# Dominance issues...what am I doing wrong?



## rosemaryninja (Sep 28, 2007)

I know this is long, but please read.

I posted a couple of weeks ago about my two female dogs humping each other. I did follow the advice given , but it seems the problem persists.

Just to refresh: I have a 9 year old beagle (Spunky) and a 7 year old one (Honey), both girls. Every day I bring them out walking for about 30-45 minutes, then bring them back for a 10-15 minute training session. The dogs behave (relatively) well on both the walk and the training, but towards the end of training, Spunky will start trying to hump Honey like mad. No matter how many times I pull her back and say "No", she is just never dissuaded. It's odd, because she is usually the more obedient of the two, and a "No" will stop her from doing almost anything, but not this. I pull her back, say "No" firmly, then once I let her go, she's back at it. When I pull her back and try to hold her by the collar till she's calm, she just barks, and barks, and barks. At me, at Honey...and it's a real frustrated bark. Even when she stops and is calm, and I praise her, that seems to trigger it off all over again.

It's almost definitely a dominance issue. Although there is no flatout aggression, there is a lot of Spunky putting her head over Honey's back/neck, or her paws up on Honey's back, and of course the humping.

This has only started happening in the last couple of months, and I think that coincides with me only starting to walk and train with treats in the last couple of months. Spunky used to have minor food-aggression but that was dealt with YEARS ago and I have never seen it since, I can now pick up her bowl and take it away when she's eating or reach into her bowl with my fingers and not even get a growl. 

I don't know much about dog psychology but I keep getting this "vibe" that Spunky is jealous of Honey. A couple of months ago I started bringing a small bag of kibble with me on walks...this was actually to combat a little bit of dog-aggression that Honey had (but is much better). Nevertheless, I bring the treats along to distract her *just in case* and I also stop at random intervals to make them sit-stay in different environments. Now, Honey is great at this, but Spunky's not so. She gets it eventually but Honey is the one who gets her butt on the floor first. So, Honey gets rewarded first. I don't know if this is the right or wrong thing I'm doing. Spunky has always been more "dominant" over Honey but is she frustrated that now Honey eats first? 

Is that also why, when I try to hold Spunky back from humping Honey, she gets so frustrated, because she thinks I'm protecting Honey even more? There is no favouritism shown towards Honey at all, except for ONE household member (out for 4) who doesn't even make it that obvious. 

Any help at all is appreciated.


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

most people will say to ignore bad behavior and it will stop or making hand signals.

me, a quick spat gets attention real fast and has more effect. but thats all up to you and how long you want to deal with them doing that.


----------



## MegaMuttMom (Sep 15, 2007)

How does Honey react to Sparky's humping? Why is it improtant for this to stop? Is it important to you or Honey? We meet up in the woods with a pair of English Bulldogs and every time, the one dog humps the other, seemingly saying, this dog is mine. The one being humped couldn't care less. So what if one is dominant???? Are they fighting over it?


----------



## rosemaryninja (Sep 28, 2007)

MegaMuttMom said:


> How does Honey react to Sparky's humping? Why is it improtant for this to stop? Is it important to you or Honey? We meet up in the woods with a pair of English Bulldogs and every time, the one dog humps the other, seemingly saying, this dog is mine. The one being humped couldn't care less. So what if one is dominant???? Are they fighting over it?


There is no fighting but Honey obviously doesn't like it. She will bark while being humped, and not in the typical beagle baying way, in the way that says something is wrong, or something is going on and she doesn't like it. She will also try to escape whenever she can and dash away; Spunky will give chase until she catches her. There is just generally a lot of agitation and unpleasantness.

Other than this half-hour window of humping every day, the two dogs are as thick as thieves...cuddle up together at night, play with each other, etc. 

Over the next few days I'm gonna try mixing up the sequences of the walking and training. I've been walking, then training...but maybe tomorrow, I'll train, then walk; or I'll do both activities completely independent of each other. Honestly, I don't understand what is going on between my dogs so I'm not sure how I can solve this.


----------



## MegaMuttMom (Sep 15, 2007)

Sounds to me like they are able to work it out between themselves if they get along so well most of the time. Your getting in the middle might just confuse the whole issue for them. I would just ignore it.


----------



## rosemaryninja (Sep 28, 2007)

It's not really something that's easy to ignore...Honey is yelping, racing around the garden and the kitchen (which has smooth tiled floors, and the last time she ran down such floors at this speed, she ended up slipping and hurting herself pretty badly). Spunky, in the meantime, is barking out of frustration and chasing Honey around. And beagles have a LOUD bark. 

Honestly, with the amount of anxiety it's causing Honey and the amount of frustration it's causing in Spunky...even if it were something I could cover my ears and ignore, I'm not too sure I'd WANT to.


----------



## MegaMuttMom (Sep 15, 2007)

Would it make sense to realease Honey from the training session first by putting her inside or in her crate or whatever. Then do some more work with Spunky so he is focused on you for a few more minutes and getting more attention and treats for doing the right thing? Since Honey always sits faster, maybe Spunky could use the extra work, I know how much my dog loves training when we are one-on-one and focused on how he can get those treats! Just an idea.


----------



## battlemonkey (Oct 14, 2007)

This isn't really something that should be ignored. Dominance can be something that might trigger a fight one day should another dog come around and try to do that to her. It's a behavior that should be stopped, and what the other member has suggested is a good idea. One-on-one training is a good way to have your dog focused on you. 

Also, when the humper is humping the humpee (sorry, had to...), I would suggest pulling her off and tagging her to the ground in a submissive pose so that the less dominant (sorry, don't remember which dog is the dominant one here) one is standing beside her, letting her know that she is above her and this behavior will not be tolerated. A quick hand bite from you and gently pinning her to the ground might let her know that you are the boss and not her. At this point, she is letting you know that she is the boss by being dominant, since you cannot do such a thing, she knows she rules the roost.

Maybe somebody else has some input on this.


----------



## Ixala (Aug 24, 2007)

battlemonkey said:


> One-on-one training is a good way to have your dog focused on you.


I wholeheartedly agree with this! Take the dogs walking together, then put one away and train them separately! 

They should not be trained together until they can keep focus on you. Train them independently, for now. Try them together again after a while to see if they can stay focused on you.

I'd also be worried that there is a growing problem which looks somewhat innocent now, but could easily grow out of control. It's a great idea to manage the situation now, before issues deepen. I'd be very thoughtful and extra judicious about those treats for a while.


----------



## MegaMuttMom (Sep 15, 2007)

I have trouble with the pinning thing. A dog who is humping for dominance, I believe, is not a truly dominant (alpha) dog but an insecure dog that is trying to establish position. The pinning may inflame the situation. The dogs seem to have a balnced relationship at any other time so I would focus on ending the training sessions in a positive way for both dogs. I stand by my last post.


----------



## Alpha (Aug 24, 2006)

Hades would try to hump Roxy every now again in rough play because he would get too excited  

Roxy's an eager one to correct, so I'd let her correct him, once, maybe twice, and then I'm stepping in.

The rule we've instated a few months ago was: If the "victim" is clearly a victim, and is uncomfortable with the situation, and 1) Doesn't correct for whatever reasons, fear of the other dog 2) The correction isn't working; it's time for me to step in.

Like when my dogs eat, I stand between them, and no one even LOOKS at each other. It's not allowed. Period. Everyone keeps their head down in their bowl to their down. THis way, everyone feels safe, and comfortable when they're eating.

If she's being really persistent, and time outs and verbal corrections aren't working, I might put a tab on her and give her a leash pop as you take her away from Honey and place her in a down stay a few feet away.

Then continue working with Honey. Every two minutes or so, go and reward Spunky for her down stay. Then release her. If she starts humping Honey again, grab her tab, give her a quick pop, "NO!", then back to the down stay.

The key with any type of correction is to be consistent, and two, if it isn't working, figure out why. Is Spunky just too driven to hump Honey and a verbal aversive doesn't over ride that desire? Are you perhaps sometimes inconsistent withe correction, sometimes letting the humping slide? Or could a be a bigger thing, like Spunky perhaps respects you on the whole, when there isn't anything that she REALLY wants to do, but she just isn't bothered by your corrections in this specific situation.

The key with what I mentioned, with the tab on the collar and placing her in a down stay is, NO TALKING other than that "No" of course 

By making confident, clear moves, giving her a quick pop, telling her firmly "No!", and placing her down stay, than leaving her alone, your message to Spunky is: This just isn't happening, no way, no how.

Maybe she'll break the down stay two or three times in a row, but if your consistent, get in there and take her right back to the place she broke, without talking, just "No!", she'll figure it out, it's just not sliding this time.

Good luck


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

battlemonkey said:


> This isn't really something that should be ignored. Dominance can be something that might trigger a fight one day should another dog come around and try to do that to her. It's a behavior that should be stopped, and what the other member has suggested is a good idea. One-on-one training is a good way to have your dog focused on you.
> 
> Also, when the humper is humping the humpee (sorry, had to...), I would suggest pulling her off and tagging her to the ground in a submissive pose so that the less dominant (sorry, don't remember which dog is the dominant one here) one is standing beside her, letting her know that she is above her and this behavior will not be tolerated. A quick hand bite from you and gently pinning her to the ground might let her know that you are the boss and not her. At this point, she is letting you know that she is the boss by being dominant, since you cannot do such a thing, she knows she rules the roost.
> 
> Maybe somebody else has some input on this.


i agree with the pinning, i did alot of reading and dogs understand that trick, non threatening of course.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

battlemonkey said:


> Dominance can be something that might trigger a fight one day should another dog come around and try to do that to her.


How can dominance trigger a fight?



> Also, when the humper is humping the humpee (sorry, had to...), I would suggest pulling her off and tagging her to the ground in a submissive pose so that the less dominant (sorry, don't remember which dog is the dominant one here) one is standing beside her, letting her know that she is above her and this behavior will not be tolerated.


Why would you put the dog into a submissive position?



> A quick hand bite from you and gently pinning her to the ground might let her know that you are the boss and not her.


How would you know that she understands this? What's important about being the "boss"? How would it help the relationship between the dogs?



> At this point, she is letting you know that she is the boss by being dominant, since you cannot do such a thing, she knows she rules the roost.


So is dominance a trait? How is a dog dominant? What does dominance look like?



ar3151 said:


> i agree with the pinning, i did alot of reading and dogs understand that trick, non threatening of course.


How and why would dogs understand this?


----------



## TooneyDogs (Aug 6, 2007)

I read this differently than most. I don't think it's a dominance issue in the traditional sense. You said this happens after training. I suspect it's done to relieve stress. Some dogs do the zoomies (high speed running) around the room to relieve the stress of training, others bounce and jump and I think yours has a different way.


----------



## rosemaryninja (Sep 28, 2007)

Thank you all so much for your replies.

That's the thing - I don't know how to solve it because I don't even know what's going on with Spunky. I don't know if she has an issue with me, or with Honey, or with the training. 

I don't make them jump through hoops or anything, it's just a short period of sit-stays and things as simple as that. I've been doing these exercises with Spunky since she was 2 months old! I've tried varying the lengths of training time too and it doesn't seem to matter. Always, near the end of the training, Spunky will start. 

