Am just reading an article by Trut who now runs the silver fox project, and she made a statement about the age of the fear response developing in domestic dogs varying by breed. I guess I had thought that - presumably in a Belgian it develops earlier than in a Newfy - but I'm now wondering whether breeder or ppl who've raised lots of Koolies have noticed a particular age when it tends to develop in this breed? I imagine that variation by breed might more helpfully be described as variation by type - that related breeds are probably similar in this regard??

Yep well I know Gabby is going through it now as I have told you a few things. I cant remember my other girls going through it. Xena has a few permant ones like the back wipers she is absolutely petrified and will jump to the front and piddle herself but the front ones are fine go figure.LOL
cheers
Danni

I don't know it I'd call it a fear response development.
But many working breeds around 9 months have a confidence stage that one must be aware of, if they are pushed too far, too fast at this point you run the risk of them shutting down permanently, being no good for work ever.

Drover has just entered this stage, before he was fearless and pushed between the sheep and fence or confronted easily without hesitation.

Now he hesitates and is unsure of himself, not to any great degree, but it's there, so I have reduced his training, allowing him only wins and short practises, so as to keep his confidence up.

If last weeks demonstration was any indication of his improvement, I'd say I didn't have anything to worry about, he is again showing a climbing confidence and has begun to take control of the yard again.

I think maybe it's something that if you aren't watching for, you don't really notice, like a lot of developmental stages.

I was actually thinking about the early one - when the first startle responses begin to appear. But there are probably patterns in the way breeds/lines experience the later fear imprint stages too.

I was thinking it would be interesting if breeders collected that kind of data on their pups - age when their eyes opened, age when fear response develops, age when ears started to lift, the age when their ears were fully up, when eyes opened etc. And then over time they might be able to identify patterns. (All these things are important because they relate to the length of the sensitive period for socialisation, it's always better for that to be longer rather than shorter. In the tame foxes, for eg, the fear resp develops at 9wks, while in the not tame strain, it develops at 6 or 7wks, and the tame strain's eyes open days earlier. It's probably one of the things that causes the difference in their behaviour, as well as being a consequence of it.)

I think a lot of people don't realise that pups go through two fear stages. The early one where it is so important to socialise them before 4mths and then the later "teenage" one. Maybe it's just a period when they become much more aware of the world around them a bit like human teenagers!

At what age would wild foxes, wolves become independent? I wonder if they go through the second phase too? Maybe it is more learning based rather than instinctual in this phase. Not thinking too well today due to headache!

Hope your headache is getting better.

Wolves and wild foxes finish their socialisation period by the time they are weaned.
Don't think I understand what you mean by learning based. I have always thought it was related to physical maturation and hormonal development, but now I'm not sure why I think that...

The actual fear response itself they need to protect them once they are old enough to move away from the den, I would think there would be strong natural selection pressure working on that (and this is known to occur later in dogs - who need it to learn to deal with the more complicated and changing world in which they live). But the dodgy patches they go through when they're a bit older, I wonder what is actually happening in their bodies at that time. I wonder whether, say, considering that they all mature physically at different rates, that individual difference makes any difference to when their fear imprint stages occur.

I'm not sure about how the other fear imprinting stages occur in wolves/wild foxes - I wonder whether it has been studied at all (unfortunately the non-tame strain of foxes that have been maintained as the control to the tame foxes are genetically also very different to wild foxes, and so you can't really study them and use that to understand much about the wild ones - being kept near ppl has selected for foxes that can breed under those circumstances, which truly wild foxes do at a much lower rate).

There is this article about a project that raised a group of wolves and dogs and made comparisons to identify what has actually changed in the process of domestication. It's a while since I read it, don't think they talked about fear imprinting. They did find some interesting things though. http://psyc.queensu.ca/ccbr/Vol2/Kubinyi.pdf

I wish there was more research about the development and socialisation of dogs - there has been so little. There is so much actual practice grounded in a fairly small amount of research - Scott and Fuller's work, Pfaffenberger, Michael Fox - that's about all. Which is why I wonder whether breeders could effectively do some of that work themselves. I'm desperate to be a breeder - not sure what I'd do it I didn't have other ppl's litters to drool over and study on here (lol).

