The book? “Born To Run”, by Christopher McDougall (Vintage Books, 2009). It’s about man and running.

My son is insane. I don’t DO running. I don’t LIKE to run. If the entire theater was on fire, I’d WALK out of the building.

My son runs. He is an ultra-runner. He runs in races that are 100+ miles. Now mind you, this is the child who wouldn’t even walk his dishes to the sink, yet he runs. He runs in ultra-races five or more times a year. That, alone, qualifies him as insane in my book.

Anyway, back to his suggested reading. “Born to Run” is an extremely good read even if one is not interested in running, per se. It covers, simply, a two-prong premise at its heart; 1) man was created to run, as supported by the life-style and culture of the Tarahumara Indians in Mexico and the human skeleton, itself, and 2) in our modern world, the “business” of running, the commercial industry, has taken us farther and farther from the human’s physical roots of running by subtly and artificially altering the the design of the shoe which alters our stance and step and creates injuries. It is from these injuries that an entire industry has grown—sports medicine—and sold a load of running shoes. The culprit behind this? Think the “N” word. Nike.

Barefoot, or minimal covering, lets the foot hit the ground in a manner our body was designed to accept. Injuries become almost nil. Slam a shoe on us and our balance and manner of placing our feet alters, which then changes impact, pressure, and stride, creating injury.

So what does the running shoe industry do?

It begins to study what it can change in the shoe to minimize the injury and then alters the physical shoe, which simply creates another injury.

(Please remember that little gem of a development as it is reflective of dogs and the training industry)

What does all this running have to do with dogs, you ask. Well, quite a bit, actually, but we must go back to prehistory: Man before man began to write and sell ideas. When ideas were based upon reality, pragmatic outcomes of survival, and sentimentality was not the greatest selling tool, along with advertising, that man ever invented. (Forget the wheel, without salesmanship it would probably have been a limited item.)

In the book it’s discussed that man is the only animal which takes multiple breaths per step. All other animals take

ONE breath per full set of steps

This means that we can run farther and longer as our oxygen intake can maintain a better energy level. Animals, when they finally poop out, just sit down. We’ve all seen it. An animal exhausted from running hangs his head, gasps for breath, and then lies down for a time to re-energize.

Since the dawn of time man has hunted. It has been long known that our relationship with the dog extended to hunting.

It has always been stated that man, once he began to use dogs, used them (and this is often simply inferred or told as basic fact) to attack animals and kill them for us in the process of the hunt. Yet I don’t think that’s true. Let’s work backwards.

Everything man has developed he has developed as an easier way to do something based on what he did before. Man did NOT spring from the ground complete with long-range laser sights on 50 caliber weapons. Long ago he had bows and arrows and flint arrow heads which increased the killing distance from his prey.

Before that? He had spears, he had to get closer to more dangerous prey and probably this is when the use of the dog as an attack methodology was perfected.

Before THAT? Man had sticks. Man had himself. Man had his feet. Man had his endurance. Man had what is discussed in “Born to Run”—the physiognomy that made running his greatest asset. It is known as “The Running Man” theory.

“The problem was this: Chasing an animal to death is evolution’s version of the perfect crime. Persistence hunting (as it’s known to anthropologists) leaves behind no forensics—no arrowheads, no spear-nicked dear spines—so how do you build a case that a killing took place when you can’t produce a corpse, a weapon, or witness?” (pg 229, Born to Run)

“David Carrier, PhD, professor of biology, University of Utah: ‘The frustrating thing is, we were finding stories all over the place…We couldn’t find anyone who’d done a persistence hunt. We couldn’t find someone who’d even seen one.’…Throw a dart at the map, and chances are you’ll bull’s-eye the site of a persistence-hunting tale. The Goshutes and Papago tribes of the American West told them; so did the Kalahari Bushmen in Botswana, the Aborigines of Australia, Masai warriors in Kenya, the Seri and Tarahumara Indians in Mexico…” (pg 230, Born to Run)

But in the 1980s, at age 20, Louis Liebenberg, a Cape Town student of applied mathematics and physics, had an epiphany, dropped out of school, searched for and found a renegade group of Kalahari Bushmen, and spent the next four years living with them. THEY introduced him to a persistence hunt.

“He’d heard a little about persistence-hunts, but he ranked them somewhere between an accident and a lie: either the animal had actually broken its neck while fleeing, or the story was out-and-out baloney. No way these guys were going to catch one of those kudus on foot. No way..’This is how we do it,’ !Nate said…The four hunters ran swiftly but easily behind the bounding kudu. Whenever the animals darted into the acacia grove, one of the hunters broke from the group and drove the kudu back into the sun. The herd would scatter, re-form, scatter again, but the four Bushmen ran and swerved behind a single kudu, cutting it out of the herd whenever it tried to blend, flushing it from the trees whenever it tried to rest….The Bushmen traditionally wore light, giraffe-skin moccasins, and now had on thin, flimsy sneakers that let their feet cool on the fly…he watched it (kudu) weave drunkenly…its front knees buckled, straightened…it recovered and bounded away…then it crashed to the ground.
‘It’s more efficient than a bow and arrow,’ he observed. ‘It takes a lot of attempts to get a successful hunt by bow.’ …(the hunts) kept the Bushmen on the run for three to five hours (neatly corresponding, one might note, to how long it takes most people to run our latter-day version of prehistoric hunting, the marathon. Recreation has its reasons.)” (pg 238, Born to Run)

And it is here that I believe we first began to use dogs—persistence hunting with a twist.

Man would NOT have had to TRAIN the dog to hunt. The dog knew how to hunt. Man would NOT have had to train the dog to hunt with man. That would have been intrinsically within the dog as pack BEHAVIOR. All man would have needed to do was master the SAME BEHAVIORAL COMMUNICATION that dogs have amongst themselves in order to harness the skill of the dog; don’t break from the place I put you until your turn in the hunt comes—then do your thing and do it well and we all eat tonight.

When the kudu entered the acacia grove, man could send in the dog. When the animal blended into the herd, the men could send in the dog, with his superior abilities to cull it out so that they might resume the chase. The dog would be unable to engage in the long running of the persistence hunt, any more than the kudu could withstand it. However, the dog COULD be used for sight, smell, short dashes, primitive “herding and culling” of the kudu, thus saving man some time and energy.

This would result in less men being needed for a given hunt as dogs would supplement the group. Thus, more men could form smaller groups and go out simultaneously to hunt, thereby increasing their success rate, widening the sources of food, which in turn would result in more and more varied forms of hides, bones, etc. Evolution, creativity, tools, life-styles, use of the dogs in hunting, would reflect the broadening choices before man.

Men would respect the dog for his hunting abilities, just as he would respect other men. He would respect the strengths and weaknesses of the individual dog and search for dogs that best off-set his own strengths and weaknesses and was best suited for the job at hand. The dog would be held in esteem for his prowess at his job, though he would also find companionship and love within the human community, both as himself and as a hunter which contributed to the overall safety and well-being of the group. The individual dog’s contribution would be valued, not merely as a companion, but as one that increased the survival rate and quality of the whole.

As the evolution of man and dog has progressed, dogs have lost their intrinsic working value. They are no longer respected (shut up! it’s true!). Dogs are relegated to a companion status, and as such, humans have forgotten, and do not see, the dogs’ intrinsic needs, skills, individualism, and capabilities. Obedience training came into being as a specific skill-based method to teach something to the dog that was OUTSIDE of the human-dog natural behavioral patterns and needs. Communication has broken down as we teach tricks in the form of obedience, which was for task-specific jobs by specific breeds, and fail to learn how to relate to our dogs in a manner they understand.

The juxtaposition of these next two pictures shows exactly what I’m talking about.

In humans, and I would hazard a guess that it can be applied to all group animals, the basic need to feel useful, and the positive emotions resulting from one’s individual contribution to the overall success of the relationship/group, is very important. Here’s where obedience fails our dogs—tricks, following a command, or competition in shows (agility, dog shows, rally, etc.) is simply NOT REAL. Practicing for a play is NOT the same thing as actually putting ON a play—we all know it. Practicing marksmanship is NOT the same thing as actually having to shoot under pressure. Swimming in a competition is NOT the same thing as swimming to rescue someone. The intrinsic emotional and self-skill measurements are not comparable. The manufactured is a poor substitute unless and until actuality takes place. Obedience is a poor substitute for the actuality of respect, true self-engagement between dog and human in a behavioral, day-to-day manner which has direct, immediate, and obvious outcomes socially, personally, and physically.

Now do you remember the statement above about the running shoes industry fixing a shoe design problem that caused injury only to create a new injury? THAT is our dog training industry today. It “fixes” a failure of our dogs and owners to master a form of training by creating a new and adjusted form of training from studying why we are failing. The obedience training industry NEVER studies whether it is the TRAINING ITSELF that is wrong.

Let’s go back to ‘barefoot-with-dogs’ and simply regain our respect for the dog, allow him to actually BE a dog, and see him as the individual he is, demanding he contribute behaviorally and socially to our families, instead of viewing him only from the point of the “love” and what we GET from him. Our dogs will be safe, have less neurosis, no need for anti-anxiety meds, and owners, shelters, and rescues will take a completely different view of him. No longer will we sell “poor, poor doggies” and sentimentality. We shall be promoting the concept of behavioral teaching which the dog missed at some point and truly educating owners in how best to have a strong, lasting relationship with the dog. THEN we will be saving our dogs. Now we are merely making ourselves feel good at our dogs’ expense, (much like a man with a ‘trophy wife’) and creating an immense industry which creates problems and then sells you their version of the newest solution.

One of the very few groups of humans that has kept the ‘barefoot-with-dogs’ concept we’ve been talking about, is the homeless (along with the working dog handler). No obedience training, no practice, no frou-frou. Just simple, pragmatic, behavioral communication and a solid relationship. If these people can do it, and without the need of a persistence-hunt, why can’t almost everyone?

Whenever this has been posted, people weigh in with a myriad of responses ranging from worry to anger if they are in The Industry, laughing at the truth of it if they’re owners.

As we should all remember: Good satire is based in truth.

Go for it, Will, maybe you can get the truth of it to “click” with people.

I haven’t found a single thing I wanted to blog about as everything to do with dogs recently is pity, sentimentality, and silly. I refuse to play into that.

However, this popped up and I could not help but want to share. How well do people REALLY know the animal they harbor in their homes? If this video is any indication, not well at all (this would go for the instincts and actions of dogs, too, people.)

Still, it is simply too funny not to share. But consider this, the frog is better at the game than humans. The human is not smart enough to not piss-off the frog.

WARNING: Do NOT be drinking anything while watching this video. ENJOY!!!

CONTACT Susan Overfield via contact tab on this website or by phone to set up a consultation time.

This BOSS Dog Clinic is being held at a private home, and as such, no address will be released except to paid registrants.

CONTACT: Susan Overfield stockdog@3rivers.net for more information, registration form and packet

Click Here or go to Products Page to make Clinic payment (due to the fact that BOSS Dog Clinics are special events and a space has been held for you, the registrant, resulting in another person being turned away, no refunds of registration fees are given unless the cancellation originates with Susan Overfield)

Tina Gauthier Phone: (406) 873-4624
Special Services Officer
Cut Bank Animal Shelter”

How a relinquished dog is handled, from the moment a shelter receives him, is of paramount importance to the dog’s overall psychological, social, and behavioral improvement and success, both within the shelter and in his future home. A staff that has the knowledge and skills that teaches the dog(s) behavioral parameters based on social identity, and can educate prospective owners in maintaining those behavioral skills, has a much healthier in-shelter period for both dogs and staff. Recidivism rates decline and adoptive owners are much happier and more satisfied with the dog they’ve chosen.

Cut Bank Shelter, of Cut Bank, MT, has used the BOSS Dog method for almost seven years with no dogs returned in all that time. An unprecedented success in shelter management.

Other shelters/rescues currently using this method: Kootenai Pets for Life, Dedman Foundation, Louisa Humane Society Animal Shelter (Va), RezQ Dogs, as well as numerous individuals in rescues and veterinary clinics (read Testimonials).

Until his death, Dave Powers, MT Co-ordinator for the American Brittany Rescue, used this method on all the dogs and held an annual BOSS Dog Clinic. We miss Dave greatly. His success rate at bringing dogs “back from the edge” and creating adoptable dogs was phenomenal.

A one-hour, interactive discussion about dogs. Everything you’ve wanted to know about your dog, how and what he thinks, why he does what he does, how to have a better relationship with him and teach him good behaviors, as well as offer him peace-of-mind. No gimmicks, nothing to buy, just a good, solid relationship built on common-sense communication and skills that dogs can understand.

Discussion led by Susan Overfield, author, national speaker, and dog behavioral instructor with 40+ years hands-on experience.

A dog, an owner, a partnership for life. BOSS Dog Clinics differ greatly from conventional obedience-based methods by teaching positive social behaviors that dogs need and owners want. Taught in a common-sense, no gimmick, no frills way that’s easy to learn and apply, dogs display desired behaviors quickly. Guaranteed to build a successful and happy relationship with the dog you love. Course is taught by Susan Overfield, author, national speaker, and dog behavioral instructor with 40+ years hands-on experience. Accepting dogs ages 8 weeks to adult, any breed, registration required.

The Dedman Foundation, in an effort to educate dog owners in a practical, successful way to instill and maintain life-long positive manners and behavior in their dogs so that fewer dogs are relinquished to shelters, is offering a one-day BOSS Dog Clinic at the unprecedented cost of $30 per dog/owner.

Registration is required. A part of the fee is a donation to the Dedman Foundation, a no-kill shelter. A limit of 20 attendees, so register early.

It’s true, however. Dog toys don’t stop a dog from chewing, they actually
reward and re-enforce the act.

Think about this, be honest. The dog is chewing on the sofa and you give him something to chew on. REWARD!

Anyway, vets across the country squirrel away x-rays of the unusual items their clients have ingested and submit them annually to see who will win the “They Ate What?” contest sponsored by Veterinary Practice News

So here we go, Onward and Inward:

But, does he come every time you call?”
The dog jumped up, grabbed the phone from his owner’s hand and ate it. (We’ll discuss jumping on people at another time.)

“Choke” Chains—A Whole New Meaning
A bulldog ate this off her house-mate. Actually, she ate TWO of these collars. The owners didn’t realize it until, upon eating the second collar, the dog became ill.

I Scream, You Scream, We All Scream (For False Teeth)
Yet another bulldog ate these false teeth that he found in a bowl of ice cream (which opens an entirely new galaxy of questions not to be addressed here.)

“And The Dish Ran Away With The Spoon”
A husky stole this fork from the sink.
A Staffie gobbled down this 15-inch long knife.
There were two of these x-rays, one was a dog that was being given medication, the other was being fed peanut butter. (If dogs were meant to be fed with spoons they’d know how to hold them.)

All I Do Is Buy Pacifiers. Where Do They All Go?
ANOTHER bulldog. This one, along with these 15 pacifiers, ate a bottle cap and a piece of a basketball.

With This Ring…
A Labrador pup snarfed this engagement ring.

Rubber Ducky, You’re The One…
(Another) Staffie involved in Duck Wars was losing the battle, so he scarfed this toy down. Possession being 9/10ths of the law, I guess.

“I Shot An Arrow Into The Air…”
A bull terrier pup ate this 10 1/2-inch toy arrow.

It’s a Dog-Eat-Dog World
A spaniel “rescued” this poor dog from a doll house.

The pics give the adage, “You are what you eat”, and entirely new meaning.

STDs, in this case SOCIALLY transmitted disease(s), is a very real, and often dangerous, risk for dogs that are exposed to the social world of dog parks, dog day care, interaction between just-met compadres, dog shows (even as a spectator), boarding kennels, or generally out and about.

In no particular order let’s cover some of the worst diseases:

1) “Oregon Fungus” — A new extra virulent strain of airborne fungus, Cryptococcus gattii, is evolving and adapting to local environments. It has infected many kinds of animals, from porpoises, to elk, to dogs, to humans. It is known to spread through the air, but researchers have been unable to track it outside the body of the infected animal. It is serious, but treatable. However, vets may misdiagnosis the fungus for its “sibling species C. neoformans” as it’s so new.

2) Therapy Dogs Spreading Superbugs — “Superbugs” are infectious organisms that make patients sick, and may even cause death because it’s very difficult to kill them with existing drugs. A study of canines used for pet therapy, who were kissed and handled by, or on the beds of patients, determined the presence of MRSA (Methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus) or C. Difficile (Clostridium difficile) being carried by the dogs on their fur and paws from patient to patient and out into the world. MRSA was also discovered on the dog’s handler. “The concern is that other bacteria, such as influence and Norovirus might also be spread by therapy dogs.” (Journal of Hospital Infection, doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2009.02.019)

3) Sleeping With Your Dog — “”the risk for transmission of zoonotic agents by close contact between pets and their owners through bed sharing, kissing or licking is real and has even been documented for life-threatening infections such as plague, internal parasites” and other serious diseases.” Yep, we’re talking the Black Death, the Plague. Along with MRSA (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus), meningitis, infection, salmonella, to name just a few. Make a bed for your dog on the floor and let him sleep there, he’ll be in the room with you and that is enough.

4) Canine Influenza — Unlike the ‘seasonal’ human variety, it can strike you dog any time of the year. First identified in 2003, it mutated from an equine flu virus and has spread across the U.S. It’s easy to catch, sneezing is an indicator of the possibility of the flu. The number of canine flu cases have risen dramatically. There is a vaccination for it, but it may not be applicable to all dogs.

5) Human Influenza — yep, you CAN give it to your dog. If you have the flu, stay away from Fido.

6) Canine Infectious (Viral) Hepatitis — Usually affecting pups and dogs up to 1 year in age, this is a highly contagious disease spread via urine, feces, saliva, or contaminated objects. There may be no symptoms shown by the dog. There is a vaccination available.

7) Canine Cough (Kennel Cough) — Easily spread by a bacteria from dog to dog your dog will need antibiotics and lots of rest. A Bordetella vaccine is available.

8 Coronavirus — No, we are not referring to drinking too much beer. It’s normally a relatively mild disease, however, your dog may not think so when infected and ill. It’s contracted when your pet comes into contact with the feces or other excretions of an infected dog. There is a vaccination available.

9) Distemper — Yes, there’s a vaccination for it, but it can live on clothing for up to several hours on hands, feet, and objects. You can be a carrier and not know it, putting pups or dogs with immune system issues at grave risk. Dogs surviving it may continue to shed the virus for up to 4 months. It’s EVERYWHERE.

10) The Big 3 — Leptospirosis “…documenting the re-emergence of the dangerous bacterium Leptospira, which can spread from dogs to humans and can cause kidney disease in both…CDC says disease trackers are noting increasing incidences among urban children…this strain, cropping up across North America, seems adapted particularly to dogs, which show symptoms including lethargy, vomiting, acute kidney failure and can lead to death…the bacteria can be transferred to people through pets or from swimming in infected water, camping or other outdoor activities…(it) is very much associated with raccoons. Leptospira was once a rural disease, but this strain has been found mainly in urban areas because raccoons are all around us…The bacterium lives in the kidneys of infected raccoons for their lives and spreads to dogs when raccoons urinate in water.” (Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/lifestyle/health/article/Dog-disease-can-be-passed-to-humans-vets-warn-1169743.php#ixzz1dPNTTIfK)
*** Rabies, Parvovirus. Get your dogs vaccinated.

Owners, from many walks of life, claim they LOVE their dog(s). Fine, I accept that, but the way dogs are being treated is just nuts.

I believe many, many owners are displaying psychosis, small or large, and cannot allow their dogs to simply be dogs. The dogs are a vehicle by which the person gains attention. This is not good.

Here are some examples of how nutty owners can get and not a single dog demanded for themselves any of the following;

Chien Bizarre Haute Couture Coats For Dogs Denmark’s Chien Bizzare is making mink coats for dogs. Let’s not even enter the discussion of what happens to the minks, let’s confine ourselves to the psychosis of owners that need to put fur coats on dogs.

Dog weddings are gaining in popularity. Gimme a break! I’ve not heard a single dog claim they are so “in love” that they want to get married. A woman in England, however, spent almost $40k on a wedding for her dog.

Dog birthday parties. These dogs obviously missed the part about having fun. They do not look happy. Maybe it’s because they realize how old they really are in human years? I’m not going to ID the place this pic came from, but the woman should have her head examined. This is simply an excuse for humans to party. Why does one need an excuse?

Dog bedrooms, in this case at a “boarding” facility, though I’ve seen it in happen in owner’s homes. I wonder if the dog likes the decor?

It’s bad enough that we put faux jewelry on dogs, but I’ve seen real diamonds and pearls on them, too. Putting jewelry on a dog is all about the person, not the dog. I really wish it would all stop.

Halloween aside, there is a booming business in dog clothing. People, resist the urge to dress your dog. It’s not your child, it’s not a fashion statement. Dogs don’t like clothing.

Another example of dog clothing, but this time I’m going to ask, “Has the owner lost all intelligence?” Let’s review this: dog is for hunting, dog is out in the woods, dog wears cammo, hunter sees movement, shoots dog as he’s camouflaged. Dare I say it? Stupid in the extreme.

And the final, and most psychotic, act by owners? Cosmetic surgery for dogs:

1) Testicular Implants — neuter and replace with these fake cojones. This quote says it all when it comes to the owner’s mindset, ““He licks them like they’re real, and I can tell he would rather have them than nothing,” says Ryan.” Cost? Around $400 a pair.

2) Tail Docking — This is now illegal in many places. If people had the brains God gave a goat they’d know that a dog’s tail is a primary communication flag for those who know dogs.

3) Canine Breast Reduction — What IS it with humans and their obsession with “boobs”? At one end we have the Dolly Parton wish (sorry, Dolly, I know there are loads of other women out there with breast enlargements, but you are the most honest, accepting, and ‘up-front’ about it,) at the other end we have a dog with saggy mammaries that an owner can’t stomach.

4) Ear Docking/Straightening — Kind of makes one wonder if Vulcans did this to their kids and if Spock resented it. What?!?! You can’t stand ears that aren’t up straight and perky so you have to go chop at them? My suggestion is you learn to love your dog as he is, not for some “look”.

5) Canine Braces — People, people, people…It’s a well-known fact that Americans are fanatical about straight, white teeth, but these dogs will need to go under anesthesia each time these braces are tightened. This is not good, you’re courting danger for looks. Sacrifice yourself to the cosmetic gods if you wish, but leave these dogs alone.

I’m sure I’ve missed something, so feel free to add to this list of stupid things people do to dogs

Though it should have come as no surprise that friendship can, and does, exist between animals (or have we forgotten that we, too, are animals?), the world looked on in wonder at these two.

Sadly, Bella died Monday night. Here, from the first coverage of Bella & Tarra’s friendship, are the videos that record their life together, as well as the sad message of Bella’s passing from Rob Atkinson, CEO of the Elephant Sanctuary, where they lived.

Here was the beginning:

The follow up of their friendship:

The seasons they shared:

Winter

Summer

The end

My dear friends,

I write to you with very sad news. Tarra’s little dog Bella has died. We found her body on Wednesday and have been dealing with the aftermath ever since, trying to work out what happened while we look after Tarra and each other.

We noticed Bella was not with Tarra at breakfast on Tuesday and later that morning she still had not appeared. Tarra and Bella have always spent short p…eriods apart as one goes off exploring briefly on their own, but this longer absence worried us deeply and a search of the property was started which continued into the next day. The search ended tragically when Bella’s body was found close to the Asia barn that had long been home to Tarra, her five sisters and Bella. During the time of the search our usually social Tarra chose to remain alone, watched over by concerned Caregivers.

Dr. Scott, our vet of sixteen years, examined Bella for the last time and, with advice from the experts from the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency, determined the probable cause of death was an attack by animals, most likely coyotes. We have sent off samples to see whether there were any other contributory causes.

Having carefully examined Bella’s wounds and the place where she was found, we concluded that Bella had not been attacked near where she was found and neither could she have walked there.

As these investigations were taking place observant Caregivers, even more watchful of Tarra than usual, noticed blood on the underside of her trunk, evidence that pointed us in the direction of what likely happened that fateful night.

The most probable scenario is that during the night Bella strayed from Tarra briefly and was set upon. Tarra arrived too late to save her but was able to stop further damage being done to Bella’s body. With deep sadness and deeper wonder we come to comprehend what likely happened next—that Tarra picked Bella up and carried her home.

Further evidence in support of our belief for what happened comes from Tarra herself. After Bella had been found, Caregivers ensured Tarra had every chance to inspect Bella’s body before it was buried and to come to terms with her death, as this is an important part of the grieving process for elephants. But Tarra was not interested in either Bella or the group of Caregivers who would normally have drawn our inquisitive Girl to see what was happening.

It was only later when we had pieced together the whole picture that Tarra’s behavior at Bella’s grave made sense. Our poor, brave, loving Girl knew what had happened to her beloved Bella and, in the dark hours of the night as she carried her body home, had come to terms with her death.

Tarra’s sisters will help her through her sadness. Although we cannot take away Tarra’s pain immediately or the pain of all those that knew Bella, I do know Bella knew true love and true freedom. It will always be so for animals that find Sanctuary.

Rob Atkinson

CEO

https://app.e2ma.net/app/view:CampaignPublic/id:2114.10852668663/rid:4b110b434ade945d1205b7367403385cSee More

Remembering

A dog, an owner, a partnership for life. BOSS Dog Clinics differ greatly from conventional obedience-based methods by teaching positive social behaviors that dogs need and owners want. Taught in a common-sense, no gimmick, no frills way that’s easy to learn and apply, dogs display desired behaviors quickly. Guaranteed to build a successful and happy relationship with the dog you love. Course is taught by Susan Overfield, author, national speaker, and dog behavioral instructor with 40 years hands-on experience. Accepting dogs ages 8 weeks to adult, any breed, registration required.
Email: Susan Overfield for registration form.

Not Fashion, Not Sense: Shame on the women who have reduced dogs to accessories and caused serious problems for them. Shame on the women who are now dumping these dogs like a pair of last year’s shoes. The Telegraph reports these dogs are being dumped in increasing numbers and have some serious issues and shelters are struggling to cope with them.

Harry Potter’s Padfoot Up For Adoption: Huffington Post reported that Paul Thompson, owner and trainer of Berry, the German shepherd that played Padfoot in the Harry Potter movie, could no longer care for the dog and he is up for adoption, along with his best friend, Porridge.

A Negative Positve Report on What Dogs Get From Dogparks: Vernon, BC, Canada, has seen five dogs die of parvo and had 14 others fall ill. ““All it takes is one dog who has a parvovirus infection to go to a dog park, spread some diarrhea — well, now you have an infected dog park for the next five or six months.” — veterinarian Ken Gummeson” Kamloops This Week has the story.

Purina Gears Ads To Dogs To Increase Dog Food Sales: Subliminal messages in advertising are not allowed. Yet Purina is selling their Beneful dog food using that strategy on dogs, and by extension, the owners. How low can we go? While many blogs are carrying this ad, you can read about it on the Washington Post National.

A Good Overview of the working Border collie: Hailey, Idaho is hosting a national working sheepdog competition and the Idaho Mountain Express and Guide has a wonderful explanation of the working dogs, the working terms, and what they do. Hopefully this will correct the misuse of terms so prevalent among the general populace, i.e., “slick” coated dog, which is actually called “smooth” coat, “lift”, etc.

