mashani brought up some good points about dogs, behavior and (bad) dog owners in another thread so I'm starting one hear to gripe a bit about what I see a lot of with small dog owners.
Before I start I will say that not all small dog owners, nor all small dogs are bad - but I've run into a lot of them lately so I'm bitching about these particular people here.
Pet peeve: Small dog owners who think it is 'cute' of 'funny' to see their small dog (regardless of breed) come charging towards a big dog in an aggressive manner. I hear comments like "he thinks he's a big dog" or "ooh, look how tough he thinks he is". This is not acceptable in any way.
There are so many issues here:
1) The larger dog is almost always viewed poorly if it does anything to defend itself
2) These people equate aggressive big dogs as needing to be trained/controlled and aggressive small dogs to be funny
3) Animal behavior is just that. When feeling threatened or uncomfortable, they will defend/attack as they feel necessary.
4) If a large dog exhibited that same behavior, somebody would call Animal Control
Case in point: One of my neighbors has two German Shepherds. We've helped train them because they are limited on time and somewhat clueless on how to do so. I'll admit, these two dogs (females) are not the most sound. You could refer to them as nervous/skittish which can lead to fear-biting. They are 100% comfortable around us and know who is in control (the alpha) when my wife or I handle them but are much more nervous and less respectful with their owners (I won't go into that tangent...).
In any case, we have many small dogs in the neighborhood, too. Often, the small dogs are roaming free while the rest of the dogs in the area are walked on leash. These small dogs have often charged the two Shepherds and the owners have had to restrain them from either hiding behind them or potentially going after the small dog(s). Not too long ago the Shepherd owners were working some obedience in our court off leash and the small dog got out of its yard and came charging and barking. One of the Shepherds got a hold of it and tore a pretty good gash along its back requiring serious stitches (nothing life-threatening). This was when the small dog GOT TO her, the Shepherd did not go after the smaller dog.
As you can imagine, the small dog owner freaked out and wanted to call Animal Control on the Shepherds and have them taken away because they were 'dangerous'. WTF?!?! Would you let your child tease either a dog locked behind a gate or a larger child that was constantly restrained? No, because you know that sooner or later something bad is going to happen.
I mention the gate because our dogs are gated in on our property but often a small dog will be walking by (even on leash) but make aggressive advances (to the end of the leash anyway) towards our dog(s) and gate. And the owners do nothing to correct the behavior. *sigh*
Sorry for the rant. mashani's comments about bad dog owners just hit home and then I spewed forth.
I, being a small dog owner, 100% agree with you in regards to most small dog owners I see as well. They think it's all fun & games or cute until something like the story you stated happens. We own two dachshunds who are VERY obedient and I would not have it any other way. Dogs are territorial by nature and of course will defend their selves when charged by another one. It's just nature, not the dog's fault at all. To me, it's bad owners actually.
If your dog (no matter the size) cannot obey you or behave their selves around others, then why bother putting them and yourself into a situation that could become very, very dangerous for all parties involved.
Our dogs stick to us when we are in public or around other dogs. They would never even think about charging another dog of any size. Most people for whatever reason (especially small dog owners) seem to think since their dogs are small, it's ok for them to do whatever they want to others or other larger dogs. Then point the blame at the other dogs owners or the dog itself. Those people (in my opinion) should not be dog owners.
Besides, who would be afraid of this dog anyway (our standard dachshund, Jenny)
Pet peeves.....I see what you did here with those words.
We belong to a community dog park that is located in our very old and beautiful City Park. For $35 a year, you get a membership card to get in 18 hours a day with a nice walk for the humans and large grounds for the dogs. Sand areas are there, water areas, lounging....it's all there. Even showers to wash your dogs.
They have a smaller area for smaller dogs and only allow the 'large' small dogs to go into the big dog area. The much smaller dogs have no choice but to go into the smaller area which is nice but simpler in design. Anyone caught bringing their dogs to the other side is warned once. After that, it's goodbye.
PABs Brewing
Planning Brew good beer and live a hoppy life Fermenting
Drinking
Disfucted
Smelly Hops
(split batch) A Many Stringed Bow Up Next
Men In Black
Funky Skunk - she's a cutie. And I'll use her as a great example (if you don't mind).