Hi KoolieMum,

I have other posts on the forum explaining my beliefs confirmed again today,

I presently have a litter of pup's that are 4 & 1/2 weeks old.

Kim the mum of the litter today seemingly attacked one of the pup's again growling at it and rolling it over with her paw and generally handling this pup very roughly until the pup growled and bit mum on the nose.

I think that pup's are often taken aback when they come across something new but are very inquisitive. they dont leave the welping area until they are 3 to 4 weeks old and venture further every day I think they learn by association and discovery and are taught by mum how to react.

I have often seen mum approach several pup's in a litter head on with head down sort of like showing eye and growling at the pup's as if to be demonstrating how they should approach stock etc I think that this is a learning experience and education for the pup's.

Once the pup's are a bit older I find that they don't have any fear and don't show any self preservation instincts until they are 10 months or older that is the reason that I won't start them on cattle until than.
Before that time the pup's are so gung ho that they would most certainly get hurt if I let them near any cattle


I have had a litter of 8 pup's several years ago when they were 7 weeks old go through an electric fence and round up 30 odd goats and keep them moving from corner to corner in a paddock and was amazed how they all worked together.

My aldult dogs however on occasion get head butted by the same goats.

Jack @ Wilja Koolies

I think the startle is as a result of their developing eyesight, rather than fear, and this makes sense considering that they then do not show fear of the novel item.

Do you take them out of their usual home area very much during that time? I'm wondering whether they would display more sensitivity in response to novel situations during this time. The usual view of development is that there are frequently sensitive periods before 10mths, and around 10mths is one of the more sensitive times. I agree with you that fear can be adaptive and allows young dogs to learn more from their mistakes.

But this is what I was raising - that there is so little research available about this topic, and that at most as breeders individuals can say, this is what happens in my lines and my circumstances.

Hi Again KoolieMum

To answer your question.

My pup's are welped next to a chook pen and can hear these chooks from birth.
I have a welping box with a heat light in it and by 3 weeks they tend to come out of this box but not yet out of the area. I start weening them at 3 weeks and by 4 weeks I leave the gate to the welping area open.

This is to give mum a chance to get away from the pup's and the pup's to start experiencing the outside world.

They will than experience these chooks first hand if I remove the mother as she is still protective of the pup's and would probably eat these chickens.

I often use 1 of my dogs to put these chickens back in which the pup's can watch.

The present litter have been to a dam some 40 metres from where they are housed and this morning walked through the gate into the house block and introduced themselves to some of my other dogs.

They are free to go where they wish but won't go to far yet as they are still experimenting.

If I get a new pup or keep a pup out of one of my own litters I usually take it with me whereever I go for the first 3 weeks and except for the house I mean everywhere to town to mates places and also when Iam working other dogs although the pup would be tethered to me.

I like to have the pup see everything that goes on here.

I believe that the Koolie is so smart that all you really need to do is show it what needs to be done and it will find a way to do it.

I usually when a litter is 6 or 7 weeks old assess them for working ability with the chickens as most people that obtain dogs here for farms leave the decision to me to choose them a pup.

I have sent a video of some 6 week old pup's out of a previous litter working chooks and this was taken the first time they were out with these chooks.
I tried to put it on the forum but was unable to due to size so it is nowe in the hands of the club and I am told that it will be put on the new website they are creating.

I have made this as a lot of people were saying thet Koolies are often not turned on before they are 6 months or older which I disagree with.

I think that mum teaches them when they are pup's and they work straight away.

I hope this is what you wanted.

Jack @ WIlja Koolies

In the meantime, would you be able to put it on Youtube?

Hi again KoolieMum

To carry on from our last discussion.

I was away recently and my wife called to say that the pup's had gone through several electric fences and were working the cattle what should she do?