Lakota Dog Finds New Home: Zi, a North Dakota dog that understands the Lakota language, has found a new home in Wyoming. Casper Journal

Urban Legend Making the Rounds: It’s not true and Snopes states that there are no nails in cheese left at dog parks according to Tinley Park Patch

There seems to be way too many women who have not grown up.
Perhaps they forgot to put their pom-poms down at the end of High School.

Perhaps they never did have pom-poms and are women stuck in the halcyon days of Barbie. Maybe their mothers refused to buy them Barbie’s house, or car, or balked at Malibu Barbie for their birthdays and the mental illness is showing itself now.

Whatever the case, they need to quit living by extension through their dogs. I suggest they purchase a copy of “The Cat in the Hat”, by Dr. Seuss. They need to read it carefully. If they are they type of person who learns better when they HEAR instructions, get someone to read it to them.

The critical part of this book lies in the line, “It’s fun to have fun,
but you have to know how.”

It has become the norm to dress up our dogs. This is not good. Dogs don’t like it, but it’s all for the people.

There’s a fine line between the psychosis of flying monkeys and this next level. A lot of you women have clearly stepped waaaaayyyyyy over it.

At CNN World there’s an article about the Chinese dyeing their Chow-chow dogs to look like wild animals.

First, let’s get some basic information solidly in those vapid brains. Dogs can identify other dogs in their breed. Screw with a dog’s appearance and you create a serious problem for recognition of dog by dog. This could cause problems like fights, puppy acceptance, not to mention mental illness by the dog.

Dogs are not dolls. Dogs are not ego extensions. Dogs are not there to fill the void in your self-esteem. Dogs are dogs. Live with it. In this case, do NOT feel the dog, do not be one with your dog!

Go listen to the Beatles…Let It Be!

Chinese dogs are being dyed to resemble all manner of animals.

Now before all you go thinking, “It’s a Chinese thing”, let me point out that the next group of photos are all from the Western world. Once again, we’re back to Dr. Seuss. However, I think most of you did not read the entire book, or if you did, perhaps your comprehension is low and you need to re-read it. You seem to have gotten stuck on, “Look at me, look at me, look at me now…”

Go back and finish reading the rhyme.

Did you do it? I hope so, because the following dogs are from women with too much time on their hands and not enough empathy for the dog. The dogs were photographed by Ren Netherland and published in an article by The Daily Mail. NONE of these dogs look happy, but I bet the women are ecstatic.

Owner and show veteran Sandra Hartness created this misery

I can only pray this next dog takes her wand and beats the living daylights out of the groomer.

I wish Johnny Depp would sue the owner of this dog.

Captain Jack Sparrow was the inspiration for poodle owner Missy Gullett

I’m sure convincing these women to stop doing this to dogs will be like ‘herding cats’. The era of the cowboy was very short. The Old West is dead, honey. Let it rest in peace.

Here’s a dog that can satisfy both sexes nostalgia: The women’s cheerleader fantasies and the men’s longing for that NFL spot on their favorite team.

Stampede. I am praying for a stampede which causes death, destruction, eradication of these groomers.

Now, for all of you that think doing this to dogs is somehow wonderful, let’s put the shoe on the other foot and see how happy WE’D be.

The Washington State government is so concerned about it that they’ve developed an ad about it. No sh^*, they paid $27,000 for a music video about picking up your dog’s waste.

It’s a catchy tune and, just in case you need visual help, they include hands-on demonstrations during the song to enable you to “grasp” the problem.

I guess this is a good thing as, recently, a study done by University of Colorado Boulder, in which air samples were taken from four locations, Chicago, Detroit, and Cleveland, cities with over 2 million people, and Mayville, WI, a town with less than 6,000, found canine fecal matter floating freely in the air.

What was determined by analyzing the DNA of the bacteria was that during the winter dog feces bacteria is at an all-time high. They wish to continue this study in other cities to see if this holds true elsewhere.

What gives me the shivers is, if these dog fecal spores are floating around at an all-time high during the winter, imagine what kind of readings they’d get at dog parks. And those people and dogs are breathing it every time they visit.

So what’s the low-down on dog poop? According to New Animal Control.Org only about 40% of people, women more than men, pick up after their dog. What are the dogs contributing to the environment that can make people ill? “E. coli, a bacterium that can cause disease, and fecal coliform bacteria, which spread through feces. Dogs also carry salmonella and giardia.” Also, “Studies done in the last few years put dogs third or fourth on the list of contributors to bacteria in contaminated waters.”

But back to the music video. I’m including it here for your enjoyment. I give it a 5 bag rating. Feel free to sing along. Ah-one, and ah-two, and ah-three…

For instance, if you wander to the stacks for Psychology you might be able to pick up a copy of Science Daily, which will cover an article in the August issue of Current Directions in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

It is a very interesting article having to do with the fact that “there simply isn’t strong evidence for the general claim that living with a pet makes for a happier, healthier or longer life.” This is according to Professor of Psychology at the Western Carolina University, Harold Herzog. This is due, he says, to the lack of “rigorous research…that studies on pet ownership often suffer from methodological problems, such as small, homogeneous samples, lack of appropriate control groups, and reliance on self-report to measure participants’ health and well-being. Furthermore, very few studies have used the kind of experimental design necessary to show that pets actually cause improvements in their owner’s health and happiness.”

If I were asked, based on my clientele, I’d have to say dogs do NOT relieve stress in humans, they actually can create it. Dogs and their problems add to human problems. Dogs, on a transitory basis, especially for those who are not their owners, may relieve stress for a very short time. But then, so does a trip to Bora Bora.

Libraries also allow you check out things. Take for instance, “Lassie”, “Stormy”, “White Fang”, and, of course, “Cujo”.

Some things you must get directly from the circulation desk. Case in point, the Yale Law Library.

Within the ivied walls of this hallowed institution lies a hotbed of stress for the highly-charged, highly-competitive world of the law student. The Law Library, back in early April, began a test-run of a new lending program. It’s name? Monty.

Monty is a dog. He can be checked out for 30 minutes sessions if you’re a “stressed-out student”. The Library is not disclosing his breed, but the librarian, Blair Kauffman, stated in an email, “It is well documented that visits from therapy dogs have resulted in increased happiness, calmness and overall emotional well-being…” And, “according to the memo to students, is hypoallergenic”

Now I don’t mean to take umbrage at a venerable educational institution, nor at a librarian of the same. However, in July, Science Daily published an article, “Hypoallergenic Dogs Don’t Have Lower Household Allergen Levels Than Other Dogs, Study Finds”, stating that, “We found no scientific basis to the claim hypoallergenic dogs have less allergen,” says Christine Cole Johnson, Ph.D., MPH, chair of Henry Ford’s Department of Public Health Sciences and senior author of the study.”

According to the Yale/Monty article, “A handful of other universities offer similar services, including the University of Wisconsin at Oshkosh.”

I think we should all return to the Psychology stacks and see what stressed-out humans do to the psychology and health of dogs. It can’t be good for a dog to sit amongst the highly-stressed all the time. Look what it does to US!

Personally? I can’t wait to see what happens when I ask my local library’s circulation desk for “wolverines”.

A monthly, subscription newsletter

Could not load product information

“I’m suggesting that you pick the poop up.”
(From the movie “Kate & Leopold” 2001)

Long has the lawn called to the walked dog. Parks, commons, any wide expanse of green, it seems, sets off the signal of need in the dog. Most owners pick up, but a few never “doo”. This has led to a plethora of signs, some not very friendly.

But, as of now, dog owners are in deep doo-doo, let me tell you, because over at Newser is an article about the Timberwood Commons apartment complex in New Hampshire, which is now using DNA testing on dog waste to discover the culprits who refuse to pick up what their dogs leave. The complex manager is, in other words, becoming a Scatological Sleuth, a Doo-Doo Deputy, a Poop Penalizer, a Waste Warden, willing to take samples and name names.

Armed with a PooPrints kit, made by a company in Tennessee, there are approximately twenty properties in the U.S. that are determined to put a stop to all the sh*& happening around their apartments. ““It’s one of the coolest things I’ve ever done as a property manager,” says the head of another development.”

It is now a fact that no matter where you go in this world, your dog may come along, but he may not leave anything behind.

Warning Sign

From a general hygiene perspective this makes sense. None of us wish to be surprised
and assaulted by malodorous wafting upon entering our vehicles, only to discover we stepped in that-which-must-not-be-named.

If these signs are any indication, this is now, obviously, a problem across the globe. As you can see, Canada has approached the problem with humor in an attempt to coerce owners, who let their dogs dump-and-run, to fulfill their latrine duty. Being Canada, of course, they make the sign bi-lingual.

Canada Has Humor

The Chinese cut right to the heart of the matter and don’t mince words.

The Japanese, using a marketing ploy which has been well received, add graphic art reminiscent of “Hello, Kitty”, but more along the lines of “No, No, Doggy”.

My 'Not-So-Pretty, Doggy'

Israel utilizes the written word, as well as international graphics, in their clear attempt to mitigate the problem.

"No" in any language

Germany places their signs where they think they will be most readily spied:

The English, always polite, give you fair warning of the cost of your egregious disdain in failure to comply with the law and for ignoring your dog’s call-of-nature with this posting:

And, of course, when stated in French, doing poop patrol always sounds more elegant:

Non poopette

Then there are places that cover all known contingencies:

Clearly we are willing to go to all lengths, including invasion of privacy, in order to nab the culprits:

Voiding on Video

Had the kit been readily available, I doubt such a public display as this would have gone unpunished:

"Out" Field

So, please clean up after your dog. And remember, in the immortal words and picture offered to us by Jefferson County, Colorado:

No more

According to an article in the Seattle Times, New York dogs are no longer allowed in pubs or bars, nor even in the outdoor seating areas of these establishments.

Long a tradition, dating back to the 1800s, neighborhood bars were known for hosting dogs. Specific dogs were even associated with specific bars. Some bars were even more egalitarian, as seen below.

Denny Shay's Barroom, New Bedford, MA

However, the New York health department has been cracking down and because beer, wine and spirits are also considered to be in the food category, dog-friendly bars can no longer allow dogs entrance if the bar wishes to pass a health inspection.

I'm 3, that's 21 in human years

Gone will be the evening stroll with Rex and a quick pop-in to the corner bar to have a beer or two with friends. The camaraderie and social hour, for both man and dog, will become a distant memory.

"Happy" Hour Ends

Across the pond, however, the tradition remains solid and approved. In fact, the dogs are welcomed and known in their respective pubs. It is a sad commentary, I think, that we Americans are losing this time-honored tradition. From now on we will only be able to experience it if we fly to the U.K. and Ireland.

Known and Liked

So raise your glasses as from now on the only way New Yorkers will see a ‘dog’ in a neighborhood bar of an evening will be the following:

Chuck Roberts, a jeweler in Georgia, owns Honey Bun. She is a Pomeranian that often accompanies him to the store, greets customers who shower her with edible treats and, generally, is an ambassador of good will.

A couple of weeks ago Chuck had loose diamonds on his desk and was called away to help a customer. During his absence Honey Bun found a way onto the desk and snarfed up about $10,000 worth of jewels. Chuck, of course, ran the pom to the vet where x-rays showed only suspicious shadows.

The diamonds were retrieved the next day during Chuck’s daily pick-up session in his yard. He did what any good jeweler would do; he washed them off and returned them to his supplier.

Diamonds are a girl's best friend

I have run across several studies of dogs and their various aspects of behavior from the past two or three years. They all seem to me, if anyone exercised one ounce of common sense, to be DUH! Moments that have world-wide anecdotal and observed basis, but have somehow made it into the “study” realm.

I’ve worked with and observed dogs for over forty years. I’ve come to a lot of conclusions, all premised on the dogs and their behaviors as displayed by them during daily interaction, both social and work. I hear my clients reiterate much of the same observations. Some clients, I will admit, go over the top and read way too much into what they see, but that’s to be expected and taken with a grain of salt.

The first of the big DUH! Moments came two years ago when it was reported that “Dogs are as smart as toddlers, study finds“. This little gem was based on a language development test and the following quote was offered, “”The dogs that are the brightest dogs in terms of school learning ability tend to be the dogs that are much more recently developed,” Coren said.” This study was predicated on the responses of Border collies.

Heck, these scientists could have learned this for the price of a beer, or perhaps a shot of very good whiskey depending on the person, from Border collie handlers over 35 years ago. That’s when I first heard that the average working Border collie had a vocabulary of over 250 words. And based on the above quote, it seems these scientists believe that it is the “newer” breeds that show the most intelligence. When talking about the Border collie, the breed motto is “Brains Before Beauty”. That says it all. We don’t breed for looks, but intelligence. This is a lost art in the dog breeding business, but if breeders actually bred for this quality, instead of the current weak dogs so that trainers and owners can deal with them as dog handling skills deteriorate, then we probably would see that the majority of breeds are actually quite smart.

I don’t refer, when speaking of my dogs’ vocabulary, to silly words such as ‘treat’, ‘out’, or ‘play’. I refer to my dogs’ ability to differentiate between truck, car, or RoadTrek. My dogs invariably head directly to the appropriate vehicle.

The second DUH! Moments appeared when it was reported that “Studies show dogs have a sense of fairness“. It made me begin to wonder if humans weren’t just a tad stupid. What makes humans believe we’ve cornered the market on emotions? What makes us believe that only humans can experience complex emotions? I remember reading a book, “When Elephants Weep“, by Jeffrey Masson, some ten or fifteen years ago. I would suggest everyone read it.

When Elephants Weep

I, though loathe to attribute anthropomorphism to my dogs, have seen embarrassment in their eyes and demeanor. One of my dogs was allowed to sleep on a sofa. She was dead-out and rolled off. Her look at all of us in the room was one of complete and utter embarrassment, I promise. I’ve also seen them do things, such as, trip or stumble, and quickly glance around as if to ensure no one saw it. These are identifiable emotions as we have had them ourselves. Why do we need a study to prove that which is so clear? Why would we not think, if embarrassment is possible, the emotion of fairness is not possible? It’s hubris to believe that emotions don’t cross species.

I was then segued into a combination of two studies that, in my mind, were linked; “Dog ‘Guilt’ Probably Just Reaction to Owners’ Cues, Study Finds” and “Study: Police Dogs Are Influenced by Their Handlers’ False Prejudices“.

In the article about guilt it was proposed that it was the owners cluing the dogs into feeling guilty. Oh, GIVE ME A BREAK!! The study told “each owner to show the dog a biscuit, instruct the dog not to eat it and then leave the room…Then the owner returned and was told the dog had obeyed the command or had been disobedient and had eaten the biscuit. Owners scolded the disobedient dogs. But half the time the owners were told the truth about whether their dog had misbehaved while the other half were misled…”The most guilty look was when the owner scolded an innocent dog,” she said. “It was a bit surprising.”…concluded that such behavior is most likely the result of subtle cues that dogs picked up from their owners that make them anticipate punishment, rather than the dogs necessarily feeling guilty.”

Quintessential Guilty Look

Here we go again—humans unable to accept cross-species emotions. Why does this study OMIT the fact that guilt is predicated on the assumption of knowing right from wrong and the resultant feeling of having done wrong and being caught out in it? How many of us have thought we were doing the right thing, then taken a ration of it for having erred? We feel guilty that we didn’t know, didn’t do it right, let another down, a myriad of reasons come into play, including the obvious; we knew we weren’t supposed to, but did it anyway. Yet, we still feel guilty. Why not dogs?

How many of us have returned home to be greeted by a dog that absolutely, positively does NOT want us to enter a specific room? We didn’t arrive on the doorstep cuing the dog to guilt. We simply came home. The dog clued us in to the fact that he’d done something he knew was behaviorally unacceptable. Guilt was written clearly all over him.

Closely coupled to this, but the flip-side, was the “Study: Police Dogs Are Influenced by Their Handlers’ False Prejudices“. Here we were shown that the cues given off by human handlers operating under specific beliefs, i.e., that drugs were to be found in a given spot, led the dogs to display the “drugs found” cue to the policeman. DUH! Moments.

I see no difference in this scenario than the one in which a person gives the desired answer/response instead of the correct one.

Put all this together and what can we assume? That while anthropomorphism is alive and well amongst the lay peoples, they are still much more aware and accepting of identifiable emotions in animals than scientists. And why is that? Probably because our survival as a species was dependent upon our ability to read the emotional intentions of those animals with whom we came into contact: Is that panther going to attack or back down?

Oooohhhh…we’ve just created another study possibility…”Do Humans Read The Emotions Of Animals: A Study in the Accurate Assessment of Cross-Species Emotional Response Cues for Survival.” Let’s go make some money.

However, that dog, without a handler who has taught and demanded behavioral parameters off-stock, continuously monitors behavior of the dog, and is knowledgeable about the fact that the dog is a dog and, if left unmonitored, can, and will, succumb to atavistic drives, can quickly change working interest into predatory interest. This is what has probably been the case in numerous feral dog & dog pack attacks this year.

Some dogs are just dumped. Others have owners who, instead of walking them, simply let the dogs out to run or ‘do their business’. For a few dogs this works. For many, and breed is not a determinant, depending on their temperaments, daily behavioral guidance, intelligence, and what they experience on their ‘walk-about’, this is NOT how one should teach social behavior for interaction with humans. The only behavior the dogs learn is to ‘pack up’.

Dogs fail to return home, or stay away longer and longer, and eventually discover each other and, voila`, a pack is born. It really is that simple. People may not WANT to admit it, but it really is that simple. Dogs learn from each other. What one dog doesn’t think of, another may, and when it comes to atavistic pack behaviors, dogs are quick learners. They’re just not behaviors that integrate into social interaction with people.

Even two or more dogs within a household setting can easily pack-up and it’s a very short step to turn feral. Dogs without solid behavioral parameters, set and maintained by humans, revert to feral very easily and quickly. It’s hard to imagine a Chihuahua going feral and probably, truth be told, smaller dogs would be a victim of something long before they could become feral. However, the genetics of the dog is still much closer to nature that we’d like to admit.

It was reported in the Huffington Post that a feral pack of 5 dogs had begun killing in late March of this year in a wide area about forty miles north of Spokane.

Residents were worried in the extreme and police reported they’d never seen anything like it. The dogs had killed goats, small farm animals, and even a 350 pound llama. The pack was rarely seen during the day and did most of their hunting at night. Residents denied knowing or accepting responsibility for any of the dogs.

Whether one likes to admit it or not, feral dogs, or feral packs, are not that unusual. Nor are their pack instincts and actions. Any dog can go feral under the right set of circumstances.

Humans often don’t understand what those circumstances are and actually, unintentionally, push dogs into behaviors and actions that only strengthen skills needed to survive in feral situations. Case in point, play time at the dog park. The rough-n-tumble, growling, physical contact, hard play that is often seen at the dog parks is greeted with joy by owners as ‘dogs having fun’. Wrong.

Feral Dog Fight NC

Dog Parks Hone Fighting Skills

Those engagements between dogs, the growly contact, the on-the-hind-legs, open-mouthed, “wrestling” they do, is actually a skill that is needed to be mastered for fighting and killing so needed in the world of the feral pack.

Lest anyone believe that only rural dogs tend to go feral, or that the Washington state pack is an anomaly, it should be noted that feral dog pack attacks are on the rise in the U.S.

Here is a list of what I’ve been able to compile:

Dec 8, 2010, Sundance, NM (Navajo Nation land near Gallup) A man, who suffered from seizures and had been taken to the hospital because of that problem the day before his death, was found lying on the ground.
Medical investigators’ report stated it was unknown whether the man “suffered a seizure before the dogs attacked or whether he was conscious when they started mauling him.”

Jan 11 Mt Vernon NY, A man in Westchester, NY waas attacked by a Rottweiler, pit bull, and a Wheaton terrier mix. Two of the animals were known to have been involved in an earlier killing of a neighborhood Yorkie. This was a group of dogs identified as from a local auto body shop.

Jan 14, Indianapolis IN, An east-side Indianapolis neighborhood has experienced a wild dog problem for nearly a year. The known pack of dogs struck again. “”They started coming after us and we made it to the porch and they were probably 10, 15 feet away from us and they were running full force at us,” Jeff Salsbery said.”

Feb 2, Detroit, MI, “…some estimates suggest as tens of thousands of stray dogs may wander the city’s 138 square miles. And Harry Ward, head of Detroit animal control, told the Free Press the problem has only worsened in recent years as the city’s economy bottomed out.”

Feb. 3, Augusta GA, Residents of Summerville, GA, say they are very concerned about a pack of wild dogs in their neighborhood.
“David Dunagan, the chairman of the Summerville Crime Watch Committee, said 15-20 cats and one dog have been killed since the pack of about five appeared two weeks ago.”

April 10, San Antonio TX, A pack of wild dogs attacked a woman jogger on the Trinity Campus about 10 a.m. The dogs did not resemble the image of the typical stray dog: They looked cared-for, resembled each other, however none had collars indicating ownership. “According to Vee DuBose, co-director of the Cat Alliance, San Antonio has hundreds of stray dogs, many of which run in packs.”

June 8, Cleveland OH, Kahmal Darby, 13, was walking through an east side neighborhood of Cleveland when a three-dog pack attacked him about 8 a.m. It’s believed the dogs could be abandoned-pets-turned-wild and are now a pack.

July 5, New Orleans, LA, “We have just received information regarding a pack of dangerous wild dogs in the Mid-City area, most recently in the 100 block of S. Scott St. The incident occurred on Monday, July 4th between 2:00 and 2:30 a.m. when a neighbor was awakened by a disturbance in their back yard and observed 3 dogs, one being a dark colored, huge rottweiler, the second a light colored German Shepherd mix and the third being a mutt attacking a neighborhood cat. The cat did not survive the attack…The Mid City Security District and SPCA have been notified, and Officer Frank has confirmed that this is the second report of a cat being killed by a group of dogs that match the same description in the last 2 weeks in the same general vicinity.”

Jul 8, Stonewall, Pontotoc Co., OK, Daniel Murray, out jogging, ran into six vicious dogs that brutally attacked him five times.

Jul. 16, St. Louis MO, “U.S. Department of Agriculture, defines a feral dog as “a domestic dog that has reverted back to the wild state and is no longer directly dependent upon humans for successful reproduction.” The feral dogs in St. Louis have never been touched by humans and form packs to help them survive in their search for food and shelter..”

Aug 2, Fayetteville, NC, “A company hired to address the wild dog issue removed six dogs over the weekend from packs roaming the city. They’ll keep that up for the next 30 days in a bid to eliminate the packs of dozens of dogs that have terrorized residents and pets…Many feral dogs are savvy to the standard cage traps used to catch them…Animal Services has ordered humane snare traps that…will be placed in the small tunnels the pack dogs use to move through wooded areas…the problem originates from dogs who are lost, abandoned or turned loose by their owners.”

Aug 4, Newport, TN A 10-year-old suffered a dog attack near his home. “Cocke County Sheriff Armondo Fontes told us wild dogs are common in this area, “You have a pack of dogs that are just neglected and left unattended by the owner. You have several people that live in this small area, and when these dogs are left to run loose they form a pack.”… The Cocke County Sheriff’s Department came back to the area and found six more abandoned dogs.”

Aug 6, W. Orange, NJ, “Police responded to call about an injured deer that appeared to have been attacked by three wild dogs on Mount Vernon Avenue…incidents of wild dogs chasing down animals and people has happened several times in the past when abandoned animals turn wild or breed in the reservations…police department was “aggressively pursuing” these dogs, setting up traps and trying to locate the animals.”

Feral is as feral does and while much is being touted about “educating” owners, dog trainers must bear the brunt of some of this onus. Current “socializing” methods being promoted via puppy class and through “play” by some trainers leave owners with a dangerous and inaccurate understanding of dogs. Education will not completely solve the developing problem of feral dogs and packs. It will, however, give the owners a better understanding of exactly what IS acceptable behavior and responses towards them, and the world at large, and how to teach and maintain it from the dog’s perspective.

(Sources available upon request)

Once upon a time the greatest snort of disgust was given to those women who applied make-up while driving.  In our high-tech world we have made gender a moot point.  Smart, phones may be, but smart people may not be.

One of my pet peeves is people who text while sitting at a stop light.  They are unaware of what’s happening and often you have to honk to get them to return to the world and notice the light has changed.

Those who text and drive are a menace, also.  The weave across the lines, can’t maintain speed, and are generally a problem on the road.  AAA states that taking your eyes from the road, for even 2 seconds, doubles the crash possibility.

However, it now seems as if dogs in the car can be dangerous.  It seems we have numerous driver-owners that have not taught dogs how to behave in cars.  These owners have failed to teach Fido to sit and stay seated while the car is in motion.  As a matter of fact, owners polled admitted to petting, even being forced to push Fido back over the seat while driving, thus creating a danger to other motorists.

I know we’ve all seen this or something similar:

'Jack' and Jill

What amazes me is that there is so little thought given to the dog.  I know the pet industry talks dog restraints for cars, but the truth is humans and dogs are at risk in cars—period.  It is the speed with which we travel that creates the increased danger level, along with the sheer mass of metal involved in any crash. (Not to mention all the junk we carry in cars that will go flying around and bean both dog and owner in a crash.)

Still, I won’t disparage dog restraints for safety.  I will, however, tell you if you teach your dog to behave in the car you’ll have lessened the chance that he will be the cause of an accident.

Joy-riding

We see the above photo and think, “He’s having fun.”  He probably is, but his owner isn’t thinking.  A dog, of any size, is at risk from road debris being flung up into his face and eyes when they hang out like this.  I’ve seen the back-wash from a semi-truck pull a dog out of a car.  Not to mention a sudden swerve or mishap and this pup will go flying.

Of course, people being people, tend to up the ante of danger for their dogs simply by not thinking, as these next two photos will clearly show:

Top down, dog gone

Easy Riders?

I cringe when I see things like the two photos above, be it in real life or in pictures, as I know how little it would take to have disaster strike these dogs.  Are these owners not thinking?  I can be fairly certain the driver of the car is unaware of what his dog is doing.  I can’t even find words for the motorcyclist.

For those of us who live in ranching areas and communities, the following pics are daily sights:

On the freeway

Cold out there

I always worry about the temperature and windchill the dog is suffering.  I wonder if the owners even think about it?

Along for the ride

I know the ranch dogs want to go everywhere with us.  I’m all for it.  Most of the time we’re going out into the pastures and fields and there’s not a thing wrong with the dogs being in the back of the trucks.  We aren’t doing 70 mph.  It’s when I see the boys driving into town with dogs  standing on the tool box or roof of the cab that I feel like going “Old West” on them.

It’s important to think of their safety as we don’t want to leave man’s best friend at home.  Yet humans will always want to take their dogs with them, because taking our dogs along for the ride crosses all races, creeds, and religions:

All Dogs Love to Go For A Ride

No one can compensate for poor breeding once the dog is on the ground. They can modify some of it, or live with it. But, the dog was bred a certain way, good, bad or indifferent, and that is what you will live and work with.

A quality handler is there to teach and help the owner reach his maximum potential in the areas of dog knowledge, communication, response, timing of corrections, expectations, tone of voice and much more. In short, all that it takes to train a dog well. This requires a not a “trainer” who is mediocre or stamped out of a mold, but one who is a true dog handler  with dog and human communication skills and all this implies physically, psychologically, emotionally, socially and verbally.

