance hierarchies exist between dogs and humans. The website was created and is supported by pretty much all of the most respected, educated, accomplished animal behavioural scientists, applied animal behaviourists, and animal welfare organisations. I think it gets the idea across quite nicely. There has been a huge amount more research carried out since this site was created which supports what it says... and despite exhaustive efforts to find it, evidence for dominance hierarchies in dogs and wild wolves has yet to be found.

Happy reading!

Mince Pie

corsav6 wrote: »

Thanks for the link. I have a huge interest in dogs and would Iove to understand them better.
As i said before I chose certain aspects of Cesar's training methods and applied them, I don't copy everything he does or do I support any training that involves cruelty.

corsav6 wrote: »

No, I believe what I see, which is an alpha male amongst 2 other dogs.

These quotes really don't correspond with each other. You say you want to understand dogs better then just revert back to your own anecdotal evidence rather than acknowledge the research that has been shared with you to help further get to know your furry ones.

Mince Pie

Sorry DBB but the fanny comment properly made me snort and disturb my furries snuggled beside me.

SillyMangoX

DBB wrote: »

I've had a fanny all my life. It doesn't make me a gynaecologist

Thanks DBB now I'm getting very strange looks from my family for bursting out laughing at a very sad part of a movie :pac:

muddypaws

Mince Pie wrote: »

Sorry DBB but the fanny comment properly made me snort and disturb my furries snuggled beside me.

surely not next to you on the sofa? :eek: They'll take over you know, soon you won't be able to get into your own house.

Mince Pie

muddypaws wrote: »

surely not next to you on the sofa? :eek: They'll take over you know, soon you won't be able to get into your own house.

Aye next thing I know they will be sitting higher than me trying to "dominate" me. Little feckers. :pac:

DBB

Some more links which you may find interesting. Again, let me draw your attention to the people writing these articles, seriously respected, clever, and experienced applied behaviourists and scientists:

http://www.apbc.org.uk/articles/caninedominance

http://www.apbc.org.uk/articles/why-wont-dominance-die

And perhaps this will help you to recognise what's actually going on when you stop your dog from charging through the door in front of you, and other things often attributed to the dog trying to be dominant, but in reality can be better explained by simple learning theory:
http://www.apbc.org.uk/articles/learn-to-earn-is-nothing-in-life-free-for-dogs

fatmammycat

corsav6 wrote: »

I enter before the dogs because I'm the master so i lead the pack. I never once said I eat before our dogs, I said they must look me in the eye before their allowed to eat. Dogs certainly are aware who is the alpha male. We have 3 dogs, 1 of those is the master when I don't intervene. He leads the way when their off leads and always meets other dogs 1st. He will take his toy before the other 2 are allowed. I'm sorry but I don't believe that dogs don't see an alpha male.

Corsav6, none of what you describe is being an 'alpha male'. Just a confident pushy dog- as DDB said.

I have one dog, a large intact male, GSD, almost 2 years old: he goes out ahead of me through doors on a regular basis, and I leave him eat his food in peace, no odd eye contact needed. He likes to doze on the bed with me in the morning. He meets all manner of dogs off lead and on lead, but despite all this, he looks to me how to behave and I don't employ ANY of the things you do because I don't believe 'alpha ' status exists. What I have is a well-trained compliant confident dog who regards me as the source of food and entertainment, and his training to happy rewards has imprinted on his growing brain.
For I to be a genuine 'alpha' I'd need a litter of pups somewhere that needed feeding and an 'alpha/parent' partner. Suggesting dogs need 'Alpha leaders' just makes no sense at all when you learn what the structure of a wolf pack really is ( family and a breeding pair).
You might have one pushier dog, after all not all dogs are robots- and even on our pack walks dogs defer to other dogs over different things (water/toys/direction/whistle response)– but that doesn't mean one is an alpha dog, not by a long shot. Indeed the notion of 'alpha' dogs get really blown out of the water when you see a large group of stable dogs interact with each other.