I said try to call them off before they get hurt if you can if they don't come out of the paddock leave them and go inside.

She ended up going inside as she couldn't call them off.

They ended up bringing my cattle up to the gate nearest the house block.

Jack @ Wilja Koolies

Ok Shandy started hers at about 3 1/2mths old and is still going through it and so is Chance but Drumma Fitz Jax and Ruby are fine and have breezed through it Chance is not to bad but poor shandy has been have a hard time with the fear thing but i must say today i took her Mirra and Dance down to the bottom yards to bring the sheep up for the night i kept Shandy on lead and let her get all stirred up with Mirra and Dance running around playing so by the time we got there Shandy was jumping and pulling on the lead and very worked up wanting to play with the nice big girls, but i did not let Shandy of lead until Dance and Mirra got the sheep out of the old Dairy yards and into the open then i called Dance to me and Quickly let Shandy of and put Dance on lead IT WORKED Shandy went straight to work and forgot about being frightened of every thing but it's still kit gloves around her and i will say it will last for another couple of mths yet Spice went through it and was real bad when she was a pup any dog that barked with in hearing and she would run up the back stairs crying and howling and hide in the house but she has grown up now thank god and got over it and Shandy will to

Koolie Mum
I've been doing some reading of a book about genetics called "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins. It's an oldie but a goodie and I've got an updated edition. Anyways he gets right into the Russian tame fox experiments as an example of how evolution can occur in sudden spurts unlike the long path that was assumed. With the Russian foxes, they are genetically the same as the wild foxes they were descended from as they were remarkably only a few generations away from them (I think that they had made the behavioral and physical changes like going from prick to floppy ears and changed colouring and being afectionate in under 20 years). How it happened though is they just kept selecting the least hostile and fearful from each litter down the line until the had a whole new fox, appearance and behavior wise. What looks to have happened is that the genes for tameness also appear to be related to the genes for certain colurs and patterns and tameness also seems to go with floppy ears etc. What they created I guess is a new "breed" of fox in the way we have created new and wierd breeds of dogs. It's not universal I guess (eg the sharpei for one), but I always ascociate floppy eared dogs unconciously with lack of agressive behavior.

Rottweiler is another one that immediately came to mind (floppy ears). I've met a lot of Rotties and most have been big sooks, yet they have such a bad reputation.

Back to the fear development. Paxy has been having some fear periods in the last little while. She still gets her hackles up on the approach of running dogs. And today whilst playing with some littles even when play bowing she still had them up! Some new experiences lately have been walking along a jetty with large white bollards - she kept baulking and starting to bark but with encouragement and some treats we walked all the way along the jetty to the edge where she found some left over bait! Did manage to get that off her but she was fine on the walk back. Also met a boat dragged up on the shore of the lake on the weekend. Something that is not usually there. We walked up to it, she kept spooking so lots of encouragement she started to investigate and waded into the water to have a look. She's nearly 1 year now.

The copy of The Selfish Gene I read early last yr didn't have anyything in it about the Silver Foxes, would be interested in what Dawkins had to say about it. He's such an interesting thinker on evolution.

I'm inclined to stick with the explanation that floppy ears are an aspect of physical neotony, and are more likely to occur with increased behavioural neotony, which is probably what has historically been selected for more powerfully than any other characteristic in domestic dogs. But one thing that the Silver Fox work points to is that these changes occur within populations that become more neotonised over-all, rather than necessarily to the most (behaviourally) neotonised individuals. They still have relatively few animals that have modified appearances, and all the footage I've seen of desperately human-oriented individuals do not have obviously modified appearance (although there is research going on into the more subtle physical modifications - I think work on skull measurements has been published - I had to return to the library the book where I think I read that paper - and they are working on consistencies and changes to other body measurements).