The enhanced personal competency and ability level of the dog is a direct result of an owner’s own personal competency and ability levels.  The enhanced personal competency and ability level of the owner is a direct result of a handler’s own personal competency and ability levels.  The enhanced personal competency and ability levels of the handler is a direct result their of innate skills and competency in “cold reading” dogs and people instantly, “feeling” dogs, instinct, empathy, verbal and nonverbal communication skills, personal character, fluidity of temperament, full-brain cognitive thinking, critical thinking skills, ability to foresee situational events, long years of personal experience with a vast number of dogs before teaching has even begun, extrapolation skills, ongoing desire for learning, teaching skills, good base in dog knowledge of all kinds (current medical findings, behavioral studies, etc.), problem-solving capabilities, adaptability and genuine care and concern for the betterment of the dog’s life and situation.

Meanwhile, the true dog handler, because they know through personal instinct, experience, study and innate talent what is required to work both the dog and owner, is still quietly working dogs that are happy, for owners that are happy.

For many years (now this will be a simple, abbreviated version of how it developed, you understand) it was not a profession.  Dog “trainers” were the person next door who always had those wonderfully behaved, happy dogs.  The reason for this was that the person doing the “training” was a true dog HANDLER.  They understood dogs, understood the way they think, move, respond, what motivates them and how to communicate clearly and easily.

At the point people began to want the neighbor to train their dog, a person developed the idea of holding obedience classes in order to maximize the number of dogs that could be “trained” and make a profit doing it.  This was normally a person with a moderate amount of dog-sense or someone who had competed in dog shows.  He could control a variety of dogs by dominance and/or harsh discipline. T his became the norm in “training” and evolved from the “choke chain method” so popular for so long.  It was also the version that advocated “helicopter-ing,” and what I term, the “snap-n-jerk” technique of “training” where you harshly pop the choke chain as you give the dog a command.  I really dislike this method as it is hurting or startling the dog at the same moment you try to teach it to obey a command (and the dog hasn’t even made a mistake, yet.)  It is an effective method, but not a good method.  It ranks right up there, as far as I’m concerned, with using a whip on someone to make them work.  The person being whipped will work, but there’s not much good you can say about the method.

Meanwhile, the true dog handler, because they knew through personal instinct, experience, study and innate talent what was required to work both the dog and owner, was still quietly working dogs that were happy, for owners that were happy.

As obedience classes became popular, a lot of people jumped on the bandwagon.  The majority of them were people who “liked dogs” and wanted (I believe) to be held in the same light as the true dog handler.  Methods were created, taught and used.  A person would attend a dog obedience class and, having some dog-sense, would do fairly well with their dog.  Taking their class success they coupled it with wanting to “train” dogs and…Viola!!  A new dog “trainer” was created.

Meanwhile, the true dog handler, because they knew through personal instinct, experience, study and innate talent what was required to work both the dog and owner, was still quietly working dogs that were happy, for owners that were happy.

After a time owners began to realize that the “snap-n-jerk” training method wasn’t very nice and the pressure was on for “trainers” to adopt a style that was less offensive, but there was a glitch—a large one.  “Trainers”, in substantial numbers, now existed using a mishmash of techniques, at a variety of personal competency levels, and the quality of dog “training” was all over the place.  Owners took a big risk when they attended dog class.  What quality am I getting in the way of a “trainer”?

Long about this time, the dog industry began to wake up and grow.  They smelled money in the air.  Owners, tired of attending classes in which they felt “something is wrong,” but didn’t know what, demanded change.  The industry, groomers, pet toy and food companies, “trainers”, behaviorists, and now, dog psychics and psychologists created themselves from nothing and poured forth for a piece of the 40-billion dollar pie.  The poor dogs and owners were now faced with a new problem.  Where there had been few choices before, now there were too many.

Meanwhile, the true dog handler, because they knew through personal instinct, experience, study and innate talent what was required to work both the dog and owner, was still quietly working dogs that were happy, for owners that were happy.

A bright, profit-oriented individual, probably someone who had been “training” dogs with fairly good results, decided there were too many charlatans running around and they were hurting business.  They saw an opportunity to get a piece of the market.  Somewhat arbitrarily it was decided what constitutes a competent “trainer” and the bar of quality was set at a moderate level in order to include the largest number of interested people.

Next they opened a school to teach a specific method of dog “training” and began to charge people to learn how to become dog “trainers”.  The profit making ability was substantially increased as it was easier and more profitable to charge higher class fees and run large numbers of students through a course than it was to increase the fees and number of dogs that one, quality, ethical dog handler could realistically work.

It also created a certain panache and patina of professionalism for those “graduating” from the schools if they could produce a certificate. Suddenly, if a person wanted to sell themselves as a “good trainer” they needed to be “certified”.  But, in the world of the true dog handler, those who could actually work immensely diverse dogs, under a variety of conditions, stresses and with differing levels of abilities and achieve consistently high results from each individual dog (and owner), the certificates mean very little, if anything.

Simply stated, all this means is just because you have gone to a dog training school and been given a certificate, doesn’t mean you are a truly good dog “trainer”, that you really “know” dogs and can successfully help owners.  It only means you have proven you can “train” dogs in one specific way.  And, ironically, that one way is failing our dogs.  It doesn’t matter if that one way is choke chain, or positive reinforcement, or clicker, or no-stress, the statistics speak the truth—it’s failing our dogs.  And it’s the dogs that pay for that failure with their lives.

All this has made money for schools, teacher-trainers, magazines and the industry in general and going to a “trainer” with a certificate is supposed to offer a balm to owners. “A good trainer is one that is certified.”  This is NOT really true.

Meanwhile, the true dog handler, because they knew through personal instinct, experience, study and innate talent what was required to work both the dog and owner, was still quietly working dogs that were happy, for owners that were happy.

At almost the same moment the certificate schools began, the industry realized that they had to respond to all the owners who were unhappy, and rightfully so, with the old, harsh methods of training. Schools converted to the kindness/positive reinforcement, treat/bribery/humane (choose one of these, or any other industry term you wish to insert) method of “training”.  This did two things; It made owners feel better about “training” and compensated for the wide spectrum of abilities in the large number of potential “trainers” that were out there waiting to be tapped.

Meanwhile, the true dog handler, because they knew through personal instinct, experience, study and innate talent what was required to work both the dog and owner, was still quietly working dogs that were happy, for owners that were happy.

So, what’s wrong with this?  In one way, nothing.  “Trainers” do need to be aware that there are better ways to “train” dogs and these schools will, at least, weed out the worst. By this I mean, those people who want to be “trainers” but have no business “training” because they have no aptitude for it, whatsoever.  But, in a more important way, many of these “trainers” are NOT competent to train. They cannot truly adjust to the individual dog, and it is the dog which decides the HOW of training and discipline to a large extent. Nor can they adjust to the variety of owners.  I fear too many certified “trainers” (and I’ve already seen loads of them in action, I know they exist in large numbers) will be unable to “train” so that the character and behavior of the human can be modified along with that of the dog’s.  Without personal flexibility of communication skills, innate ability to “read” humans and dogs and all their nuances of behavior, fluidity of working that can be instantaneously adapted to the situation, dog, owner and environment simultaneously, the taught “trainer” has only one method to draw from to solve the myriad of problems, large and small, which constantly arise during sessions.  Their biggest safety net when faced with a dog they cannot “train” is to tell the owner they have failed class or that the dog is “aggressive”.  The onus falls on the owner.  How can you get your dog trained if the trainer won’t accept it for training??? (At this point I suggest owners request their money back and not slink away into the night in embarrassment and/or shame).

Here is a generalized look at what it takes to become a certified trainer. Decide you want to make money by training dogs. Find a certified training school that you can afford (prices range from around $3,000 to $12,000.) Fill out an application. Prove your are at least 18 years old, have a HS diploma or GED, pass a scholastic pre-entrance test, pay your money.  Now what happens?  You spend time, the majority in classroom or long-distance learning covering academic and theoretical knowledge about dog behavior, genetics, etc.  Pass a test for this portion.  Then comes approximately 15 hours (longer if you don’t do well as this stage) of “hands-on” instruction with a trainer-mentor who is already certified, so that you can learn to teach the exact same method, the exact same way to your future clients. You attend obedience classes with real owners and their dogs where you will learn and help with class. Then, in some courses, you may have to train a dog you have brought with you and demonstrate your competency as a trainer of their method.

When I investigated several of these certificate schools I repeatedly had the following conversations as I asked them ALL the same questions and the reply was almost word-for-word the SAME:

Q: “How is it you determine what makes a good trainer?”

A: “You pass our academic test. For the hands-on part, our certified dog trainer/teacher decides that, based on your ability to show how well you have mastered our method.” (I felt like barking.)

Q: “So…how does a person learn how to handle the individual dogs?”

A: “Our certified trainer will teach you.” (I am concerned when those promoting a school are unable to discern what it is that I am asking. It doesn’t bode well for the overall training method when school representatives are unable to tell the difference between questions about a training method and questions about adjusting to individual character.)

Q: “But, HOW do you learn to handle individual dogs?  Some are willful, some shy…how do you learn?”

A: “You get that after you have had a dog in your class for a while.  After you’ve been with them two or three weeks you’ll know each dog.”

Q: “But, how do you learn to “read” dogs?  It’s the first day of the class I’m offering and I have all these dogs and I need to know what is front of me?  How do you teach me to know what I’m working with?”

A: “After you have taught for a year or two and worked with dogs, you’ll have some experience and begin to know.”  (Look, folks, as a trainer I don’t have more than about 30 seconds to sum-up the dog and how it manipulates the owner.  I had better know, know to my gut, and deal correctly and effectively right out of the shoot or class will be in shambles-dog fights, out-of-control behavior, in short-wrecks everywhere I turn.  I either, as a competent, truly skilled handler, can read dogs and their owners, or I can’t. You can’t be taught that.)

Q: “But, dogs are all different. How do you teach them?”

A: “By using our method.”

These are NOT made-up answers. They are ALL REAL. I talked to MANY different certified schools. They ALL responded the SAME, regardless of who I talked to—receptionists, counselors, trainers. (The best I can say is that they are very good at teaching one way to the right kind of receptive person.)  The industry makes BIG bucks turning out dog “trainers”.  But, it doesn’t mean these trainers KNOW dogs.  It doesn’t mean the trainer can truly “read” dogs.  It doesn’t mean the “trainer” knows any other way, but one, to fix problems.  It means that if their method fits and is easy for you to learn, it will work.  But, this type of method teaching is not designed to accommodate variations or deviations to insure success for both owner and dog.  Current market analysis has stated that certified trainers can charge more, at time double or triple, what non-certified trainers can charge. Why?  Because of a piece of paper.  I suggest “Buyer Beware” be the owner motto.

Meanwhile, the true dog handler, because they know through personal instinct, experience, study and innate talent what is required to work both the dog and owner, is still quietly working dogs that are happy, for owners that are happy.

The Trained “Trainer”: The first is the trained dog obedience “trainer”.  This person has attended one of the many schools popping up to teach them to train dogs. (Nice way to add a large layer of profit to the training industry, but it doesn’t mean much except somebody is making a lot of money and the failing methods and their “trainers” are still out there. Meanwhile, the true dog handler, because they know through personal instinct, experience, study and innate talent what is required to work both the dog and owner, is still quietly working dogs that are happy, for owners that are happy.)  This “trainer”, basically, is taught one way to train dogs.  They are usually individuals that have said, “I really love dogs and want to become a trainer.” These “trainers” tend to only be able to apply that which they have been taught and cannot adjust well, if at all, to dog individuality.  This where you so often hear an owner say, “We failed dog class.”

How on earth can you fail dog class???  Dogs have been sitting, staying and learning what acceptable and non-acceptable behaviors amongst themselves are for thousands of years.  Do you really believe that they don’t know how to do these things?  Of course they do.  The necessary skill is to know and understand dogs and to communicate exactly when, where and how YOU want them to do it. (Dogs know how to do this with each other, too.)  If there has been failure, short of the owner quitting class, then the “trainer” didn’t have the skills and knowledge, personally, to teach the dog and owner how to communicate.  Nor did the “trainer” probably have the innate ability to adjust to the individual dog.  This is “cookie cutter” training, both for the “trainer” who is taught, and the dog whom the “trainer” teaches.  We know this style of teaching doesn’t work for the majority of humans, we know it doesn’t work for the majority of dogs.  Owners have always known this and it is why you sometimes feel that there is something “wrong” with certain classes/trainers you observe, or why the need to retake, or take new or higher level, obedience classes.  There are specific communication skills, as well as personal attitudes and behaviors that owners need to understand, learn and master in order to establish basic behaviors that all dogs need to learn. If the pack can teach a puppy, why can’t many “trainers” teach the dog/owner duo?  Because they can only teach what they have learned, they can’t tweak it when needed to fit the individual dog/owner.  I would not be satisfied with, nor want, this type of “trainer” for my dogs.

The Modified Trained “Trainer”: The second type of “trainer” has been taught, or picked up, a specific and/or limited variety of methods and is able to couple this with a learned and/or unconscious limited awareness of dog behavioral cues. This is a “trainer” about whom owners often say, “They’re good with dogs.” The “trainer” may try to combine a few methods, or try different ones, in order to help the owner get the dog to learn dog obedience.  This may also be the person who will be the “teacher” at many of the dog trainer’s schools. They may, or may not, use treats/positive reinforcement or choke chains and will attempt to explain what they are trying to get the dog to do as far as response.  Usually, however, if the dog doesn’t “get it” or “acts up”, this “trainer” having been using either a severe method to intimidate or bribery to achieve an end will tell the owner to practice, practice, practice. “Pick a specific time and practice.”  ”I don’t think you practiced last week.”  ”You need to practice more with your dog.”

WHY?  What does good behavior have to do with practice?  The dog behaves or it doesn’t.  Tricks you practice, behavior is knowing what is acceptable and what is not in the way of a personal response, both from people and dogs.  Bad behavior is stopped, good behavior is allowed to continue.  Even very young children get that idea without practicing.  An owner is training a dog every minute they spend with it-as well as every minute they DON’T.  This would be the type of “trainer” that I would go to only because my choices were limited and it was the best of all the bad options.

What I see is that training by practice of one method is reconstructing the owner and dog into a predetermined mold.  You both have to fit it, not make it work for your individual character and lifestyle.  No wonder there is so much practice involved—it’s totally foreign to how both dogs and people function.  You need to force yourself and the dog to learn it until becomes a habit.  I build obedience responses off the inherent feelings and reactions of both people and dogs.  You don’t need to practice the response, it’s a natural one.  What may be practiced is the correct form of communication to elicit the natural response.  This works so much better and is easier for all concerned.

An owner wants a fluid relationship between two caring individuals, dog and person.  All relationships need to be worked on; communication does not always come easily, concisely or clearly.  But, I don’t know any couple in the world that goes home at 5 o’clock and “practices” their relationship.  I can see how long that would last…a husband comes home and the wife jerks his necktie and says, “Sit.”  If he doesn’t do it immediately, the wife makes him sit by jerking the tie harder and pushing him down into the chair (harsh method).  Or, he sits on command and the wife pops a cookie in his mouth (bribery method.)   Yep…that will be a happy couple, but only if they practice, practice, practice.

The reality of a relaxed, satisfying, complex, fluid relationship is that each individual is aware of the other.  They adjust constantly, but not by using bribery or punitive actions if the relationship is healthy.  They have developed a language that includes trust, understanding, looks, words, tone, actions and sounds that indicate to each other the acceptability, or non-acceptability, of actions, statements and behavior.  When a spouse makes that certain “noise”, or shoots that certain look, the other person has the choice to ignore it (and we all know what happens then) or modify their behavior.  Most modify quickly and quietly for a variety of reasons.  They don’t want a fight, they do it to maintain the balance in the relationship, they modify to please the other person, they adjust because it is also in their best interests, or a combination of these.  There is no need to slap, jerk or bribe to get them to modify.  Every parent knows that old plea, “If you behave, I’ll buy you a/let you…(fill in the blank.)  We know it doesn’t work.  On the other hand, neither does the “all-love” method of training work.  Why should a dog do anything you ask when it gets what it wants most (affection from you) without one iota of effort????  In human relationships this would be equivalent to an “enabling” scenario usually seen in unhealthy, damaged (i.e., alcoholic, abusive) relationships.

The Niche Trainer: The third kind of trainer is the niche trainer. They might be combined with one of the types listed here and don’t necessarily do, or may not be able/want to do, general public obedience “training”.  These trainers are individuals that concentrate on a specific niche, such as guide-dog training, stunt/trick training, specific forms of work (livestock, rescue, therapy, etc.) or show-dog training, to name a few. These trainers are usually very good at what they do, but their method, or end product, may not have any bearing on what the average owner can replicate or needs.  Some of these trainers can, and do offer obedience “training”, but it is difficult for the normal owner to understand and actually put into practice as this type of trainer offers a system that works for a specifically inclined type of dog and the system is not geared to accommodate dogs with temperament/abilities that don’t fall into the training category. By this I mean it is almost impossible to train a dog with no livestock instinct to truly work stock, or a dog that doesn’t have the correct temperament to work as a therapy or assistance dog, or to train a dog with little, or no, athletic ability or inclination to do stunts/tricks.  The trainer can get results on a temporary/limited basis from many dogs, and exceptional results from a select type of dog, but an owner, in all probability, will never be able to reach or maintain any form of consistent obedience because they cannot do what the trainer does and do not have the “right” kind of dog for that method of training.  I would certainly look to this type of trainer for specific training needs, such as training Border Collies to work livestock.

The True Dog HANDLER: This fourth person has an innate knowledge of dogs.  It was there when the person was born and has been honed subconsciously over many years of working with dogs.  They begin to “work” dogs in childhood and so, have many years of experience before they ever do it for a living.  No trained “trainer” can ever hope to come close to the performance of this type of handler.  The true dog handler naturally “sees” and “cold reads” a dog instantly.  They can tell what dog will do before the dog does it.  It is a combination of senses, knowledge and empathy that CAN NOT be taught.  They tend to be fluid handlers, adjusting what is needed in the way of communication, discipline, freedom and method to the individual dog without sacrificing the basic goals and end result.  (In the horse world they are called “horse whisperers.”)  They have a connection with the dogs that the majority of people can’t see or understand.  It is here that the owner says, “He/she works magic.” “They have the touch.” “They have a special talent.” This is because the can adjust, “read” and communicate effectively with dogs to achieve the greatest desired result.

Some of these true dog handlers, however well they work with dogs, cannot explain what it is that they are doing.  They simply “know”.  But, knowing doesn’t help an owner understand or communicate.  These are still incredible dog handlers, but they tend to take the dog from the owner, either in class or as a job, and work it, then return the dog. The owner receives a well-trained dog, but after a while, because the owner can’t duplicate or continue what the handler built as a foundation, some deterioration in behavior occurs. Not because the training wasn’t good, or the owner didn’t try, but because the owner didn’t receive instruction to enable the communication, continuity and consistency of skills needed, and so the dog begins to become lax in its responses.  This would be a normal scenario, even for humans with some dog handling ability.

A child, as a simplistic example, is taught to brush her teeth before bed in one home (parent’s), then goes to her aunt’s house. The child continues to brush her teeth with only an occasional reminder for a time, but one night she’s just too tired, or simply doesn’t want to, and begins to ignore the reminder or subtle correction of this deviation in trained behavior.  The child begins to skip brushing more and more often.  The aunt may not see the child is not brushing, or may not know how to handle the child when she won’t brush when she’s told.  Suddenly, the child realizes that there is a 50/50 chance she can get away without any true downside.  She opts for the easiest path for her—not brushing her teeth.  You really can’t blame the aunt.  She knows the parents taught the child to brush nightly and assumes the child knows what is expected and will do it.  Maybe the aunt hasn’t had children and it doesn’t occur to her the child will take advantage of a situation in which she senses a lack of guidance, attention and knowledge of correction.  The aunt doesn’t realize that “just this once” from the child is setting the stage for “every chance I get.”  The same holds true for an owner who receives a dog back from a trainer.  Just change a few words in the scenario. Child=dog, parent=trainer, brushing teeth=command. The initial behavior of the dog is wonderful and the owner expects it to be that way forever.  The owner doesn’t think about the part they play in leading the dog, nor do they really know what to do if the dog just flat out begins to take advantage of their lack of knowledge and experience and ignores their command.  The dog has been “trained”, the owner is still in the dark and doesn’t really have the skills to correct and cope with the situation.  The dog is usually sent back for a “tune-up”.  It wasn’t a case of a poor handler, they instructed the dog well, they simply didn’t have the communication skills to impart to the owner so that training and expectations could be maintained.

The flip-side to this kind of person is rare and, I believe, a top-quality handler.  It’s the handler who can not only communicate with dogs, but with owners as well.  This person can adapt to both dog and owner needs, explain what is happening and why and impart the reasoning and skills behind the methods to most people—Lucky dog, lucky owner. Communication is usually enhanced for all concerned and corrections become minimal. Owners begin to see an immediate behavioral difference in their dog.  The dog relaxes as it begins to work with consistent, clear leadership, behavioral parameters and a communication technique it can easily understand.  “Obedience class” is not a punishment seminar held weekly, with the owner feeling inept and inferior and the dog unhappy and either unwilling or manipulative.  Nor is it a “treat factory” with the owner resembling a grocery store fully stocked and the dog focused on empty-calorie rewards, not behavior.  It is an experience that leaves both owner and dog with a clearer understanding of what is expected from each of them and the means to achieve the desired behavior and correct any miscommunication or outright unwillingness without resorting to bribes or “snap-n-jerk” methods.  This is the dog handler, that as an owner, I would hunt for high and low to work with myself and dog.

MYTH #1: You can’t train a dog before it’s 6 months old

This, in my mind, is the most detrimental myth out there.  It leads owners to believe that a dog is incapable of learning obedience until it has reach six months old-a certain magic age.  This is based on, primarily, two critical issues.

The first is that, the quasi-“trainers” are NOT teaching behavior, but using ineffectual props, such as choke chains, treats or all-positive/no-stress methods already shown to fail.  If this were not the truth, we would not have a growing number of shelters, rescues and fosters all clamoring for money and a large number of dogs being killed annually.

The LEADING KILLER OF DOGS UNDER THE AGE OF 2 YEARS OLD IS BEHAVIORAL PROBLEMS.

By using traditional, choke collar training methods, a very young dog of eight weeks to about six months old can’t physically handle the immense throat and tracheal abuse that occurs when the “snap-n-jerk” method is used.  This method is physically and psychologically hard and, because pups are just learning their world, it can be extremely damaging to them, destroying their confidence in their skills, the world around them and their owner’s trustworthiness.

Dogs, at age six months or even older, can become shy, fearful or even aggressive in self-defense when trained using the choke chain method. They certainly won’t think the person who owns them is someone to trust as they have been hurt by them repeatedly with this type of training. It is certainly NOT a method I would ever use on a young, emotionally and physically developing dog.  It would, in all probability, scar them for life or leave them with shaky self-confidence.  I have only needed to use a choke collar twice in all my time of training.

Almost 60 years ago it was deemed by scientists and behaviorists that using choke-chains to train resulted in “learned helplessness” on the part of the dog.  Obedience was gained not by the innate willingness of the dog to follow leader-established rules, but because repeated pain and fear had been administered the dog simply didn’t try to do ANYTHING. (Hey, guys, I didn’t make this up…it’s a fact).

The majority of trainers fall into two categories; a) those who rely on choke chains/pinch collars, a method predicated on harsh, domineering techniques that doesn’t require a trainer to adjust their training to the personality, age, breed or emotional development of the individual dog, and b) what I call the “treat” method which bribes a dog to behave. (This is not a viable method as it adds unnecessary calories and is VERY slow and undependable unless an immense amount of mindless, repetitive work is practiced. The bribes are then very important to hold the attention of a dog bored to death with rote practice.  And, as we all know with bribes, the minute something more important comes along, the ante is upped or you are ignored completely.) Choke chains require a dog with some “body” to him in order to be able to withstand the abuse.  Bribing is slow and results in erratic constancy of response in non-bribed conditions.  Owners know, in their gut, that both these methods are not right.

There is an old belief about one year of a dog’s life is equivalent to seven years of a human’s.  Veterinarians have determined a much more realistic development table which blows this out of the water.

5 months (age of dog) = 10 years (human age)

8 months=13 years

10 months=14 years

12 months=15 years

Everyone knows a normal parent would NEVER allow a child to grow to the age of 11 years without ever having taught good behavior, teaching the child about the world, the people in it and how to be polite, and saying “no” and enforcing it—not only for the child’s sake, but for the parent’s and family’s mental and physical well-being.  So, why would any caring owner allow their dog to develop that long without teaching these same skills?  Because the current failing method of “dog training” and “trainers” don’t know how to teach behavior and to cover their failure that is what they tell owners.  (This is now changing a bit. The industry is pushing Puppy Classes, but we will look at that in Myth #3.)

Here is the inherent problem with age-restricted training.  By the time the dog is six months old they have developed some bad behavioral habits and have the size, speed, determination and strength to engage in them causing owners to pull their hair out and begin to really dislike the dog they once loved.  It also makes the dog crazy as it tries to understand the rules and accommodate an always emotionally-changing owner.  One day the dog receives love and positive attention as it hasn’t done anything to tick-off the human.  The next day the owner is at his wit’s end and punishing the dog.  No one—not dog or owner—is happy or secure.

In the past few years puppy classes have begun to spring up. Nice…But, most are simply modified social classes with overtones of adult dog classes.  They DO NOT TEACH THE CORRECT BEHAVOIR TO THE DEVELOPING PUP.  If they did, the leading reason for the death of dogs under age 2 would NOT be behavioral problems.

After completing this training you are instructed to plan to bring the pup back, at about 6 months old, to begin adult training.  This is an industry gimmick to make more money and we will explode it.

MYTH #2: There are different levels of obedience

This is a greatmyth.  Many trainers, and the dog industry, get a LOT of mileage and bucks from this one.  Why would anyone charge oncefor training when they can charge three or four times?  Let’s tell the truth here…you deserve to hear it.  After all, every one of you works hard for your money.  You probably have to do some serious schedule rearranging to make time for obedience classes.  You are the people that love the dog, but have to replace the couch, hold onto your temper when faced with a dog that is ignoring your command (which is usually only given for the dog’s safety) and worry yourself sick that your pet may be hurt or killed as it takes off down the road or across a field in hot pursuit of something.  It is you that feels a failure when your dog “doesn’t get it” and does poorly in “obedience training. “  Here is how “obedience” classes work now, for the most part:

Beginning obedience—pay  once.  This seems to mean that your dog learns to lower his hind end to the ground. (Hopefully upon your command, because I can guarantee you he knows how do this without your telling him.)

Intermediate obedience (pay twice) seems to mean that you return to the trainer to teach your dog to lower his hind end to the ground and stay in one place while you stand for a specific period of time.

Advanced obedience seems to mean you take another class (pay three times) to teach your dog to sit on command, stay in one place while you walk away or around a corner and, possibly, do this all off-leash.  (Please understand this is a simplistic, condensed version of what is happening, but it doesn’t make me happy to see dogs and owners go through unnecessary and prolonged training.)