corsav6

Cheers for the links guys, I will bookmark them a read when I get time.
So no alpha male, just a confident dog taking charge in out little pack here. I will still use some of Cesar's methods despite some peoples hatred of him here because it works for me. The main thing for me is to have my dogs under control, we have children and visitors bring their children so its important that the dogs are under control.

borderlinemeath

corsav6 wrote: »

Cheers for the links guys, I will bookmark them a read when I get time.
So no alpha male, just a confident dog taking charge in out little pack here. I will still use some of Cesar's methods despite some peoples hatred of him here because it works for me. The main thing for me is to have my dogs under control, we have children and visitors bring their children so its important that the dogs are under control.

I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a hatred, at least he's been man enough to come out and say he was wrong on a lot of his opinions and earlier methods. He went along with a lot of popular ideas that labelled behaviours and gave trainers a lazy way to diagnose problems. All problems were because of 'dominance' or your dog trying to be 'alpha' and an owner probably felt relieved to call the behaviour something, as opposed to not labelling it. But the bloody programmes still repeat on TV and there's still books on shelves with his old methods.

I also think that part of the problem is the human need for familiarity, they see a programme or a book by somebody they've heard of and they think, that must be right, right? It's like the comfort of a well trusted brand name of dog food - millions buy pedigree, because it's always been there - but it's one of the worst foods to feed your dog.

corsav6

borderlinemeath wrote: »

I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a hatred, at least he's been man enough to come out and say he was wrong on a lot of his opinions and earlier methods. He went along with a lot of popular ideas that labelled behaviours and gave trainers a lazy way to diagnose problems. All problems were because of 'dominance' or your dog trying to be 'alpha' and an owner probably felt relieved to call the behaviour something, as opposed to not labelling it. But the bloody programmes still repeat on TV and there's still books on shelves with his old methods.

I also think that part of the problem is the human need for familiarity, they see a programme or a book by somebody they've heard of and they think, that must be right, right? It's like the comfort of a well trusted brand name of dog food - millions buy pedigree, because it's always been there - but it's one of the worst foods to feed your dog.

I have a terrier and like all terriers seem to be he's over confident, to the point that he would get himself killed. He is now a lot more accepting of other dogs and has calmed down a lot. Our 3 dogs are rescue dogs so training started after they were a year old, if that matters. They are now obedient dogs who can be trusted off lead and around other dogs, when we 1st got them this wouldn't have been possible. I'm sure at this stage there are better ways to train dogs and my alpha role is non existant, but certain aspects of Cesar's method still apply. I think all dog owners should learn how to read a dogs body language, and react accordingly.
As i said before I don't copy everything Cesar does. To pin a dog down by his neck is pointless, to make a dog walk beside a lawnmower he's terrified of is cruel, mow the lawn when he's not around. I want them to look at me before feeding so they know its my food to give them and I can safely take their bowl without incident before they finish, i don't like them growling at everything when they feed just because their eating.
As for food, I feed them bakers and some breeder food from the local pet stop.
So I may be wrong in some of my methods and probably wasting time but it works for me.

borderlinemeath

corsav6 wrote: »

I have a terrier and like all terriers seem to be he's over confident, to the point that he would get himself killed. He is now a lot more accepting of other dogs and has calmed down a lot. Our 3 dogs are rescue dogs so training started after they were a year old, if that matters. They are now obedient dogs who can be trusted off lead and around other dogs, when we 1st got them this wouldn't have been possible. I'm sure at this stage there are better ways to train dogs and my alpha role is non existant, but certain aspects of Cesar's method still apply. I think all dog owners should learn how to read a dogs body language, and react accordingly.
As i said before I don't copy everything Cesar does. To pin a dog down by his neck is pointless, to make a dog walk beside a lawnmower he's terrified of is cruel, mow the lawn when he's not around. I want them to look at me before feeding so they know its my food to give them and I can safely take their bowl without incident before they finish, i don't like them growling at everything when they feed just because their eating.
As for food, I feed them bakers and some breeder food from the local pet stop.
So I may be wrong in some of my methods and probably wasting time but it works for me.