I'm very, very reluctant to pin my dog. I'm not assured of its effectiveness and I wouldn't even know how to go about doing it properly. Spunky knows I don't like what she's doing, she understands "No!" and like I said, it works every time...for everything else. I have never seen her this disobedient; she just does not listen to anything I say. I time her out, she barks her head off and once the timeout is done she's right back at the mounting. And it's hard enough for me to get her in a sit when she's so riled up, let alone a down-stay.

And, if it really is a jealousy issue with Honey, won't it be worse if I give her a timeout/down-stay her a few feet away and keep working with and giving attention to Honey?


----------



## TooneyDogs (Aug 6, 2007)

rosemaryninja said:


> Thank you all so much for your replies.
> 
> That's the thing - I don't know how to solve it because I don't even know what's going on with Spunky. I don't know if she has an issue with me, or with Honey, or with the training.


Do you see any signs of stress while training? Licking of the lips, ears back, legs shaking, frantic, 'big eyed' looks left and right, sweating paws, hesitancy in responding to commands? 



> I'm very, very reluctant to pin my dog. I'm not assured of its effectiveness and I wouldn't even know how to go about doing it properly. Spunky knows I don't like what she's doing, she understands "No!" and like I said, it works every time...for everything else. I have never seen her this disobedient; she just does not listen to anything I say. I time her out, she barks her head off and once the timeout is done she's right back at the mounting. And it's hard enough for me to get her in a sit when she's so riled up, let alone a down-stay
> 
> And, if it really is a jealousy issue with Honey, won't it be worse if I give her a timeout/down-stay her a few feet away and keep working with and giving attention to Honey?


Don't correct, pin or give timeouts. 'Talking back' is another sign of stress and frustration. As suggested earlier, work the dogs separately and out of view from each other. I suggest you work Spunky first. Give the non-working dog a chewy, a Kong or a Buster Cube to keep it occupied then, switch dogs. After the training, no party, no pressure, keep it low key and just go about your business. Working Spunky first gives her a chance to relax and chew which relieves stress while you work with Honey. See if that makes a difference.


----------



## Love's_Sophie (Sep 23, 2007)

rosemaryninja said:


> There is no fighting but Honey obviously doesn't like it. She will bark while being humped, and not in the typical beagle baying way, in the way that says something is wrong, or something is going on and she doesn't like it. She will also try to escape whenever she can and dash away; Spunky will give chase until she catches her. There is just generally a lot of agitation and unpleasantness.
> 
> Other than this half-hour window of humping every day, the two dogs are as thick as thieves...cuddle up together at night, play with each other, etc.
> 
> Over the next few days I'm gonna try mixing up the sequences of the walking and training. I've been walking, then training...but maybe tomorrow, I'll train, then walk; or I'll do both activities completely independent of each other. Honestly, I don't understand what is going on between my dogs so I'm not sure how I can solve this.



Perhaps, then, when you do get home from these walks, separate them; work them both individually so you have each dogs attention and individual affections. Work with Spunky first. Then work with Honey. 

Then take them into the yard (if it's fenced) and have Spunky on a long line (no less than 30ft) and if she starts going after Honey, simply grab up the lead and take her inside, and put her up in her crate; no words, no nothing, just put her up to chill out for a while. Cover her crate up if you have to, so she gets the idea that she has to be quiet; then wait for her to simmer down, let her out, give her some individual time again, and then let her be with Honey once more; keep up the cycle until she reconciles to the fact that she neededn't be so 'frustrating' to Honey after your walks, and work times. 

Perhaps it is time to consult a professional though...it sounds like an anxiety issue, and you may need some hands on help to solve it.


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> How and why would dogs understand this?



doing research like people said to do. it was recommended.

because thats whats dogs know since they are dogs?

actually works, my 11 month old was waaaay too rowdy last night and she wouldnt listen to me or my girl, i got her and laid her down and she looked away and calmed down. no swatting or extreme yelling. 

i meant to ask you curbside, is elsa your only baby?


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

ar3151 said:


> doing research like people said to do. it was recommended.


Perhaps you should do more research. One of the supporters and early users of this technique were the Monks of New Skete. Strangely enough the Monks of New Skete no longer recommend this technique. 



> because thats whats dogs know since they are dogs?


What do dogs know from the technique?



> actually works, my 11 month old was waaaay too rowdy last night and she wouldnt listen to me or my girl, i got her and laid her down and she looked away and calmed down. no swatting or extreme yelling.


I do appreciate anecdotal evidence, but anecdotal evidence does not give reason to advocate such techniques.



> i meant to ask you curbside, is elsa your only baby?


Elsa's not my baby, and I'm not sure what this question has to do with the topic. But if you're asking if Elsa is my only dog, yes, Elsa is the only dog I care for at the moment. And before you make any assumptions, I'm not foreign to multiple dog homes.


----------



## rosemaryninja (Sep 28, 2007)

Sorry, I'm not going to alpha roll my dog. Spunky understands a firm "No!" as well as she would understand me rolling her onto her back, and I'm much more confident of doing the first one correctly.

Well, today I brought them out for a walk together, then got back and trained them separately. We have a gate separating two portions of our garden so Spunky was on one side and Honey was on the other. I worked with Spunky first...out of sight of the other dog, but I'm sure the other one could still hear/smell me. 

After that I put Spunky on a leash. I don't have a particularly long leash, and I don't think I've ever seen one that long in pet stores. At first, I held on to the leash. I let Spunky go where she wanted to go for the most part. When she tried to mount Honey, I would jerk the leash, pulling her away and saying "No". She tried a couple of times, yelled a little bit. Finally she sort of calmed down. I let go of the leash, so it was trailing behind her. She kept trying, and I kept stopping her. When she seemed to be alright, I took the leash off completely. I watched her for about 20 minutes after that, she would try but a "No" would stop her, and finally she just stopped.

So basically, progress has been made, but she's still putting up a good effort. Am I going to have to watch her for 20 minutes after every training session or is she ever going to get the idea?

-EDIT-
Oh yeah, and my dogs don't like chew toys. I don't know why. After two years they just stop chewing anything at all. They will only ever chew something if they can actually eat it.


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> Perhaps you should do more research. One of the supporters and early users of this technique were the Monks of New Skete. Strangely enough the Monks of New Skete no longer recommend this technique.
> 
> 
> What do dogs know from the technique?
> ...



first im not like most of the people here, i dont make assumptions about other peoples animals or training technics. so please dont try to put me in that category, not once have i hinted of questioning you.

i have agreed to what 2-3 other people said, and as i expected im the only one that gets the whole "anecdotal evidence", but thats ok. from what it sounds like you have a personal issue with me? if that is the case lets openly talk about it. but always trying to point out someones flaws does not show strong character. 

we both have researched and read things, but who really is here to say what is right and what is wrong? we can be open minded or closed, personally i like to hear and see both sides, i cant really say the same....




rosemaryninja - im glad to see your making progress, i wish you best of luck on getting the subject worked out.


----------



## TooneyDogs (Aug 6, 2007)

rosemaryninja said:


> Sorry,
> So basically, progress has been made, but she's still putting up a good effort. Am I going to have to watch her for 20 minutes after every training session or is she ever going to get the idea?
> 
> Yes. Part of the problem is that it has become a habit and that's why you need a diversion/new activity. See below.
> ...


Try a Kong filled with peanut butter, cheese cubes or a Buster Cube filled with Cheerios (not the best but, they work well).


----------



## rosemaryninja (Sep 28, 2007)

I am gonna try to buy them a Kong tomorrow...

I'll just buy one, yeah? Since one will be working with me and one will be chewing...I don't think I will leave it out all the time for them to play with.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

ar3151 said:


> from what it sounds like you have a personal issue with me? if that is the case lets openly talk about it. but always trying to point out someones flaws does not show strong character.


I think you're misunderstanding *why* I pose these questions. I don't know you, I don't plan on knowing you, therefore, I have no personal opinions of you, or your flaws...if you have any. But if you're asking, I'm not perfect, but for you to question my character is a personal matter, it's out of place, and not open for debate. 

*Why* I pose these questions because I am not biased with common thought. I pose these questions because I find certain *ideas* harmful to, the topic *we* are discussing, dogs. I pose these questions because mind viruses exist, and they are propagated on these forum, often without question. So I *will* question them. If you are as open minded to ideas as you believe, you'd appreciate that. 

So before you accuse me of *wanting* to point out someone's flaws, perhaps you should understand *why* I question certain ideas. Alpha rolling btw, is an idea I always question, and even if you were my beloved mother, I'd point out your "flaw". And my mother wouldn't have raised her son to do anything less.

So, if you're capable of discussing these ideas, we won't be exposing our flaws...we'll be discussing ideas. I assume you're capable. Otherwise, I'm sure others can make their own conclusions.


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> I think you're misunderstanding *why* I pose these questions. I don't know you, I don't plan on knowing you, therefore, I have no personal opinions of you, or your flaws...if you have any. But if you're asking, I'm not perfect, but for you to question my character is a personal matter, it's out of place, and not open for debate.
> 
> *Why* I pose these questions because I am not biased with common thought. I pose these questions because I find certain *ideas* harmful to, the topic *we* are discussing, dogs. I pose these questions because mind viruses exist, and they are propagated on these forum, often without question. So I *will* question them. If you are as open minded to ideas as you believe, you'd appreciate that.
> 
> ...


i am open minded, i listen and talk. im not going around telling people they have "anecdotal evidence". when in fact you might want to do some reading up on your own literature when speaking about "anecdotal evidence"

This is information taken from the source you listed "The Monks of New Skete" under the Title "Becoming the Alpha"

And for anyone else that doesnt think that "Alpha" exists.

"Dogs, having descended from wolves, are pack animals who, right from the beginning of their lives, are sensitized to social hierarchies. This will be a constant throughout the dog's life: All dogs need leadership. At first, pack leadership (the figure of the alpha) is exclusively revealed in the mother. However, early on in the development of the litter a pecking order among the pups develops, and each littermate fits into a particular role in the pack. This is partially how the individual personality of each pup begins to manifest itself. We can learn from the mother how important it is to be a firm, yet benevolent Alpha. The mother commands the absolute respect of the pups, yet at the same time their love as well. When a pup goes to its new home, it becomes a member of a new pack, and will begin to act like a pack member, testing its limits, trying to determine where it fits in. It is absolutely essential for the owner(s) to assume the role of alpha in their pup's life. Understanding early socialization is an important element in assuming the alpha role. Democracy is a forbidden word as it applies to the dog/human relationship. While many owners have negative associations with concepts of leadership drawn from their human experiences, they have to understand that dogs require a leader and that this must be their role. Owners know far better than their dogs what is in the dogs' best interest"

and if i am wrong then these "The Monks of New Skete" must be wrong too.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

ar3151 said:


> and if i am wrong then these "The Monks of New Skete" must be wrong too.


Is it wrong to compare wolves to dogs? I'm sure there's much that can be learned by observing wolves, but to deduce chimpanzee behavior would be a good model in describing human behavior, I do say is wrong. And to propagate ideas formed by substandard models is silly, if not harmful, and the reason dogs suffer from our treatment. I'd ask if you could see that, but I'm not certain you *can* let go of your anecdotal evidence. 