Here’s the truth, unvarnished and totally without tact.  There are NO different levels of obedience. Either your dog is obeying or it isn’t-right from the beginning.  When I train by establishing behavioral expectations and rules—I get good behavior AND obedience for which I don’t have to specifically train—it  is a natural extension of pack behavior to follow the rules and the dog finds it easy to comprehend and comply.  Both of us are happy.

Here is another area in which I differ dramatically from the established methods of “training.”   I hold certain truths to be self-evident.  I believe both people and dogs can think, reason, learn and apply what they learn IF they understand what is being taught to them.  How well they can apply this knowledge depends upon a variety of factors. Still, these factors can be modified or improved upon for a higher consistency rate of good behavior.  I KNOW that most of the problems within obedience classes and between owners and dogs occur when owners don’t communicate in a way that dogs understand.  The owner says one word, their tone indicates something different, their body language communicates a third thing and their actions throw the fourth, and final, monkey-wrench into the stew.  The dog is confused.  The owner frustrated.

When I teach behavioral-obedience the very first lesson for both the owner and dog is to learn to respect each other, become calm, think about what is happening and practice self-correction.  Each dog is an individual, with individual traits at different levels in such things as willfulness, timidity or willingness.  While the basics of good behavior are taught, they are tailored to the individual dog/owner.  The dog determines the level/form of communication and discipline needed to insure they believe you mean what you say.  Dogs are NOT stupid.  When they misbehave and you effectively communicate disapproval, if faced with a consequence (such as not being allowed to play during socialization time, continuing a walk, being returned to a kennel, or verbally reprimanding in a no-nonsense tone, to name a few) dogs don’t tend to repeat the mistake if the owner understands and knows how, when and how forcefully to correct their individual dog.  This method is humane, instructive, easy to understand and quickly assimilated by the dog as it is exactly how they would be corrected by a higher-ranking dog pack member.

MYTH #3: Puppy classes will help a dog get ready for obedience classes

This is a mixed-bag myth. It is absolutely correct if the “trainer” is using a standard, one-method form of “training. “  It is a giant myth if you are speaking of what a puppy can actually learn. We know dogs’ brains are much like a human’s.  That their learning is condensed due to rapid maturation is known by true dog trainers and evidenced by the age table above.  We also know that the optimum time for socialization of a pup is between eight and sixteen weeks of age.  True dog trainers have always known it is also the optimum period for basic behavior  in that a pup has few learned bad behaviors, is receptive to social development and yet is still young enough accept, easily and quickly, the rules as laid out by the owner.  What a handler does NOT DO is work a pup as if it were a more physically and emotionally mature dog.  Corrections, training time lengths for specific behavior (such as sit,) physical limitations and their concentration span and more must be taken into account and/or modified when teaching puppies in a class setting.  But, puppies CAN be taught ALL THE BASICS of good behavior between ages 8-16 weeks.  As a matter of fact, it much easier to train a pup than an older dog: The older dog has learned how to manipulate and ignore in order to simply do what it wants.  That results, many times, in a battle of wills between owner and dog to change bad habits. Look at it from the older dog’s point of view.  Why should it change doing something it has gotten away with for months and enjoys, just because you’ve decided it’s old enough to do it differently?  The easiest thing is not to let the dog form bad behavioral habits that will need to be broken later.  That means training it as a pup and educating the owner.

A pup of 8-16 weeks is totally capable of holding a sit command for long periods of time. What a good dog handler will understand and incorporate in the work is that the pup, also as part of his development, will need supervised play, exploration, social and love time.  These are important skills which all dogs should learn, but they still need guidance as to appropriate behavior patterns.  I will put a pup in my regular class.  I don’t hold a puppy-only class.  The pup will learn rapidly if the class has mixed ages and all dogs attending benefit.  There are some aspects of behavior which dogs can teach to dogs.  Keep the different ages segregated and dogs miss a valuable social interaction lesson.  A true dog hander, however, can immediately read, and has generalized knowledge about, the dogs in class and knows which dogs will not respond well with others, regardless of the situation.  It’s the handler’s responsibility to warn owners which, or when, other dogs should not be approached.

MYTH #4: An “X week/Z hour per session” traditional obedience class is necessary to train a dog

This myth is certainly convenient for “trainers.”   If the dog isn’t “getting it”, no matter the reason, the “trainer” can put it back on the owner and claim the client didn’t practice that week.  The truth is that a dog, if the communication is correct, will understand the basic rules (not necessarily the specific vocabulary, though I’m never surprised that they figure out what we want) in just as little as half-an-hour.  The owner may take a lot longer.  Dogs, if a handler is offering clear communication, will frequently work on a variety of skills for two or more hours easily (this will not, many times, hold true for puppies as using their brains takes a lot of energy and their basic energy output is high to begin with.)  Any good handler can tell you a bored dog is hard to handle.  They can be destructive, easily distracted, not listen, become hyper-active, or in the words of one of my clients,” …act like complete idiots, jump like jesters and run as if the Alien is after them.”  I strongly encourage dogs to think.  Think when he hears a correction sound.  What am I doing that incorrect?  Then think what he was doing before he heard the sound.  The majority of dogs will self-correct almost immediately without any other incentives needed to obtain the desired behavioral response.

The methods most “trainers” use to alter behavior is to slap a choke chain on and jerk the dog around, or bribe them to be obedient with treats. The first hurts and is often used incorrectly and/or too much by well-meaning owners who have been poorly trained and corrected themselves as to timing and communication techniques by dog trainers.  The second gets the dog to focus on food as a reward, not quickly and permanently changing behavioral responses as it has not true pack or self-benefit.

Teaching Behavior vs. Obedience

There is a third method, which is the oldest and most consistently successful method, is the one I use and build on, one which dogs want more than almost anything in the world: Acknowledgement from their owners that their behavior is right, acceptable and pleasing as it applies to their behavior and relationship. The best behaved, least troublesome dogs have one thing in common-a feeling of security and an owner who is a confident leader and gives of himself as the reward for being a valued, trusted and loved companion.  Why wouldn’t a dog behave if that were the pay-off?  The owner has a dog that can be trusted and so the owner offers opportunities for the dog to have fun, interesting or enjoyable experiences because the owner knows that it takes very little to correct a behavioral mistake, even at a distance.  If a dog hears my correction sound due to inappropriate behavior, then self-corrects, it is allowed to continue with life, not made to practice a good behavior.  The dog understands quickly not engage in, or stop exhibiting, unwanted behavior.  In my training, to ignore a correction warning is to guarantee the owner will administer some form of discipline. The discipline may be something as simple as bringing all activities to a screeching halt, but only because the dog did not respect the correction sound and self-correct his behavior.  Most methods either make the dog come, lie down and stay (stopping all behavior so the dog can’t make or learn from any kind of mistake) or spend an inordinate amount of time practicing “good” behavioral responses—usually with bribes.  These, to me, are silly methods.  People and dogs learn from mistakes.  The goal is not to allow either one of them to make a mistake that will result in physical harm, yet still respect the warning, both as it pertains to the immediate situation and future.  How do people teach this to children?  by a warning.  Let me give you two examples as they offer a clear demonstration of the difference in how I look at teaching dogs and people to get a desired behavior.

Here is one simplified example; If the child ignores an initial verbal warning not to touch a hot stove, in a controlled warning method the mother steps in before harm can happen and takes the child’s hand, now sternly warning him again not to touch and at the same time physically removing him from proximity to the stove. The child is allowed to continue playing, helping or whatever.  The child has now learned two things simultaneously, a hot stove, specifically, is off-limits according to mom and it is important, in general, to listen to and respect her warnings.  The child will heed future warnings because mom has taught the child that she will step in and administer sterner discipline for ignoring a first warning.  Touching the stove, will not happen if mom has proven in other, less dangerous situations she is serious and not to be ignored when she issues warnings, not to continue with a certain behavior.  The child will think twice before doing something after hearing her warning.  Usually this is because the child knows what mom will do if she is ignored, but doesn’t know what the stove will do.  The point of this example is not the danger to the child, per se, but that it is the verbal warning administered that alters the behavior, not a reward or practice system, that achieved immediately the desired behavioral response.  This is exactly the method I use to train dogs and they understand it perfectly.

Time and again I hear, “My dog is great on a leash, but let him off and he won’t come when he’s called.”  Most “trainers” now will bribe with treats to get a dog to learn to come.  Or, using the older method, they will put a dog on a long rope, command “come” and pull sharply to make the dog obey.  Once again, I say these are silly methods and clearly demonstrate that the majority of “trainers” don’t know squat about dogs.  Most “trainers” do not explain to owners what the dog may be thinking or what the owner is setting up in the way of habits that inadvertently trains a dog NOT to come, and finally, how to change the dog’s response by changing owner’s habits and behavior because they do NOT understand dogs.

The other problem owners bring to me is that they can’t get their dogs to hold a “stay”.  Again, “trainers” tend to use the same two methods of training—bribery or punishment—for not staying.  Let’s look at this from a dog’s view point.  Most of the time when a dog is put on a “down/stay” it is for one of three reasons;  1) the owner doesn’t trust it to come when called and puts the dog on a “down” so that they will know exactly where he is, 2) the dog is doing something wrong and the best way for most owners, with standard “training”, to punish or gain control over the dog is to make it stay in one place, and 3) because the dog WON’T stay down, the owner has been told to practice.

Any genetically and mentally healthy dog can learn all it needs in the way of behavioral-obedience in an average of two to four hours.  (I will be happy to supply all the references wanted.  This is why my Dog Camps and BOSS Dog Clinics are so popular.)  There are many variables that often lengthen the time that it takes a specific dog to accept a new behavior structure.  These may range from early upbringing, individual willfulness of the dog, length of time with current owner, to owner’s individual character strength and communication abilities. All play a crucial part in the time span it takes some dogs to accept the “new rules” being put in place, but they do learn—usually in a matter of hours—not  weeks or years.  What may take an extremely long time, possibly forever, is teaching the owner how to communicate correctly and be consistent about rules and corrections. I hold four Dog Camps yearly and instruct BOSS Dog Clinics all over the United States throughout the year.  At that time owners bring their dogs and we work—Hard.  We spend quite a bit of time in the beginning learning about dogs.  How they develop emotionally, physically, psychologically and socially: not only academics or theory, real dog knowledge from dogs themselves and my experience.  (Sometimes academics and theories don’t dovetail with how dogs truly respond to corrections, stimulation and their environment.)  How dogs communicate amongst themselves.  How dogs teach other dogs acceptable forms of behavior.  During the Camps and Clinics the dogs are in attendance and learning.  Learning patience, to sit quietly, wait for release commands, learning the correction warning sound, learning that their owners are becoming consistent in their expectations and responses and much, much more.  Owners admit that they see a complete change in attitude and behavior by lunch.  This is because by lunch owners are more knowledgeable, look at their companions differently and communicate and respond in ways that dogs understand.  I cover all basic commands for dogs, but tailor the work to the individual dog and owner, fine-tuning owner’s responses, attitudes, communication methods and physical cues.  Each owner may video tape only their dog’s work to take home and use as a “refresher.”  By the end of the day, if not sooner, most dogs have been working off-leash and everyone is happier.

A caveat is necessary at this point.  A dog will always be a dog.  The best dog handler in the world cannot alter certain aspects of inherent dog behavior.  No handler can guarantee 100%, mistake-proof behavior because individuals are involved.  Dogs still have a will of their own.  Just like people, they will sometimes do things they know they shouldn’t or break a rule in the face of known consequences. Training may be able to modify certain behaviors, but it cannot make them disappear completely or forever.  But, on the whole, the true dog handler will be able to bring out the best in you and your dog—far more than a “trainer” due to the handler’s intimate understanding of dogs.

MYTH #5: My dog can’t be trained, it needs a dog behaviorist/psychologist

I just love this one.  Because the one-method “trainers” couldn’t, for some reason, “train” your dog, the industry developed an entirely new sector that allows a person to pursue a high-paid profession in which they have more room to try different tricks to alter the behavior of your dog.  (This is merely another form of a “trainer/training”, but you get to pay large sums of money where one-on-one someone who never actually works your dog gets to tell you how to do it on your own at home.)  True dog handlers, from the beginning of working with the dog, are also behaviorists, teachers and psychologists.  Why?  Because all of these things must be incorporated into the way they deal with the dog and owner as a whole for the work to be successful.

MYTH #6: A dog for everyone (or how to pick the right breed for you)

I’m going to advocate solely on the dog’s side in this one.  Sometimes we just shouldn’t own a dog. Forget whether there is a “right” breed or not.  We aren’t at a place in our lives where we can do what is best for the dog.  Maybe because of a work schedule and we’ll be out-of-town a lot.  Or maybe, the daily schedule keeps us away too long.  It might be that there has been a major upheaval in your life (Being under loads of stress in NOT a good atmosphere into which to introduce a dog.  No matter how much better you might feel with a companion, think about the dog and how it feels living with a very upset owner.)  If you’re in the military and subject to transfer orders where the dog may not be able to accompany you, don’t get one.  If adopting, you need to expect some emotional/behavioral issues will arise.  If you’re not will to deal with these and/or lay out money because instruction is needed to improve behavior so the dog will feel love and acceptance, don’t get one. If you can’t understand and accept that you’re responsible for keeping a dog for life, don’t get one.  If you want a dog, but another family member doesn’t, until you both agree totally, don’t get one.

If you’re not willing to accept ALL the responsibilities that go with owning dogs (of any kind), DO NOT GET ONE.

Having said all of that, if you are ready to get a dog, let’s talk about what is a good one for you.  Many people try to be responsible and do their homework as far as what kind of breed would best fit their lifestyle.  I applaud you all, but look further.  Will the temperament of the individual dog mesh with you/your family’s?  Are you a loud group with active children that make sharp, sudden movements?  Bad match is a pup/dog that is easily startled or shy (too much pressure), or movement-oriented dogs (they will be nipping heels, quickly.)  Do you have lots of people come and visit, or have a business where the dog will be spending time?  Bad match is a dog/pup that demonstrates a high degree of territorial imperative.  Are you in the human health care profession?  Bad match is usually a dominant dog, you’ll have problems getting control of behavior.  Are you a dominant personality that likes quick reactions to your commands?  Bad match is a “light” dog (one which doesn’t handle tonal changes well.)

These are some of things you need to think about when picking a dog in order to make life easier for both of you and be better companions.  If you’re not sure about what kind of personality is in a pup get a copy of the dog personality test to help point you in the right direction.  Remember, though, all dogs go through a final personality change at about two years of age and that is what you will end with.  I have seen very active dogs settle at about two. I have seen easy going dogs change temperament drastically and start picking fights.  (These are extreme, I concur, but a change does happen and you need to know it.)  Beware and be aware.  If choosing a pup/dog from a breeding kennel talk to people who have purchased from the breeder and have pups/dogs from the same cross.   Ask them how the pups have developed and allow leeway for individual character traits and handling.  You will see some similarities that may help you decide.  Really, do a lot of homework on the breeder.  Too many “backyard breeders” are popping up and selling dogs without really any genetic knowledge of the lineage and serious thought into behavioral and breeding goals for the proposed litters.  Too many of my clients have purchased expensive and problem-ridden pups through “hobby” and show breeders!  It has then been a real issue to return the dog and claim a full-payment refund!

All dogs, just as people, can modify behavior to a point. But, a bad match from the beginning sometimes can’t be fixed.

Every true dog handler knows that dogs function by certain truisms. These are; one of us is the leader. (Either you are clearly in charge, or the dog is. Leadership can be achieved by a variety of methods.) Dogs don’t negotiate. (Dogs don’t sit around working out problems by negotiations in the classic sense. Rules are rules.  If a rule is broken there is a clear and understood consequence for the offender.)  Dogs don’t bribe each other for desired behavior, nor do they offer a treat for desired behavior.  (I’ve seen forms of “flirting”/play enticement, but never bribery).  Dogs use clear forms of punishment when misbehavior occurs despite a warning.  (Punishment can be in the form of physical chastisement, ignoring the offender, up to shunning for select periods of time.)  Dogs don’t take weeks to teach another dog how to behave.  (This lesson in manners is quickly and efficiently imparted as the harmony and security within the pack, both for the offender as well as the other members, is totally destroyed if it is not.)  Good behavior is rewarded with emotional and physical interaction with pack members (NOT with food treats.)  Why is that human dog obedience “trainers” are so against using the forms of communication that dogs inherently know and understand?  Because many don’t see them or cannot correctly communicate them.  True dog handlers will go to great lengths to help an owner see, understand and master correct timing and communication—the happiness, well-being and improved, long-term relationship between owner and dog is important to a true dog handler.

There was a time that we lived, worked, and depended upon dogs and their skills, their intelligence, their very presence, for our livelihoods, safety, food, and companionship in our daily lives and, sometimes, lonely and wild places.

There was a very practical aspect to the dogs we had, much like the spouses we chose, the friends we made and the lives we led.  Anything less led to a higher chance of not surviving.

Because of this, we were very aware of the dog as an individual.  We studied each dog’s strengths and weaknesses, talents, drive, intelligence and willingness to work with us.  They truly were our partners and we had to have complete and utter trust in them.  We also had to define what their place was in our lives, the responsibility we put on them, and the behavior that we expected of them, both while working and as a member of our family.

They went to war with us and fought, and died, beside us.  They were left at home with wives and children as primary guardians.  They had jobs that increased the overall quality of our lives; herding and guarding livestock, killing vermin, babysitting, sentries calling the alert to strangers, and emotional companions.

It is often depicted as dogs were “things” to be owned and used.  The idea promoted was that dogs were viewed as a tool and dispensable, not as a loved companion and valued partner.  It is often portrayed that dogs were not allowed in the house, the place of love and haven from hardship, and sometimes this was true, but it stemmed from a far more practical point; often the dogs carried fleas and ticks, had rolled in something, were covered in burrs, and generally made it more difficult to keep houses clean.  While this still holds true today, it was not the standard for most dogs.

Dogs with skills were highly valued, loved and cherished, well taken care of and their death was a cause for grief.  Throughout history there are examples of people cherishing their dogs, feeding them when they, themselves, had nothing.  Ensuring the dog(s) had comfortable housing; we included them within the family and allowed them in the house and in our lives.

As early as Pharaonic times, as well as in China and Persia, there were laws protecting dogs and defining what constituted good care and treatment.  Dogs were identified by collars and had legal status.  Persia punished anyone who maimed or killed a dog; even feeding bad food to a dog could result in the punishment of 50 to 200 lashes.

Delta, a victim of the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius in 79 C.E. (Common Era, now replacing A.D), was a smallish dog whose remains were discovered lying protectively across the body of a young child.  However, this was not the dog’s only selfless and remarkable act.  With her remains was found a silver dog collar upon which was engraved her name, her owner’s name, Severinus, and listed and honored the fact that she had saved his life three times.  First, she pulled him from the sea when he was drowning.  Second, she fought off four attackers who attempted to rob her owner.  Third, she fought off a wolf which attacked them near Herculaneum.

Sir Frances Drake, 5^th Baronet of Buckland Abbey (1723-94), began to improve the manor after the death of his mother.  He installed a new, elegant staircase leading to extensively remodeled upstairs rooms.

He balanced his love for his pack of Irish wolfhounds against potential damage to the new staircase by installing a dog gate in the main hall, thus only allowing the dogs to reach the second floor via a back stair.

The gate was custom-made and a doozy, in my mind.  It clearly shows that our current child-gates are poor reproductions of an old, old idea and that owners have been including dogs in a select manner for long time.

Drake made certain his beloved dogs were included in his life, yet had no qualms about defining where they were allowed to roam and their behavior within the house.

Our inclusion of dogs in our lives is clearly shown in the examples above.  But HOW we included them and led them to be partners is rarely examined.  Many of the methods and equipment used today on our dogs came from a period of time in which the dog was an integral part of our daily work and life.  Much of that equipment was originally used to protect the dog and has now been perverted into training equipment for use ON the dogs.

Owners seeking training for their dogs today fail to realize that very few of the methods being taught NOW come from this much earlier, physical, and practical period of mutual existence that simply is not applied to our lifestyles, on the whole, today because it has been forgotten.  These successful methods predated modern training as it is known today.  They incorporated the whole of the dog, along with a practical application FOR the dog and his successful integration into the human unit.

Let’s look at some collars, as examples of what I’m talking about.

To the left is a pair of Scottish silver coursing collars, 1830.  They’re lined with red leather, adjustable with three slits, joined by a ring and two links with snap fastenings.  This allowed multiple pairs of dogs to be controlled by a single handler in the course of field work.

This is the modern equivalent to the above.  The materials have changed, but the concept has not.  Nor has the basic restraint method altered.  The difference is only that an owner has more than a single dog and those dogs, usually, have no real working  purpose to their lives, nor are receiving behavioral directives.

Top: A German medieval iron collar consisting of eight linked W’s ending in spikes with ring for lead attachment.  c. 1400s

Middle: German iron collar of almost stirrup-shaped links each with a spike, original leather lining. 1400s

Bottom: German iron hunting collar with two rows of iron elongated oval links and clasp.  Early 1600s

Note: on all three of these collars, the prongs point outward for protection of the dog from aggression.

Bullmastiff wearing an iron collar for bear or wolf hunting. 1500s

Today’s collars (below).  I don’t see much physical difference, yet the practical application is vastly different.

Up to approximately the late 1700s there had always been, throughout history, informal competition between handlers and their dogs, regardless of the practical application—be it sled dogs, herding dogs, field/bird dogs, hunting dogs, etc.  These competitions took place, primarily, to determine a) the quality of the handler/trainer, b) the quality of the dog and his/her skills for future breeding purposes and specific uses/jobs, and c) to learn new and better ways to handle dogs and increase both human and dog skills and abilities.  They were also, of a secondary nature, social get-togethers for like-minded people in order to share information, knowledge and self-improvement.  It was peers judging peers and assisting novice handlers.

This format, now formalized, is only seen today in working Border collie and bird dog field trials, where it, too, is being co-opted into a “weekend warrior” show, not an assessment of handler and dog for improvement of human competency and technique and dog genetics and capabilities.

By the 1800s many of the informal competitions had morphed into a show at a local tavern (England) where a favorite dog had supporters.  It was primarily held for the toy dogs, still, these dogs were demonstrating some form of skill, usually in the form of a trick performed for an audience.

Then, in 1859, the first formally organized dog show, which was comprised solely of bird dog breeds, was held. It was only fourteen years later that the first official dog show was promoted by The Kennel Club (England).  The emphasis was on breed conformation, temperament, and to maintain stud books.

This timeline and format was closely paralleled in the United States, with the formation of The American Kennel Club happening in 1884.  Still, both England and the U.S. Kennel Clubs were focused on primarily the maintenance and promotion of genetically sound dogs for work.  Those handlers dealing with these dogs still had a practical application to supply to their canine companions and were interested in ensuring the best dog for the work.

Throughout this long relationship with dogs, competent, skilled and intelligent handlers knew better than to beat a dog, but reward it with personal attention and physical and emotional inclusion in the daily life.  They knew that food could be used in some cases as a training/reward aspect, but could not take the place of the human-dog relationship bond.  The majority did not endanger their most valued companions and partners with stupid displays of risk, such as bear-baiting, dog fighting and the likes, nor did they knowingly or willingly endanger their dogs in the act of work.  The majority did not ask their dogs to do what they, themselves, would not.  The majority valued their dogs as companions, friends, and working partners and loved them.  The majority of handlers did not behave inanely, clap their hands, jump up and down and squeak excitedly at their dogs in order to get any type of results.  The majority was quiet, calm, and sensible, common-sense filled people, and as such, they created quiet, calm, sensible, common-sense filled dogs. The majority of quality handlers succeeded in having a personal, intimate relationship with their dogs, who were well-behaved, and had practical work skills—and all without obedience training.

In America, these handlers and their successful method became a dying breed due to the hubris of one woman.

Before beginning this next part, as an aside, let me give you an idea of what poodles were originally intended to do as a job. poodle 1825, from Ger. Pudel, shortened form of Pudelhund “water dog,” from Low Ger. Pudel “puddle” (cf. pudeln “to splash”) + Ger. Hund “hound.”  Probably so called because the dog was used to hunt water fowl.

Originally from Germany (NOT France), they were bred as water dogs, retrieving foul for hunters.  Poodle-like dogs go as far back as Roman times where it is recorded they were used as a pointer in falconry.  Their scent skills were utilized to hunt truffles in Italy, Spain, and France.  A quote about poodle-like dogs in Hans Fredrich von Flemming’s “The Complete Hunter”, 1749, states, “They retrieve well in reed field and fast rivers: They also hunt out foxes, otters, and wild cats from the reeds.  Such Water Pudel is of great service to the Fowler” Hoyt, p. 24

The Beginning of the Long, Slow Decline of Our Dogs and the Crisis They Now Face:

Col. Konrad Most, a German, was training dogs and explaining, from a dog trainer’s perspective to other dog trainers, how dogs learned.  He began, in 1906, to train police dogs while serving as police commissioner at the Royal Prussian Police Headquarters, Saarbruchen.  In 1912 he became director of Berlin’s State Breeding and Training Establishment for police dogs.  He headed the Canine Research Department of the Army from 1919-1937.  In 1931 he helped form the German Society for Animal Psychology.

Long before the publication of B.F. Skinner’s The Behavior of Organisms, Col. Most had a rudimentary understanding of the relationship between consequences and behaviors as applied to dog training for specific tasks, though he still approached the dog through the submission of the body, while primarily dismissing, or perhaps not even recognizing the intrinsic social, and necessary integral, emotional and total-dog aspects of learning and behavioral responses.  Many of his methods or procedures are considered “heavy-handed” by some trainers today.  Most’s belief was, “The order of hierarchy can only be established through physical force”, so dogs he trained were forced into the sit, down, or heel position.  He explained the reasoning and goal behind his training method was, “The object of compulsion is to obtain the paramount and unconditional surrender of the dog”.

In 1910, Col. Most’s manual Training Dogs became one of the foundation books for “how to train” dogs, a manual for training dogs whose primary purpose was for use in police work and war.  The dogs that couldn’t cut it, make the grade in Colonel Most’s training regime, were discarded.  So, right there we have a SELECTIVE OPERATIVE that has no bearing on the vast majority of dogs, and yet, we’ve adopted a training technique that’s based on two primary objectives:  complete subservience without thought and the willingness to be aggressive upon demand.

Now, I ask you folks, WHAT does that truly have to do with the majority of dogs?

Two of Most’s students, Josef Weber, The Dog in Training, 1939, and Hans Tosutti, Companion Dog Training, 1948, brought Most’s training methods to England and the United States.  Weber, in his book, states that he “wanted to bring to the American dog owners the practices used by experts in international schools.”

In 1933, a woman named Helene (Helen) Whitehouse Walker, a socialite who bred Standard Poodles at her Carillon Kennels, was miffed that people didn’t take her dogs seriously.  Under the AKC rules her poodles couldn’t compete in AKC-licensed field trials.  She’d read about obedience tests in English dog magazines and her main objective became to introduce to America the growing English sport of obedience “trialing”.  To this end she traveled to England and studied the “sport” of obedience and its training methods.  She spent a total of six weeks learning how to train HER dogs.