Has anyone ever heard of stress testing your pups starting very early before they evn have there eyes open. I always thought it was a load of crock and thought well there is not point but the last three litters that we have had I have done it and I think it may actually work. I read somewhere I cant remember were I read it or got it from but anyways it is very simple really I read that people will hold there pups around the waste safely of course so they cant get away and swing them around and stuff in which I didnt feel comfortable with at all so i did some more research in to it and sorry but I can not for the life of me remember were I read it sorry but all they do instead of swinging them around is hold them around there belly like securely and safely and so they can kick there legs a bit and hold them there for about I only do it for 10 to 15 seconds and all that it sayd you are doing to them is getting them used to a bit of stress. they will kick a bit for a couple of seconds ut after about 5 seconds they stop whimpering and kicking and basically just stop and relax. After the 15 seconds roughly I dont time it I give them a cuddle and a pat and say good girl and good boy and go on to the next one. But we have found in some observing that these pups arent so prone to being scared of storms or anything like that. I may be way of base here and sorry if this seems cruel to some but I believe it is working. I have had some phone calls from owners of our pups who have said they havent had any trouble with these pups and stress in which a lot of the owners have had trouble with other pups they have had before. All of this may be coinscidence but it know it doesnt hurt the pups in any way and only takes a little bit of time and yeah I have had a lot of comments about these pups being excellent in stressful situations. Sorry I am rambling again. I was really wondering if anyone has heard of this being done before or of they do it aswell. Like I said though I coldnt do the whole swinging around thing as I just could bring mtself to do that really. But just letting them kick and stress a small ammount wondering if that does actally work and I only do it for a few weeks until they have there eyes open and then they are moving around and stuff. Just a question.

Sounds like 'early neurological stimulation'. http://www.breedingbetterdogs.com/achiever.html, http://www.puppyprodigies.com/Early%20Lear...L%20STIMULATION
Lots of ppl seem to be getting good results with this, and like many things when it comes to breeding, it is worthwhile taking what feels like a risk (usually only because you haven't done it before) and then monitoring what happens with those pups. Of course it isn't possible, with the small numbers an individual breeder produces, to know for sure whether any particular thing that happened to the pups had an effect on any particular aspect of their behaviour as adults, but if it *seems* to help, and doesn't seem to harm, I'd say great, keep it up. Breeders who handle pups more in general seem usually to produce pups that are more human-social and tolerant.

Looking at Puppy Prodigies again, haven't for ages, interested to see 'biotinus testing' (above ens). Many yrs ago a trainer explained something I guess is similar to me - I think it was just moving the pups away from Mum, and watching how fast they moved back to her. It could indicate lots of things, such as size and health, but he believed a fast return to the dam was strongly correlated with high drive and perseverance.

Bluedog it is interesting about Paxy and her hackles. With Zorro (my last dog) his hackles always came up when he met another dog, but he was mostly in play mode with his other body language full play bow and everything. I tried to find answers regarding it but couldn't. Asked vets and researched on the internet but nothing. If you find an answer to this quirk I would be most interested to hear it.

All the rotties that I have met have been sooks. Two were therapy dogs for disabled children, autistic children responded especially well to the great big boofers. Floppy ears I guess look cute and maybe that is why people associate it with non aggressive behaviour, it is similar to dogs with forward facing large eyes.

You know what, you're right, it's not the Selfish Gene, it's in The Ancestors Tale. I'm reading them both together on and off. I'll hunt out what he says or try and find a version on the net or a you tube.

OK, I found this, not sure where it's from but there's some floppy eared and exotically couloured ones in there, and an explanation. http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=enrLSfxTqZ0

I think Dawkins main point is that evolution can happen very suddenly rather than new species and genus taking thousands of years to develop as previously assumed.

Ok, I'll have a look for it. I'm so bored and desperately waiting to get back to uni, I'm looking for interesting, challenging things to read.