Some owners with a dog like that will let their dog bark at, nip at and run at other dogs and children and not think twice about it because of her size. Nobody is calling Animal Control. Now, if that dog were a Shepherd, Pitbull, etc. it would be a different story. Sure, the size of the dog is different but the behavior is the same. And lest anybody get the wrong idea, I don't dislike small dogs. I dislike bad dog owners (regardless of size).
Paul - I need to see pics of this place. That sounds awesome! While traveling from CA to Yellowstone last year we stopped at a lot of dog parks and 99% of them were better than we had at home. More similar to what you mentioned.
Kealia wrote:Funky Skunk - she's a cutie. And I'll use her as a great example (if you don't mind).
Some owners with a dog like that will let their dog bark at, nip at and run at other dogs and children and not think twice about it because of her size. Nobody is calling Animal Control. Now, if that dog were a Shepherd, Pitbull, etc. it would be a different story. Sure, the size of the dog is different but the behavior is the same. And lest anybody get the wrong idea, I don't dislike small dogs. I dislike bad dog owners (regardless of size).
Paul - I need to see pics of this place. That sounds awesome! While traveling from CA to Yellowstone last year we stopped at a lot of dog parks and 99% of them were better than we had at home. More similar to what you mentioned.
Not at all, and thank you.
I am in total agreement with you as well. Usually it goes back to the owners on how their dog behalves or misbehaves, for all the reasons you listed out there. If they are small, for whatever reason, they think it is acceptable to allow their dogs to act that way. Rubbish in my opinion and gives all dogs (and owners) bad names and reputations as well.
Here's the link but I'm not sure they show pictures on this site:http://www.nolacitybark.org/index.html
You can also put nola city bark into google then click the images tab to see some photos that have been taken thru the years.
Welcome to NOLA City Bark!
New Orleans' Premier Dog Park
Our excellent dog park includes these wonderful features:
4.6 landscaped acres in beautiful City Park
Separate play areas for small & big dogs
Howdy entrance gates
Water fountains for dogs & humans
Shade pavilions
An event lawn and a .25 mile walking trail
Mutt Mitts for clean-up
On-site restrooms
NOLA City Bark is a 4.6 acre plot located in beautiful City Park behind Popp Fountain. The property is bounded by Zachary Taylor Drive , Diagonal Drive, and Magnolia Drive. A map and driving directions to NOLA City Bark appear below.
PABs Brewing
Planning Brew good beer and live a hoppy life Fermenting
Drinking
Disfucted
Smelly Hops
(split batch) A Many Stringed Bow Up Next
Men In Black
Years ago when I was married, the ex and I had a Rat Terrier. We also had a neighbor with a Rottweiler who walked down the road in front of our house daily. One time when my ex was reaching outside for the mail our Rat Terrier slipped out and attacked the Rot. We didn't think it was cute and feared for the life of our dog. If the Rot had harmed it we would have accepted the responsibility for what happened. As it turned out the Rot gave our dog a warning nip and scared it back to the house. The owner of the Rot was very apologetic. My ex assured him he needn't be as the situation was our fault entirely.
When I have had little dogs I have never thought it was cute when they acted aggressively toward larger dogs. I always feared for their safety. And I always felt it was my fault when situations like that arose. Sometimes they do even among the most responsible of dog owners.
Small Dog syndrome, it is really interesting to see it happening, I have two big dogs and if they tried to do half of the things that most people let small dogs get away with I would be in big trouble. Since the one is ~100 lbs I really have to be in charge of him. Since I can't physically control him easily if at all I have to be able to control him verbally. Body language is huge, he used to get super excited and kind of aggressive when he saw other dogs or people while we were walking but once we got a different collar for him and I knew I was in control and was more confident he shaped right up it was night and day just that simple amount of body language that we are not always even aware of. He listens to me very well in most situations but sometimes he does get a mind of his own, I can't imagine his behavior if he didn't listen to me. One of my co-workers was recently bit on the lip by a small dog who she knew well. It happens in the blink of an eye and you have to know what you are "saying" to a dog since most of it is silent. I don't even come close to claiming to be an expert but it is something that is very important.