Walker studied under trainers the trials, techniques and methods being utilized by the Associated Sheep, Police, Army Dog Society (ASPADS).  This group held specific trials within the working parameters of each job specification in order that the dog progress through ascending stakes (levels); Utility Dog (UD), Working Dog (WD), Tracking Dog (TD) and Patrol Dog (PD) in which the following must be demonstrated by the handler and dog duo, Control (heel, recall, stay, etc), Agility (jumps and scaling a wall), and nosework (search square and tracking) to demonstrate mastery of specific tasks in order to qualify as competent within their working job description.

The obedience and methods she studied was that of Colonel Most, as it was his training method being implemented upon dogs participating and competing in these English trials specifically geared to show the competency of dogs in demonstrating MOST’S method at a JOB designed for specific temperament dogs trained to be competent within a limited job performance demand.

Walker focused on the dog training techniques being displayed, which were heavily predicated on the police and army concept of training, all of which were foundationally replicating Col. Most’s training techniques.  These techniques were rote learning for specific tasks and had little, if any, variables within the context of learning.  The dogs were taught a specific response to a specific command and no deviation or personal thought by the dog was allowed to enter the equation.  Trainers were taught in this same manner.  Say “this” and the dog must respond by doing “that”.  It was a connect-the-dots training technique that failed to include the real dog.  It still is accomplished in this same manner today, be it by positive or negative training influences.  It is training for a specific task.  You are an army dog, you are to help control and put prisoners on trains and not let them revolt, run, or attack your officer. Once you finish your job, you are most probably kenneled until you are needed for work.  As a dog, you have one task, outside of doing that task, you do not truly exist.  And when you can no long perform your task, you will be put-down, as you cannot integrate into a normal household.

As you can clearly see, this has NO basis in the majority of our dogs’ real, daily behavior, it is a JOB, and training only FOR a job.  Not communication of behavioral expectations coupled with social integration into a human/dog relationship.

Walker returned to America and laid siege to the AKC.  As The AKC web page states: “In the mid 30′s, Helene Whitehouse Walker was instrumental in establishing obedience tests. She submitted a pamphlet of procedures to the AKC in December 1935, and three months later the Board of Directors approved it in principle. In April 1936, AKC published the first official “Regulations and Standard for Obedience Test Field Trials”.

Now here’s a little back-story on Helene.  Her maternal grandfather was Sir George Duntze, 4^th Baronet Duntz, in…….(please hum the Jeopardy song here)…..ENGLAND.  This gave Helene an “in” to ASPADS that she would not, otherwise, have had.  It meant her mother was LADY Ethel Maude Duntze Whitehouse and, as such, when Helene stood before the AKC Board to ask for the inclusion of the “sport” of obedience trialing, she had money, social standing, and, for some, an enviable heritage.  Now please, tell me if that, possibly accompanied by a hefty financial donation to the AKC (though I can’t prove it), wouldn’t be enough to get the all-male Board in 1933 to move heaven and earth and accept her request in the very short documented time of three months.

In the fall of 1932, Walker placed an ad for kennel help.  Blanche Saunders, a farm hand on the Dell-Howe (aka Green Chimneys) Farm, in Patterson, New York, got the job.  Walker taught her all she knew about dog training—all six weeks worth—and  Blanche went on to study at the feet of Josef Weber, who had been taught by Col. Most.  The link was now set for today’s crisis.

The first American Obedience Trial was held by Helene Whitehouse Walker on her father’s estate in Mount Kisco, N.Y., an extremely affluent and influential community, in 1933, with the assistance of Blanche Saunders, kennel manager and Mrs. Walker’s dog trainer. Saunders later wrote a book called The Story of Dog Obedience.  The old pictures in this book—particularly of Saunders in riding breeches—give the enterprise of dog training the feel of an English period novel—estates, entitlement, kennel managers.

It is also most interesting to note that the woman most intent upon proving her dogs’ abilities did so with the barest minimum of on-the-ground experience in training dogs.  She then passed that responsibility over to her kennel manager and dog trainer.  But, using her social standing and resources, forced through a form of training which is now proving as an abysmal failure—to the tune of almost five million dogs euthanized annually and fully three generations of Americans that now incorrectly handle dogs—all for a bit of hurt ego, she wanted to prove her dogs were not “sissies”.

This form of cookie-cutter obedience training grew fairly steadily.  Then, in 1937, in a bid to gain wider acceptance and participation in her chosen sport, Walker and Saunders took three standard poodles, a travel trailer, and a Buick, and set off on a 10,000 mile cross-country trip aimed at promoting her budding “sport” of choice.

From that point forward ALL OBEDIENCE training based their premise of training on the body, NOT the entire dog, and it all stemmed from the foundational teachings of the police and war dogs of Colonel Konrad Most.

In the 1940s, Keller Breland, best known for operating the Arkansas tourist attraction IQ Zoo, which featured trained wild animals, began using the clicker as a method of training.  He and his wife, Marion, were students of B.F. Skinner, a behavioral psychologist.

The popularity of this zoo brought Keller to the attention of the commercial animal training industry in the 50s.  The Kellers developed the first operant-based (positive or negative consequences following a behavior to increase or decrease the occurrence of the behavior) bird and mammal shows for Marineland of the Pacific.  Animal trainers from all over came to them to learn this method.  This program was interrupted due to WWII, but the methods he pioneered are used today in oceanariums and theme parks all over the U.S.

Fast-forward to 1984.  Karen Pryor, founder of Sea Life Park in Hawaii, a Cornell graduate (1954) with a background in zoology and behavioral biology, was a pioneering dolphin trainer.

We all know how this form of operant conditioning works.  Clicker makes a noise, dolphin does a trick, and dolphin gets a treat/reward for performing the trick.

Here’s something to think about.  At the end of the SHOW the dolphin does NOT go home with the trainer.  He returns to the other dolphins and (learns) his normal dolphin behavior.

In both the cases of Breland and Pryor, these people were teaching WILD ANIMALS tricks—NOT behavior.  NONE of these animals went home and LIVED with the trainers.  Therefore, the animals were capable of returning to their normal behavioral patterns upon cessation of the job/trick.  And while I agree this training method is wonderful for tricks and/or jobs outside the normal range of daily behavior, it has nothing to do with the dog with which you live.

In situations where one is working with wild animals, the operant training method is probably the most effective and humane way to train.  If one is speaking of dogs, however, one must remember that selective breeding for compatibility with, and connection to man has altered the dogs’ inherent response structure to work WITH us and to respond to our emotional state.  Dogs read this very quickly and can interpret whether their behavior pleases us or not.

Food, while nice, is not the be-all, end-all for the dog.  Inclusion, emotionally, psychologically and physically is very high in their world.  Whether the interaction between human and dog within these parameters are met under on-going stressful interactions, or under stable, quiet, and secure daily interactions is truly important and should be approached on a relationship-based premise.  Obedience training does not address the core emotional needs of dogs and, therefore, does not truly fix the problems.  Behavioral-relationship handling does.  It is on-going, fluid, takes into account the individual dog, allowing personal expression within the behavioral expectations of the group and most resembles the family/pack.

Humans are animals.  Animals function within the set laws of nature.  Many of the behaviors cross species.  Minute-by-minute, day-by-day, we communicate to our families what constitutes good behavior in our group.  Include your dog in that and you won’t need obedience training.  He’ll be well-behaved, relaxed, and secure and work with you.  He may make mistakes, but he’s not looking for a fight.  It’s not enjoyable to live in a family filled with tension and dogs pick up emotions so easily.

Watch your dog and learn to see what he’s saying with his actions. Allow him the necessary outlet of expressing himself as an individual, as long as he does it within the limitations of behavior you set for your family.  Help him to be the best dog he can be and you’ll find he has much more to offer, intellectually, socially and emotionally, than you ever thought possible.

(This is a reprint from Psych-O Analysis Newsletter, Susan Overfield, author, editor, and publisher)

But I, along with these ‘dog handlers’ follow Mother Nature’s lead.  All species on this earth, with the exception of dog “trainers”, teach behavior FIRST.  It is always successful.

It is very important to understand and remember the following statement when working with dogs:

If it’s true and right you can do it and it will be successful.  If it’s
contrived and based on a falsehood, it will fail and you can NEVER
make it work, particularly under any kind of stress.

I returned to general obedience training, after a hiatus of about four years, at the request of a local veterinarian.  I am pleased, and thankful, that all vets in my area, and many outside of it, are impressed by my training results and refer dogs to me.  This tells me they see a distinct improvement in the dog/owner relationship of those they refer to me.  That, for me, is what is important.  I began this web site at the behest of all my clients, many of who have become good, personal friends.  I don’t advertise as I work strictly by word-of-mouth, but they insisted that the way I train was “…So different, clear, ‘dog-friendly’ and instructive for owners…” and every one of them had seen “…By the end of the first class an immediate difference in the dog—both attitude and behavior…” that I needed a web page so that others could learn “…This much different, but better way, to train owners and dogs.”  I built the first site.  Nothing fancy, nothing great. I have little knowledge or skill in web page building. But, time has changed, I have seen a growth in day clinics and dog camps and a client, in thanks for what I have done for his dog, donated his considerable skills, and almost nonexistent time, to build this new site.  I thank him.  I think he did a wonderful job, I hope you like it as much as I do.

I’m going to discuss the differences in the way I train vs. the current failing method throughout this work.  Those who know me understand I have some “soapboxes” when it comes to dogs and issues pertaining to them.  I want more people to understand that there is no great mystery, as far as I’m concerned, to training dogs.  There are different abilities and skill levels with each person encountered, yes.  But, the biggest hindrance to training that I see today, is that most trainers cannot, or will not, explain to an owner, so that he/she has a greater grasp of what is going on, the how, when, where and why of what is happening with each dog and its training.

Owners are not insensitive to their dogs and want to do their best for the companions they love so much. People have, by virtue of their concerns, forced some good changes on the dog industry. But, as long as owners remain in the dark as to how things work from the dog’s perspective, they will continue to make mistakes, be unable to adjust to changes within the developing dog and immediate environment in which they are working.  Owners will also experience, sometimes, unreasonable expectations and frustrations.  I feel fortunate that I have been able to work with so many different, unique dogs—personal pets, shelter and rescue dogs running the gamut of little to severe behavior and obedience problems.  I had a large group of the rescued “Camp Collie” dogs attend class (they had made national news) and was extremely pleased to see the immense caring, concern and desire to do the best for the dogs that all the owners evidenced.

It was immensely satisfying to be able to explain to owners how their dogs were thinking and feeling, put both dogs and owners at ease and watch the dogs turn from hesitancy and outright fear, to joy and trust.  I was amused to watch the owners’ disbelief as, within the first two hours, we had almost all the dogs off-leash and calmly working commands for which the dogs had no vocabulary, simply because the owners were being educated and their communication skills improving with direction.

Susan Overfield, in her state of Montana and nationally, is known to consistently and successfully, through her behavioral obedience training for dogs, teach owners a proven method that dogs understand, can achieve and maintain. So immediate is the change in the dog’s behavioral response, so full of common sense and information about dogs and how they think is Overfield’s behavioral obedience training for dogs, that owners, as well as some dog trainers, shelters and rescue personnel, are altering their teaching methods to this form of obedience training for dogs with amazing and positive results for all.

BOSS Dog Clinics differ greatly from conventional obedience-based methods by teaching positive social behaviors that dogs need and owners want. Taught in a common-sense, no gimmick, no frills way that’s easy to learn and apply, dogs display desired behaviors quickly. Guaranteed to build a successful and happy relationship with the dog you love. Course is taught by Susan Overfield of Overfield Kennels, author, national speaker, and dog behavioral instructor with 40 years hands-on experience. Accepting dogs ages 8 weeks to adult, any breed, registration required.

Click HERE to pay online

BOSS Dog Clinics differ greatly from conventional obedience-based methods by teaching positive social behaviors that dogs need and owners want. Taught in a common-sense, no gimmick, no frills way that’s easy to learn and apply, dogs display desired behaviors quickly. Guaranteed to build a successful and happy relationship with the dog you love. Course is taught by Susan Overfield of Overfield Kennels, author, national speaker, and dog behavioral instructor with 40 years hands-on experience. Accepting dogs ages 8 weeks to adult, any breed, registration required.

Click HERE

Please join us in the verdant rolling foothills of Virginia for a delightful evening with Susan Overfield and other dog lovers. Enjoy a lovely buffet dinner with a glass of Weston Vineyards fantastic wine (selection provided). Nationally and internationally known behavioral-obedience trainer and author of “Saturday Dogs…and the owners they train”, Susan loves to talk about her passion; dogs. Since your dog is welcomed, yours may get a little special attention, especially if inappropriate! Get started early! A relaxed, casual evening that promises to be entertaining, as well as informative, and will be a great segue into the next day’s clinic. Wine will available for sale by glass or bottles. Buy a copy of Susan’s book and get it personalized! This is an optional event. Even if you are not attending the clinic you are welcomed to attend the buffet dinner.

Cost: $25/plate before May 22nd ($30 after May 22nd)

Please visit http://westonfarmvineyardandwinery.com/ for directions and other information.

For more information, email the Louisa Humane Society Animal Shelter at info@louisahumanesociety.com or call (540) 967-4647.

Dogs and puppies, including family, shelter, rescue, foster, “bad dogs”, “problem dogs” and some forms of “aggressive dogs”, understand this form of psychological behavioral-based training inherently and master it almost immediately. Owners may take a while longer to learn this dog psychological behavior training method and how best to put it into consistent practice in order to achieve the highest quality of dog or puppy to improve their relationship with canine companions.

Fundraiser for the Louisa Humane Society and the Louisa Animal Shelter.

Saturday, June 11 · 9:00am – 4:30pm
Whether you just got a puppy, have raised your dog, adopted your dog, or rescued your dog—a well-behaved dog is what owners really want and can learn how to get in a day, guaranteed.

BOSS Dog Clinic — A dog, an owner, a partnership for life.

BOSS Dog Clinics differ greatly from conventional obedience-based methods by actually teaching positive social behaviors that dogs need and owners want. Taught in a common-sense, no gimmick, no frills way that’s easy to learn and apply, dogs display desired behaviors quickly. Guaranteed to build a successful and happy relationship with the dog you love. Course is taught by Susan Overfield of Overfield Kennels, author, national speaker, and dog behavioral instructor with 40 years hands-on experience. Clinics accept dogs ages 8 weeks to adult, any breed, registration required.

Happy Holidays to all of you and your dogs.

I would love to receive a “card” from each of you, so please feel free to leave a comment, if only your/your dogs’ name(s). Thanks, Susan

I thought, since I travel the country speaking and training, and almost always have three dogs with me, that passing along my discoveries, likes, and dislikes, might help you as you wend down roads less traveled with you pets.

I will be titling it Traveling With Dogs and then add the state or area I’m focusing on at the moment. It will rarely include interstates as they are an anathema if you want to get out and give your dog(s) a real break.

Even the best dog, when traveling, can become a tad stressed or need to blow off some serious energy. They need to get back to a relaxed state and motel rooms just don’t do it for them. The places we chose to stay allow the dogs outside time, grass-rolling opportunities, fresh air, new things to watch, fantastic new smells, and an opportunity to simply lay around at the end of a long day of traveling.

Wisconsin has very, very nice rest stops if you must travel the interstate. They are spaced evenly, have many trees and good dog areas, the buildings are clean, people friendly and they are staffed with volunteers ready to ply you with free coffee, lemonade, tea and/or cookies.

The rest stops’ green areas extend back behind the truck parking area and offer a very nice place to walk the dogs safely, or if your dogs are well-behaved enough to allow them to walk and explore a bit off-leash. These are great places in a pinch.

Cave of the Mounds/Blue Mounds State Park is beautiful. It’s off of US 18/151 on Cave of the Mounds Rd. The Cave of the Mounds has a wonderful green area with picnic tables, it is quiet, until children come for tours, it is a safe place to follow a couple of walking trails or simply sit after letting the dogs stretch their legs. Our dogs were happy and grateful to escape the noise of the car, roll in the grass, sniff the various plants and then snooze under the picnic table until lunch was finished.

The Alma/Hixton KOA, up by the Wisconsin Dells is one of the nicest KOAs around. It is set in a serene bowl with wonderful trees, the cabins are in good locations and the owner is a wonderful, generous person. It was relaxing to be able to let the dogs walk the perimeter and investigate without anyone getting upset. There are many rabbits and raccoons in the woods, so if your dog isn’t capable of ignoring on command or doesn’t have an iron-clad recall, just keep her on a leash, she will still enjoy the quiet and smells.

The Madison KOA, on the edge of town, is run by some very nice, friendly, helpful people. They have a large tent camping area that is wide-open and since no one was there we played ball and frisbee with the dogs for quite a while. It made the sleeping all the better to have taken the edge of their energy.

Wisconsin’s back roads are wonderful if you are traveling with dogs. They have large areas open almost everywhere, if you know where to look. Here are some suggestions:

Behind or around churches there are often fields. The same holds true for farm implement dealers. They have some, but not many, wayside stops that make a good place to take breaks. There are so many small, open areas on Wisconsin’s back roads it makes it easy to let the dogs out for water, walks, and to stretch their legs. Often you are the only person there and the road is quite a distance from you, so you need not worry about traffic.

Even around the big cities, such as Madison or Milwaukee, all these places can be easily found.

Wisconsin is, in my estimation, a good back-roads traveling state if you have your dogs with you. You will also be enamored of their lakes, countryside and charming small towns full of character. You dog will be enamored of the quality breaks you offer him.

My advice? Take a little more time and get off the interstate. You and your dog will enjoy the trip much more.

I’ve had several of these moments in the past month. It gives me great pleasure to know that a dog is living a better life because the owner willingly grasped what I was teaching and wanted the best for their dog.

I derive satisfaction helping dogs become whole again. The joy comes from not having to “convince” owners that what we are doing works if they’ll only embrace it. They DO embrace it and see an immediate change in their dog’s behavior and realize it is not something that only I can achieve.

First example:

I had an adopted kelpie brought to me that was on the edge of going out-of-control. A smart, wonderful dog that had his owners buffaloed. The couple wanted to meet the needs of the dog and not continue the disintegrating behavior.

The owner listened hard the day we worked. She had to overcome some personal reluctance at some of the things we talked about doing for a short time, but agreed, for her dog’s sake, to do what was needed. None of it was harsh, or punitive, but she had to step out of her preconceived ideas of how to engage with her dog and learn how to communicate effectively.

She saw her dog, who often ignored her and had been unable to hold a sit for any length of time, hold a down for a LONG time as she walked around. That was only one of her conquests that day. This woman went home and continued with all she had learned.

Two weeks later I received an email from her. The subject line was “Arthur made me proud today!” She had taken the dog to the vet and he had behaved perfectly in the waiting room, where other dogs were acting like asses, and in the exam room. Even the vet commented on how well he behaved.

This woman had a right to be proud. She had changed, her dog had changed and was well-behaved, they were both happier and people noticed. That gave me great satisfaction.

Second example:

I had a woman who contacted me from the East coast. She was at her wit’s end with a adopted beagle, Annie, that had severe separation anxiety and had been on meds for quite a long time. Annie had caused extreme damage and the owner was frightened, and rightfully so, that the dog might injure herself in the course of an anxiety attack which caused her to attempt to escape the house.

She brought their dogs, both beagles, to me and the entire family went and spent a few days in Glacier. I immediately got the dog with anxiety off the meds and then did nothing other than observe her until the owners’ return.

The family and I worked with the dog, actually both dogs, for a full day. They then took off for home. They are a wonderful family and ALL of them, including the children, willingly changed how they handled the dogs in order to create a success.

Her email informed me that both dogs are doing exceptionally well and that no anxiety issues existed. What she actually said, which made me laugh, was, “Annie is good no real issues. Ginger has been getting up at 2/3 am wanting to go out. I feel like I had a newborn!! Yikes!!!: (We solved that middle-of-the-night issue via email.)

I’ve had several dogs over the past month just like the two examples above. All are doing fine now and the owners are relaxed and enjoying their new relationships with their dogs. That gives me great satisfaction.

Life, for me and my dogs, is good. It is a deeply satisfying to be able to teach other owners how to have that same good feeling.

The country was called ‘This-porch’ and was ruled by a good fairy queen. Her name was ‘Big Dog’ and all the dogs in the land of This-porch wanted to be Big Dog’s. Now the Queen realized that the dogs in her realm were missing something very important: families. She knew that all the dogs would be happier if they were loved and cared for and all dogs were valued members of families. So she magically created families. Families of people that walked with dogs, worked with them, little boys with fishing poles and little girls with tea sets that played with them and old aunts that let dogs sit on their couches and beds.

Each year the Queen would call all dogs without families to come to her, regardless of size or age, and one-by-one they would tell her what they had learned in that year. If the dogs showed that they had learned to be helpful, well-mannered and were caring towards all in This-porch, then the Queen was proud and told them they had done well and they were now Big Dog’s and gave them a family of their own. And all dogs were happy. They were content to be Big Dog’s and have families that they could love and help in return.

Sometimes dogs and their families had problems because they spoke different languages. Because there were so many dogs in This-porch the Queen couldn’t help teach human language to each dog individually. So she gathered a group of fairies that had always had the respect of the dogs and were able to solve any kind of problem. This special group became known as Big Dog Handlers and they handled all the problems of dogs and families. Because the Handlers taught both the dogs and families, communication was restored, so were trust, freedom and love. Everyone was happy once again.

The land next to This-porch was not as happy, nor pretty. It was called ‘Trainers’ and was ruled over by an evil, wicked, nasty, fairy princess who had been dropped on her head as a baby and couldn’t think very well and had bad eyes and couldn’t see much, either. Her name was Princess Certified.

The Princess had divided her kingdom into small, fenced areas and dogs were assigned an area and were not allowed to leave them and the law said if a dog had to move to another area he had to move on a restraint. The dogs did not like this. She assigned each dog a guard, whose title was Owner and it was printed on a jacket, and who was responsible for teaching the dog all the laws he needed to learn. If the dog didn’t learn the laws, the Owner was blamed.

Princess Certified had always been jealous of Queen Big Dog. The Princess didn’t like the fact that all the dogs of Trainers would rather live in This-porch and often ran away. When Princess Certified called her subjects to come and tell her how things were going, they ignored her. This made her very, very angry.

Her chief counselor, Lotta Treats, told Princess Certified that in order to get the dogs of Trainers to come, they should issue an edict to the Owners to bribe them. So Princess Certified, with the help of Lotta Treats, got Owners to bribe dogs to come, sit and stay long enough to hear what she had to say. Several dogs refused to come at all and so the Princess sent out the Army of Trainers and had the Owners bring the dogs on long leashes, or collars that pinched or choked the dog if argued about coming. It made many of the Owners uncomfortable as they knew the dogs were unhappy.

Once in front of Princess Certified of Trainers, the dogs refused to sit or listen. Lotta Treats quickly whispered to the Princess and she said, “I shall create an open area where all dogs may play.” She encouraged the Owners to take the problem dogs to this area, which she dubbed ‘The Dog Park’, so that they could see how good life was in the land of Trainers. But fights broke out and dogs and Owners were still not happy.

The Army of Trainers went to Princess Certified and said, “The dogs won’t listen. They won’t do what we tell them. What should we do?”

Princess Certified screamed, “Focus—all of you! I want you to be as good as Big Dog’s Handlers. Get smaller dogs. Only use willing dogs for public demonstrations of how we live in the land of Trainers. Invent a new way to work with the dogs. I don’t care, but I don’t want to lose any more money trying to fix these problems. Now find a way!”

The Army of Trainers went away and tried many different things, all of which failed. Dogs kept running away, wouldn’t come to the yearly meeting. The Owners were told to go to special schools, but nothing worked. The Army of Trainers blamed the Owners. The Owners blamed the dogs. The dogs were not happy.

One day a few members of the Army of Trainers saw some owners with their head close together, their dogs sitting quietly. “What is going on here?” demanded one of Princess Certified of Trainers minions.

“We have talked to one of Big Dog’s Handlers and she has helped us and our dogs are now happy. We are not going to do it your way anymore. We are leaving,” said one of the Owners.

“You can’t leave. The Handlers lie. They don’t know your dog. They can’t help you. WE teach you what you need to know to work with the dogs. Don’t listen to that Handler!” cried out one of Princess Certified’s panicked instructors.

The Owners threw their leashes at the feet of the instructors and crossed the border into the land of Big Dog. The owners and dogs were happy at last.

The Instructor of the Army of Trainers ran to Princess Certified and cried out, “They are taking your people and dogs!”

“What?” screamed Certified. “Get them back now! Promise those Owners anything. Threaten them. Denounce any Handler you see!! Go, NOW! Bring me those dogs!” Certified’s face was a mask of fear and fury. Her eyelid twitched rapidly, she had a small amount of spittle in the corner of her mouth. “Don’t think, go now and get them back here!”

The Army of Trainers turned as one and marched to the border between the two countries, a gathering crowd following them. There they all hesitated and watched as the dogs and families of This-porch played off-leash in open fields, walked together, worked together and all people and dogs were happy and getting along nicely.

“Come,” yelled Certified’s Instructor, “there are more of us in the Army of Trainers than there are of Big Dog’s Handlers. We must crush them or lose our status!” The group crossed the border into This-porch as Trainers’ Owners watched.

“Give back Trainers’ Owners and dogs,” demanded an Instructor.

“Are any of you Owners?” questioned a Handler to the crowd.

“No! We are families,” replied the group.

“There’s your answer,” said the Handler to the Trainer, “it is only people and the dogs they love and respect here.”

Many of the crowd, standing on the border between the two lands, suddenly crossed over, quickly unsnapping leashes and handing them to Trainers’ Instructors and were greeted by a Handler who made them feel welcome and at ease.

“Those are OUR dogs and Owners,” complained the Instructor. “Why won’t you come back to us?”

“Because we now understand what we were missing and what you could not teach us,” said a lady stripping off her Owner jacket and walking away.

Two of the Instructors sidled up to the Handler and asked if they could come live in This-porch.

“Are you ready to give up being Trainers? Learn new ways of living and working with dogs?” asked the Handler.

One Trainer looked with frightened eyes towards the Army, bowed his head, and whispered, “I’d lose everything I’ve worked for,” then slunk back to his group. The other Trainer replied, “Yes, I am ready.”

“Then come learn and perhaps you’ll become a Handler,” was the warm reply.

The Army of Trainers returned to the Princess and fearfully explained that the Owners had willingly turned to the Handlers so their dogs could lead better-behaved, freer, more satisfying lives with families that loved them.

Princess Certified screamed, tore at her hair, and shook with anger while her three dogs jumped, barked, got into little fights, and acted like total idiots around her.

The Duke of Vet quietly said, “Princess?”

“What?!?” she snarled.

“Your dog is peeing on the throne.”

MORAL:
To help dogs be well-behaved and happy you’ll have to give up being Certified’s Trainers because there are only Big Dog Handlers of This-porch.

For the remainder of the “trainers” that don’t ‘get it,’ don’t want to ‘get it,’ or can’t ‘get it,’ perhaps they should consider another line of work.

I haven’t posted in a while as I’ve been exhausted, hurting and, quite frankly, sick to death of beating my head against the stonewalling of the trainers to the detriment of our dogs.

I just finished speaking to the Montana Veterinarian Medical Association at their conference and was extremely grateful that they are an open-minded, intelligent, result-driven, pragmatic, polite, and funny group of true professionals.

I had a “meth” lab that I had never before met, whom I worked for the vets as an example of what I teach dogs and owners.  The dog was calm, listening, off-leash, and ignoring the other dogs (also off-leash) within about 30 minutes.  A true epiphany for the owner and vets.