But....how do they know it's YOUR food to give them? You're assuming they understand that when they absolutely don't. Dogs don't understand that you own the food, to them it's just food, nourishment - something they're hardwired to seek out since birth.

Were they growling at each other or at you when the food was down? If they're resource guarding the food by growling, the last thing you want to do is scare them further by making them look at you. I pointed this out in a post earlier, a dogs natural instinct when scared is to defend - so no wonder they were growling.

To properly work with a resource guarding dog you need to be showing them there is no problem with their food, they can have food, more food, they don't need to guard what they have - from you, or any other human, or the other dogs. Keep adding food, or nice treats to the bowl when they're eating, dogs will learn by association and they will associate the person coming to the bowl with food as a welcome thing, not something to be scared of. My rescue boy was a food guarder when he arrived, now he'll happily sit eating a bone (the most prized of all foods) beside my other dog, he'll let her take it, he'll let me take it, he's worked through his problems.

I absolutely wouldn't rate Bakers at all as a food, loads of colourants (for whos benefit? Dogs don't care what colour it is) Terriers are active enough little feckers as it is - add some low nutrient food, high in colours and additives and you've some hyperactive dogs. Feeding a low quality supermarket food has been known to cause behavioural issues in dogs. What is the other brand of food you feed? Could you stick with it and cut out the bakers?

corsav6

borderlinemeath wrote: »

But....how do they know it's YOUR food to give them? You're assuming they understand that when they absolutely don't. Dogs don't understand that you own the food, to them it's just food, nourishment - something they're hardwired to seek out since birth.

Were they growling at each other or at you when the food was down? If they're resource guarding the food by growling, the last thing you want to do is scare them further by making them look at you. I pointed this out in a post earlier, a dogs natural instinct when scared is to defend - so no wonder they were growling.

To properly work with a resource guarding dog you need to be showing them there is no problem with their food, they can have food, more food, they don't need to guard what they have - from you, or any other human, or the other dogs. Keep adding food, or nice treats to the bowl when they're eating, dogs will learn by association and they will associate the person coming to the bowl with food as a welcome thing, not something to be scared of. My rescue boy was a food guarder when he arrived, now he'll happily sit eating a bone (the most prized of all foods) beside my other dog, he'll let her take it, he'll let me take it, he's worked through his problems.

I absolutely wouldn't rate Bakers at all as a food, loads of colourants (for whos benefit? Dogs don't care what colour it is) Terriers are active enough little feckers as it is - add some low nutrient food, high in colours and additives and you've some hyperactive dogs. Feeding a low quality supermarket food has been known to cause behavioural issues in dogs. What is the other brand of food you feed? Could you stick with it and cut out the bakers?

I would have no problem getting rid of the bakers at all, I'll get the other brand and post it as soon as I get home.
The dogs never growled at each other when eating, but if a stranger passed to close then the teeth would show. Now anyone can walk over and pick up their bowl without incident. I may have went the wrong way about it but it has worked. All 3 dogs are very happy and well looked after, their part of our family.
I appreciate all the advice your giving me here and I will certainly take it on board. I want what's best for them and when I'm in control I'm more comfortable when they interact with other dogs, or people, because sometimes its not the dog at fault but the person.
I'm on mobile so I'm sorry if my posts are all over the place.

ShaShaBear

corsav6 wrote: »

I would have no problem getting rid of the bakers at all, I'll get the other brand and post it as soon as I get home.
The dogs never growled at each other when eating, but if a stranger passed to close then the teeth would show. Now anyone can walk over and pick up their bowl without incident. I may have went the wrong way about it but it has worked. All 3 dogs are very happy and well looked after, their part of our family.
I appreciate all the advice your giving me here and I will certainly take it on board. I want what's best for them and when I'm in control I'm more comfortable when they interact with other dogs, or people, because sometimes its not the dog at fault but the person.
I'm on mobile so I'm sorry if my posts are all over the place.