Deadhouse Brewing Pipeline Drinking: Northern Brewer Nut Brown, Pale Rider, Charon's oar Conditioning: Charon's OarFermenting: Single Obol Stout Next Up: Persephone's Tears Blackberry Wheat
I talked about dog to dog socialization when young in that thread. The biggest issue with a lot of the small dogs (that are not caused directly by their owner that is) that I have worked with is that they often come from unscrupulous breeders (puppy mills), are pulled from their social group at too young of an age, and have not been socialized with dogs of all sizes when they were at a young age. Even ones that come from a good source have issues sometimes - one of the biggest travesties in my mind is how Vets will tell people to keep their puppies away from other dogs until they are older, to avoid a very small chance they will get a disease. There is a window of time where dogs learn proper social behavior from each other the best - and the recommended "keep away" times directly interfere with this socialization window. So instead of a small chance of a disease, you end up with a large chance of a dysfunctional dog in dog to dog communication terms.
Dogs believe it or not have to "learn" how to communicate properly to some extent, it's not totally instinct, only the most primitive bits are. They seem to have lost some of the innate ability when they learned to understand "humans". Where say wolves, unless socialized with humans at a very young age, they are clueless about humans, but they have much more sophisticated body language with each other then dogs do dog-to-dog. Even when socialized at a young age they still can never understand humans as well as dogs and will always remain somewhat more unpredictable. In effect dogs gave up part of their brain power at understanding each other so that they could understand us it seems.
So say my dog who I say is the "detector" of such animals... She will give it a calming signal, and it will do something stupid in response because it never learned from older socialized dogs how to respond. This takes all of 1 second. A dog that has been well socialized with other dogs will offer some appropriate behavior in response to such a signal.
Also some dogs seem to have given up more of this ability - in order to be better "human" pets - then other breeds. A more wolf like breed may use signals that they simply do not understand, unless they grew up around them and "learned it".
One of the things I will do when rehabbing is carefully supervise such a dog in playing with dogs of known temperament to help them "learn stuff" and overcome fear issues. And yes this means I mix small dogs and bigger dogs, even some REALLY big dogs. But they are really big dogs of known temperament and low to no true prey drive (I say true prey drive because herding dogs like mine have INTENSE prey drive. But it stops short of killing or hurting things on purpose - it's focused totally on their herding behaviors). So although they could squish the little yappy things they do not. Given enough time they will learn and become better at interacting with other dogs. But it takes a lot of time and effort it they are older, where when puppies it would simply happen. I'm talking about bigger herding dogs, and sporting breeds (labs, goldens, spaniels), vs. say a big terrier who's job it is to kill critters. I'd never use a dog like that for this purpose.
We tend to tether the little dogs so they can watch and go ape shit and see all the big dogs just ignoring them like "wtf is wrong with you, you little shit?", and just playing and having a great time together. Eventually the little dog will stop going ape shit because they realize the big dogs are not going to just eat them, and then we will let them start to more directly interact. If there are any issues it's back to the tether. If one of the big dogs gets overstimmed the get temporarily tethered or crated, but this is rare with the dogs I'll use for this. The little dogs do learn eventually, and become well adjusted - but it takes time. It also takes leash work and carefully approaching dogs on leash with known temperments and never letting the little dog get "over the threshold" during the approach, rewarding for not reacting. A reward doesn't have to be food - getting away from something that is irritating is a reward too, and then the dog learns to trust that you won't put it in a situation it isn't ready for. There's lots of techniques that can be used to "fix" these things, but they all take lots of time and patience when the dog is older and messed up.
Another thing I'll just mention is that retractable leashes that put constant tug on the dogs are evil when it comes to such unsocialized dogs meeting other dogs. A dog with tension can not offer appropriate signals to other dogs. And the tension is actually a stimulator. (liking to pull against tension is instinct - it is why sled dogs like to pull sleds). Extra stimulation is not helpful in such situations. If I see any dog on a retractable leash, my dogs go nowhere near it as a general rule of thumb.
As an owner of both a large dog (golden retriever) and small dog (yorkie), I would agree with everything that has been said here. Luckily our yorkie comes from a home breeder who socialized her very well. She is the calmest small dog I have ever seen, but she will occasionally act aggressively to dogs she does not know. I always keep her on leash when other dogs are around or when she might see a squirrel or other "prey". The golden has the typical calm temperament of the breed and they get along wonderfully. They play together all the time and he is amazingly gentle with her, even when she gets excited and nips at him during play. They sleep together with her curled up against him.