Also, a client who had taken her dog-aggressive dog to a place in Bozeman (Montana) where the “certified” trainers

“…take an integrative approach to training…where we incorporate social, emotional, physical and nutritional well being into our programs. Our training methods are based on operant and classical conditioning, with dog friendly methods.”

Sounds good.  Says “all the right things.”  But, the “trainer” soaked my client for a lot of money, gave her a list of ineffectual, costly, time-consuming, as well as ridiculous and unobtainable goals to work on, caused a worsening of general behavior from the dog, and covered her rear-end by claiming the dog would be, or was in,  “transition” which might be the reason it would take so long to see a result.  Aromatherapy was on of the “training” tools.  (You may read MY version of aromatherapy training here )  The vets just laughed at this ridiculous concept.

I, however, find this form of “training” to be idiotic and a testament to the fact that most “trainers” don’t truly KNOW or understand dogs.  Not to mention it’s a waste of time, money, and detrimental to the owner and dog.

My client spoke of how within a single day of a BOSS Dog Clinic she had her dog under control and his behavior vastly improved–and STILL improving.  And she had not needed more “training.”

While she spoke, her dog, only a month previously dog-aggressive, sat next to another dog with absolutely NO PROBLEMS or unacceptable behavioral reactions.

I had an opportunity to sit and talk socially with a couple of the vets and I’m sure, had I more time, I could have been regaled with stories that would have had me on the floor with laughter.

Of the vets I spoke with in passing, all maintained that what I was communicating and teaching was ‘ground-breaking’ and much needed to bring dogs, and how we handle them, into the present.  They all compared it to the epiphany of training that was the result of clinics taught by Ray Hunt, Pat Parelli, et al, in the horse world.

For those of you who may not have caught video excerpts on the Aahhtt!! The Difference in Training is Black & White Facebook page, I spoke for about 3 1/2 hours and had two trainers standing quietly in the back the entire time.  Near the end they decided to get involved and confront me.  I now call it “The Trainer Wars.”  (You can watch Part 1 here.)  It was fairly contentious.

However, and more importantly, the vets DID understand.  Here’s what they had to say:

However, the vets gave me hope.  They actually told these trainers that their dogs, and those they train, may be obedient, but they were uncontrollable and rude.

The vets, and the attending owners, quickly understood there is a HUGE difference between BEHAVIOR and OBEDIENCE.  That obedience is just NOT cutting it with our dogs.

I also felt, and this truly is ONLY a feeling, that the vets got their first good look at the difference between actual successful behavior training and “trainers” that CLAIM they are training behaviorally.  And they now understand it is not the owners’ fault, but that the “trainers” are not teaching what they claim.  That what the “trainers” tell the vets they do for owners and what they truly do are miles apart.

It was patently clear that the “trainers don’t get it.”

But the fact that the vets did ‘get it’ gives me great hope.  They are on the front-line with the dogs and owners.  I suspect our dogs may have some hope now, too.

Here they are, along with their words.

Wasted Days & Wasted Nights

Wasted days & wasted nights, that I spent in training you,
You still won’t sit,
You still won’t come,
You still won’t stay,
What am I supposed to do?

How Do You Solve A Problem Like My Dog?

(How do you solve a problem like Maria–Sound of Music)

How do you solve a problem like my dog?
How do make him sit and then lie down?
How do you make him stay, And listen to all I say?
The trainer says practice every day.
Oh, how do you solve a problem like my dog?
Oh, how many times must I pay?

Wasted Time (Eagles)

Well baby, there you stand
With your little leash, down in your hand
Oh, my God, you can’t believe it’s happening again
Your dog is gone, and you’re all alone
and it looks like the end.
And you’re back out on the street.
And you’re tryin’ to remember.
How much have you paid?
You don’t know why it fails.
You don’t care much for your trainer’s touch,
And they can’t teach your dog.
You never thought you’d be alone this far down the line
And I know what’s been on your mind
You’re afraid it’s all been wasted time

My Heroes Have Always Been Trainers

I grew up a-dreamin’ of bein’ a trainer                                                                                       and lovin’ the trainers’ ways.
Pursuin’ the life of the dog trainer’s ego,
I charged all that client’s would pay.
I learned all the rules of a modern-day trainer,
Blame owners if I can’t succeed.
Just charge what you can from the owners and  leave them
With a dog that they don’t understand.
Trainers are special with their own brand of misery,
From screwin’ the public too long.
You could be broke and your dog way too old,
Before knowin’ you done it all wrong.
Inventin’ new methods,                                                                                                                 ‘stead of takin’ the heat,
I take all that the clients will pay.
Old worn-out owners, and old worn-out doggies,
And not one has learned how to stay.
My heroes have always been trainers.  And they still are, it seems.                                   Gladly they’ll charge you, nothin’ they’ll teach you,
‘Cept their scams and their dog trainin’ schemes.

These are questions that haunt dog owners.  You worry.  You fret.  You seek answers.

Well, seek no more.  Aromatherapy for dogs will solve these problems.

Many “trainers” are now converting to this pleasant, easy, olfactory training method aid.  This amazing new “dog training” method  came to our attention when we sniffed out a certified trainer who includes this in their “whole dog, integrated training” approach.

Let’s start with the basics of what Aromatherapy IS.  It is believed, though science is still out on producing any hard, cold evidence, that certain aromas can aid mental, physical, and emotional improvement.

Well, I am all for that.  I may just be a closet convert.  Time for me to wake up and smell the roses.

However, I know you are still very concerned about whether or not your “Certified Pet Trainer & Canine Aromatherapist” (CPT&CA),  knows what he/she is doing or if you’ve just hired a fraud.  How CAN you tell?  Listed are just some of the ways you can determine if you may be getting scammed.

You may have hired a CPT&CA fraud if:

–You are told to purchase essential oils that are used for humans

–You are told to use essential oils which may be purchased from any Aromatherapy  store or merchant, i.e., lavender, clary sage, ylang ylang, chamomile.

–You are told to purchase diffusers from such places as “woo-woo scents”, “dream-a-little-dream”, or “you nose your scents aromatherapy oils”, in order to create an atmosphere of calm in your home (what you’re going to do out in the world is not their problem)

–You are told to put a drop of lavender on the left ear and a drop of sage on the right ear, exactly 1.78 millimeter from the tip between two hairs of equal length, 3 minutes and 27.5 seconds before leaving the house

–You are charged $100 per hour for a minimum initial consultation of 2 hrs, wherein no work takes place, but you are given a long list of items to buy and then told to return in 2 weeks for another long consultation of 2 hrs, at which point you will be told you didn’t put the essential oils on correctly which is why no improvement in attitude has been seen.

–You are told it will take time for the aromatherapy to be effective as your dog is in “transition”

IF you are truly desirous of aiding your dog’s emotional and behavioral improvement by use of aromatherapy here is THE most professional, definitive site you should visit:

www.aromatherapyiscaninereliefadministeredpretense.com   or www.aromatherapyiscrap.com

They are both the same site and offer a wide array of essential oils developed BY dogs FOR dogs.  I’ve taken the liberty of including some of their information below.

Here at Aromatherapyiscrap, we have only your dog’s well-being in mind.  Daily your dog’s senses are assaulted by the world leaving him tired, depressed, exhibiting dog-on-dog aggression, stressed, or frantically hyper-active.

Whether your dog is in “transition” or simply out-of-sorts, our CRAP Oils are developed BY dogs FOR dogs, so you just KNOW they have to work.

Our company is a family-owned and operated enterprise which has been in existence for almost 150 years.  It was begun by our great-grandfather, Lucius McHasben, who coined our motto, “We Create Scents to Make Cents Out of Your Dog’s Misery”.  We take great pride in the fact that Lucius escaped being run out of every town on a rail and reaped great amounts of money for producing nothing.

Here are our TOP 5 essential oil products:

INSOMNIA: Tired of your dog padding up and down the hall all night?  You no longer need to walk the dog to tire him out

Red Mandarin infused with Tired Puppy Hair. The mandarin is now known to be more effective with sleep disorders than other oils.  Adding Puppy Hair creates the ambiance of total relaxation.  Is there anything more relaxed than a tired, sleeping puppy?  Our dogs say, No. (5 drops on dog-bed nightly & at nap time)

CHRONIC FATIGUE: If your dog just won’t play ball, isn’t interested in chasing the cat, or no longer becomes excited about a ride in the car, and all your high-pitched “good boy!”, treats, unending praise and clapping fails to get results, then this is for you

Geranium infused with essence of Old Leash. Guaranteed to remind him of his wandering youth when he jumped the fence, ran the pasture, or chased Maxie the cat up the neighbor’s tree. (3 drops daily on tip of nose)

INDIGESTION OR LACK OF APPETITE: This is one of our biggest sellers and never fails.  Increases interest in useless training treats,too.  Our file cabinets are crammed with customer testimonials

Fennel with Other-Animal Poop. Absolutely guaranteed to change finicky eaters, dogs with indigestion, or those who have lost interest in their food into focused, food-driven dogs again.  (2 drops in bottom of food bowl at feeding time)

DOG-ON-DOG AGGRESSION, GROWLING, THREATENING BARKING & TERRITORIAL DISPLAYS:  Another of our top sellers.  Guaranteed to save you from having to be anything but positive with your dog.  If used ceaselessly for 5 years or until age 9 (whichever comes first) your dog will, by the end of that time, no longer be exhibiting any of the above issues

High Altitude Lavender infused with essence of Panicked Domestic Cat.  Just the thought of chasing cats creates endorphins in dogs.  High Altitude Lavender, the most relaxing of all the lavenders, infused with PDC, never fails to create a demonstrably happy & relaxed dog.  Guaranteed to restore that “I just ran 3 miles, treed the cat, and now I’m going to snooze for a while” look again.  (2 drops on collar, 1 drop on left ear, 3 drops on 2nd pad of right hind foot—administer twice daily or any time you are leaving your house, car, or entering the world with your dog)

CONCENTRATION: This is THE top seller for dogs in obedience class, rally, and agility to enhance eye contact and master the FOCUS command so enamored and sold by certified pet dog trainers.  Your dog will excel at FOCUS when you use this

Clary Sage infused with essence of Small Child & Unknown Dog. The sage is known to create centering, euphoria, and visualization, while the additions of Small Child & Unknown Dog is known to create highly focused attention.  (2 drops on dog’s forehead, 1 drop on owner’s nose during each training session)

All orders must be accompanied by a note from your CPT&CA.  We apologize for the inconvenience, but due to the number of fraudulent & inept “dog trainers” out there we must be assured that you are being sold this bill of goods by a true professional.  Our goal here at Aromatherapyiscrap is the same as that of your CPT&CA, to gain your continued, repeat business for years to come.  Thank you.

I’m going to do this in pictures so there’s no argument about A) the fact of the growing stupidity is obvious, B) just because a person SAYS they train dogs doesn’t mean they know squat, it only means they know more than you, which may not be a lot, C) a lot of letters after a trainer’s name usually spells BS, and D) Dog TRAINERS don’t hold a candle to dog HANDLERS.

Let’s take a photographic stroll with some dog handlers who have never gone to obedience training and use  non-certified training methods, shall we?

Ask yourself, “Did this woman take her dog to a special obedience class?”    How  can  this be?

Here are boys and men, from a “primitive” culture, only 1 is using on a light rope as a lead, the others of off-lead.  This is not an acceptable substitute for modern equipment, which you will be told you MUST have.

Where did they learn this method?

This can NOT be right.  Tracking dogs off-leash?  These men are not certified trainers, how dare they.  Just WHAT is their background in dog training?

EVERYONE knows you can’t have this kind of dog off-leash.  They run away.

Cheers for modern technology as this photo must have been taken with high-speed film to be able to catch the dog before he sprinted away.

This Samoyed man is not a responsible dog owner to allow this breed off-leash

What’s wrong with this picture? The goat is on a tether, the dog is not. OMG, I bet this lady thinks she knows something about how to handle dogs, you can just tell by the way she’s laughing—what arrogance!

What’s THIS?  Hunting dogs with their noses off the ground? Not running off?  WALKING?  Not barking?  I bet they were trained using a harsh method.

Oh, wait, I know!  All the riders have treats which they throw to the dogs while galloping over fields and jumping stiles and hedges.

See Spot?  See Spot work the sheep? Spot is looking at the SHEEP, NOT the man.   (If Spot looks at the man, the sheep escape.)  Boy, does this guy need some AKC or All-Breed Herding lessons. (see below in next section)

Dog watching cows.  Man watching dog.  Man has no flag, rope, stick in hand.  How did this man win this competition when he’s so inept at training?

OLD lady with what looks to be a prime-aged dog of about 5 or 6.  Bet the woman never put the dog on a leash.  Bet it didn’t run away and she didn’t chase it.  How did she do it, I wonder?  MAYBE she started it out right as a pup.  What a concept.

Now let’s look at modern, certified, positive-method trainers.

Here’s a trainer. Look at the grip this woman has on her dogs.  Did her training not work when she taught sit?  Maybe she should practice more.

Remember the Samoyed man?  He was hugging his kids while his dog sat nicely.

Stumble.  Trip.  Tangle. Fall.  Choke.

Now that’s the way to teach a dog to herd.  Modern training with no trust or ability, unless you have a leash.

You’ll have to look closely, but this dog has  what seems to be 100′ lead dragging in the dust, a flag waving in his face (which means he’s NOT looking at his sheep–remember above?)

If you don’t know dogs, livestock, or how either of them work or respond, try this kind of training.  It’s not real, but it’ll make you feel good.  And you’ll never feel inadequate as the trainer doesn’t know squat, either.

I’m trying, really trying to figure this one out.  Does she really think the dog is learning something?  Would this dog look at a pack leader this way?  She sure is cute, though.  Perky.

Silly me, of course, that’s what’s sold, perky training to feel good.

Good for the human ego, but what’s the guy going to do the day he has his hands full or the dog’s back is to him?

Betcha dogs don’t use paw signals to communicate.

Modern trainer unable to teach a dog to walk nicely ON or OFF-leash creates a gimmick to sell to gullible owner.

Think we ought to tell that boy with the light rope about this?  I think this is JUST what is needed in the jungle.

WAIT!  Let me see if I can name all the things wrong in this picture.

Death-grip on the leash.  Pulling the leash so head goes back.  Treat so that the pup needs to relearn that you are important.  Starting wrong so that the trainer can tell you to come back for loads more classes.  Not to mention obesity, useless calories, & wasted bucks.

A trainer who needs a long lead is NOT a trainer.  A trainer that uses a long lead is like a wife that hires a private investigator: No trust, no respect, expects the worst and gets it.

This is what you are being taught.

How much will you have to pay to teach your dog to do something this useless?  Wouldn’t you rather pay once to get a well-behaved dog and then teach this on your own for free?

Oh, well…look at it this way, if your dog misbehaves you can always get him to sit in the corner on the chair.

Today’s trainers, having learned failing methods, are teaching them to you and your dog at great cost; mentally, physically, and socially.  It’s why more and more dogs are exhibiting neurosis and poor behavior.

Let’s go back to what worked, still works, and is good for both dog and human.  Let’s learn how to handle dogs correctly.

Q:  What do you think about strollers and dog bags for small dogs?  I have a Peke and love taking her everywhere in her dog purse.  I just love her little head peeking out of the purse.  My friend’s dog was trained by you and she and I had a disagreement about Cin-Cin being carried in her purse when we go out.  I think it’s just fine.  She said I should get your opinion. Kimi W., NY

A: I’m going to do this.  I know I shouldn’t.  I know I will get into trouble, but I cannot help myself.  Yep…here goes.

Honey, put the dog on the ground, throw out the purse, and drop the diminutive of your name.  Grow up (regardless of your current age), let the dog be a dog and stop insisting it’s a fashion accessory.

To all you women out there with names such as, Lori, Lisa, Kimberly, Patti, Michelle, Cyndi, Tammi, Sherri, Jacquie, Stephie, or any derivation thereof, who in any manner emulate the following pictures, please…get help.  Intervention programs may help you and your dog will be much happier.

You are not, you never were, nor will you ever BE the conspicuously rich air-heads  you see here.  Your dog cannot make you seem as if you are, or will be, a social power.

Look at the relative age of these “women”.  They still carry pacifiers and haven’t developed breasts.  They can’t think beyond themselves.  LOOK at that dog.  Does he LOOK HAPPY?  If the twit in the picture was three years old you, as a sane and responsible adult, would tell her she was not to carry the dog around in that manner.  Woman!  Heed the advice!  Don’t carry your dog!

I’m sorry, but the woman on the left does not look so much as if she cares for her dogs, so much as she resembles a nymphet in a porn movie ad for “Deidre Does Dachsies”.

You never know the looks that go on behind your back.  Take my word for it, if you are over eight years old, don’t try to carry your dog.

Carrying  your dog in a backpack does not mean you are active.  It does not mean that you can bike or run faster than your dog as you are, somehow, an Olympic contender.

It simply means you are too lazy to walk the dog or teach it to jog next to your bike.  It also means you are too self-absorbed to slow down and think about your dog.  Which, in case you’ve missed the point I’m attempting to make, is what this entire issue is about.

Dogs are not colorblind and can see in pastels.  However, that does not give you license to opt for bags, first and foremost, and definitely not bags of neon colors which are merely to call attention to the fact that you are carrying a dog.

Look at the faces of these dogs, they are NOT happy.  Stop being so unaware of the misery you are causing.

The woman who did this to this dog should be placed in residential treatment.  The dog’s eyes look as if he’s on crack.

Hyper, trapped, never exercised all to feed the ego of some frou-frous female.  These are the women who ‘do’ dog parks, cell phones, and low-fat lattes—SIMULTANEOUSLY.

These are the dogs that are insufferable because of the hubris of their human.

Your dog is NOT a baby.

Your dog is NOT a toy.

Your dog is NOT a fashion accessory.

Your dog is NOT an inanimate object.

Your dog is NOT a sop for your fragile self-esteem.

So my advice?

Put down the dog and no one will get hurt!

(First Photo: Jaime Rodriguez/Globe Photos; Clinton H. Wallace/Globe Photos; Sonia Moskowitz/Globe Photos)

This dog was lucky in the fact that he fell into the hands of what I call a positive rescuer.

The first ugly truth which needs to be addressed is there are 2 types of people that rescue dogs:

The negative rescuer, which is much like Munchhausen by Leash (as I call it), where the person’s ego and emotional actions and decisions are based upon what THEY get from rescuing a dog and, if the truth is faced, don’t really care about the dog at all.  It was, is, and always will be, “I rescued this dog.  See what I am doing for him?  See how I am “helping” him?  Look how frightened he is, but I will love him back to “health”.  These are people that don’t want the dog to improve because they will lose their attention base.  Much like parents with physically or mentally challenged children who keep the kids tied to them so that the parent may show, do, impress upon others how much THEY sacrifice on behalf of the child.  There is no thought in the negative rescuer as to how they have limited the life of the dog, how little they are truly “helping” the dog improve and resume or assume a positive life full of social, emotional and physical positive interaction with the environment and world around them.  It is in their own self-interest to keep the dogs impaired in some form.

The Negative Rescuer, the “dark side”, “saves” dogs in order to:

1. Be people who rescue so that they can feel better about themselves, fill some emotional hole in their own psyche
2. Get kudos and emotional pats-on-the-back from the world for saving a poor, benighted dog
3. Really do not want to change the mental/emotional condition of the dog because they DO get attention from others for saving the “poor thing”
4. Are unwilling to change themselves, learn a better/new way of handling rescued dogs, or have the dog improve mentally because they, as a rescuer, will no longer be “needed”
5. Get some kind of emotional charge out of showing the world how they are bringing the dog along, even if it means the dog lives for years in psychosis and fear
6. Maintain that the dog is not “normal” and, therefore, must be handled in some “special” manner
7. Believes that “rescuing” a dog is the be-all-end-all of the process and always uses the shibboleth “He was abused/neglected/rescued” to freeze the dog in time.
8. Are willing to let the dog remain in a very bad place, emotionally/socially/psychologically in order to continue feeding their own emotional needs

The positive rescuer is honest about the dog’s mental state and wants improvement.  The rescuer, himself, is not what is truly important, but doing right by the dog IS the primary goal.  These people will refuse to accept that the dog is defined by where he came from and how he used to live.  They focus on making a whole dog, one that can live comfortably in the world.  These rescuers will be brutally honest about what problems the dog still faces, that they need help changing the problems, and that the dog can become independent and secure.  These rescuers realize and admit that they are merely the means to an end for the dog.  The dog is not a means to an emotional end for them.

The Positive Rescuer, the “light” side, saves dogs in order to:

1. Give them an improved life, physically, mentally & emotionally
2. Is willing to go the extra mile to find out if there’s something that will help the dog achieve independence
3. Will change themselves in order to help the dog improve
4. Is always considering the whole dog first and foremost
5. Is unwilling to let a dog live in fear, neurosis, mental instability for their own ego
6. Understands that “rescuing” a dog is the easy part, making it whole again is where the work takes place.
7. Is unwilling to burden the dog with what was his previous existence, but concentrates from the minute they get him on what IS and WILL BE his existence.

Many rescuers will try to kid themselves into believing that they are positive.  They aren’t.  They are VERY much the negative rescuer.  Until they are willing to take a long, hard look at themselves and change, they will ALWAYS be negative rescuers.

This is why I said at the beginning of this blog, “This dog was lucky in the fact that he fell into the hands of what I call a positive rescuer. ”

Often, because I’m called in to help rescued dogs with severe emotional problems, or even family dogs with behavioral problems, people believe that what I teach is only for “special” dogs.  However, more and more, what I do is being seen for what it is;  the right way to handle ALL dogs, regardless of their age, breed, or backgrounds.  It’s “right” because it works.  Because all dogs understand it.  Because it’s what dogs teach dogs and how they behave toward one another.

I will not make people feel comfortable by saying the “party” line, or what they want to hear.  I will not sell out by saying there are many ways to “train” a dog.  I will NOT lie to you.  Why?  Because for ME, the bottom line is the dog, his improvement, his overall well-being and all humans, including me, take a back seat to that.  My satisfaction and happiness comes when I see a dog relax, come into himself, become (even for a few moments) the great dog I know he can and should be, free from neurotic tendencies and feelings.

If I only had to work with dogs things would always go quickly and smoothly.  But, I have humans in the equation.  Thank GOD there are people out there who want to have their dog improve and are willing to do what is needed, accept a different, older and successful approach, do it right and not buy into the stupid that is being sold by inept and failing training methods, or put themselves and their emotions before the dog.   These are the people that call me in from around the U.S. to help.   They attend BOSS Dog Clinics to learn.  They change in order to effect change.

Here are a couple of photos of the dog we worked:

These are positive rescues, positive owners, positive trainers, positive people.  I can’t tell you how glad I am you all exist.  Now let’s work on changing others into becoming positive–for the dogs’ sake.

If you wish to see more photos, please go to Facebook

I don’t know how spring is going around the rest of the country, but here in Montana today is gorgeous.

We have no wind, the temperature is 72*, the sky is blue and cloudless and the dogs and I have walked and sat merely for the fun of it.

We parked ourselves along the creek and watched a couple of beavers who seemed a bit bemused by our lack of trees.  We also watched a muskrat going about some undefined business.  The ducks kept a wary eye on us, but instead of flying away, they just floated off downstream a bit.  The geese, who are laying or sitting on nests, were perturbed by our presence, but soon ignored us.

We then ambled back up to the front deck, relaxed with the cats and lazed away some time.  I finally felt it important that I achieve something of worth today and am now blathering away at this blog.

The dogs and I will be going back outside now.  It is my understanding that it may rain or snow in the next day or two.  I won’t waste a wonderful spring day inside.

Hope you, too, are enjoying the day.

It’s a very sad commentary, and one that frustrates me no end, that the majority of those who call themselves “trainers” don’t know squat about dogs and have little respect for dog owners.

I know this to be true as I’ve actually heard these “trainers” make seriously disparaging remarks about owners, their abilities, and the fact that they shouldn’t own dogs, so bad are they at working with them.

They also make these same dismissive remarks about other “trainers”.  These “trainers” are so fearful of anything different, anyone better than they, that they go to great lengths to dismiss them, be vocally negative, and refuse to think there might be a better way.

I am unable to understand the unwillingness to improve, particularly when the bottom line is the dog.  These “trainers” are willing to sacrifice dogs for their own ego and fear.

If this is how these “trainers” feel, why are they in the business of training dogs when dogs are half of the equation and owners are the other half?  To lack respect is to ensure failure for both dog and owner.

One thing I do know is that honest-to-God dog handlers, those who can work any dog under extremely diverse situations, have (as long as I can remember) had little respect for obedience “trainers” and have said, repeatedly, that these people “can’t do, so they teach.”  I must say, for the most part, I agree.  However, I also know that there are several dog trainers that CAN and are willing to learn a better way and I applaud them.

The Dog “Training” industry is firmly entrenched, believed and touted.  The reasons for this have been previously discussed in a earlier blog, The History of Modern Dog Training.  However, behavioral studies have shown the intrinsic failure of the overall methods and the dog’s ability to absorb and retain what is being taught.

The study shows that dogs being trained fail to master and owners must practice, practice, practice, because current & traditional methods are proven to only be retained by dogs for two days [1]

TWO DAYS.  Well no wonder owners can’t get “it” and must practice till the cows come home.  The owners can’t get “it” because the dogs can’t get “it”.  The “trainers” are teaching failure.

This begs the question, “How long does one need to practice in order to make an action, foreign to inherent behavior and understanding, a habit?”  A long, long, long time seems to be the answer.  And there is absolutely NO guarantee that it will succeed.

That lost time is the window that results in many, many dogs being released to shelters and euthanized due to behavioral problems that the “trainers” can’t seem to overcome.

So, what IS it we want for our dogs?

What I hear, constantly, is “I want a well-behaved dog”.  I never hear owners say they want their dogs to learn tricks, obedience, or compete in anything.  They simply want a dog that listens, thinks, works with them and the family, and can monitor his own behavior with simple reminders or warnings.

That doesn’t seem too much to ask.

This, then, behooves all of “us” that know, understand and use this easily understood method — a method that dogs have always used and “trainers” constantly put-down out of fear — to embrace it for the dogs’ and owners’ sake and stop this insanity that results in abandoned dogs and leads them to their death.

What do we want for our dogs?

We want “trainers” that are brave enough to step outside the unthinking masses of the failing methods and offer a better, more successful way to the dogs and their owners.

We want owners to step up, take some responsibility, stop looking for the “easy”, do-it-for-me, I-want-to-feel-good-forget-what-the-dog-needs way and demand “trainers” who can produce instead of talk, and work with their dogs to create a life that is positive and integrates the dog correctly.

We want the industry to stop supporting failing methods strictly for the consumer-driven profit margin.  (This last one is pie-in-the-sky until owners walk away from the failing methods and “trainers” that cost them time and money without producing success.)

Can we do this?  Yes.

Will it happen?  Perhaps when dog owners and brave trainers turn away from failure, embrace success, and draw others to them BECAUSE the DOGS profit in every aspect of their lives from it.

Dog “training” is mired in the dark ages.  The horse world has altered and works with horses from the horses’ behavioral response, and is highly successful now.