I'm familiar with the Monks...apparently you're not, and I can't say that's a bad thing. I mentioned the Monks for the specific reason that they *use to* promote alpha rolling (you agree with alpha rolling), but now the Monks don't. Why? Perhaps if you researched a bit harder you would have discovered the answer to this question, and too the flaws with wolf theory. 

And yes, I don't believe "Alpha", in it's true sense, as a descriptor within a wolf pack hierarchy, is how one should approach the relationship they have with their dog. But that's a topic, if you're truly open to discuss, that would be better suited in a new thread.


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> Is it wrong to compare wolves to dogs? I'm sure there's much that can be learned by observing wolves, but to deduce chimpanzee behavior would be a good model in describing human behavior, I do say is wrong. And to propagate ideas formed by substandard models is silly, if not harmful, and the reason dogs suffer from our treatment. I'd ask if you could see that, but I'm not certain you *can* let go of your anecdotal evidence.
> 
> I'm familiar with the Monks...apparently you're not, and I can't say that's a bad thing. I mentioned the Monks for the specific reason that they *use to* promote alpha rolling (you agree with alpha rolling), but now the Monks don't. Why? Perhaps if you researched a bit harder you would have discovered the answer to this question, and too the flaws with wolf theory.
> 
> And yes, I don't believe "Alpha", in it's true sense, as a descriptor within a wolf pack hierarchy, is how one should approach the relationship they have with their dog. But that's a topic, if you're truly open to discuss, that would be better suited in a new thread.


who said anything about propagting ideas to harm dogs? thats just absured to even think. funny i never said anything about harm, but you bring it up.

you cant always compare other things that are not in the topic, ie: chimpanzee', blind people....etc. no reason to bring things that arent directly related.

apparently i am familiar with the Monks, thank you. obviously you arent as familiar, or you just have a little anecdotal evidence yourself. go to the link http://www.dogsbestfriend.com/ and see where they say "becoming the Aplha". i dont know where you come up with knowing them so well, but if they *use to* do it, then why do they specify that on the website? you are right, i might not know if they approve rolling, but i will continue to research instead of thinking i know it all


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

ar3151 said:


> who said anything about propagting ideas to harm dogs? thats just absured to even think. funny i never said anything about harm, but you bring it up.





> i agree with the pinning, i did alot of reading and dogs understand that trick, non threatening of course.


Those are your words correct?

Here's a logic string you're obviously not familiar with, but I am...

Owner watches an episode of the Dog Whisperer.
Owner's dog jumps on couch.
Owner alpha rolls dog.
Dog bites Owner. Fear.
Dog becomes and "outside" dog.
Dog becomes a barker. Dog wants to be inside with Owner.
Owner "corrects" dog's barking and dog aggresses towards Owner.
Dog is taken to the pound for being "aggressive". 

This dog has 5 days to prove he's anything but aggressive. If not, he's euthanized. Is that harm enough? Do you want any part in this logic string? If you deny this logic strings exists, you're too far removed from reality to continue this discussion. 



> you cant always compare other things that are not in the topic, ie: chimpanzee', blind people....etc. no reason to bring things that arent directly related.


Exactly my point. You shouldn't compare wolves to dogs. Did you not see that's what the Monks do?

Have a good day ar3151.


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> Those are your words correct?
> 
> Here's a logic string you're obviously not familiar with, but I am...
> 
> ...


ok well that owner obviously was really stupid for watching a TV show and trying to act it.

next he is a professional, that makes a sound and sticks a dog in the chest or neck around with his fingers. so let me guess you want to degrade him for this so called "harming". 





Curbside Prophet said:


> Exactly my point. You shouldn't compare wolves to dogs. Did you not see that's what the Monks do?
> 
> Have a good day ar3151.


dogs share common ancestry with wolves, so in a since i can compare. did you not see where the monks said they descended from wolves? 

or on a more scientific basis:

Dogs:
Scientific classification 

Kingdom: Animalia

Phylum: Chordata

Class: Mammalia

Order: Carnivora

Family: Canidae

Genus: Canis

Wolf:

Scientific classification 
Kingdom: Animalia

Phylum: Chordata

Class: Mammalia

Order: Carnivora

Family: Canidae

Genus: Canis 

Relation to the dog
Much debate has centered on the relationship between the wolf and the domestic dog, though most authorities see the wolf as the dog's direct ancestor. Because the canids have evolved recently and different canids interbreed readily, untangling the relationships has been difficult. But molecular systematics now indicate very strongly that domestic dogs and wolves are closely related, and the domestic dog is now normally classified as a subspecies of the wolf: Canis lupus familiaris. The main differences between wolves and domestic dogs are that wolves have, on average, 20% larger brains, better immune systems, a better sense of smell, and are generally larger than domestic dogs.

_North American domestic dogs are believed to have originated from Old World wolves and no known dog breed is indigenous to America. The first people to colonize North America 12,000 to 14,000 years ago brought their dogs with them from Asia, and apparently did not separately domesticate the wolves they found in New World._*

*source - http://nationalzoo.si.edu/ConservationAndScience/SpotlightOnScience/fleischer2003108.cfm



it seems you always look for the "worst case scenario". not everything is a slippery slope.

good day it is!


----------



## TooneyDogs (Aug 6, 2007)

ar3151 said:


> This is information taken from the source you listed "The Monks of New Skete" under the Title "Becoming the Alpha"
> 
> and if i am wrong then these "The Monks of New Skete" must be wrong too.


They were wrong. They regretted and retracted that concept in their 2nd book.

Alpha's do not rule by force, even in nature. When 2 lesser pack members get into a squabble he does not charge in and start ripping them apart. He calmly, confidently steps between them...end of dispute....he doesn't Alpha roll. He may earn his position by winning a fight but, he only keeps it by nurturing the health, safety and well-being of the entire pack..leading the pack wisely. You've already won the role of Alpha...you were born with it.... and it is extemely rare that a dog will ever challenge you for that position even once during your lifetime.


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

TooneyDogs said:


> They were wrong. They regretted and retracted that concept in their 2nd book.
> 
> Alpha's do not rule by force, even in nature. When 2 lesser pack members get into a squabble he does not charge in and start ripping them apart. He calmly, confidently steps between them...end of dispute....he doesn't Alpha roll. He may earn his position by winning a fight but, he only keeps it by nurturing the health, safety and well-being of the entire pack..leading the pack wisely. You've already won the role of Alpha...you were born with it.... and it is extemely rare that a dog will ever challenge you for that position even once during your lifetime.


see thank you for taking the time to talk and explain, what you said makes sense. i will for sure keep reading for the sake of good knowledge. 



Curbside Prophet said:


> Is it wrong to compare wolves to dogs? I'm sure there's much that can be learned by observing wolves, but to deduce chimpanzee behavior would be a good model in describing human behavior, I do say is wrong. And to propagate ideas formed by substandard models is silly, if not harmful, and the reason dogs suffer from our treatment. I'd ask if you could see that, but I'm not certain you *can* let go of your anecdotal evidence.
> 
> I'm familiar with the Monks...apparently you're not, and I can't say that's a bad thing. I mentioned the Monks for the specific reason that they *use to* promote alpha rolling (you agree with alpha rolling), but now the Monks don't. Why? Perhaps if you researched a bit harder you would have discovered the answer to this question, and too the flaws with wolf theory.
> 
> And yes, I don't believe "Alpha", in it's true sense, as a descriptor within a wolf pack hierarchy, is how one should approach the relationship they have with their dog. But that's a topic, if you're truly open to discuss, that would be better suited in a new thread.


Since we cleared up the Alpha role and relation to wolves, time to move on.

Since you did quote Ceaser Milan "the dog whisperer". here is one from himself. explaining his role and technics.

"I give [dogs] a firm correction, a firm grab in the neck, which is what dogs do to each other. They pin each other, and they hold on to each other until one of them surrenders. Dogs do this to each other. I do not do it with anger or frustration. I come with a calm, assertive approach to create a calm, submissive state of mind. Submissive to me does not mean cowed, it means accepting of fair human leadership, and that the unwanted behavior is not tolerated. A mother dog will reprimand a puppy physically, and she does it firmly but it is not abusive. I am the same—firm and fair—not abusive in any way."

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/dogwhisperer/cesars_way.html

if that doesnt work or is bad for the dog, then why does he use it?

day is getting better!


----------



## Alpha (Aug 24, 2006)

There's always more than one way to achieve something with our dogs.

Sometimes the choice you make should be with safety in mind, and other times it should be made with a "What would *I* want someone to do to me?" mind.

I think alpha rolling (Which Tooney explained in fact is more of a dance between dogs where the submissive dogs VOLUNTARILY rolls themselves) is one of those things that should be avoided with SAFETY in mind.

Most people don't know enough about dog behaviours to do such a thing. Most people don't know enough about how THEIR OWN BODY LANGUAGE provokes behaviours from our dogs to do such a thing.

And MOST (just most) of the time, there is a better way of coming to the same result aka one that does not include force.

Some people (myself included at times) will choose force over "the happier, rainbow way out", for whatever reasons, but I don't think it should be the first method that anyone should advise someone to do on an internet forum. Discussing the methods is a different thing, reccomending something that could be possibly dangerous if not performed correctly is another.

A positive method performed incorrectly may not get results, but it probably won't end in a dog biting owner tragedy like Curb mentioned.

The whole Alpha thing (my name is more comparable to good leadership, I like to say I'm the leader by default in our house because of resource control) is sometimes misunderstood. I see it used a lot with things like dominance, and the general idea meaning physical force when it's just not the case.

Alpha, to me, means I'm the "leader". I'm only the leader because I'm in control of everything my dog NEEDS to live. The things my dogs WANT. It's a very non-physical way of being head of your funny, half furry half not pack.

The thing that usually provokes a "EUREKA!" moment for people if you want to go to the "in the wild" side, is "alphas" are not physical. At all.

They do nothing physical to get to the top. And the few that do, are outed quickly by the pack, for the BETTER of the pack. An article I read on the topic states: No one, even in the dog world, likes a dictatorship  Alpha's are the resource controllers. They are aloof, non-physical and confident.

By doing something as physical as Alpha rolling, you are in fact LOWERING yourself in the pecking order. Which can be very confusing to dogs.

Very generally:
Alphas - not physical
Middle of the pack - fights over anything and everything
Bottom - doesn't fight because they know it will get them nowhere.

So when you yell, get angry, stomp your feet and physically punish your dog, instead of sending the message that you are the leader, your in fact saying, "Hey, we're both on the same level, let's duke it out to see who gets this toy or the cookie etc etc"

The dog isn't fighting you because they want to be on top. They're displaying what some would say is "dominance" because YOU'VE opened the door for them to believe that's what YOU want to DO. Feral dogs would act that way, your trying so hard to be part of the pack, you've achieved that, just not the status you were hoping for. 

Sorry, waaay off topic,

I'm glad to hear things are coming along.