You have the basic concept. Control. You should be able to control your dog at all times. All we are saying is it is infinitely better for them to be controllable through love and respect than fear and respect. Control through love is permanent. Control through fear is temporary.

corsav6

ShaShaBear wrote: »

You have the basic concept. Control. You should be able to control your dog at all times. All we are saying is it is infinitely better for them to be controllable through love and respect than fear and respect. Control through love is permanent. Control through fear is temporary.

I don't want them to fear me, or anyone else. Your spot on with control, I think its extremely important. A dog is the owners responsibility and should be taught how to live in the human world. Our dogs respect us and do as their told but would not fear us in any way.
Anyway thanks for all the advice, its nice to see so many people take their dogs training serious. To me owning a dog is more than a fluffy pillow and vets visits, its also teaching them how to behave in different situations, looking after their mental welfare as well as physical. Their part of our family and not just there to do as I say.

ShaShaBear

corsav6 wrote: »

I don't want them to fear me, or anyone else. Your spot on with control, I think its extremely important. A dog is the owners responsibility and should be taught how to live in the human world. Our dogs respect us and do as their told but would not fear us in any way.
Anyway thanks for all the advice, its nice to see so many people take their dogs training serious. To me owning a dog is more than a fluffy pillow and vets visits, its also teaching them how to behave in different situations, looking after their mental welfare as well as physical. Their part of our family and not just there to do as I say.

That's what we like to hear!

corsav6

corsav6 wrote: »

I don't want them to fear me, or anyone else. Your spot on with control, I think its extremely important. A dog is the owners responsibility and should be taught how to live in the human world.

Your right and you hit the nail on the head by saying Human world which is an alpha dog society. No matter what ever anybody says when it comes to training and Theory . There are lots of different methods out there but none of them are 100%

corsav6

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Your right and you hit the nail on the head by saying Human world which is an alpha dog society. No matter what ever anybody says when it comes to training and Theory . There are lots of different methods out there but none of them are 100%

Well the dogs are happy, healthy and under control. I will still use some of Cesar's methods but will also research other methods which I can combine with what I know so far.
My main goal is to have happy, healthy and controlled dogs, I think we have done well so far and we can only get better.
I think we may have went a little off topic here so apologies to the OP.

Mince Pie

corsav6 wrote: »

I think we may have went a little off topic here so apologies to the OP.

No need to apologise, the point of the thread was to discuss the methods of training dogs and the prevalence of the Alpha theory.

corsav6

Mince Pie wrote: »

No need to apologise, the point of the thread was to discuss the methods of training dogs and the prevalence of the Alpha theory.

Well 1 dog owner here has learned something new, which is a good thing.
Just so people know, if anyone cares, we have a Parsons Russell terrier, a lurcher and what we think is a red setter mixed with a lab.

Mince Pie

corsav6 wrote: »

Well 1 dog owner here has learned something new, which is a good thing.
Just so people know, if anyone cares, we have a Parsons Russell terrier, a lurcher and what we think is a red setter mixed with a lab.

If one person learns something new (myself included) then its been a successful OP.
I have two rescues myself, a terrier mix, not sure of what her flavour is, there is a previous thread to determine it. And I have a lurcher as well, have had her for 5 years. We have good taste.

ETA:Oh and please feel free to post pics!

corsav6

Mince Pie wrote: »

If one person learns something new (myself included) then its been a successful OP.
I have two rescues myself, a terrier mix, not sure of what her flavour is, there is a previous thread to determine it. And I have a lurcher as well, have had her for 5 years. We have good taste.

ETA:Oh and please feel free to post pics!

I will get some fresh pics later and post them here. We only have the lab mix a short while so not many pics yet, but loads of the other 2.
Not a great pic and don't worry, the lurcher has a real bed, he jumped in the amazon box as his bed had been moved to the new house an hour before.