Perhaps it’s time for the dog “training” world to grow up and admit their failure.  To begin to work with the dog, instead of the “trainers’” egos.  To put dogs first, everything else second.

One of the most important questions you may ever ask is, “What do I want for my dog?”

Your answer, your actions, will determine the future of all dogs.

[1] Thorn, J.M., J.J. Templeton, K.M. Van Winkle, and R.R. Castillo (2006). Conditioning shelter dogs to sit. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 9(1): 25-39. ISSN: 1088-8705. NAL Call Number: HV4701.J68)

Those who claim to be “dog trainers” have poo-pooed the sound, responded with disdain, said it’s stupid, claimed “we don’t need to make sounds like dogs, we’re not dogs, are we?”  In short, they have told owners it BS.

Perhaps these people engage in this dismissive attitude because they don’t understand dogs and are too ego-driven to do right by them.  I don’t know.  Sometimes I think it’s because they can’t really work dogs that they fight so hard to defend their failing methods.  The problem with that is the dogs they come into contact with suffer from these “trainers’” hubris.

However, a study recently published in the Animal Behavior journal, is now showing that dogs “rely on context-dependent signals when they growl at each other”.

My answer to that is, “Well, DUH!”  Dogs have been growling at each other since time began.  They understand it and they respect it.

Aahhtt!! is what I growl — the dogs get it. You who have been instructed by me get it. Science is discovering it.  It should only take another 20 years for those calling themselves “dog trainers” to get on board.

To read about this, you can go to msnbc.com and read Dogs Understand Growls, Even if We Don’t.  Or you can go to ‘The bone is mine’: affective and referential aspects of dog growls for an abstract of the authors’ article.

I thought I’d list a few.  Feel free to add to this.

1. Bottled water
2. Halties
3. Rental dogs
4. Dog concierges
5. Body painting

Your turn

His abilities are without question.  His credentials are sterling.  His successes are documented.  And he sits about 2 degrees off plumb. (Please remember this carpentry term.)  If we were using a scale, plumb would be represented by zero on the scale of one to five.  Plumb is defined, in this case, as the traditional, widely accepted, but failing methods of training pet dogs utilizing choke chains and/or treats.  Sadly, in the current world of dog “training” the word plumb is the antithesis of its TRUE definition, hence, it’s failure.

My friend does use treats, but it must be understood he trains dogs for a specific job and the treat is not necessarily food, and is a reward for an action achieved OUTSIDE of the dog’s normal behavioral parameters.  His ideas area not so far off the traditional patterns of training as to be considered fringe, yet neither are they squarely in agreement.  He sits a little to the side of the traditional mind-set, methods and preconceived notions of dogs, their behavior, their reactions, and the techniques used to train them.  So, on this imaginary scale I would place him at about three.  Most who have attended his seminars believe him to be a dog-god because of his “unique” approach and success rate.

He and I, oddly enough, hold many of the same views about dogs, their training, the current crop of quasi-”trainers” and, in general, humans.  I, however, come from a different approach and so if he sits at three on the scale, I sit on a five, hence, our discussions.  This five rating places me on the “fringe” of currently accepted training methodology.  What I do scares the patooties out of the majority of the fakes that call themselves dog “trainers” because they CAN’T do it, don’t understand it, and they fight, tooth and nail, to discredit it.  Even though it consistently proves successful.

Of course, I’m in good company.  These fake “trainers” also seek to discredit people like Cesar Milan and highly competent handlers of Border Collies–their rationale is that the dog’s reward is the work.  All I can say is, “Keep on talking, guys, you make my point with every dog you fail in class, cannot get a handle on, or whose owner releases it to a shelter.”  But, still they anger me because it is the dog and owner that pay for their hubris.

But, back to my friend.

I reveled in the theoretical, practical and personal observations, approaches, and knowledge we each brought to our discussion.  It had been a long time since I  sat down and discussed in such depth and breadth dogs, their behaviors, humans and all the interplay.  My discussions with him, and I must thank him for this, forced me to explain myself in a manner I’d not had to do for a long time.  It also helped me to develop a clearer explanation which might make it easier for the average person to understand what it is you are attempting to master in my method.

The differences in our approach and beliefs stemmed from our thought process deviations.  My friend is still, for the most part, firmly entrenched in the linear thinking process which is the primary process most often used when dealing with, and training, dogs.  He approaches each dog and its training by identifying the task or problem, developing an action (for the most part physical, though he does venture into the realm of emotional and I am thankful for that), and implementing a solution.  This is logical and I can see trainers’ and male heads bobbing in agreement.

My approach is a paradigm thinking process followed by the linear thinking, which must in my view, always be subservient to paradigm thinking.

I stated that those of you who understand the way I train, who have embraced this method and are living proof of its success, both for you and the dog, are coming at it from the paradigm process.

The analogy I gave to explain my method and paradigm thinking process is carpentry.  (Remember “plumb”?)

In carpentry there are two ways to build a house.  The first is based on linear thinking.  It works like this: A) use these tools, B) use these materials, C) follow the blueprint and attach slot A to B in order to create finished product.  Voila` Your house is built.  However, when structural problems arise due to environmental pressures, internal substandard materials, and/or poor craftsmanship, the house may exhibit severe compromise at best, and collapse at worst.  The carpenter (“trainer”), who does not understand certain conceptual truths necessary for building, opts for more tools i.e., I could do this if I had a heavier hammer (a different dog or better/smarter owner) because it will improve my carpentry skills.  Or, the carpenter might blame it on the materials i.e., these nails won’t drive straight, they’re of poor quality.  I need to get better nails (Halties, shock collars, treats).  I’m sure you can figure out the how and why of the collapse of the house (obedience of the dog) in this type of thinking.

The second way, which I try to impart, is based in paradigm thinking and begins by teaching certain immutable laws.  You wish to build a house?  I want you to understand the meaning of “level”.  It is a truth.   Something is either level, or it isn’t.  That which is level can endure more stress, breaks less easily, makes building upon it easy and successful for long range stability and durability.

It is unimportant if you understand HOW “level” works, it’s only important that you understand the concept and use it correctly.  The person who fails to understand the concept of “level” cannot successfully build a house which will last regardless of wear and tear.  It is not important what hammer you use to erect that house as long as you ensure that during construction all things are “level.”

In my method I attempt to teach the dog’s truths of “level” at the emotional, not the tool, end of training.  Training manuals, videos, and current teaching methods don’t teach the concept of, nor do they discuss, the dog’s truths.  Once, however, you grasp the truths, you may indicate, any time or any place, to your dog whether or not he is behaving in a “level” manner.  Because of your understanding and ability to see this “level” you don’t continue to build on an unleveled foundation and run the risk of having the structure (dog) askew or collapse due to poor workmanship (methods/training) or environmental pressures.  Once you understand the truths you almost never need a  tool to teach it or achieve and maintain “level.”

Dogs are born with respect for the individual (species is unimportant) that takes care of them.  People lose the dog’s respect by virtue of the fact that they don’t understand the concept of, and cannot use, “level” correctly.  The owner does not communicate to the dog that as the owner you are responsible for ensuring “level” as reflects behavioral expectations.  The dog, understanding “level” atavistically, only knows the world he lives in is totally askew (not “level”), and it’s an uncomfortable feeling.  The human does nothing to create “level”, to ensure stability and soundness in the relationship.  There is little trust in a situation such as this.  Obedience is hard to come by, difficult to maintain, and quite frequently collapses under pressure.

You, however, who have attended my classes or BOSS Dog Clinics have mastered the concept of “level” and your dogs reflect that.  The dogs are secure, well-behaved and follow your commands regardless of the emotional or environmental weather.  You’ve built a level foundation and a strong house.  Your relationship with your dog reflects that.  It will stand for a long time.

The origin of Bran and Sceolang (shkeolawn) were that they were twins of Fionn’s aunt or sister, depending on the age of the text, who was transformed into a bitch while pregnant, and thus gave birth to the two dogs.  It is my belief that this explanation of the dogs’ heritage is an allegory on the closeness of the three and their connectedness.  However the dogs came to be, Bran and Sceolang remain firm names in the history of mac Cumhaill.

Fionn loved his dogs, Bran in particular.  He was never separated from them and they adored him.  The communication and thread between the three was recorded without variation as virtually unbreakable.  They have been portrayed as either Irish deer hounds or wolfhounds.  Their vast intelligence and deep love is noted in all versions of the story.

It is recounted that when young, the hounds and Fionn were out hunting deer and the pack was on the scent.  The group of dogs brought a deer to ground, but Bran and Sceolang, being of human heritage were able to discern that the trapped deer was really a woman named Sadbh (Sive), who had been turned by a druid into deer form.  They protected her from the other dogs.  Later Fionn would ‘marry’ Sadbh and their son, Oisin, would become a hero of some note.

Sadbh could retain human form while with Fionn and his band.  However, she was lured from Fionn’s protection and, once away from him, returned to deer form to run the forest.  Fionn often went out with Bran and Sceolang, who were the only ones that could recognize Sadbh in her deer form, in hopes of finding her again.

Long into the lives of the two dogs Finn, once again, decided to search for his lost love.  He was cautioned to leave the aged dogs behind or suffer sorrow, but he would not.

The three had been out in very bad weather for several days and, on that fateful day, chose to try one more time to find Sadbh.  It was at the end of that long day of searching that Fionn gave the signal for the dogs to, once more, cast out and search.  Sceolang, of advanced age, and after days of walking and searching, was exhausted and for the first time in her long, long life, could not, as much as she wished, fulfill the command of Fionn.  She sank to a sit and remained there.

Bran attempted to encourage her and when that failed, he, with immense effort, set off on his final hunt.  Fionn commanded Sceolang to wait and followed Bran.  Fionn was led into the craggy hills of Ceentlea.

On the slope ahead of him Bran caught a scent and age dropped from him.  He began to run and bay as he’d once done as a young dog.  Fionn followed the sound of the dog out of the undergrowth and onto the open summit of the crag which overlooked a small lake.

Silhouetted against the dying sun, on the edge of the cliff, stood a red deer.  Fionn called out Sadbh’s name.  The deer turned, looked at him, then whirled and jumped from the cliff.  It is said that Bran turned and looked once at Fionn, then willingly followed the deer.

When Fionn had not returned after three days from his hunt, his man, Caurag, and a group went in search of him.  They found Sceolang, near death, but in the place her master had told her to wait.  She was unable to physically follow Bran and Fionn, so Caurag gathered her up, a feat that would not have been possible when she was in her prime, and followed where she glanced.

When they finally were close to Fionn, Sceolang demanded to be put on the ground and slowly made her way to where Fionn sat, unmoving, staring into the lake.  Sceolang licked Fionn’s face once, then waded into the lake and began a mournful howl.

Fionn called her away to him and they returned home.  Fionn carried Sceolang as she was too old to make the return journey.

Several years later Sceolang died quietly in her sleep and Fionn had her buried and a cairn erected over her body.

The tale of the love, devotedness, intelligence, and loyalty of the dogs and Fionn lives on.

There was a time that we lived, worked, and depended upon dogs and their skills, their intelligence, their very presence, for our livelihoods, safety, food, and companionship in our daily lives and, sometimes, lonely and wild places.

There was a very practical aspect to the dogs we had, much like the spouses we chose, the friends we made and the lives we led.  Anything less led to a higher chance of not surviving.

Because of this, we were very aware of the dog as an individual.  We studied each dog’s strengths and weaknesses, talents, drive, intelligence and willingness to work with us.  They truly were our partners and we had to have complete and utter trust in them.  We also had to define what their place was in our lives, the responsibility we put on them, and the behavior that we expected of them, both while working and as a member of our family.

They went to war with us and fought, and died, beside us.  They were left at home with wives and children as primary guardians.  They had jobs that increased the overall quality of our lives; herding and guarding livestock, killing vermin, babysitting, sentries calling the alert to strangers, and emotional companions.

It is often depicted as dogs were “things” to be owned and used.  The idea promoted was that dogs were viewed as a tool and dispensable, not as a loved companion and valued partner.  It is often portrayed that dogs were not allowed in the house, the place of love and haven from hardship, and sometimes this was true, but it stemmed from a far more practical point; often the dogs carried fleas and ticks, had rolled in something, were covered in burrs, and generally made it more difficult to keep houses clean.  While this still holds true today, it was not the standard for most dogs.

Dogs with skills were highly valued, loved and cherished, well taken care of and their death was a cause for grief.  Throughout history there are examples of people cherishing their dogs, feeding them when they, themselves, had nothing.  Ensuring the dog(s) had comfortable housing; we included them within the family and allowed them in the house and in our lives.

As early as Pharaonic times, as well as in China and Persia, there were laws protecting dogs and defining what constituted good care and treatment.  Dogs were identified by collars and had legal status.  Persia punished anyone who maimed or killed a dog; even feeding bad food to a dog could result in the punishment of 50 to 200 lashes.

Delta, a victim of the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius in 79 C.E. (Common Era, now replacing A.D), was a smallish dog whose remains were discovered lying protectively across the body of a young child.  However, this was not the dog’s only selfless and remarkable act.  With her remains was found a silver dog collar upon which was engraved her name, her owner’s name, Severinus, and listed and honored the fact that she had saved his life three times.  First, she pulled him from the sea when he was drowning.  Second, she fought off four attackers who attempted to rob her owner.  Third, she fought off a wolf which attacked them near Herculaneum.

Sir Frances Drake, 5^th Baronet of Buckland Abbey (1723-94), began to improve the manor after the death of his mother.  He installed a new, elegant staircase leading to extensively remodeled upstairs rooms.

He balanced his love for his pack of Irish wolfhounds against potential damage to the new staircase by installing a dog gate in the main hall, thus only allowing the dogs to reach the second floor via a back stair.

The gate was custom-made and a doozy, in my mind.  It clearly shows that our current child-gates are poor reproductions of an old, old idea and that owners have been including dogs in a select manner for long time.

Drake made certain his beloved dogs were included in his life, yet had no qualms about defining where they were allowed to roam and their behavior within the house.

Our inclusion of dogs in our lives is clearly shown in the examples above.  But HOW we included them and led them to be partners is rarely examined.  Many of the methods and equipment used today on our dogs came from a period of time in which the dog was an integral part of our daily work and life.  Much of that equipment was originally used to protect the dog and has now been perverted into training equipment for use ON the dogs.

Owners seeking training for their dogs today fail to realize that very few of the methods being taught NOW come from this much earlier, physical, and practical period of mutual existence that simply is not applied to our lifestyles, on the whole, today because it has been forgotten.  These successful methods predated modern training as it is known today.  They incorporated the whole of the dog, along with a practical application FOR the dog and his successful integration into the human unit.

Let’s look at some collars, as examples of what I’m talking about.

To the left is a pair of Scottish silver coursing collars, 1830.  They’re lined with red leather, adjustable with three slits, joined by a ring and two links with snap fastenings.  This allowed multiple pairs of dogs to be controlled by a single handler in the course of field work.

This is the modern equivalent to the above.  The materials have changed, but the concept has not.  Nor has the basic restraint method altered.  The difference is only that an owner has more than a single dog and those dogs, usually, have no real working  purpose to their lives, nor are receiving behavioral directives.

Top: A German medieval iron collar consisting of eight linked W’s ending in spikes with ring for lead attachment.  c. 1400s

Middle: German iron collar of almost stirrup-shaped links each with a spike, original leather lining. 1400s

Bottom: German iron hunting collar with two rows of iron elongated oval links and clasp.  Early 1600s

Note: on all three of these collars, the prongs point outward for protection of the dog from aggression.

Bullmastiff wearing an iron collar for bear or wolf hunting. 1500s

Today’s collars (below).  I don’t see much physical difference, yet the practical application is vastly different.

Up to approximately the late 1700s there had always been, throughout history, informal competition between handlers and their dogs, regardless of the practical application—be it sled dogs, herding dogs, field/bird dogs, hunting dogs, etc.  These competitions took place, primarily, to determine a) the quality of the handler/trainer, b) the quality of the dog and his/her skills for future breeding purposes and specific uses/jobs, and c) to learn new and better ways to handle dogs and increase both human and dog skills and abilities.  They were also, of a secondary nature, social get-togethers for like-minded people in order to share information, knowledge and self-improvement.  It was peers judging peers and assisting novice handlers.

This format, now formalized, is only seen today in working Border collie and bird dog field trials, where it, too, is being co-opted into a “weekend warrior” show, not an assessment of handler and dog for improvement of human competency and technique and dog genetics and capabilities.

By the 1800s many of the informal competitions had morphed into a show at a local tavern (England) where a favorite dog had supporters.  It was primarily held for the toy dogs, still, these dogs were demonstrating some form of skill, usually in the form of a trick performed for an audience.

Then, in 1859, the first formally organized dog show, which was comprised solely of bird dog breeds, was held. It was only fourteen years later that the first official dog show was promoted by The Kennel Club (England).  The emphasis was on breed conformation, temperament, and to maintain stud books.

This timeline and format was closely paralleled in the United States, with the formation of The American Kennel Club happening in 1884.  Still, both England and the U.S. Kennel Clubs were focused on primarily the maintenance and promotion of genetically sound dogs for work.  Those handlers dealing with these dogs still had a practical application to supply to their canine companions and were interested in ensuring the best dog for the work.

Throughout this long relationship with dogs, competent, skilled and intelligent handlers knew better than to beat a dog, but reward it with personal attention and physical and emotional inclusion in the daily life.  They knew that food could be used in some cases as a training/reward aspect, but could not take the place of the human-dog relationship bond.  The majority did not endanger their most valued companions and partners with stupid displays of risk, such as bear-baiting, dog fighting and the likes, nor did they knowingly or willingly endanger their dogs in the act of work.  The majority did not ask their dogs to do what they, themselves, would not.  The majority valued their dogs as companions, friends, and working partners and loved them.  The majority of handlers did not behave inanely, clap their hands, jump up and down and squeak excitedly at their dogs in order to get any type of results.  The majority was quiet, calm, and sensible, common-sense filled people, and as such, they created quiet, calm, sensible, common-sense filled dogs. The majority of quality handlers succeeded in having a personal, intimate relationship with their dogs, who were well-behaved, and had practical work skills—and all without obedience training.

In America, these handlers and their successful method became a dying breed due to the hubris of one woman.

Before beginning this next part, as an aside, let me give you an idea of what poodles were originally intended to do as a job. poodle 1825, from Ger. Pudel, shortened form of Pudelhund “water dog,” from Low Ger. Pudel “puddle” (cf. pudeln “to splash”) + Ger. Hund “hound.”  Probably so called because the dog was used to hunt water fowl.

Originally from Germany (NOT France), they were bred as water dogs, retrieving foul for hunters.  Poodle-like dogs go as far back as Roman times where it is recorded they were used as a pointer in falconry.  Their scent skills were utilized to hunt truffles in Italy, Spain, and France.  A quote about poodle-like dogs in Hans Fredrich von Flemming’s “The Complete Hunter”, 1749, states, “They retrieve well in reed field and fast rivers: They also hunt out foxes, otters, and wild cats from the reeds.  Such Water Pudel is of great service to the Fowler” Hoyt, p. 24

The Beginning of the Long, Slow Decline of Our Dogs and the Crisis They Now Face:

Col. Konrad Most, a German, was training dogs and explaining, from a dog trainer’s perspective to other dog trainers, how dogs learned.  He began, in 1906, to train police dogs while serving as police commissioner at the Royal Prussian Police Headquarters, Saarbruchen.  In 1912 he became director of Berlin’s State Breeding and Training Establishment for police dogs.  He headed the Canine Research Department of the Army from 1919-1937.  In 1931 he helped form the German Society for Animal Psychology.

Long before the publication of B.F. Skinner’s The Behavior of Organisms, Col. Most had a rudimentary understanding of the relationship between consequences and behaviors as applied to dog training for specific tasks, though he still approached the dog through the submission of the body, while primarily dismissing, or perhaps not even recognizing the intrinsic social, and necessary integral, emotional and total-dog aspects of learning and behavioral responses.  Many of his methods or procedures are considered “heavy-handed” by some trainers today.  Most’s belief was, “The order of hierarchy can only be established through physical force”, so dogs he trained were forced into the sit, down, or heel position.  He explained the reasoning and goal behind his training method was, “The object of compulsion is to obtain the paramount and unconditional surrender of the dog”.

In 1910, Col. Most’s manual Training Dogs became one of the foundation books for “how to train” dogs, a manual for training dogs whose primary purpose was for use in police work and war.  The dogs that couldn’t cut it, make the grade in Colonel Most’s training regime, were discarded.  So, right there we have a SELECTIVE OPERATIVE that has no bearing on the vast majority of dogs, and yet, we’ve adopted a training technique that’s based on two primary objectives:  complete subservience without thought and the willingness to be aggressive upon demand.

Now, I ask you folks, WHAT does that truly have to do with the majority of dogs?

Two of Most’s students, Josef Weber, The Dog in Training, 1939, and Hans Tosutti, Companion Dog Training, 1948, brought Most’s training methods to England and the United States.  Weber, in his book, states that he “wanted to bring to the American dog owners the practices used by experts in international schools.”

In 1933, a woman named Helene (Helen) Whitehouse Walker, a socialite who bred Standard Poodles at her Carillon Kennels, was miffed that people didn’t take her dogs seriously.  Under the AKC rules her poodles couldn’t compete in AKC-licensed field trials.  She’d read about obedience tests in English dog magazines and her main objective became to introduce to America the growing English sport of obedience “trialing”.  To this end she traveled to England and studied the “sport” of obedience and its training methods.  She spent a total of six weeks learning how to train HER dogs.

Walker studied under trainers the trials, techniques and methods being utilized by the Associated Sheep, Police, Army Dog Society (ASPADS).  This group held specific trials within the working parameters of each job specification in order that the dog progress through ascending stakes (levels); Utility Dog (UD), Working Dog (WD), Tracking Dog (TD) and Patrol Dog (PD) in which the following must be demonstrated by the handler and dog duo, Control (heel, recall, stay, etc), Agility (jumps and scaling a wall), and nosework (search square and tracking) to demonstrate mastery of specific tasks in order to qualify as competent within their working job description.

The obedience and methods she studied was that of Colonel Most, as it was his training method being implemented upon dogs participating and competing in these English trials specifically geared to show the competency of dogs in demonstrating MOST’S method at a JOB designed for specific temperament dogs trained to be competent within a limited job performance demand.

Walker focused on the dog training techniques being displayed, which were heavily predicated on the police and army concept of training, all of which were foundationally replicating Col. Most’s training techniques.  These techniques were rote learning for specific tasks and had little, if any, variables within the context of learning.  The dogs were taught a specific response to a specific command and no deviation or personal thought by the dog was allowed to enter the equation.  Trainers were taught in this same manner.  Say “this” and the dog must respond by doing “that”.  It was a connect-the-dots training technique that failed to include the real dog.  It still is accomplished in this same manner today, be it by positive or negative training influences.  It is training for a specific task.  You are an army dog, you are to help control and put prisoners on trains and not let them revolt, run, or attack your officer. Once you finish your job, you are most probably kenneled until you are needed for work.  As a dog, you have one task, outside of doing that task, you do not truly exist.  And when you can no long perform your task, you will be put-down, as you cannot integrate into a normal household.

As you can clearly see, this has NO basis in the majority of our dogs’ real, daily behavior, it is a JOB, and training only FOR a job.  Not communication of behavioral expectations coupled with social integration into a human/dog relationship.

Walker returned to America and laid siege to the AKC.  As The AKC web page states: “In the mid 30′s, Helene Whitehouse Walker was instrumental in establishing obedience tests. She submitted a pamphlet of procedures to the AKC in December 1935, and three months later the Board of Directors approved it in principle. In April 1936, AKC published the first official “Regulations and Standard for Obedience Test Field Trials”.

Now here’s a little back-story on Helene.  Her maternal grandfather was Sir George Duntze, 4^th Baronet Duntz, in…….(please hum the Jeopardy song here)…..ENGLAND.  This gave Helene an “in” to ASPADS that she would not, otherwise, have had.  It meant her mother was LADY Ethel Maude Duntze Whitehouse and, as such, when Helene stood before the AKC Board to ask for the inclusion of the “sport” of obedience trialing, she had money, social standing, and, for some, an enviable heritage.  Now please, tell me if that, possibly accompanied by a hefty financial donation to the AKC (though I can’t prove it), wouldn’t be enough to get the all-male Board in 1933 to move heaven and earth and accept her request in the very short documented time of three months.

In the fall of 1932, Walker placed an ad for kennel help.  Blanche Saunders, a farm hand on the Dell-Howe (aka Green Chimneys) Farm, in Patterson, New York, got the job.  Walker taught her all she knew about dog training—all six weeks worth—and  Blanche went on to study at the feet of Josef Weber, who had been taught by Col. Most.  The link was now set for today’s crisis.

The first American Obedience Trial was held by Helene Whitehouse Walker on her father’s estate in Mount Kisco, N.Y., an extremely affluent and influential community, in 1933, with the assistance of Blanche Saunders, kennel manager and Mrs. Walker’s dog trainer. Saunders later wrote a book called The Story of Dog Obedience.  The old pictures in this book—particularly of Saunders in riding breeches—give the enterprise of dog training the feel of an English period novel—estates, entitlement, kennel managers.

It is also most interesting to note that the woman most intent upon proving her dogs’ abilities did so with the barest minimum of on-the-ground experience in training dogs.  She then passed that responsibility over to her kennel manager and dog trainer.  But, using her social standing and resources, forced through a form of training which is now proving as an abysmal failure—to the tune of almost five million dogs euthanized annually and fully three generations of Americans that now incorrectly handle dogs—all for a bit of hurt ego, she wanted to prove her dogs were not “sissies”.

This form of cookie-cutter obedience training grew fairly steadily.  Then, in 1937, in a bid to gain wider acceptance and participation in her chosen sport, Walker and Saunders took three standard poodles, a travel trailer, and a Buick, and set off on a 10,000 mile cross-country trip aimed at promoting her budding “sport” of choice.

From that point forward ALL OBEDIENCE training based their premise of training on the body, NOT the entire dog, and it all stemmed from the foundational teachings of the police and war dogs of Colonel Konrad Most.

In the 1940s, Keller Breland, best known for operating the Arkansas tourist attraction IQ Zoo, which featured trained wild animals, began using the clicker as a method of training.  He and his wife, Marion, were students of B.F. Skinner, a behavioral psychologist.

The popularity of this zoo brought Keller to the attention of the commercial animal training industry in the 50s.  The Kellers developed the first operant-based (positive or negative consequences following a behavior to increase or decrease the occurrence of the behavior) bird and mammal shows for Marineland of the Pacific.  Animal trainers from all over came to them to learn this method.  This program was interrupted due to WWII, but the methods he pioneered are used today in oceanariums and theme parks all over the U.S.

Fast-forward to 1984.  Karen Pryor, founder of Sea Life Park in Hawaii, a Cornell graduate (1954) with a background in zoology and behavioral biology, was a pioneering dolphin trainer.

We all know how this form of operant conditioning works.  Clicker makes a noise, dolphin does a trick, and dolphin gets a treat/reward for performing the trick.

Here’s something to think about.  At the end of the SHOW the dolphin does NOT go home with the trainer.  He returns to the other dolphins and (learns) his normal dolphin behavior.