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

i respect everything you just said. thank you

i apologize for getting off on a tantrum, but i do not like someone telling me im wrong, when i have proven science to back it up. if i am wrong fine, thats cool. but everytime i post darn near i was getting called out. so if people want to use this "anecdotal evidence" crap. 

people think i abuse my dogs, hell my dogs are more spoiled than me, but they cant see that, they see how i did a couple of training methods i prefer and they think im abusing. when i say "i used this techni" people reply all offended like im trying to tell people to beat the crap out of their dog.

if you are scared to be one with your dog then that person has no business owning a dog. dogs can sense fear which is probably why they would snap. 

alot of people that have training problems, still have them because they chose to train a certain way. i dont need someone always on my heels saying what im doing is bad, its up to the owner to decide. also from what i read those people who choose the "ignoring method" are still having problems. i personally havent seen many threads saying "i have used physical discipline and it doesnt work!" not saying those threads dont exist, but i dont see them that common. i wonder why? and other people have let me know in pm's that they do the same as i do. 

most people didnt read where i said no me and my dogs roll as a pack, we play and such. so i agree with the i am one of the pack, not hey im the alpha and get home from work and beat the crap cause i am the alpha, thats just BS.

well im off the rant for now. thanks for taking the time to talk and not judge or telling me im wrong.


----------



## Alpha (Aug 24, 2006)

Hey everyone has their tantrum days 

It's so easy to say that the method doesn't work, the ignoring method.

Of course if your not seeing results, your going to blame the method. When in fact it's not the method that doesn't work, it does, I use it. It's that it's not being executed PROPERLY.

The word "proper" comes into play in a lot of things with dogs. Properly using aversives likes prongs or e-collars, it's the defense of many of the people who use those tools (and rightfully so) so why can't it come into play on the other end of the spectrum?

When a more positive method doesn't work, why in fact is it always assumed that it's the method that isn't right? Why can't it be that it's not being executed properly?

A large role in ignoring, just isn't ignoring. Confusing huh? ROFL! Its' the general "vibe" of the situation that still keeps the dog engaged with you. You just don't ignore them so they walk away and go play with a toy. It's a way of ignoring, that keeps their focus on you, and brings them into that "calmer state of mind". It's a certain way of using your body language to convey a message. It's a specific way of movement that shows your firm and confident.

It's much more than just ignoring. 



> i personally havent seen many threads saying "i have used physical discipline and it doesnt work!"


I'm not picking at you, just had to add this 

I think when people use physical discipline (I mean, harsh physical discipline, with IMO, would be alpha rolling), if there isn't a negative effect right away, a lot of the time, there are negative effects that come out in other areas of "life" in general.

Example)

Someone alpha rolls their dog for growling over a bone.

The dog never growls again. Fantastic! It worked right? Or do people (who probably don't really know what they're doing) just not see the connection between when they rolled their dog and the behaviours that popped up after, like; submissive urination, cringing when you go to roughly pat their neck, slower recalls etc etc, until that one day, they near the dog, it's uncomfortable, and instead of growling, it goes straight to the bite.

It's just the other end of the spectrum, in a way.. I guess kinda. A lot of the time "dominant" percieved behaviours are caused by something else, lack of leadership for example. Well, physical discipline can be the cause of other behaviours, where some wouldn't make that connection. Just assume it's a whole new problem, when in fact, it's completely relative to the harsh physical correction.


----------



## battlemonkey (Oct 14, 2007)

Well, I"m glad everybody has gotten that out of their system and I'm glad we're on the same page! 

We know we're all here for one reason and one reason only: for better understanding, help, knowledge, assistance and friendships for us and our four-legged babies! (if that made any sense, I hope...lol)


----------



## TooneyDogs (Aug 6, 2007)

ar3151 said:


> Since you did quote Ceaser Milan "the dog whisperer". here is one from himself. explaining his role and technics.
> 
> "I give [dogs] a firm correction, a firm grab in the neck, which is what dogs do to each other.


The technique works. I think what everyone is trying to say is there are many ways to apply almost any technique. From gentle to harsh and everything in between. In this particular case a touch to the neck with just the fingertips can often be just as effective depending on the dog. 
The middle of the road is Milan...grab the neck. The harshest application is a scruff shake with both hands. And if you want to get really tough, you lift the dog off the floor by the neck and helicopter him. Good trainers/handlers will always use the least harmful method of any technique before moving up to the next level or they might change methods depending on the initial response.


----------



## Ixala (Aug 24, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> *Why* I pose these questions because I am not biased with common thought. I pose these questions because I find certain *ideas* harmful to, the topic *we* are discussing, dogs. I pose these questions because mind viruses exist, and they are propagated on these forum, often without question. So I *will* question them. If you are as open minded to ideas as you believe, you'd appreciate that.


What's a "mind virus"?


----------



## battlemonkey (Oct 14, 2007)

I also agree that Cesar's technique works, the one of the "hand bite". I have started using that on my dog since I've started watching him on TV, and she listens to me alot more now. We still have some issues, but for the most part, I'm now becoming more pack leader, and less of a mother spoiling her child.

Dogs need balance in their lives, dogs need to have leaders and the only ones that can do that are their owners.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Ixala said:


> What's a "mind virus"?


Ideas the develop without empirical evidence, believed to be reality, never questioned, and propogated as truths. Dominance theory is an example of a mind virus. Dominance theory is based on the premise that if you can just exert adequate dominance over the dog, everything else will fall into place. The unfortunate consequence in believing such a premise is, incredible amounts of abuse are going to be perpetuated against the dog if an adequate amount of dominance isn't found. Viruses can be deadly, and so can the abuse of dominance theory. 

I contend that anyone who believes in the dominance model, would get a better result with less wear and tear on their dog, if they had a more thourough understanding of learning theory. Mind viruses like dominance theory are useless when compared to the results that can be obtained using learning theory.

Unfortunately some people are averse to learning or to being scientific. So they accept constructs based on popularity alone. I find this shameful and parsimonious to the animals we celebrate.


----------



## rosemaryninja (Sep 28, 2007)

Sure, pinning dogs may work, but I think most dogs don't need it. Alpha rolls should only, in my opinion, be done in very extreme cases, and only by professionals. You could very easily get a bunch of stitches in the face if you tried to roll an aggressive dog without knowing how to do it properly. Most people watch The Dog Whisperer once, and then try to roll their dog that's been a little hyperactive around guests. Not necessary, in my opinion, when much less physical methods could have been used. That's why I disagree with Alpha rolling, because it is so often abused.

Not to bring things back on-topic (haha) but - I think I found something that works. Today I went out, trained for 10 minutes, then walked both the dogs for about half an hour. After half an hour, I sent Honey back home, and then walked Spunky for about 15-20 minutes more. She was pretty knackered out when we got home (they walk about 30 minutes in the morning too) and did not try to hump Honey once!

Well, okay, once. After I brought Spunky back from her extra walk, I supervised them for a little while; nothing happened. Once I left the room I heard the barks that meant Spunky was at it. I went back in, gave Spunky a "No!" - which managed to stop her - and then I sent her to her corner in a sit-stay. Left the room, everything was fine, after about 15 minutes of calmness I went in with a few pieces of kibble, made them "sit" (relatively simple task) and fed both at the same time.

Not a peep from them since, so I think everything is going okay.


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

i tried that pin thing 1 time, just cause it came up the past couple of days. its not something i have to do really. dont really like to do it. either.

i have started looking at the dogs and using hand commands now, i got all 4 rowdy ass dogs to all sit, by just lowering my hand as if i was telling them down. worked well 

and to come i whistle to get attention and pat my leg a few times and walk in the door from out back and 4 dogs come running in. 

glad to see we can all discuss things.


----------



## battlemonkey (Oct 14, 2007)

yeah, being on the same page is awesome, especially that we're all looking for one thing in common...

About the pinning thing, I have been using it for about a month on Jesse cause she's very strong willed (is that even a word...lol) and thinks she's still the pack leader, but only when we see other dogs or she's behaving badly around the cats, other than that, I don't use it when training or anything, so I hope nobody is thinking that. I also like Cesar's motto "Exercise, discipline, affection, all in that order". I think a tired dog is a good dog that will do whatever you ask of him/her, and that way you can give them lots of love for doing a good job!!


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

right on, i praise the hell out of them for doing good and man they know they did good. now if i can just take care of the digging part.


----------



## MegaMuttMom (Sep 15, 2007)

Aren't you glad it's working? All it took was a little change-up in the routine. I can't believe all this discussion of pinning the dog. It would be a rediculous response to the issue you are dealing with and could have changed so much between you and your dogs. Thank you for discarding that advice.


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

lol i love my doggies! yeah that discussion got carried away.

i need to post up some pics.. hmm


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

battlemonkey said:


> About the pinning thing, I have been using it for about a month on Jesse cause she's very strong willed (is that even a word...lol) and thinks she's still the pack leader, but only when we see other dogs or she's behaving badly around the cats, other than that, I don't use it when training or anything, so I hope nobody is thinking that.


Strong willed? No. Poorly socialized? Yes. This is what I mean by dominance theory being a mind virus. You see your dog act a certain way, therefor the dog must be vying for a higher place in the pack hierarchy, therefore pinning becomes acceptable. 

Whether you use it during training or not doesn't matter. How any why you use it is, and perhaps the reason your dog exhibits poor behavior in these situations. If you understood that the dog was poorly socialized (not necessarily your fault), does viewing the dog as wanting to be the "pack leader" benefit the dog? I guess if the dog is being pinned, the behavior does stop, for that moment, but has it solved the real issue? Likely not.


----------



## Ixala (Aug 24, 2007)

rosemaryninja said:


> I think I found something that works.


That's great!  

While it seems true that dogs like routine, being present with them, rather than following either scientific or anecdotal "ordained methods", generally gives us humans far more chance to work in harmony with our dogs!



battlemonkey said:


> Jesse cause she's very strong willed (is that even a word...lol) and thinks she's still the pack leader,


LOL. My girl's got a strong will and personality too! Our house would be a zoo if I hadn't set consistent limits and boundaries with her. As strong willed as she is, however, I really believe she is relieved to have a trusted leader in me ... takes a lot of responsibility and pressure off her!


----------



## TooneyDogs (Aug 6, 2007)

battlemonkey said:


> About the pinning thing, I have been using it for about a month on Jesse cause she's very strong willed (is that even a word...lol) and thinks she's still the pack leader, but only when we see other dogs or she's behaving badly around the cats,


There is a very real downside to this when you do that in the presence of other dogs or cats. From the dogs point of view he gets punished/pinned when a dog (or cat) gets close to him. This is how you train dogs for pit fighting...punish them in front of another dog...make the other dog the cause for all his pain and suffering. He doesn't think the one inflicting the punishment is Alpha at all. From the dogs point of view, the best thing to do is get rid of the other dog (or cat) which will stop the punishment before it happens. The dog is just reacting...not reasoning.
The more you do this, the worse it gets...not better.


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

TooneyDogs said:


> There is a very real downside to this when you do that in the presence of other dogs or cats. From the dogs point of view he gets punished/pinned when a dog (or cat) gets close to him. This is how you train dogs for pit fighting...punish them in front of another dog...make the other dog the cause for all his pain and suffering. He doesn't think the one inflicting the punishment is Alpha at all. From the dogs point of view, the best thing to do is get rid of the other dog (or cat) which will stop the punishment before it happens. The dog is just reacting...not reasoning.
> The more you do this, the worse it gets...not better.



i am just trying to learn more myself, but how do we know it makes things worse? 

i do agree with the not doing that in front of other dogs, i can see what you mean how that would not be good. might make them want to do what you did to other dogs.