I've got all the Silver Fox clips I have been able to find in a playlist here... http://au.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=1CB9D843B1340C29
The tame fox they 'test' here looks wild. It's showing of its tameness more than any of the others I've seen. http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=mzTcmE-pMLU&...C29&index=0

These are the stats on some of the changes (the number of animals with the characteristic, per million - the 1st number is the number within the bred-tame population, the second in the non-modified population)...
white spotting - 12400, 710 (1600% increase), brown mottling - 450, 86 (460%), gray hairs - 500, 100 (500%), short tail - 140, 2 (6900%), circle tail - 9400, 830 (1033%). When I first saw these numbers, I was struck by the relatively small number of animals that were modified, and how the obvious physical changes did not correlate with the changes in behaviour particularly neatly (many more animals than this have changed behaviour). Have you read this article by Trut? http://www.floridalupine.org/publications/...t-fox-study.pdf

Hackles is associated with arousal. It occurs when some dogs are behaving aggressively because they are then highly aroused, but it is not the aggro itself that is causing them to do it. It can also occur when a dog is aroused in play. In general, it's not considered a 'good sign' in any kind of intereaction because a dog as aroused as that (and who tends to get as aroused as that) is closer to losing control of its behaviour, and is probably just being a bit ott.

With the stats on the modifications to tame/wild foxes, with those kind of increases and given the breeding rate of foxes, (I'm not great at math) but very quickly the numbers will start to increase exponentially, it would be slowed down though if you were still just picking out the tamest of the tame to breed with, but after a certain point you would tip the balance in your favour and not have to breed selectively.

Koolie Mum, the Ancestors tale is a fantastic read, and I'm sure that's where I saw Dawkins talk about evolution occuring in short spurts, but it may have been somewhere else, maybe a tame fox you tube ha ha.

Koolie Mum
Loved the Trut article! As you're so bored I dug this up by Dawkins http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_out_of_Eden I have it in PDF on the computer, but no weblink :)

Thanks for that file, looks really interesting.

Yes, I guess that there's a pretty good chance, if the theory is right, that our ancestors started selecting their dogs based on looks fairly quickly (and there is a complex feedback loop associated with a puppy being appealing to humans - good looking pups get more handling, so may then appear 'nicer' in behaviour as well), and that would have quickly changed what happened to the population, compared to the fox work were at least the main strains are still being selected for behaviour. Considering how interested humans usually seem to be in the looks of their dogs (I believe there aren't many situations in which dogs are selectively bred in the world where looks is not an important consideration for the majority of breeders, even working breeds, the dogs are usually selected to look some particular way.) Perhaps this is one of the reasons that domestication is as limited in it's behavioural effects as it is? (I think some of these foxes look more ppl-oriented than a lot of dogs would, who had been raised in similar, impoverished situations, with minimal handling.) I'm not sure who it was who I was reading a while back about resource guarding. This person was talking about how it appeared that resource guarding had not historically been selected against at nearly the level of certain other behaviours that had reduced much more in the wolf to modern dog transition. It seems that some aspects of wildness have not reduced as much as they might have, if breeders had historically set out to reduce them as much as they were able.

I see it could have gone another way too, which is early dogs were selected for behaviour (or in the alternate the less hostile and wary ones would come in closer to the humans to scavenge food and would therefore be available to breed) as the humans saw uses for them. Their appearance began to change as a result and when they were just handy old dogs the human need for aesthetics moved in and they started refining the looks into many different kinds. Also there is the human need to infantalise things as well which is why cutsie lap dogs came along.

The Dawkins book above is like a summary of his last few. He has a really ruthless view on genes in that he sees living creatures as being just the temporary carrier of a set of genes, and so long as you get to pass the parcel so to speak, it doesn't matter what becomes of you. I guess it's true really. We are just digital coding photocopying itself I guess. I love it!

DNA in all the test results it looks like a barcode!

With regard to resource guarding, I think I read the other day in some text that there is some evidence that the closer a link with the wolf the more likely the dog to resource guard.

Even when we're looking at pics of Royalla's, Trentrenae's or JackieH's pups we pick our favs on looks first - or at least I am.lol!! I don't know anything about their individual temperaments just judging from the photos but I think that is how most of us are programmed anyhow. I think there are now numerous studies on how humans usually pick symetrical faces with more infantile features over asymetric faces.