In both the cases of Breland and Pryor, these people were teaching WILD ANIMALS tricks—NOT behavior.  NONE of these animals went home and LIVED with the trainers.  Therefore, the animals were capable of returning to their normal behavioral patterns upon cessation of the job/trick.  And while I agree this training method is wonderful for tricks and/or jobs outside the normal range of daily behavior, it has nothing to do with the dog with which you live.

In situations where one is working with wild animals, the operant training method is probably the most effective and humane way to train.  If one is speaking of dogs, however, one must remember that selective breeding for compatibility with, and connection to man has altered the dogs’ inherent response structure to work WITH us and to respond to our emotional state.  Dogs read this very quickly and can interpret whether their behavior pleases us or not.

Food, while nice, is not the be-all, end-all for the dog.  Inclusion, emotionally, psychologically and physically is very high in their world.  Whether the interaction between human and dog within these parameters are met under on-going stressful interactions, or under stable, quiet, and secure daily interactions is truly important and should be approached on a relationship-based premise.  Obedience training does not address the core emotional needs of dogs and, therefore, does not truly fix the problems.  Behavioral-relationship handling does.  It is on-going, fluid, takes into account the individual dog, allowing personal expression within the behavioral expectations of the group and most resembles the family/pack.

Humans are animals.  Animals function within the set laws of nature.  Many of the behaviors cross species.  Minute-by-minute, day-by-day, we communicate to our families what constitutes good behavior in our group.  Include your dog in that and you won’t need obedience training.  He’ll be well-behaved, relaxed, and secure and work with you.  He may make mistakes, but he’s not looking for a fight.  It’s not enjoyable to live in a family filled with tension and dogs pick up emotions so easily.

Watch your dog and learn to see what he’s saying with his actions. Allow him the necessary outlet of expressing himself as an individual, as long as he does it within the limitations of behavior you set for your family.  Help him to be the best dog he can be and you’ll find he has much more to offer, intellectually, socially and emotionally, than you ever thought possible.

(This is a reprint from Psych-O Analysis Newsletter, Susan Overfield, author, editor, and publisher)

I like animals—ALL animals.  But where I seem to be able to make a difference is in the instruction of owners of dogs, and by extension, the lives of dogs.  Therefore, my concern about what is happening is focused, primarily, upon dogs.

I wish to continue the discussion begun in the last post about the Cut Bank Shelter.

As we discussed, the Cut Bank Animal Shelter has stepped outside of the animal shelter template of dog handling and is, with unprecedented success, and on a very limited budget, permanently re-homing adopted dogs.

How?  By not following the failing template used by animal shelters and rescues around the United States, but by concentrating on improving the behavior of the dogs and instructing owners on how to maintain that good behavior once the dog is adopted.

I don’t believe that the majority of animal shelters or rescues WANT to fail in helping animals.  But, they do.  They all follow the same template and it isn’t working.  It’s time to demand they change how they handle animals. 

But, in order to do that, one needs to know what is failing and not continue to use a training method, disbursement of funds, or listen to entities expounding the same old cliches, to name just a few of the parts of the failing template.  For to adopt any part of the failure is to ensure continued failure.

Here are some disconcerting facts:

• U.S. charitable giving is estimated to be $307.65 BILLION (in 2008)
• The average American earning under $50,000 gave 6.1 percent of income to charities
• The average American earning under $10,000 gave $991 to charities
• The average American gave 3.4 % of their income to charity
• There are (listed) 12,732 Animal Shelters & Rescues in the United States (PetFinder  shelters by state added for total)
• Of that total, 834 are No-Kill
• HSUS says there are about 3,000 shelters  (it helps them to have skewed numbers for soliciting funds)
• 3-5 million animals are euthanized yearly (2008 figures)
• The current rate of euthanasia is about 32%  (this low number is due, in a large part, to Rescues taking animals out of shelters in order to save them from euthanasia)
• HSUS says there are about 3-4 million animals ADOPTED annually from shelters
• Current recidivism rates of adopted animals can reach 50% by shelter

Let’s take some of those numbers and do some math.  (Please feel free to double-check my math.  Even if I’m wrong, and there’s a good chance of that, the numbers will still be huge.)

Using an arbitrary amount of .025%  (of percentage of income given annually to charities) divided into $307 billion we come up with a total of approx. $7.6 BILLION given to shelters and rescues in 2008.  Not wildlife or animals around the world—simply shelters and rescues.

If we use the $7.6 Billion divided by the listed shelters/rescues, that comes out to be approx. $602 MILLION per shelter/rescue annually.  (This number does NOT INCLUDE monies in City budgets for Animal Control.)

The Seattle PI (David Martosko, July 15, 2008) has this to say about two of the largest Animal Fund Vampires (my own name for them):

“Look at how PETA has spent the money it already has:  The group raised more than $30 million last year, and found adoptive homes for 17 animals. Just 17. Meanwhile, it killed 1,815 dogs and cats — slightly more than the number of naked interns it sent out to “save” cows, chickens, and minks.

And although much of the public (and press) consider HSUS to be an actual “humane society,” its record isn’t any better. The group’s name hides its lack of affiliation with any hands-on pet shelter anywhere in America. Of the $85-plus million HSUS spent in 2006, it gave only 4.2 percent to pet shelters.”  (Ed. note: it is estimated that HSUS has taken in over $95 million in U.S. donations, the $85 million above is what it spent in lobbying,  salaries,  etc.)

So let’s do more math:

$602 million, take away PETA and HSUS (less what it says it gave to shelters) amounts, leaves $491 million PER SHELTER OR RESCUE.

So where is all the money?????

The majority of it is going into everything BUT the animals.  It goes for bigger, flashier buildings, architect fees, salaries, taxes (on employees, etc), advertising, fund-raising, membership fees for administrators, utilities, and the list goes on.

One of the big expenditures (other than fund raising) is “Public Education” or “Humane Education”.  Shelter employees take animals out into public or into classrooms to meet children in order to “teach” humane attitudes.  However, “…no shelter director—not a single one—can point to any results…Over thirty years of humane education has yet to produce a single study showing it has had any impact, while millions of dollars are diverted to the effort nationwide.” (Redemption:  The Myth of Pet Overpopulation and the No Kill Revolution in America, Nathan J. Winograd, 2009, Almaden Books)

Let’s stop scrabbling for wasted dollars.  Let’s stop pleading for more money.  Let’s stop blaming owners.  Let’s stop blaming breeders.  Let’s stop blaming pet overpopulation.  Let’s stop blaming animals.  Let’s not waste time.

We need to hold up the Cut Bank success as a new template.  Let’s attract the donated dollars of caring people by holding up successes—NOT FAILURES.

Cut Bank has proven they can find homes for dogs.  Homes that are permanent.  They have proven they can do it without killing the majority of the dogs that come through the door.  If their success is spread, they will see an increase in donations and that will have a positive result for ALL the animals in the Cut Bank Animal Shelter.

If you are involved in a rescue or shelter operation, I suggest you learn how Cut Bank achieved this success and duplicate it.  If you are an owner or potential owner, I suggest you donate to, or adopt from, a shelter or rescue that is using the Cut Bank template.

If your local shelters or rescues aren’t using this template, tell them about it.  It may simply be they don’t know there is a better way.  If they can’t or won’t change, find a group willing to do it the right way, the successful way.  The way that truly benefits the animals.

God knows there’s more than enough money out there for each shelter or rescue, but not if it is going to be thrown down the drain on the useless, failure-ridden system currently in place. Current shelters and rescues cannot show success.  Cut Bank can and has.  Simple.

You can help without even leaving your computer.  Simply send this blog on to others you know.  Leave your opinion in the comments section.  The more hits it gets, the higher ranked and easier it will be for the average person to stumble upon and learn there is a better way for the dogs.

Ultimately you are helping to save animals’ lives by spreading a new, successful template.

It’s a small shelter in Cut Bank, Montana, but run by two intelligent, dedicated individuals: the husband and wife team of Joe and Tina Gauthier.

“Their work and devotion to the animal shelter has helped earn it the reputation of being a “low kill” shelter.  This means they work like “cats and dogs” to find homes for all the animals placed at the shelter.  The only animals put down are those that are unhealthy or un-adoptable due to irreversible temperament issues.  Animals are never put down due to lack of room at the shelter.”

Several years ago, both Tina and Joe attended a Psych-O (Psychology-Obedience) Clinic [now re-named BOSS (Behavioral Obedience Skills Seminars) Dog Clinic] being held by the Humane Society of Cascade County, in Great Falls, Montana.

I remember Joe brought a Karelian bear dog and both he and the dog were self-contained and quiet.  Joe is a former K-9 trainer, so when Joe, Tina and the dogs departed that day, I wasn’t certain if what I was teaching had created any impact.

Time passed and I produced a book, “Saturday Dogs…and the owners they trained”. Tina was kind enough to say that both she and Joe read it, enjoyed it, and in some form it sparked something in Joe.  I personally think he simply laughed his keester off at my misadventures with dogs.

But, whatever the reason, Joe and Tina have been incorporating behavior into their handling of shelter dogs and teaching it to the owners that adopt them.  Recently, Tina was kind enough to post the following  recommendation on Linked-In and I’m proud of it, because for the Cut Bank Shelter it has successfully helped dogs.

“Susan (Overfield) is a wonderful instructor and has a command over dogs and the people that they own.  Cut Bank Animal Shelter uses Susan’s training techniques and psychology of dogs with every animal that we handle.  We have had no returned animals when adopted. [Ed. bold/underline]   People love that they are receiving a dog that knows more obedience  (& good behavior)  than they had ever expected.  An adoption from our shelter includes an hour long talk about dog psychology and basic obedience.  We are very happy to recommend Susan to anyone that has a dog with behavior or obedience issues.  Susan will also work with special needs dogs.  Those that other people have given up on.  Susan has a way with dogs that many people may envy.  She is willing to teach anyone that is willing to learn.

Tina Gauthier
Special Services Officer
Cut Bank Animal Shelter”

Phone: (406) 873-4624
Fax: (406) 873-2096

Email: cutbankanimalshelter@hotmail.com

Here is a true success story for dogs and shelters everywhere.

I am asking every single person who reads this to do me a personal favor—send this blog to everyone you know.  Send it, or take it, to your local shelter.   Contact Montana’s Governor Schweitzer (this is a comment form) and commend the Cut Bank Shelter to him so that he knows of their success.

If we don’t bring attention to the success of the Cut Bank Animal Shelter and Tina and Joe Gauthier, how will other shelters know there is a template that they can copy if they truly want to help dogs.

I know you love your dogs, I know you care about dogs, if you want to make a real difference and help dogs, then the best way is to spread this success story any way possible.

Thank you all, I know you’ll help.

Recently, with our sub-zero weather and deep snow, the dogs have been inside much more than usual. This has led to an over-abundance of dog hair.

Dog hair is an interesting thing.  For instance, if you want to know which vacuum cleaner is truly the best, ask a person with multiple dogs.  I have, personally, killed three different brand name vacuums over the years.  The average life-span of a vacuum in a multiple-dog house is a year.  I even killed a shop-vac in my attempt to keep dog hair at a minimum.

I am constitutionally incapable of wearing clothes that do not have dog hair clinging to them.  I should have invested in stock in those rollers to de-hair things.  I’d be rich by now.

I lock up, put away, and seal things, and still they have dog hair on them.  I knew it was a losing battle when I found dog hair in sealed items from the grocery store.

Most people  get lint in their dryer.  I don’t.   I get fluffed dog hair.  I did the laundry the other day and upon shaking my clothes, a blizzard of hair floated around me. That’s when it hit me.   I didn’t need to buy a new vacuum annually.  I didn’t need to “roll” the hair off of my clothes.  I simply needed to accept the situation for what it is and find the positive in it.  If I was going to have hair on the floor and pounds of it fell off equivalent to a small dog, at least it was a clean small dog.

God obviously wanted me to accept the gift of dog hair he was sending, so who was I to refuse? So I began to view dog hair in a positive light.

Here, then, are the top ten positives of dog hair.

1. You won’t have to admit you have gray hair, blame it on your white dog
2. You won’t need to buy wall-to-wall carpet, just wash and shake clothes and the hair will float to the floor as if you were a fairy throwing rose petals
3. The shaking of number 2 is an aerobic workout and will improve your over-all health
4. You won’t need to purchase thermal underwear
5. If you’re into haute couture, tell people your sweaters are ”mo’ hair’.
6. Save the dryer lint and use, or sell, it as insulation  (R factor 45)
7. People will think all dogs love you (which translates to a “good” person) as dogs flock to  smell you. (This is particularly important if you are a FedEx, UPS, or Postal Service employee)
8. If you are a hunter, it is great camouflage

And the final two most important positive things about dog hair are:

9.  No one has ever said a bad word against a person’s housekeeping abilities at their funeral

10. If God had wanted you to clean house, he wouldn’t have sent you a dog.

Good or bad, dogs are a litmus test of the true person.  Dogs reveal who we really are.

I often catch a shining moment of compassion.  The dog is kind to a small animal and so I realize the owner has enhanced the dog’s kindness.  Or, it might be I glance and view happiness.  A dog cannot be happy without an owner who is, also.  Confidence quietly wraps the dog and I understand a human has helped it learn to master problems without fear or insecurity remaining.  Loving, loyal companionship, a head that follows your movement, an ear cocked to the sound of your return, a body sleepily making contact with yours are all indications that an aware and caring human has extended the gifts of respect, emotional honesty, and the right to express individuality to their dog at some point.

The human has learned to bear the mantle of leadership well, all for their dog’s sake.  I’m not referring to the dog’s obedience, though on the surface that’s what trainers would have you believe creates a good dog.  I’m speaking of the human trying to understand the dog better, to communicate, to trust, to enjoy, offering freedom, emotional security, a complete existence rich and varied, full of respect for the individual dog and his intelligence.  A life wherein the human helped him learn behavioral skills that he would need in order for him to feel at ease and for people to like him.

The person will turn themselves inside out and never complain.  They’ll change old habits.  They’ll face their inadequacies squarely and strive to improve themselves in order that their dogs have a better chance to live life to its fullest and be seen as a good dog.

Being human they may fail often, but never stop trying.  They may fall short and push harder to make it right the next time.  They will force themselves to admit their shortcomings and then diligently concentrate on personal change in order to make it easier for their dog to achieve the human’s unexpressed personal desire – for others to see in the eyes of their dog what they themselves have seen – a good, loving, intelligent and respected companion.

I may not hear from people for months, but when I do I will hear pride and contentment come through in their voices or in the words they write about their dogs.  I may see them after a long hiatus and notice a confidence and new, unspoken communication flowing between the two.  Pleasure, from both dog and human, is almost visible to my naked eye as a shimmering color.

It seems, whenever I begin to wonder if I truly make a difference, or help people and their dogs, I encounter or hear from someone and they radiate quiet contentment and pleasure over their deepening relationship with their dog.  When life is very generous, the dog  remembers me and is pleased to see me again.  For me, it is one of life’s greatest treasures.

I want you, for a minute, to close your eyes and imagine you have a baby in your arms.  You’re out at a party and an unknown person walks up to you and asks to hold your child.  Soon, everyone is handling the baby, talking to him, and he begins to cry.  Yet he is continuously passed around, hugged, cooed at, and his back is patted, even though he is crying.

Are you a good parent socializing your child, or a bad parent for not responding to the child’s fearful reaction to this unwarranted stress?

Everywhere you go you take your child so that he may become socialized and everywhere you go this same scenario is the result.  I don’t know many parents that believe that the way to socialize a child is to take them out into the world and pass them around, encouraging incorrect behavior, fear, and learning responses that the parent must un-teach later.

Normally, we take our babies and toddlers out with us, let them see the world and what’s going on in it, but do not expect them to interact with every person or thing they come into contact with.  We also are very aware of our children tiring from this overload of experience.

We guide their behavior and responses to people and things they come into contact with while exposing them, judiciously, to life.

Yet, we demand that our pups live in this chaos, overload and fear all in the name of socialization.  Rarely do we give a thought to the pup’s exhaustion, fear, trepidation and allow, even encourage, everyone to touch, loom over, coo at, or in some manner stress the young dog.

Is it a wonder it takes so long for pups to learn to trust their owners?  His owner is constantly pushing him into fearful interaction without our support or guidance.

Is it a wonder that once the pup is numb to fear it begins to learn to react to people and dogs in a hyper manner?  After all, he has been encouraged to show a hyper response to all people when they greet him with a high-pitched tone.

Is it a wonder that the pup ceases to listen to the owner?  The person who has repeatedly pushed him into, or by failure to intervene allowed him to have to deal with, each new experience on his own?

If you truly want a confident, calm, trusting & listening pup, then don’t insist he interact with everything and everyone.  It is enough that he observes the world around him.  After all, it is enough for us to SEE a car accident to understand we don’t want to experience it first-hand.

Stand up for your pup, don’t let everyone swoop down on him, touch him, pick him up.  It’s frightening and you’ll have emotional and behavioral obstacles to overcome if this form of interaction is encouraged.

If you won’t let people do it to your infant, don’t let them do it to your pup or small dog.

Such an idyllic mental picture, however, the cost of that play time may be higher than you ever dreamed possible.

Hopefully owners are cleaning up at least some of the bodily waste left behind after the party is over.   Still, what remains behind can make your dog ill and your pocketbook thin.

Case in point, The Animal Foundation of Great Falls (Montana) opened a dog park and within a very short time owners were complaining that several dogs caught kennel cough after only a single visit.  The owners reported to me they were very certain it came from the Dog Park as their dogs had not been commercially kenneled or interacted with other dogs anywhere else.  In fact, it was so that the dogs could interact with other dogs that these owners took them to the dog park.  That single decision cost quite a bit of money.

In the case of the diseases listed below, the AVMA (American Veterinary Medical Association) states that “clothing, equipment, surfaces and hands should be cleaned and disinfected after exposure to dogs exhibiting signs of…disease…”

Now we all know that’s not going to occur at dog parks.  There is no Sanitation Gnome running around cleaning.  No owners are carrying bottles of bleach, nor is there a way to disinfect the grass, fencing, communal watering hole, benches, and humans.

Here are some diseases you might find at your local dog park:

Canine Distemper It’s a highly contagious and serious virus which attacks the respiratory, gastrointestinal, and nervous system of puppies and unvaccinated adult dogs.  According to the AVMA, “Vaccination and avoiding contact with infected animals are key elements of canine distemper prevention.”

Canine Flu / Dog Flu (influenza) A relatively new virus that most dogs do not have immunity against.  While a vaccine is available, it’s not recommended for all dogs.  The virus is spread via respiratory secretions, contaminated objects, including surfaces, bowls, collars, leashes, and toys.  The virus is capable of surviving up to 48 hours on surfaces, 24 hours on clothing, and 12 hours on people’s hands.  Dogs are most contagious during the 2 to 4 day incubation period, at which time they show NO signs of the virus.  Regardless of breed or age, all dogs are at risk to this virus, it is estimated that 80% of all exposed dogs catch this flu, with a death rate of between 1-5% (+/-).

Parvo This is a very contagious virus, though there is a core vaccination for it, and most dogs receive it as a matter of course.  However, it’s spread via direct contact with contaminated feces, surfaces, bowls, collars, leashes, equipment, clothing, and people.  It’s known to survive in soil for years. Even with vaccination, some dogs never develop immunity and remain at-risk for contracting the infection.

Ticks, Fleas, & Mange These are everywhere and can be carried into the park by dogs, squirrels, even rabbits, to name a few.  These little buggers transmit diseases, worms, and can be spread from dog to dog by direct contact.  Even hitchhike home with you and settle in spreading the joy to other home-bound pets.

Fertilizers/Pesticides Some of these are toxic.  You certainly don’t want your dog to come into contact with them, however, if the dog park is green and pretty, ask yourself what has been done to the grass to make it so beautiful.  I doubt that whoever is in charge of the grass and park will post a sign of closure and your dog is at great risk.

Intestinal Parasites These would be hookworms, tapeworms, roundworms, and whipworms, the eggs of which are passed in the feces and then contracted by a dog that licks/eats contaminated ground, licks contaminated paws, fur, water (feces in the mouth will be transported to water in the communal drinking “fountain”), or ingests fleas, lice, or contaminated rodents.  There is also the possibility of your dog picking up, and ingesting via licking, Coccidia and Giardia.

Kennel Cough (Canine Infectious Respiratory Disease Complex/CIRDC or “infectious tracheobronchitis”) Most commonly associated with, and found in commercial kennels and shelters, this is not a “simple” disease and is caused by a combination of bacteria and viruses and has an incubation period of 3-10 days, with post-recovery shedding period of 2 weeks (viral) up to 3 months (Bordetella).  It’s highly contagious and the current vaccination may help reduce, even entirely prevent, kennel cough in the correct environment.  The AMVA has this to say, “Survival of primary and secondary pathogens may be greatly enhanced by persistent moisture in the environment; therefore surfaces should be in good repair to prevent pooling of contaminated water, and cleaning should be followed by thorough drying on a daily basis. Kennel cough could spread to your other dogs.  Vaccinated, healthy dogs in a home usually develop mild if any signs of kennel cough after exposure to a new dog, however in some cases serious illness may be transmitted.  Always remember that vaccines do not completely protect a dog that is exposed to kennel cough.

Ringworm is due to fungal infection of the skin.  It’s spread by contact with an infected dog or something that dog has come into contact with, and can survive in the soil, and may spread to humans.

Toxic Plants Here’s a nice compilation complete with gorgeous photos, courtesy of the ASPCA site, of the most frequently encountered plants with reported systemic effects on animals.  Make sure these don’t show up in your local dog park.

What won’t be discussed is the fact that the rule also points out that the “trainers” didn’t help the owner and, yet, still got paid and continue to fleece owners of money via a new outlet. Rally and agility are no substitute for lack of behavioral instruction .

At working dog trials there are very few dogs ever kept on leash.  Those that are seem to, quite frequently, be handled by novices or those who have “come over” from obedience backgrounds.

These two diverse approaches to handling dogs are clear examples of control and non-control, both from the dog in the form of self-control, and the handler in the form of trust in their dog and ability to indicate behavioral parameters.

Those handlers who have focused on teaching behavior to their dogs find great success that transfers to all new experiences for their dogs.  They have engaged in a quiet, dignified, and very private and constant education of their dog–and it shows in the dog’s self-control, confidence, and relationship with their human partner.

Those who “train” in the culturally-promoted, failing obedience methods must practice for years in order to gain true control.  This is usually because the dog has outgrown the bad habits, not because of training.

Today’s “trainers” are ignorant of dogs.  They may own dogs, but they’ve never been partners with them.  The dog is usually the vehicle by which the trainer gains attention and status.  These people work the body of the dogs and never, ever really understand or know dogs.  Thus, they tell everyone to practice.

There is nothing sexy about teaching good behavior to a dog, but it certainly makes life better, richer, more varied and a strong, solid relationship between dog and human.

The dogs of behavioral instruction don’t show  up in shelters, rescues and fosters, they are not the dogs with problems.  It is the dogs of obedience training that suffer the ills of  being not understood, not trusted, and confused by the world and their owners.

This is clearly shown when you watch dogs enter the rally, show, or agility arenas.

It’s a very sad commentary that “man’s best friend” will rarely know security, trust, and be happy, well-adjusted and content due to the insistence that “obedience training” will help him.

However, it is a comfort to know that there are still a large number of dogs that will never show up in shelters or rescues due to the fact that they live with competent, knowledgeable dog handlers.  These dogs will  live wonderful, valued, participatory lives filled with trust, inclusion and respect, because they’ve been taught to behave well.

Because they are a solid, well-behaved team of dog and handler the obedience will naturally fall into place.

Yep, I said it.  Dog “training” today doesn’t work.  It is failing our dogs.  If  it DID work then we wouldn’t have so many shelters, rescues, fosters, and ads begging for money, and the leading killer of dogs under age 2 wouldn’t be BEHAVIOR problems.

I know 99% of those that call themselves “dog trainers” have never truly depended on a dog as a partner in a practical job sense.  If they had, they never would “train” in the manner they do.

They also base all “training” on a failing model and do not offer the one thing ALL species do–the teaching of behavior.  BEHAVIOR BEGETS OBEDIENCE and every animal on the planet, except the dog trainer, can seem to understand this and teaches it above all other things first.

Also, these ‘quasi-trainers’ would have a much higher regard for the entirety of the individual dog and consilient thinking.  They would draw  information from a wide range of sciences.  These people would realize the true intelligence of  the dog and stop dealing with them as if they were mildly retarded in their ability to learn, delineate, infer, and implement reason, experiences, and memories.  If this weren’t possible, the dog would have become extinct a long, long time ago.

An interesting piece by Frans de Waal is posted over at Huffington Post and has several examples of a wide variety of animals and their incredible intelligence as a complete entity.

I hope you read it and respect your dog for his diversity, intelligence, and individuality.  That would be a wonderful New Year’s resolution–a rich and varied life for your dog and total inclusion in your relationships because you’ve taught him good behavior, NOT obedience.

“I’ve taught her one thing: No.  Don’t do this, don’t do that…to do nothing but obey is no gift.  Obedience without understanding is a blindness.  Is that all I’ve wished on her?” The Miracle Worker, MGM, 1962

Susan Overfield

Please ‘sign’ this card by leaving (at least) your first name, your dog’s name(s), and the city where you live in the comments.  Thank you and we hope you all have a wonderful holiday season.  Pet your dogs for us ~ Susan

‘Aahhtt!! Reindeer’ copyright Susan Overfield 2004

The reality, however, can be very different and causes one to pause and, occasionally, wonder if the dog we love is possessed.  MY memories of dogs and holidays are vastly different from the media’s.

I remember Taos, a large, noble dog that took immediate and immense dislike to my (ex) mother-in-law the second she walked through my door.  I can’t fault the dog; I was of the same opinion.  However, HE was able to act out his dislike.

She didn’t like dogs, didn’t believe they should be in the house, and this resulted in her being testy with him.  This was not a good idea as he took it as a throwing of the gauntlet.  It became his mission to drive her crazy during her holiday stay with us.  And he did it well.  It began with little inconsequential acts, but escalated quickly.

Soon his covert operations were expanded to entering her room each morning and sitting next to the bed, staring at her until the intensity of his gaze woke her.  To be greeted like this in the morning really got her day off to a bad start.

Once he was certain of his ability to irritate her, he upped his game again.  He would stealthily enter the bedroom and gently lay his nose within an inch of her ear and breathe.  Inevitably she would wake to see two eyes and a very wet nose close up and personal.  Taos had just ensured her mornings were even worse than before.

The culmination came on Christmas morning.  Don’t ask me how that dog knew it was Christmas, but in my heart of hearts I am certain he knew, and I was fortunate enough to observe his final coup de grace.

I was passing her room and happened to look inside.  There sat Taos, head resting on the bed, his nose almost touching her ear.  He heard me and raised his eyes over her sleeping form without moving from his position.  Keeping his eyes locked on mine he took a deep, deep breath and let out a very loud, melodic, yodeling howl.

With a screech she sprang from the bed and staggered around the room all the while gasping, “Wha???? Wha???? Wha????”

Like a wraith he slunk unobserved from the room and ambled past me to lie down in the living room as I tried to get control of myself.  He was laughing.  I KNOW he was laughing.

His was a wonderful Christmas gift to me, I just don’t believe it to be a gift that is marketable.

Please leave us your special Christmas tail in the comments.  We’d love to read them.