However I have been a bit guilty of letting the little one do things like jumping into ones lap, that I would never tolerate from the golden. I have been working on this but unfortunately other people do think this is cute and will encourage her to jump.
I really do think that most "problem dogs" really are the result of problem owners.
FWIW, there is a difference between "inviting" a dog to your lap and the dog jumping onto it on it's own. I do not believe in any way, shape, or form that allowing a dog to do something that you ask/invite it or teach it to do in a certain situation will cause issues or make it think it's "your boss". It's a matter of the dog learning that it needs permission, or a reason and should not just do it on it's own if it's an unwanted behavior.
As an example, for SAR behaviors, I teach the dog to jump onto me and put it's paws on my chest. I would *never* want a dog to do this for no reason, and I will not tolerate it for any other reason, but for SAR I want an absolutely clear signal from the dog that "I FOUND SOMETHING" and I do not want it to be subtle and possible to misinterpret. That is not subtle and not possible to misinterpret because it *only* happens for that reason. Were say something like a nose poke or a paw to the leg might be depending on the dog. IE a lot of the dogs I train would use those for other signals, IE a nose poke to some place if the phone is ringing, somewhere else if the doorbell is ringing, paws somewhere or lick my face if the alarm clock is ringing... think "hearing alert" dogs... Or similar behaviors if blood sugar is low or high, or a seizure is immanent (diabetic alert or seizure alert dogs). Or permission to go sniff something or eat the desiccated squirrel jerky at the side of the road (lab owners know what I'm talking about LOL) or play or to lead me to something not so important... all depends on the dogs.
But anyway, I'll let any dog on my lap if I'm in the mood and the dog likes human contact. None of them think they are the boss of me. I give them their food, shelter, and calm and constant direction and use body language or the environment, or rewards, or removal of things until the dog stop being a jerk (for say resource guarding) to redirect or control behaviors I do not want. As long as you are consistent in what you ask and do not give the dog confusing signals about what is ok and what is not, the dog will learn. Unfortunately lots of folks give their dogs very mixed signals, or as you say other people undermine their efforts. To this, honestly, you have to tell the other people to stop it, and if they get pissed at you that's their problem.
My pet peeves are no so much related to dogs, but their owners.
Please don't take offense, but EVERYTHING you ever heard Cesar Milan say about dogs with the exception of needing exercise is FLAT OUT WRONG!!
Dogs are not wolves, even if they were, wolves are not pack animals. What was mistakenly taken for a pack is actually a family. There is a social order in the family, Mom and Dad and kids and aunts etc, but that is it. They actually like each other. Wolves do NOT do 'alpha rolls' on other wolves. Feral dogs do not form socially hierarchical packs either. Feral dogs don't even form the family group that wild wolves form. As a matter of fact, the behavior that Cesar exhibits when working with dogs would be considered extremely rude by dogs. He is an ass hole that is perpetuating a myth started by a Nazi by the name of Konrad Lorenz, continued by the Monks of New Skete (I call them the assholes of New Skeet), and popularized on TV by Milan. Besides all those facts, we just found out that dogs and wolves have an extinct common ancestor and are not descended from modern wolves, so basing an interpretation of dog behavior of modern wolves is completely invalid scientifically. Dogs do NOT try to 'dominate' you, they do what works for them at the time.
Other myths:
Going out the door before you means the dog is trying to become 'pack leader' WRONG!
The dog eating before you means the dogs is trying to become 'pack leader' WRONG!
The dog being higher from the floor means the dog is trying to become 'pack leader' WRONG!
There is no 'pack leader' for them to become. You are projecting human behavior onto your dogs if you believe these crazy things.
Sorry I just spent a weekend with a couple that have terribly reactive Chihuahuas, and watching them 'alpha roll' the poor things for everything and listening to their unscientific beliefs about dogs. Based on my reading of Calming Signals, their dogs are scared stiff of them, but they would misinterpret their dogs, make up weird anthropomorphic stories and laugh and think it was cute. Like the time they shoved a treat in front of one of the poor things, the dog licks its lips (indicating that is was nervous) and they go: 'Oh look, she's really hungry, licking her lips like that'
This topic hit a nerve.
