Mary Healey wrote:


Now, of course, he's a manipulative sumb*tch and will run my life if I let
him. I actually prefer him this way. I am under no illusion that he's
doing anything to please me -- at best, my approval pleases HIM.


Ooooh, meet Cala!

Cala was a very independent puppy. From the time the puppies could
wobble around, if I clapped and called Cala would either ignore me or
follow the other puppies--to jump one of them for a wrestle. She really
didn't have much desire at all to please me. I had to build that. And
she's come a tremendously long way. She now really, really wants to
please me because she's learned that pleasing me results in pleasing
herself. She has a high desire to work and play, and by pleasing me she
gets to do both. The example of her glueing her nose to my cheek to get
me to throw the ball is a perfect example. Is she giving me a sweet,
affectionate kiss? No. She's pushing me to give her something she desires.

Viva, OTOH, has a need to be bonded. She is very strongly bonded to me
because she feels secure that way. She's not at all independent and
would do anything for me--but that's because she needs that attachment.

Robin Nuttall wrote:
Ooooh, meet Cala!

I have, but not since her ears were bigger than her body g. Even
then, though, she was All About Cala.

Cala was a very independent puppy. From the time the puppies could
wobble around, if I clapped and called Cala would either ignore me or
follow the other puppies--to jump one of them for a wrestle. She
really didn't have much desire at all to please me.

I think Duke might have been quite a different dog if he'd been raised
differently.

Viva, OTOH, has a need to be bonded. She is very strongly bonded to me
because she feels secure that way. She's not at all independent and
would do anything for me--but that's because she needs that
attachment.

Both types have benefits and drawbacks. I was used to that "Velcro"(TM)
tendency, and came to rely on it while training -- that'll bite ya in
the behindermost bits when you get a Cala or a Duke.

It's funny, but I don't take Duke's manipulations at all the same way as
the cowdogs. With Sam, Noah, or Ranger, if they were on the sofa and I
wanted to sit down, I'd make them get completely off the sofa. Duke
makes like a boneless Lab-shaped lump, and I just squeeze in beside him.

With the other dogs, I might consider that behavior a challenge, but
with Duke it just *feels* different. He's interested in "dominance" the
same way he's interested in other interactions -- what's in it for him?
He took Sam down to become pack leader, but I really think he did it
just to be left alone and not from any inherent drive to be alpha. In
that way, he's a very thoughtful dog. He knows what he wants, and he
figures out how to get it. I've created what would be a monster, except
that he doesn't really want much. He's actually very easy to live with.

Should he ever decide to take over the world and I get nailed for taking
him less than seriously, well, that'll be on me, won't it?

--
Mary H. and the Ames National Zoo:
Raise A Fund, ANZ Babylon Ranger, ANZ MarmaDUKE, and Rotund Rhia

Mary Healey wrote:
Robin Nuttall wrote:

Ooooh, meet Cala!


I have, but not since her ears were bigger than her body g. Even
then, though, she was All About Cala.

Oh yeah. Tough little snot. She's taught me a tremendous amount.


Cala was a very independent puppy. From the time the puppies could
wobble around, if I clapped and called Cala would either ignore me or
follow the other puppies--to jump one of them for a wrestle. She
really didn't have much desire at all to please me.


I think Duke might have been quite a different dog if he'd been raised
differently.

Probably. I put a tremendous amount of work into Cala in her first year
to develop a willingness to please me. On the way we had some true
battles. If she had been in a regular pet home she'd be dead, dead dead
by now, because she would have bitten someone badly. She wouldn't see
that as a problem at all to get her way, and she's strong enough to be
very comfortable with taking over. Fortunately our battles happened at
about 3-4 months of age when she couldn't hurt me much. We still butt
heads, but not violently any more!


Viva, OTOH, has a need to be bonded. She is very strongly bonded to me
because she feels secure that way. She's not at all independent and
would do anything for me--but that's because she needs that
attachment.


Both types have benefits and drawbacks. I was used to that "Velcro"(TM)
tendency, and came to rely on it while training -- that'll bite ya in
the behindermost bits when you get a Cala or a Duke.