----------



## TooneyDogs (Aug 6, 2007)

ar3151 said:


> i am just trying to learn more myself, but how do we know it makes things worse?
> 
> i do agree with the not doing that in front of other dogs, i can see what you mean how that would not be good. might make them want to do what you did to other dogs.


Let me use a more common example to try and explain this as it produces the same results. Walking your dog on leash. Your dog sees another dog and starts acting up. You jerk the leash trying to get the dog to stop/settle down. You do this every single time you see another dog (because your dog is still acting up) and you jerk even harder..maybe even add some scolding.
Soon the dog is acting out even more...now lunging, growling...becoming impossible to take for a walk. You soon stop walking the dog because your dog is 'dog aggressive'. (He's not...he was 'taught' to react that way).
Getting home, out of sight of the other dogs and then giving leash corrections would be absolutely useless...it wouldn't teach a thing.
Neither will pinning the dog later...away from the other dogs.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

ar3151 said:


> i am just trying to learn more myself, but how do we know it makes things worse?


And also, to use physical punishments you have to know both the severity that is required of the punishment and the timeliness that's required of the punishment. The average dog owner knows neither, and poor communication with the dog only exacerbates the problem.


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> And also, to use physical punishments you have to know both the severity that is required of the punishment and the timeliness that's required of the punishment. The average dog owner knows neither, and poor communication with the dog only exacerbates the problem.


well actually that should apply for any type of punishment, physical, psychological...etc.

right on, which why i dont dont abuse mine, lol, actually "never did". but there is no long term proven examples?


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

ar3151 said:


> well actually that should apply for any type of punishment, physical, psychological...etc.


Absolutely, but to err with physical punishments is tantamount to abuse. 



> but there is no long term proven examples?


In today's political climate, no. But I'm sure some can be found dated in the 40's and 50's.


----------



## fightingfame (Oct 20, 2007)

battlemonkey said:


> This isn't really something that should be ignored. Dominance can be something that might trigger a fight one day should another dog come around and try to do that to her. It's a behavior that should be stopped, and what the other member has suggested is a good idea. One-on-one training is a good way to have your dog focused on you.
> 
> Also, when the humper is humping the humpee (sorry, had to...), I would suggest pulling her off and tagging her to the ground in a submissive pose so that the less dominant (sorry, don't remember which dog is the dominant one here) one is standing beside her, letting her know that she is above her and this behavior will not be tolerated. A quick hand bite from you and gently pinning her to the ground might let her know that you are the boss and not her. At this point, she is letting you know that she is the boss by being dominant, since you cannot do such a thing, she knows she rules the roost.
> 
> Maybe somebody else has some input on this.



Best advice Ive read in this post. A lot of people need to understand that you must treat dogs like what they are dogs. Most people try to discipline their dogs like their a child. Treat the dog like your the leader of the pack and there behavior is not right. The above technique does work and lets the dominant female know whos the leader of the pack. Only do this when it happens or is "triggered". Bump here hind quarters with ur foot (to get attention) then lay her down as stated above until she relaxes. 

Cheers
Brandon


----------



## rosemaryninja (Sep 28, 2007)

fightingfame said:


> Best advice Ive read in this post. A lot of people need to understand that you must treat dogs like what they are dogs. Most people try to discipline their dogs like their a child. Treat the dog like your the leader of the pack and there behavior is not right. The above technique does work and lets the dominant female know whos the leader of the pack. Only do this when it happens or is "triggered". Bump here hind quarters with ur foot (to get attention) then lay her down as stated above until she relaxes.
> 
> Cheers
> Brandon


If you'll read through the last few pages of this thread you'll understand why Alpha rolling your dog often leads to more problems rather than cures the problem. Alpha rolling is a technique that may work only as a last resort. Most people try to train their dogs with this technique when their dogs don't really need it, and a less physical method would have sufficed. And when a dog that doesn't need to be rolled gets rolled, a lot more behavioural problems pop up.

So no, I am not going to Alpha roll my dog, nor do I foresee a need to ever do so.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

fightingfame said:


> A lot of people need to understand that you must treat dogs like what they are dogs.


But we are not dogs, and do not communicate like dogs. Are you suggesting that the dog will be able to interpret our poor dog-like communication, and that will be enough to settle our position in the pack?


> Treat the dog like your the leader of the pack and there behavior is not right.


How about treating the dog like he's influenced by his environment. And who's in control of his environment? The "pack leader." So guess who's behavior isn't "right" and needs to change? The "pack leader's". You say to treat the dog like a dog, yet you state we should give the dog morals? That sounds very anthropomorphic to me, and contrary to your statement about how we should treat dogs. 


> The above technique does work and lets the dominant female know whos the leader of the pack.


The original question wasn't about whether it can work...even a broken clock is right twice a day. The original question was, is it appropriate? And then a follow up question, is it appropriate for novices? Or do you also carry the same caveat Cesar does with his show?



rosemaryninja said:


> So no, I am not going to Alpha roll my dog, nor do I foresee a need to ever do so.


I'm so glad that through the mudiness, of at least, my diatribes, you have a clear understanding of it all.


----------



## battlemonkey (Oct 14, 2007)

If people want to "alpha roll" their dogs, that's their decision, and nobody should tell you otherwise. The reason I do it to my dog, is because she's gone way overboard with trying to rule the house and our walks, and that's the only thing that seems to have worked. I've spent hundreds, even thousands of dollars on different dog trainer techniques, even one-on-ones with trainers, and none of them have worked. Each trainer had a different way of trying to help us, and nothing has changed, so while watching Cesar's techniques, I tried them on my own and it's been working so that's why I use it.

I agree, it's not for everyone and you must have a strong will to do so in order for it to work. But, hey, if it works for you, why not? I have a very strong, very stubborn and dog-agressive hound, and a single "pop" of the leash doesn't help, like trainers will train you to do, so I've tried a different method, and that's worked for me, as it might or might not for others.



TooneyDogs said:


> Let me use a more common example to try and explain this as it produces the same results. Walking your dog on leash. Your dog sees another dog and starts acting up. You jerk the leash trying to get the dog to stop/settle down. You do this every single time you see another dog (because your dog is still acting up) and you jerk even harder..maybe even add some scolding.
> Soon the dog is acting out even more...now lunging, growling...becoming impossible to take for a walk. You soon stop walking the dog because your dog is 'dog aggressive'. (He's not...he was 'taught' to react that way).
> Getting home, out of sight of the other dogs and then giving leash corrections would be absolutely useless...it wouldn't teach a thing.
> Neither will pinning the dog later...away from the other dogs.



So what you're telling me is to praise my dog when we're on walks when she lunges at other dogs? Or to get rid of my cats because my dog gets hyper and tries to play with them moreso than they enjoy? Fat chance of that happening, I'm sorry.

I don't "jerk" my dogs leash when we're walking past other dogs, she wears a Halti, and we simply keep walking and I don't talk to her at all, which doesn't entice any reaction from her, for the most part. Mind you, we've just started doing this so it's still something we're working on, so it's still not 100% but it's getting there. My dog has not been confined to my house, or "trained" to be dog-agressive. She was raised on a farm with hundreds of cattle and barely any dogs around. When we moved to the city is when she finally realized "hey, there's more dogs in this world" and wanted to devour them all. I have never said "I'm not going for a walk ever again because my dog hates every other canine", I would never do that. I don't pin her away from the other dogs, she always gets a "hand bite" from me when she's acting up around other animals, not when she's at home behaving, so not quite sure what you mean by that since I thought I explained that earlier, if I didn't, I appologize, my mistake for not making that more clear.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

battlemonkey said:


> If people want to "alpha roll" their dogs, that's their decision, and nobody should tell you otherwise.


Whether one chooses to alpha roll their dog at home is one thing, recommending it to someone else is another. When someone mentions *not* to do it, it's with good reason. To silently object to this recommendation, is an approval. I'll not be silent.


> The reason I do it to my dog, is because she's gone way overboard with trying to rule the house and our walks, and that's the only thing that seems to have worked. I've spent hundreds, even thousands of dollars on different dog trainer techniques, even one-on-ones with trainers, and none of them have worked. Each trainer had a different way of trying to help us, and nothing has changed, so while watching Cesar's techniques, I tried them on my own and it's been working so that's why I use it.


Were the trainers certified? If so, by whom? The major reason training techniques fail is due to lack of owner compliance. More so than the actual technique. 


> I have a very strong, very stubborn and dog-agressive hound,


Calling a dog stubborn is being anthropomorphic. Being dog aggressive has nothing to do with stubborness. Your dog is poorly socialized (again, not necessarily your fault), but calling the dog stubborn is incorrect, and lends itself to an out of place training protocol.


> So what you're telling me is to praise my dog when we're on walks when she lunges at other dogs? Or to get rid of my cats because my dog gets hyper and tries to play with them moreso than they enjoy? Fat chance of that happening, I'm sorry.


I believe that was you're inference, not Tooney's. A systematic desensitization and counter conditioning protocol would better fit your dog's behavior than alpha rolling.


> so it's still not 100% but it's getting there.


How are you testing it?


----------



## battlemonkey (Oct 14, 2007)

I was being more than 100% compliant with all my trainers suggestions of training my dog. I'm testing the training method while out of the house, while on walks, and when I'm myself asking things of my dog. If my dog listens to me, then I'm making progress, because she was barely listening 2 months ago, so that's proving the effectiveness for me. Whether or not anybody else wants to believe it, that's their own decision.

I know my dog is not socialized well, and I'm working on that as well. We go to the dog park where she I keep a close eye on her but don't interfere in anything that happens unless another owner who obviously baby's their dog starts complaining that my dog, being dominant, is chasing hers, than I take my dog out of the situation so as to not make anybody angry or upset over my dogs actions, which I know is not right, don't get me wrong, but some owners are babies themselves, like their dogs, and can't accept the fact that some dogs are dominant, some submissive, plain and simple. There have never been attacks made at the dog park being started by my dog, always by other dogs (mainly little yappy things that are babied and coddled by their owners and border collies that try and herd and nip everything in sight).

I think to each his own when it comes to raising their children, or training their dogs. If you ask for my suggestions, that's totally cool, I'll give them to you. But I think it's been mentioned before, that everybody has a way of doing things, and not everybody will agree with it and I've come to terms with that. But to say negative things about the way I train my dog is not just wrong, it's plain rude! I have never once made fun of or poked fun at the way somebody was training their dog/s. If you want to spoil your fur-babies, by all means do. Does a dog know if he's being lugged around in a 1000$ Gucci bag? No. Does a dog know whether or not his dog food cost 20$/bag or 75$/bag? No. Does a dog know whether or not you're his leader or follower, bet your sweet hiney he does.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

battlemonkey said:


> I'm testing the training method while out of the house, while on walks, and when I'm myself asking things of my dog. If my dog listens to me, then I'm making progress, because she was barely listening 2 months ago, so that's proving the effectiveness for me.


May I suggest a better way to test it? Count the number of dogs you encounter, and count the number of times you have to alpha roll your dog. Total the counts every month and take note of the distance from the dog, and weigh it by the distance. If the ratio of encounters versus alpha rolls drops. Alpha rolling is an effective punishment. If the ratio of encounters versus alpha rolls stays level, or increases. Alpha rolling is not an effective punishment. If you chart your progress this way, only then can you say alpha rolling is effective for *you* and *your* dog. But I doubt by aplha rolling alone, you'd make any progress. But again, not listening is *not* a sign of status seeking. 