Monty
If anyone disputes anything I've said references upon request, but go read a few books by Patricia McConnel (PHD) or Karen Pryor, or Nicole Wilde, or Pamella Dennison or any number of other 'positive' trainers. Probably the best book to read is 'On Talking Terms with Dogs: Calming Signals' by Torid Ruggas (http://www.amazon.com/On-Talking-Terms- ... 1929242360) you learn what they are saying with their body language and how they avoid conflict amongst themselves.
Actually monsteroyd there are two good documentaries on dogs I have watched a couple times that confirm everything you just said. One was a National Geographic and the other was a Nova documentary. It seems scientist are starting to take a hard look at the relationships between humans and dogs now because of the discovery that some dogs can detect cancer more accurately than our cutting edge medical instruments. Both of these were on Netflix but I don't know if either of them still are. If anybody ever gets a chance to check either of these shows out I highly recommend them.
Monty, I agree with you as I think you know. Most of what you are describing as "belief" came from very flawed science done by Nazis on captive wolves separated from their family units and therefore totally stressed out and acting very much UNLIKE wolves do in the real world... but the results, even though flawed happened to reflect their world view, so it became "real" to them even if flawed. If you want to know how wolves really act in the wild, go read publications put out by researchers at Wolf Park and similar places.
But unfortunately these beliefs have been propagated. And unfortunately also to some extent that type of training can work, even if the reasoning behind it is flawed, which is why military and law enforcement still use it, although there are some around here who have evolved with help of various folks. This is because all 4 quadrants of operant conditioning can work - but that doesn't mean they are necessary (or humane, or "good"). And also most people at home (who watch too much dog training on tv) who do correction based training can't do it with the proper timing, so even though "it could work" they end up screwing up their dogs more then fixing them. Then someone like me ends up having to fix the dog and teach them that not all humans are jerks. But scientifically all the quadrants do work in behavior adjustment (this is why brainwashing works, and why people who are abused can form co-dependent relationships with their abuser). So I am unwilling to say that there is *never ever* a reason to use +P, however I am willing to say I have *never ever* found that reason and hope I never do.
That said, although I will not advocate for it, nor do it, nor am a proponent of it, to be completely transparent and honest - correction based training can give results "faster" when correcting or trying to get "against the grain / against instinct" issues/behaviors if done by someone who actually does it right (and as I said these people are far between and not your average pet owner, the timing of it has to be much more precise then with +R methods) - but it doesn't make it necessary - and it doesn't make it better or produce a better animal IMHO. But we are a culture of "I want it now" types, so they just want their dog to stop jumping on furniture and not go running off, so if the WTF BBQ method "get's r done" they don't give a shit that it also makes their dog not want to really learn anything else, because often these dogs become afraid to try anything new lest they or get zapped, pronged, or choked. That leads to the dog having to be punished to learn more things instead of learning because it's fun to figure out what their owner/trainer wants them to do. But the Nazi's where "I want it now" types, in that they wanted to make a lot of military/attack/guard dogs really quickly. This method worked well for that, even if their logic behind it the "why" of it was flawed. The why is simply psychological, it's got nothing to do with Nazi dominance theory.
I find doing it with just +R (rewards) /-P (taking away things if necessary, IE resource guarding) although it may take longer leads to a dog that is willing and happy to learn new things and can think for itself when necessary. And that's what I want in dogs. You will not find many service dog trainers (none that I have anything to do with) who use +P (corrections) as their primary method if a method at all. We are all about making "thinking dogs" not dogs that are afraid to do anything except for exactly what you taught it to do on command and absolutely nothing else. Yes we want to prevent certain behaviors, but that doesn't mean we want the dog to shut down and not be a creative/thinking/evolving creature. Most of what I teach evolves as kind of a game broken down into tiny steps and then chained together into a complex behavior as each step is mastered. Sometimes the steps are even done backwards from the way the behavior finally ends up because it just works better that way. Every dog here knows if I bring out certain things, it's fun time, and we are going to learn cool stuff and it's awesome.