This topic is a real good one. I am reading all of it and I am really interested in all of it. I was very impressed with Jacks 6 weeks old pups bringing the cattle in. They were game werent they. Our pups are up at our sheep yards at 6 weeks and they are in with our pet sheep basically just haven a bit of fun and 90% of the time they are pretty keen to chase and look at them and they ahve a ball and the sheep are really good with them. They will look at them and I sware some times when they look at these little pups they say what are these half pints. It is really interesting ho our sheep respond differently to the young young pups than to a pup that is 12 weeks and a bit bigger. We used to have chooks and we have talked about geting some more. In which I am thinking is a really good idea for the pups really. Anyways all our pups that are around 6 weeks go for drives ith us on the back of the ute. We put our herdles on the back of the ute so they cant fall off an they think it is the bees knees. Anyways that is what we do. But keep writing in this topic as I am so interested. Well done all

Just reading your post Bluedog about picking dogs on how they look in the face. Well the photo I picked of Ceejay when TJ sent the photo was of her bottom, that was all that was poking up in the photo (I had a chuckle from your post and thought I would share). But yes even though you try not to be influenced by looks whether it is human or canine you do. I know subconsciously we also do it by scent with the human species, can you imagine what a dog would pick up with their scent skills.

I am yet to read the article will sit down tonight and have a browse through.

I actually never saw Paxy's face either!

What an interesting idea. Were they distinguishing between dogs that guard from ppl and from dogs? My Foxy would guard very seriously from dogs, but I don't remember her ever guarding anything from me (or any other person). Wal used to guard from ppl as well as dogs, but I haven't seen him do so for yrs. Although now I am soooo careful about it, and no doubt read him much better than I used to, so my behaviour probably also averts it, as well as any change in him (and he no longer lives with another dog, so is less likely to redirect his guarding from them onto ppl).

Yes, that's exactly what I've been thinking about. Imo, so much of human interaction is based on what we think the physical appearance of another says about their behaviour and personality.

Mine guard automatically from both. It is both a blessing and a curse, particularly combined with Jacksys leash reactivity. I am making some headway with both with this crazy method I've kind of worked out for myself...I don't know whether it's dog training best practice, but there you go. We admit we three are a dysfunctional household ;)

A Koolie I know (although haven't seen her for ages) apparently guards water from the other dogs she lives with.

Shaunagh - in what way is the guarding a benefit? I'm curious about owners experience with it, because maybe there is some benefit associated with it to counter the negative effects and explain why it has not been selected against more strongly. Guarding from dogs seems a more neutral characteristic, though, I would not expect there to be the level of motivation to reduce it in the population.

I'm interested also in the relationship between guarding and sociability. I'm thinking around the idea that it might be like aggression in general - that aggression increases as sociability increases (between species). Group living animals need it and use it more, and have more strategies for using it, including ritualized behaviours. Comparing cats and dogs say, cats are much less competent at guarding their food and will usually just move away from it if challenged for it, perhaps because their group living strategies relate to their history of living with ppl (who historically haven't really competed with them for food, cats mostly having fed themselves) rather than other cats.

OK, I need to think more about this but for now here is what I have. My dogs are the most loving, affectionate kissy kissy (with me and with each other, and with any person or dog they get to know) animals in the world,at HOME. Out and about they are not at all interested in other dogs or socialising, only in doing stuff, like tennis and tracking. In short they are doers. They live in the city, but if they were in the country they would be doing traditional work-and be mighty dedicated (Dam and sire came off a mixed stock farm). This is the source of Jacksys leash pulling. He knows we are going out to "go-go-go"(even when unfortunately it's just to the chemist to get tied up). He flicks back and forward with excitement in the car too-same reason. So that is his source of his nutsiness-and it's fair enough too.

Having said that, out and about he is quite well behaved with other dogs, but he does this up and down silent patrol thing. To give an example (the newcastle peeps will know what I'm saying) he "patrols" silently and diligently and without obvious aggro, our spot at Horseshoe beach. No one or their dog ever sits near us because the Constable is just up and down, gettin' behind and movin' them along-but he gives no offence, he isn't aggro, just persistent.