> We go to the dog park where she I keep a close eye on her but don't interfere in anything that happens unless another owner who obviously baby's their dog starts complaining that my dog, being dominant, is chasing hers, than I take my dog out of the situation so as to not make anybody angry or upset over my dogs actions, which I know is not right, don't get me wrong, but some owners are babies themselves, like their dogs, and can't accept the fact that some dogs are dominant, some submissive, plain and simple.


Chasing other dogs is also *not* a sign of dominance. It's evidence of poor socialization, perhaps even motivating to the dog. 

I'm not clear on what other dog owners have to do with your dog's behavior.



> There have never been attacks made at the dog park being started by my dog, always by other dogs (mainly little yappy things that are babied and coddled by their owners and border collies that try and herd and nip everything in sight).


Again, I'm not sure how other owners treat their dog has to do with your dog's behavior.



> But to say negative things about the way I train my dog is not just wrong, it's plain rude! I have never once made fun of or poked fun at the way somebody was training their dog/s.


If you think I'm making fun of *you*, you do not understand my intent. 



> Does a dog know whether or not you're his leader or follower, bet your sweet hiney he does.


By your own definition yours doesn't know, correct? Do you know where the term "pecking order" derived? It came way of studying chickens. Out of all the animals, the chicken is the most widely studied animal on social hierarchies. At first glance the chicken pecking order appears plainly linear. You have the "dominant" chicken on top, and every other chicken has it's place in the hierarchy. Pretty cool huh? Kinda supports your belief, doesn't it? Curiously though, if you separate all these chickens and a month later bring them back together again, they form a new hierarchy, and the "dominant" chicken no longer rules the roost. If "dominance" were a character trait wouldn't the "dominant" chicken always be at the top of the pecking order? What does it mean that a new hierarchy developed after the separation? Two things... One, "dominance" is not a character trait. And two, what defines the pecking order is the relationship. 

I don't know about you...how you treat your dog really is your prerogative, but I never want my dog, or any dog I handle for that matter, to question whether they are in a pecking order or not. I assure you my dog is neither babied nor looked at as a subordinate. She's my teammate, and that's what I advocate...this *is* my intent.


----------



## Alpha (Aug 24, 2006)

This is the link where a lot of the stuff I've posted here comes from.

For those that speak of "using physical force" to become the leader and are general pro-alpha rollers, PLEASE READ THIS!

It's an excellent read. 

http://www.bogartsdaddy.com/bouvier/Training/alpha-roll_no.htm

Just a very short part quoted here in case you don't want to read the whole thing... but you should! LOL



> These were short-term studies, so the researchers concentrated on the most obvious, overt parts of wolf life, such as hunting. The studies are therefore unrepresentative -- drawing conclusions about "wolf behavior" based on about 1% of wolf life.
> The studies observed what are now known to be ritualistic displays and misinterpreted them. Unfortunately, this is where the bulk of the "dominance model" comes from, and though the information has been soundly disproved, it still thrives in the dog training mythos.
> 
> For example, alpha rolls. The early researchers saw this behavior and concluded that the higher-ranking wolf was forcibly rolling the subordinate to exert his dominance. Well, not exactly. This is actually an "appeasement ritual" instigated by the SUBORDINATE wolf. The subordinate offers his muzzle, and when the higher-ranking wolf "pins" it, the lower-ranking wolf voluntarily rolls and presents his belly. There is NO force. It is all entirely voluntary.
> ...


----------



## applesmom (Jun 9, 2007)

I haven't read the entire thread. Quit when it went off topic. 

Back to the original question. As I see it, this most likely isn't a dominance issue at all! Chances are that it's a physical problem instead.

The dog that's being humped is probably putting out some sort of signal that's triggering this frantic behavior. It could very easily be a scent. Possibly from the anal gland or a UTI. 

I'd suggest having that dog checked for either of those conditions. If she checks out okay I'd suggest having the other dog checked for possible thyroid dysfunction.

Hope you figure it out soon and get them back on an even keel.


----------



## rosemaryninja (Sep 28, 2007)

applesmom said:


> I haven't read the entire thread. Quit when it went off topic.
> 
> Back to the original question. As I see it, this most likely isn't a dominance issue at all! Chances are that it's a physical problem instead.
> 
> ...


If this were the case, wouldn't Spunky be humping Honey all the time? She only humps after walks or after training sessions. Not during the regular day, and not during feeding time either.


----------



## Renoman (Mar 20, 2007)

Just my two cents.... 

I have to go along with those that suggested seperate training sessions. Each dog needs 'special' time alone with you and if by training seperately you can eliminate the problems you're having as well as giving them their special attention, seems to me it would work out for everyone.  

If the humping issues start to show up at another time during the day, then I would look for professional help. It might be something you're unknowingly doing (or not doing) that triggers these episodes. Having a professional witness and evaluate how the girls interact during the training sessions would go a long way in helping to resolve the problem, I think anyway.


----------



## rosemaryninja (Sep 28, 2007)

Thanks. Separate training sessions didn't help, but I found that giving Spunky her "special time" with me during a short extra walk does. One question though, is this going to pose long-term problems later on if Honey should get jealous? I start by walking them both, then after about half an hour I specifically send Honey home and then leave again with Spunky only. Should I keep up with this or should I walk Honey alone, THEN Spunky also alone?


----------



## Renoman (Mar 20, 2007)

It can't hurt to try walking them seperately. That way they have their 'special' time alone with you and your undivided attention.  

If you can't find a solution on your own, I would again suggest calling in a professional for an evaluation.


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

battlemonkey said:


> I think to each his own when it comes to raising their children, or training their dogs. If you ask for my suggestions, that's totally cool, I'll give them to you. But I think it's been mentioned before, that everybody has a way of doing things, and not everybody will agree with it and I've come to terms with that. But to say negative things about the way I train my dog is not just wrong, it's plain rude! I have never once made fun of or poked fun at the way somebody was training their dog/s. If you want to spoil your fur-babies, by all means do. Does a dog know if he's being lugged around in a 1000$ Gucci bag? No. Does a dog know whether or not his dog food cost 20$/bag or 75$/bag? No. Does a dog know whether or not you're his leader or follower, bet your sweet hiney he does.



See this is what im talking about.

Curbside, im not calling you out, but this is why we had our deal, you talk down to everyone, assume they are mistreating their dog, just cause someone swats their dog once you think its everyday, lastly you do disagree with what everyone says. You did the same thing to battlemonkey as you did me. 

I tell people what i did and what works for me, if people want to take it fine, if not they dont have to.

and there is no long term proven damage to the dog, but the 40's and 50's are a long time ago.


Alpha, 

i see what you mean, and i think you are right, the subordinate wolf submisses, but see he/she does it when the higher ranking does it. alot of people are to scared to establish dominance, so when they do that they get bit. i think that is part of the problem here. there is no need to force if they wolf respects.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

ar3151 said:


> Curbside, im not calling you out, but this is why we had our deal, you talk down to everyone, assume they are mistreating their dog, just cause someone swats their dog once you think its everyday, lastly you do disagree with what everyone says. You did the same thing to battlemonkey as you did me.


Again, and this will be the last time I say it, I only speak to ideas. I don't know you, your training techniques, or your dog. I don't plan on knowing you, your training techniques, or your dog. However, if I disagree with an idea, expect it to be challenged. I do, and if you stand behind your idea, it shouldn't be a problem. But if you haphazardly offer ideas, perhaps you can be easily offended, but you'd be missing the point. And I can't help how you perceive that.

Besides, who in their right mind hits their dog once and proclaims to others they've found the solution to all their dog's problems?



> I tell people what i did and what works for me, if people want to take it fine, if not they dont have to.


And if you tell someone to jump off a bridge, expect someone to explain how moronic that would be. To each their own until it's deemed harmful. 



> and there is no long term proven damage to the dog, but the 40's and 50's are a long time ago.


Dogs have suffered long enough to know that punishments needn't be physical, therefore I believe they shouldn't be physical. I can't believe in this day and age, with all the experiments suffered by dog, that we'd have to assume it's okay. Silly.


----------



## battlemonkey (Oct 14, 2007)

Thanks Andrew...now I totally understand what you were talking about the other day with me...

It's true, when people have different training techniques than others, than there will be some disputes, there's no doubt about it. But my problem is when you judge somebody for having different ways of doing things and pretty much tell them it's wrong, and it's never worked for you, and blah, blah, blah. Well, maybe it's worked for us. Maybe it's worked for more than just us.

Myself, I have never hit my dog for any reason. Maybe a little flick on the nose when bumming for food, but no backhand to the butt, no kick in the flanks, nothing.

Would you do the same thing to somebody on a board for raising kids that if somebody put their kids in the corner, and that worked for them, that they shouldn't do that cause it didn't work for you? Oh wait, maybe you would cause you're doing that here.

Sure, everybody has the right to their own opinion, but like Andrew said, you look down on everybody for having one, unless it's the same opinion as yours. If dog pinning didn't work for you, or you got bit by your dog, then don't just assume that every dog will bite their owners if they try the same thing.


----------



## Ixala (Aug 24, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> I only speak to ideas.


That's easy to find merit in.



Curbside Prophet said:


> Besides, *who in their right mind* hits their dog


 (Emphasis mine)

That contradicts the first expression, and reads like a form of name-calling.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Ixala said:


> That contradicts the first expression, and reads like a form of name-calling.


It would be a contradiction if it were a statement made of anyone here. It was a question. I assume no one here would raise their hand to this question and say "I". Would you?

Whether you care for my opinion is not my concern. When it comes to the abuse that is perpetuated on our dogs, I'm all out of "nice." Perhaps that *is* transfered into my opinion, rightfully so, but do you question the intent? 

Funny though how you're looking for a malicious intent. Who's the judgmental one now? It's just a question.



battlemonkey said:


> Sure, everybody has the right to their own opinion, but like Andrew said, you look down on everybody for having one, unless it's the same opinion as yours. If dog pinning didn't work for you, or you got bit by your dog, then don't just assume that every dog will bite their owners if they try the same thing.


Yes I know. I'm a very bad person for suggesting you should test your pinning technique. Or for suggesting that you should train your dog before punishing him. What was I thinking? And I know it was completely wrong for me to illustrate that dominance wasn't a character trait. I apologize for speaking up for your dog. How rude of me!


----------



## Ixala (Aug 24, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> Funny though how you're looking for a malicious intent. Who's the judgmental one now?


Again, that reads, to me, like more name calling.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Label it which ever way pleases you. But if you have a problem with the information contained in my posts, please comment on them. Otherwise, we're done on this point.


----------



## battlemonkey (Oct 14, 2007)

You're saying you're speaking up for my dog??!! Hahahahaha... Thanks, but I'm pretty sure I can tell alot more what my dog is thinking than you can, and I'm damn well sure she isn't giving me your point of view on things. Like I said, if it works on my dog, and it doesn't work for others, than why wouldn't you just leave me to it? Why would you keep calling me out, or others who use the same technique, saying that we shouldn't do it cause it doesn't work on some people, probalby the people who don't know how to use it properly and get "bit by their dogs", or so you say.