Oh yeah. I'd certainly never had a dog like Cala before. I thought I had
high drive in Viva--and I do. But it's coupled with tremendous innate
desire to please. Cala's got even more drive and a lot less innate
willingness to please. Tough combination but like I say, she's teaching
me a lot and I'm not sure whether I'll be ready to settle for less in my
next dog.

Robin Nuttall wrote:

Oh yeah. Tough little snot. She's taught me a tremendous amount.

:-) I think if you're doing things right, each one of them teaches
you an enormous amount. I know that I learned something important
from each one of my own dogs and even from my foster dogs.

Diannes

diannes wrote:
Robin Nuttall wrote:

Oh yeah. Tough little snot. She's taught me a tremendous amount.


:-) I think if you're doing things right, each one of them teaches
you an enormous amount. I know that I learned something important
from each one of my own dogs and even from my foster dogs.

Yes, but there are easy dogs and hard dogs. Viva was a challenge in one
way, because I'd never owned a working-bred high drive dog before. But
in another way she was really easy, because she's both high drive,
resilient, and very willing to please. It was just a matter of me
learning how to deal with the drive. If I'd had Cala before Viva, I
don't think I would have been able to keep her. As it was, it was very
touch-and-go the first year.

"diddy" wrote in message
...
Have you read the Culture Clash
If so, what are your opinions regarding it.
I'm reading it now, for about the third attempt. And I am about to
put it
down again, because I think this woman is working with VERY stupid
dogs,
Her experiences must be really bad with dogs.
I just don't get this book.

I thought this book was a must read, I've seen constant references to
it here and not just from Leah. What exactly are your gripes about it
other that than that she workd with stupid dogs?
I'm still trying to finish it? I think dogs are more than just
instinct and conditioned responses.
I enjoyed The Other end of the leash. It was too much about training
for me and I lost interest but a trainer said to me on a forum.

"There is a fine line between training and behaviour unless of course
you are referring to instinctual, natural behaviour that the dog used
for survival.
I'd read the Culture Clash if you can because this covers both,
although a large part is geared towards the psychology of how dogs
learn the principles of reinforcers and non reinforcers."
Another book recommended to me is William . E. Cambell , Behaviour
Problems in dogs.Have you read that ?
Alison

"Alison" wrote in message
...

"diddy" wrote in message
...
Have you read the Culture Clash
If so, what are your opinions regarding it.

BTW, Why are you asking Leah? I thought you said she'd left the group
though I sincerely hope she hasn't.
Alison

"diddy" wrote in message
...

Just about every page so far. I read a page, and go grab the puke
bag. I
think I'm about to give it up again and put it on the dust collector
shelf
.... again.
I knew you were on that book list.
I bought the book based on raves from people that I respect as
trainers.
And then I start reading this.. and go UGH.
This woman made a name for herself... and I just don't get. it. She
writes
a stupid book... And because it got published, for some reason it
gave her
some credability.
I hated it so much I didn't finish it the first, second and third
attempts
and am about to put it down for the fourth time due to lack of
merit.
I read through ALL of Koehlers books that I own, and although didn't
like
them, I found some merit in his philosophies and extracted enough to
find
it worth reading. I don't like his methods, but the principles have
merit.
I think the Culture Clash is the FIRST book that I've ever read that
I
honestly could finish due to lack of merit.

You're not being specific enough ! Lack of merit based on what?
Alison

"shelly" wrote in message
...
Ayn Rand, get thee behind me!

Who's that, then ?
Alison

"diddy" wrote in message
...
in thread : Leah
Roberts
whittled the following words:

On 24 Feb 2005 09:54:01 GMT, wrote:

1. Dogs don't do anything to please you


Actually I've seen many many dogs where you only had to show them
ONCE.
They got it. .



Have I got it right that Koelher to train a dog to sit , you push a
dog into sit position 25 times two days running and then do the same
for the next two days while saying sit?
Does that imply a dog is stupid?
Alison