Dogs evolved to have humans fill the role that mom and dad would do in a wolf pack, as in to give direction. Because dogs were bred to work for us. That's why they exist in all their forms, not because they were cute. It's just becomes a mess when humans do not give the consistent leadership that a mom/dad in a wolf pack do. This leadership is based on respect, on clear and consistently defined boundaries, on understanding "how things work" or "when things happen", and on providing what the dog needs, both physically (food, etc.) and mentally (appropriate jobs/tasks/activities). In this regards the "pack theory" people might have a clue, but the how and why of it is for all the wrong reasons IMHO.
RE: what folks call "alpha roll". If you watch dogs (or wolves) playing in slow motion, you will see that they typically *never touch each other* when you see this behavior start, and if any contact is made it's inadvertent. And you will then typically see another calming signal from the dog that made the inadvertent contact (sniff ground, turn to side, etc). The "roll" is actually instigated by the dog that's "rolling", not the one that folks are calling "alpha". It is simply another kind of calming signal, and this behavior is simply part of play. Making actual contact is aggression, not a calming signal, so by doing what folks think of as "alpha rolling" your dog you are being an aggressor not a play mate. That is not helping your dog learn anything except to fear you. Maybe that's good for some people, but I do not want my dogs to fear me. Respect yes, cooperate with me yes, but not fear me. "Fear is the mind killer" like someone said. I do not want that.
There are some dogs that do have more bossy / dominant personalities (I have one, and I have others that visit or are boarded often). This does not make them alpha as people like to claim, but they may get into skirmishes a less bossy / dominant dog would not get into. It has more to do with breed type and role they were meant to fulfill, which can lead to confusion when you mix a bunch of dogs that don't understand each others behaviors together. They have to "learn" each others behaviors/signals/roles/jobs in the environment you have. One of my dogs simply think most other dogs are dumbasses that have no sense of order, and being a dog who's job is to keep 20 acres of land totally "in order", and make sure everything stays exactly where it should and be as it should... that can cause conflict. But I can introduce any dog to her in 5 minutes and make all things well, because she respects that I know what I'm doing and what I say belongs does belong.
There are also some really messed up dogs that either due to actual brain dysfunction (think inbreeding), or fear issues caused by humans or other dogs will simply go around attacking other dogs or even people seemingly at random (or not so much). That needs to be corrected by a trainer who knows what they are doing, or a vet behaviorist, or in the case of the most severe cases, I would have no issues with removing that dog from the world. There are too many good dogs that need homes to mess with some of the most extreme cases, especially if it's caused by inbreeding/line issues, in which case the dog might end up making even more truly messed up dogs. But again this does not make them "Alpha" dogs looking to claim top spot. They are simply and truly just totally messed up in the head. I've worked with service dogs that were attacked by police dogs and became aggressive / had fear issues, and we have rehabilitated some successfully even when the service dog organization just told the person to "get a new dog". It is possible but YMMV.
There are also some dogs that simply will not get along. Just like there are some people who simply will not get along. They look funny, they smell funny, they dress wrong, whatever... They aren't fighting for top spot, they are fighting because they think the other one is "wrong".
Sometimes if not often, one of them *is* wrong. Take the dog(s) the vet. Sometimes one of them is in pain and reactive because of it (this leads to human bites "out of nowhere" too). Sometimes one of them is having micro seizures, or has thyroid issues, etc. Once they are cleared up then often everything calms down. Sometimes they are simply not socialized well and give off the wrong signals. Working with a behaviorist or trainer can help. You might not notice a 1/5th of a second seizure or that your dog smells funny, but every other dog on the planet will and sometimes they react badly.
(this same behavior is actually what allows seizure alert and diabetic alert dogs to work with people, it's a matter of making the reaction something you WANT).
If not, then the answer is - don't force them to live together.
Anyways, I'm rambling so I will shut up now LOL. EDIT - sorry I keep editing this but I keep thinking of little things to add to it because I'm trying to be thorough and cover all the reasons, and be as honest and open as possible, and not just a whiney +R "your bad and I'm not" type of response that often happens in a thread like this.
Mashini - you so totally rule. Totally agree with everything you've said. I can tell you've explained this before. Nice Job, and thanks for all the editing.
We are so on the same page. I live my dog relations by the old credo: May I only be worthy of my dog's devotion. And it is never the dog, always me messing up and not managing or training.