I have never once been bitten by my dog for being more dominant than her You say my dog should be trained before being punished? What makes you think I am punishing her? What makes you think she is not trained? You keep saying in your posts that you don't know us, our dogs or our ways, nor do you want to, but now you're accusing me of abusing my dog and not training her. That, my friend, was rude...


----------



## Cheetah (May 25, 2006)

There is a bottom line on the advising of alpha rolling on this forum and that is this:

It is very DANGEROUS to advise alpha rolling on a training forum like this, because it is populated by many new/first-time dog owners, who could potentially take the advice and try it on their own dogs, which could result in serious injury to the dog and/or the owner. This would also be a LIABILITY.

Thus, regardless of how you or we feel about it, we DO NOT advise alpha rolling on this forum. This would be why I don't think you'll find a moderator on here who is "super pro-alpha rolling".


----------



## Gates1026 (Mar 14, 2007)

battlemonkey said:


> Like I said, if it works on my dog, and it doesn't work for others, than why wouldn't you just leave me to it? Why would you keep calling me out, or others who use the same technique, saying that we shouldn't do it cause it doesn't work on some people, probalby the people who don't know how to use it properly and get "bit by their dogs", or so you say.
> 
> What makes you think I am punishing her? What makes you think she is not trained?


What would you say Alpha rolling your dog is? Is it in some way a reward or positive experience for your dog? I don't think that it requires a great stretch of logic to call this sort of treatment a punishment for your dog.

You also hit on one of the main points of this thread (and overall topic in general) when you say that someone may do it incorrectly and get hurt. That is exactly one of the problems in recommending this method for others. Does the average dog owner know enough to do this safely? What would you say to someone who takes your recommendation and gets hurt?

Even if I was convinced that this method was effective (and I surely am not), I think that there are many far safer and positive alternatives.


----------



## Cheetah (May 25, 2006)

Personally, I make it a point to put my dogs on their backs on a regular basis, for training purposes - but not as a form of punishment. I do it so they will readily accept grooming/handling. I figure if I use it as punishment, it pretty much ruins being able to use that position for anything positive that I will need to use it for (let's say my dog has a leg injury, and I need to flip him over so he's not standing on it, and so I can get a better look - and yes this has happened and it was very useful to be able to do quickly).

There are better ways to train my dogs anyway.


----------



## Alpha (Aug 24, 2006)

I'm going to be completely honest.

I've gone against what experienced dog people have told me NOT to do. I have. Because I used the old: You don't know me, you don't know my dog, blah blah blah... childish nonsense. (referring to myself, not anyone on this thread!)

And I did it anyways. Thank GOD, what I did (e-collar usage with an aggressive tendency, although with a method that many use effectively that's a whole other thread) didn't have a negative effect on my dog and our relationship.

Truth be told, it didn't work anyways! LOL. BUT, it could've very well put an awful, negative strain on our relationship. I believe it didn't because I spend a lot of time with my dogs, more than your average person (My work allows me to bring my dogs pretty much everywhere I go). 

I know I'm stubborn, and I didn't want to believe what they told me. So, I only came about to realize how wrong I was, until I did it. Then compared it to what worked 100%, stepped back, and said; "Wow... They were right.. what an idiot I am". But it took me going against their advice, and doing it myself for me to realize.

So I know firsthand, all the information, all the experience and knowledge won't change anyone's mind about alpha rolling.

Unfortunately it will take a tragic happenstance. Or, like in my situation, if you continue to educate yourself about dog behaviours/training, you'll just figure it out for yourself 

I've been awful rude to a person, or two or three (  ) when it comes to certain training methods, I'll admit. And from my personal opinion, I think it's because in the beginning, your trying to be nice about it ie: Hey man, I've done it, or I've seen it done, and no good can come of it.

But after it feels like your repeatedly banging your head against a brick wall, you get angry. Why isn't this person listening to me? I'm really trying to help....

So that's my rant for the day  Or not... ROFL!


----------



## battlemonkey (Oct 14, 2007)

Dude, I'm not saying I use it as a form of punishment, I've never once mentioned that. I don't punish my dog, she doesn't do anything to merit any form of punishment. I simply use it as a form of training, when I feel she's being more dominant then me, simply put.



Cheetah said:


> There is a bottom line on the advising of alpha rolling on this forum and that is this:
> 
> It is very DANGEROUS to advise alpha rolling on a training forum like this, because it is populated by many new/first-time dog owners, who could potentially take the advice and try it on their own dogs, which could result in serious injury to the dog and/or the owner. This would also be a LIABILITY.
> 
> Thus, regardless of how you or we feel about it, we DO NOT advise alpha rolling on this forum. This would be why I don't think you'll find a moderator on here who is "super pro-alpha rolling".



How would it be a liability? I'm not telling this person use it, I'm telling them that it's worked for me, and it's only a suggestion, as with everybody else's suggestions on this forum. I'm not telling this member to do it or else, which is what everybody is implying pretty much.

There's nowhere in the forum rules that I've read about not suggesting alpha-rolling, whether mods like it or not, I'm not going to stop training my dog this way, and if somebody asks about it, I'll share my thoughts, why not? Isn't this forum made for suggestions and assistance to other dog owners who feel their dogs need further help? Or should we all just refer everybody to "professional dog trainers", much like alot of members do on these boards.

I'm sorry if I'm being harsh, but I've had a hard day and with all this accusing me of punishing my dog by pinning her to the ground is kinda ridiculous, especially since I have nowhere once mentioned that I punish her whatsoever. If the mods want to delete this or ban me, then by all means, all the power to you, and I appologize if you think I'm being un-realistic but I thought I was allowed to pitch in my 2 cents, as is everybody else, without being judged.


----------



## Cheetah (May 25, 2006)

battlemonkey said:


> How would it be a liability? I'm not telling this person use it, I'm telling them that it's worked for me, and it's only a suggestion, as with everybody else's suggestions on this forum. I'm not telling this member to do it or else, which is what everybody is implying pretty much.
> 
> There's nowhere in the forum rules that I've read about not suggesting alpha-rolling, whether mods like it or not, I'm not going to stop training my dog this way, and if somebody asks about it, I'll share my thoughts, why not? Isn't this forum made for suggestions and assistance to other dog owners who feel their dogs need further help? Or should we all just refer everybody to "professional dog trainers", much like alot of members do on these boards.
> 
> I'm sorry if I'm being harsh, but I've had a hard day and with all this accusing me of punishing my dog by pinning her to the ground is kinda ridiculous, especially since I have nowhere once mentioned that I punish her whatsoever. If the mods want to delete this or ban me, then by all means, all the power to you, and I appologize if you think I'm being un-realistic but I thought I was allowed to pitch in my 2 cents, as is everybody else, without being judged.


I never said you suggested it. I simply said that is why WE THE STAFF do not advise it, and advise against it.

And "alpha rolling" is a form of positive punishment. By a behavioral definition, positive punishment is adding something negative to the environment to decrease a, unwanted behavior. A person would "alpha roll" their dog in an attempt to decrease unwanted dominant behavior. So, yes, if you are using alpha rolls for training, in the way that they are usually described in books and training videos, you are, in fact, using a form of positive punishment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_roll
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operant_conditioning

Check out the part about "Reinforcement, punishment, and extinction." It should help explain better.


----------



## Alpha (Aug 24, 2006)

> I simply use it as a form of training, when I feel she's being more dominant then me, simply put.


The problem I have with this is that if your trying to assert dominance, this is an awful way of doing it. I hope you read the article I posted the link too, but it clearly explains WHY alpha rolling is so confusing and terrifying to our dogs.

In the wild, a wolf would only forcibly roll another, if he meant *TO KILL IT*. You obviously haven't killed your dog, but everytime you do it, those are the thoughts going through her head. Then when you don't, do you think she trusts or respects you more? Nope. She might be scared so it APPEARS that she respects you, but respect and fear are two different things. [Had to add, perhaps sometimes my dogs "fear" me, if I'm angry with them, but not because they think I'm going to kill them. Because they're afraid what will happen if I'm angry with them... and it's nothing physical. All mental; They won't get to cuddle with me on the couch, I may take their bed away, I'll ignore them. All very important things in my dog's lives. Things that they like, things that I am in control of]

If a wolf/dog is trying to assert dominance, they do it by controlling the resources. I dont' like what you just did, no food for you tonight or no baby making rights for you or no comfy spot in the den etc etc, simply put. 

None of the above are done with any force, it's all mind control... Mwa ha ha! LOL

I'm not judging. Just giving my opinion as well.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

battlemonkey said:


> Why would you keep calling me out, or others who use the same technique, saying that we shouldn't do it cause it doesn't work on some people, probalby the people who don't know how to use it properly and get "bit by their dogs", or so you say.


Since you asked let me tell you a story that happened to me recently. I volunteer my time at a local shelter a few hours during the week, but mostly on the weekend. One Saturday I went to the shelter with the intention of walking more than a few dogs. In fact, one of the dogs there now looks as beautiful as yours. Anyway, I didn't walk dogs that Saturday as I normally did. The staff was short handed and they needed someone to help out in the surrender lobby. I volunteered. 

I volunteered 6 hours on that Saturday. During that time 6 dogs, 4 cats, and 1 chicken were surrendered. Of those animals, 2 dogs, all 4 cats, and the chicken were surrendered as strays. One dog was surrendered by an elderly lady who no longer felt able to care for her dog. The other 3 dogs were also owner surrenders. Why were they surrendered? They bit their owners. If you're wondering, these dogs were all promptly euthanized when the holding period expired. Known biters are too much of a responsibility for any City to risk adopting out. Why did the dogs bite you ask? Each of their owners stated at one point in their interview that they tried "Dog Whisperer" training. One dog was a constant barker. One dog was an escape artist. And the other dog didn't respond well to the "new" puppy. All things, with proper training, that can be corrected without physical force. I'm sure these people too bought in on Cesar's mantra and wanted to be the "dominant" one in the house. Well, they succeeded.

Now, I'm not one who's foolish enough to believe this story is anything but anecdotal. Surely it must have been coincidental that half the surrendered dogs on that Saturday just happened to be from people who acknowledged using Cesar's techniques but did not acknowledge Cesar's caveat. Whether they got the idea to use physical force from Cesar's show or from an *internet forum*, the death of one dog, by novices who used physical force, is one too many. I don't blame Cesar for these dogs dying. I don't even blame the owners for trying things on their own. What I do blame is the idea that physical force on dogs, no matter how mild we perceive it to be, is acceptable...and especially in the absence of training or testing. 

Sure, if you don't know how to use the technique, you shouldn't use it. Duh! Sure, if it works for your dog there's no problem, right? Wrong! I know 3 dead dogs who's owners weren't dog savvy enough to understand that a technique like alpha rolling is dangerous - it certainly was for these dogs, ultimately ending all behavior. And guess what? These same kind of people frequent internet forums just like this one. So yes, if I speak up for dogs, I apologize. And I'm sorry if I disagree with your advice. I'm certain you wouldn't want your advice to be a contributing factor in a dog's death now do you. <=Notice that was a statement, not a question. I know your answer already because I don't doubt you're a caring person. 