Alby is a shocker out and about, and rotton and aggro in the car (it's getting better thankfully). Any dog that comes near our game or spot gets upward heckles and aggro. He plants his face on the car window if he even sees another dog on the road. So far it has never ended badly, it goes to a bit of bum sniffing and life goes on, but he does make a scene. What I am really worried about is a bloody big mad dog calling his bluff and both of my dogs getting hurt (because Jacksy always comes in to back Alby up). Mind you, the two together are pretty formidable.....

Anyway, as for home, Jacksy starts it. He will not tolerate anyone crossing the front of the house, postmen, other dogs, peeps in general too slow to move on, and both fang it out the back if they hear something in the back lane. Thank God they are not chronis or repetative barkers.

I live in the inner city and am glad of the security. So is the lady next door. I simply keep the front door shut to minimise drama from normal pedestrain traffic HOWEVER, like anyone I would like to get the odd pizza delivered without having to lock the dogs out the back, yanno. My dogs would not hurt another dog out and about, their stuff is all show-but I would like them to calm the hell down sometimes and walk a bit more leisurely on the leish.

Now, half the problem with the leish is they compete with each other to get ahead (and Alby does his block if he sees another dog). I never take them out seperately as there is too much tragedy and grief for the one left at home, plus they play together in a workery kind of way. I confess they have never been separated since Alby came (they are genetic full brothers too so there is a lot of survival benefit to them sticking together too, (according to Dawkins ha ha)and they get distressed when separated.

Just for your info, I've actually looked at your site and the training material, and distracting with food rewards doesn't work. They couldn't care less about treats. Their biggest motivation is keeping our little show together. Anyway. That's my guys. God luv 'em!

Are you sure it was in my stuff? Can't think where I talked about using treats to distract dogs on my site, that's not usually how I would recommend they be used. Actually, I don't think there's anywhere on my site where using treats is mentioned at all??

I can see we've got our wires a bit crossed about the guarding - I was thinking about dogs guarding their stuff from others, rather than property guarding. When they are guarding ppl and other dogs from others it is more complicated to be sure of the motivation, but I do believe it is very often a form of resource guarding (although a more complicated form than a dog simply defending its food or toys).

Yeah, maybe not yours. I got a fact sheet on distracting from reactive leish behavior from somewhere and it was from somewhere reputable from the UCLA Berkely, thought I may have got the link from your site which is pretty informative, but maybe not. The upshot was that you should distract with high end rewards like liver treats when your dog starts to get gnarley on leish when it sees another dog. Anyway, didn't work with mine!



Oh Alby also guards his toys from other dogs. Thankfully neither are food possesive.

I put a link on here to the Berkley article about teaching a positive interrupt. They do mention using distraction, but the reason I think it's a good article is because of the interrupt and name that dog. I like both those strategies very much.

That's right, the positive interupt and name the dog. I'm going to have to find something other than treats to link the interupt with because they are not in the mood for treats when out and about, but name the dog has been working with Alby (a bit). Need to do more on it.

Wal neither, a lot of places. If dogs are into toys/balls they're great, because they tend to have such a passion for them. But I have also used running away (for owners who are althetic enough). I do use that quite a lot for Wal - I think it's great for herding dogs. The dog will then hopefully expect you to take off when they hear the cue, and so look at you when you say it.

But Wal would also prefer to get out of most difficult situations (I think most dogs would), and I've found that if I do it early enough (before he actually starts acting up, when he's first starting to tell me he's not happy), just walking away from it with me is actually very rewarding for him, without actually needing to engage or build any high level of 'drive' in response to the interrupt cue. I'm actually inclined to think that rewards that build that high level of excitement in the dog (toys, play, chasing the owner) are a bit more risky in a situation that involves risk of aggro behaviour - that the dog might redirect some of that excitement in ways you'd prefer they didn't. Although I haven't actually seen a dog do that, I think it's possible.