> You say my dog should be trained before being punished? What makes you think I am punishing her?


Why would you alpha roll a dog if you didn't intend the frequency of the previous behavior to diminish? I'm not against punishments...that are appropriate and non-physical. 



> What makes you think she is not trained?


Did you not say that you moved into the city? Where dogs are more present? Did you not say this is when you discovered you had a problem? Did you not acknowledge that your dog *was* poorly socialized? Socialization requires training, does it not? I'm sure you're working hard at socializing your dog. I don't fault you for working on your dog's social skills. It's commendable to acknowledge your dog has a problem and that you're actively working on it. But if you're actively working on it, your dog isn't trained...yet. 



> You keep saying in your posts that you don't know us, our dogs or our ways, nor do you want to, but now you're accusing me of abusing my dog and not training her. That, my friend, was rude...


I'm glad you finally decided I *am* your friend. Perhaps now we can make some headway, or not, but nope, I haven't accused you of anything. Again, you do not understand my intent. What I'm accusing, is the idea of alpha rolling, being a good example of a correction. And when I questioned you on it, only then did it become a personal matter, on your part. I understand that people *like* people to agree with them. I understand that there may be "nice" ways to disagree, but that's not my concern here, and if it's not now obvious to you that I disagree with "alpha rolling" and not "battlemonkey", I can't help you. I'd be "nice" if dog lives weren't involved. Perhaps I am being too dramatic, but I'm speaking with conviction.


> In a manner that bespeaks the determination with which *I* believe it. Because contray to the wisdom of the bumper sticker, it's not enough these days to simply question authority, you have to speak with it too! - Taylor Mali


----------



## Ixala (Aug 24, 2007)

Cheetah said:


> WE THE STAFF do not advise it, and advise against it.


<sigh> I just wish such advice and opinions could be, consistently, offered impersonally, without emotionalizing judgments and name calling.


----------



## rosemaryninja (Sep 28, 2007)

Ixala said:


> <sigh> I just wish such advice and opinions could be, consistently, offered impersonally, without emotionalizing judgments and name calling.


That's almost impossible. You can try criticise the training method ONLY, but the trainers who use that method will almost always rush to the defense of their practices. That is when it stops being impersonal - when people take it personally.

I honestly don't think that advice to alpha roll should be dispensed on this forum. Like I said, I don't agree with alpha rolling, but I believe it can help SOME dogs. However, it should not be used with every dog. People were encouraging me to pin my dog because it wanted to mount my other dog. That was hardly called for and if I hadn't known better I would actually have tried it. I highly doubt that Spunky would have bitten me, but it would have harmed our relationship negatively.


----------



## Cheetah (May 25, 2006)

rosemaryninja said:


> That's almost impossible. You can try criticise the training method ONLY, but the trainers who use that method will almost always rush to the defense of their practices. That is when it stops being impersonal - when people take it personally.
> 
> I honestly don't think that advice to alpha roll should be dispensed on this forum. Like I said, I don't agree with alpha rolling, but I believe it can help SOME dogs. However, it should not be used with every dog. People were encouraging me to pin my dog because it wanted to mount my other dog. That was hardly called for and if I hadn't known better I would actually have tried it. I highly doubt that Spunky would have bitten me, but it would have harmed our relationship negatively.


I totally agree.

And I think it should be added that even if there are times when an alpha roll might work, it's best to first consult with a professional (certified animal behaviorist). Even before Cesar Millan's show, each and every time, and even right in the middle after the commercial break, it says: "Do not attempt these techniques without consulting a professional."


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

Ixala said:


> <sigh> I just wish such advice and opinions could be, consistently, offered impersonally, without emotionalizing judgments and name calling.


Yeah i know what you mean.

to discuss is one thing, but some folks like to go around and telling people they are wrong isnt always the best way to get the point across. Me and Battlemonkey talked and i told her that i usually get attacked for saying some of the things i do. but personally i dont give a f***. if someone doesnt like the way i do things oh well, but my dogs are happy and yes i know and yes it shows. how some of you might ask? well for one their tail is wagging the bounce around the house excited, not hiding in the corner. 

Curbside, im sorry but you do tell people they are wrong in the wrong way. as if alot are dumb kids. if you know so much, how about using it to aid, not point out negatives. is it possible to help people without using condescending language. im glad you help that shelter lord knows those animals need help. but from what it appears no one is a f***ing animal perfectionist. we can all have a pissing contest to see who is right, or we can all learn each other and help each other. im the worlds worst, if someone says "no you are wrong" and i know im not wrong, then i go find something to back it up. 

the alpha pinning: peope this has gone back and forth. I think to many people are catching this thread in the middle. i thought we closed out that topic? well i think "always" forceful pinning might not always be the best, but if you pin when they are submissive the point is crossed. if your dog flies off the handle and you need to get a strict point across, then IMO go for it. and for anyone who wants to tell me how bad it is, please dont waste your time typing. everyone here has found something to back up their theories, so its a dead topic.

Cesar Millan: i think we need to decide to take his advice or not. i see people use hes advice, but when someone brings up some other form of technique he uses, that same person tells others to not use it cause its not safe. yes or no?


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

ar3151 said:


> Curbside, im sorry but you do tell people they are wrong in the wrong way.


And I have an e-mail box filled with thank-you's. If I'm wrong, I'm not aware of it. Don't take it personally, it's not your life on the line that I'm worried about.


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> And I have an e-mail box filled with thank-you's. If I'm wrong, I'm not aware of it. Don't take it personally, it's not your life on the line that I'm worried about.



congrats on that.  

and no one's life is on the line, again dont assume bad things are always going to happen to animals, you shouldnt live in fear.


----------



## rosemaryninja (Sep 28, 2007)

ar3151 said:


> Yeah i know what you mean.
> Curbside, im sorry but you do tell people they are wrong in the wrong way. as if alot are dumb kids. if you know so much, how about using it to aid, not point out negatives.


That's what she does. In order to help somebody, you correct them. 



> well i think "always" forceful pinning might not always be the best, but if you pin when they are submissive the point is crossed. if your dog flies off the handle and you need to get a strict point across, then IMO go for it.


How many times has your dog flown off the handle? I know my dog has never flown off the handle, and mounting Honey does NOT count as flying off the handle. So why did you recommend me to roll her?



> Cesar Millan: i think we need to decide to take his advice or not. i see people use hes advice, but when someone brings up some other form of technique he uses, that same person tells others to not use it cause its not safe. yes or no?


I think a lot of what Cesar says - his mottos like "exercise, discipline, affection", and so on - make sense. They are common sense and "exercise, discipline, affection" is basically a summary of what you would read in any good dog book. However, I don't agree with him doing such physical training on the show. Cesar deals with some EXTREME cases, like dogs who can't pass another dog without raging out and seriously meaning to kill. In this case, I would agree that physical methods are called for, but these methods need to be done right, by professionals like him or other dog behaviourists. Not the average joe pet owner. 

By doing them on television, he's telling everybody that "if your dog is like this, do this alpha roll and she will learn better" when he really should be telling them "if your dog is like this, get professional help". So, firstly, this leads to people trying to alpha roll their aggressive dogs and setting themselves up for potential injury.

Secondly, it tells people who have mildly dominant dogs that alpha rolling is the answer. Pinning should never be done unless in the absolute worst case scenario, but advocating it through a medium like television encourages people to pin their dogs when they bark at the mailman, when they strain on the leash, when they growl over their food and a hundred other scenarios in which alpha rolling is completely uncalled for. And these owners will end up terrifying their dogs rather than teaching them.


----------



## battlemonkey (Oct 14, 2007)

rosemaryninja said:


> That's what she does. In order to help somebody, you correct them.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He does tell people to seek professional help before attempting anything he does on TV, he doesn't just tell random people to do whatever he does. He's had years and years of experience, and it shows. If people want to try doing what he's been doing, then why not? Live and learn, maybe you'll come out on top, maybe you won't, s*** happens, right?!

Your dogs have never flown off the handle, congratulations! Some dogs are more well-behaved then others, some dogs take less time to train then others, some people don't even train their dogs, the list goes on and on. My dog is 9yo and I'm still training her. I've been trying to train her since I adopted her when she was 2 months old, there's nothing wrong with that. There is always something to learn, whether you agree or not. I am still learning things in life, then why shouldn't our pets? Would you think it's wrong that I'm trying to train my cats? Oh, God, I push their bums down to try and teach them to sit before a treat, is somebody going to scold me because it's the wrong thing to do? I am using physical touch...now I'm sure somebody will tell me that my cats are going to bite and claw my eyes out because I'm touching them (mind you, alot of cats claw your eyes out if you touch them...lol).

Andrew is right, this case should have been closed and I'm asking the mods to please close this thread before something gets said that shouldn't be.


----------



## ar3151 (Oct 12, 2007)

rosemaryninja said:


> That's what she does. In order to help somebody, you correct them.


There is a difference in helping and talking down to someone, im sorry im not a person that lets people do that.




rosemaryninja said:


> How many times has your dog flown off the handle? I know my dog has never flown off the handle, and mounting Honey does NOT count as flying off the handle. So why did you recommend me to roll her?


i have a rowdy dog what can i say? she flies off from time to time, she is 11 months old and just cause she is rowdy doesnt make her a bad dog and im not going to get rid of her, so i choose to work with her more. 

no i dont think you should roll her. unless she doesnt listen to you at all, i would only do that when the dog just really doesnt mind. i personally would give a good pat on the bottom and say NO! but thats where im a bad person according to some folks. but thats my method.




rosemaryninja said:


> I think a lot of what Cesar says - his mottos like "exercise, discipline, affection", and so on - make sense. They are common sense and "exercise, discipline, affection" is basically a summary of what you would read in any good dog book. However, I don't agree with him doing such physical training on the show. Cesar deals with some EXTREME cases, like dogs who can't pass another dog without raging out and seriously meaning to kill. In this case, I would agree that physical methods are called for, but these methods need to be done right, by professionals like him or other dog behaviourists. Not the average joe pet owner.
> 
> By doing them on television, he's telling everybody that "if your dog is like this, do this alpha roll and she will learn better" when he really should be telling them "if your dog is like this, get professional help". So, firstly, this leads to people trying to alpha roll their aggressive dogs and setting themselves up for potential injury.


you see what i mean by him, its hard for average people to do those things. i just say we leave him out of our talks since it seems alot of people get mixed up.




rosemaryninja said:


> Secondly, it tells people who have mildly dominant dogs that alpha rolling is the answer. Pinning should never be done unless in the absolute worst case scenario, but advocating it through a medium like television encourages people to pin their dogs when they bark at the mailman, when they strain on the leash, when they growl over their food and a hundred other scenarios in which alpha rolling is completely uncalled for. And these owners will end up terrifying their dogs rather than teaching them.



i agree with you, there is a time and a place for everything, i dont normally roll or pin my dogs, but again they dont really do anything that bad. i just agree with those types of discipline. and it appears that i do them all the time, but i have stated where i dont. im more of a way "come on melody stop" rather than lash out, LOL.  

thanks for the talk.


----------



## Cheetah (May 25, 2006)

If the OP of this thread has gotten what they need from it and would like it closed, please PM me and I will be glad to do so.


----------

