Fair or not? Your opinion

[Miabella]

Originally posted by Bucky's Mom
...you WOULD have got the shock of your life if the person you ran up to and corrected was JUDI W :D

:)

I'm sure you're right, I'd better mind my own manners. ;)

Thanks everyone, this has been a very thought provoking thread.

[Burnsway]

Originally posted by Miabella
I understand what you are all saying, but what still doesn't jive with me is that she walked directly into these dogs when she could have gone around. Seemed like she was setting him up.

I was reading through this yesterday and didn't post because I wanted to think the scenario through a little bit. You say it looked as if she was setting him up. She very well may have been. She may have been proofing some training.

I myself have corrected Psyche for turning around to socialize with stray dogs.(not sure the socializing was always going to be friendly on her part....lol) I want 100% control of my dog around loose dogs and if she doesn't listen when I say leave it or move on I tend to rip her a new one.....:D As we walk on, if the dogs or dog continue to follow, I usually keep walking but turn a bit and say "GO HOME!!!"....

9 out of 10 times they do....:D That other 1 time they usually just stop in their tracks and look at us as we walk with a Who the heck does she think she is look on their face.....:D

Our love for animals and even kids make us especially as women want to step in.(It's a mother instinct thing) I sometimes see a little kid getting in trouble in the store and want to run up and hug them, then I remember just how bratty kids can be....

[Mattweiser]

Originally posted by DNeff
IMO the one needing a harsh correction was the owner of all the dogs involved. If your dog is off lead and harasses another dog you had better be over there in a flash retrieving your dog.

And to allow your dog to be harassed by strange dogs and then punishing him for try to either trying to calm the other dogs with postures or looks to me is so wrong!!!!

If you own a dog it is ALWAYS your responsiblitiy to protect it from wayward dogs or strangers. PERIOD. If not, you are setting your dog up to have to defend itself and no one wants to see that happen. Especially if you have a rottie or a pit, because you will be the one to blame because of your breed.

Proofing in a controlled setting is one thing, but she knew nothing of those dogs intent. The chances of things going sour is quite high and then you have only taught your dog that strange dogs can possibly harm him and your owner will not defend you and instead may punish you. ACK!!! This kind of thing drives me crazy.

But see.. this is the point of a "truely" proofed dog.... one that will always offer the required behavior... it does not make a darn bit of difference to me if the other dogs are bothering him or not... I don't care if he is on fire.. if I say "heel" I mean "heel"...

perhaps the only way for me to put him out, is from the heel position... you never know....

;)

[Judi W]

My initial point was that "you don't know" so mind your own business. Could have been proofing, could have not, but in any case, the observer does not have all the information nor is it our obligation except in the case of egregious abuse, to butt in without an invitation.

I know you are all laughing at me. but - this business of feeling free to inform any and all that come into our line of sight of our opinions can certainly be overdone. I know how I would react about someone who knows nothing about me or my animal thinking they are in a position to make a determination about my handling of my dog. Not bloody likely would I take that in stride.

[Bucky's Mom]

Originally posted by Judi W
I know how I would react about someone who knows nothing about me or my animal thinking they are in a position to make a determination about my handling of my dog. Not bloody likely would I take that in stride.

Whew Laurie - it WAS Judi W :D

[Burnsway]

Originally posted by Bucky's Mom
Whew Laurie - it WAS Judi W :D

Naaaaaa, Judi W doesn't own a pit.....:D

Well then again she may but she never let on......;)

In miabellas defense she did mind her own business, she just was wondering in our own opinion what we thought. If the correction was too hard for the situation the dog was put in. I agree with Judi that we have absolutely no idea what the situation is. Therefor move on.

I have on more times then I care to count had people over step boundaries with me. The worst was when I was in the park working with a 10 year old Autistic student. He was not a very high functioning one and for him to even be allowed to play out in public he had to follow commands. Yes you heard that right, "commands". It was the only way to safely control him and one lady told me she was going to call child care services on me for treating my son like a robot and a dog......

If she would have just watched she would have heard him call me Mrs Melissa so obviously I was not his mother and it only took half a brain to see he was Special Ed....

I know that isn't dog related but just an example to back up the Mind our own business statement.....:D We just don't know what the situation is.

[tugger5000]

I'm going to say fair. The pit was not released from the heel position and any deviation should be corrected. As stated in previous posts, not having the background on either of the owners makes it difficult to say what was actually going on.

Ideally, I feel every dog should be on a leash because I don't think people have as much control over the dogs as they thing they have. The best any of us can do is anticipate those situations and set the expectations for behavior through training and experience. Like Rotty owners, Pit Bull owners have to be especially careful because of breed perception.

[MARYDVM]

'a truly proofed dog ...one that will always offer the required behavior..."

But there is another training philosophy that relates to dogs in more than a master-servant role. In working disciplines where the dog is a thinking partner, setting that partner up for corrections to harshly stifle his natural instincts is counterproductive. Here is Donald McCaig, writing about training from a shepherd's perspective:

"It is the job of the dog trainer to summon the dog's genetics, not to impose man's will over dog's... When Geoff goes shepherding, he brings a novice dog along with Cap. The young dog rushes about, trying to understand his life's work and Geoff, without interrupting his tasks, shows it to him. If the dog goes wrong, Geoff tells him. He doesn't pat him or give him treats....Although Geoff is noted as a dog trainer, in a nation of superb dog men, nothing I see him do resembles what Americans call 'dog training". Training is where you get the dog to do what you want him to, right? When he does wrong you scold him, when he does right you give him a pat or a treat, right? A well-trained dog obeys every command despite his inclinations, otherwise what's the point?.... Many Americans confuse training with taking commands....Our American method of pet dog training is designed to be context free; the dog should heel though the skies are bright with Armageddon; the dog should recall though the owner means to have him put down the moment he gets his hands on him. The presumption of this training is that dogs are willful and stupid and, no doubt, some are....Learning a dog's worldview, altering it(within bounds), accepting a dog's understanding as sometimes more reliable than a man's - these commonplace tools of dog training are a mild cultural treason."

[Mattweiser]

I am not clear on how to appropriately respond to that post....

was that a knock on competetive dog training, a joke, or an attempt to enlighten the rest of us as to to how natural and "mystical" dog training should be??

regardless, if you are endeavoring to "completely" train your dog, the above mentioned situation is not at all unreasonable, nor uncommon

[Willabeast]

Originally posted by Miabella
I
Oh well, guess we'll never know and it's a good thing I kept my big mouth shut. :D

:D You are probably right not knowing the whole situation, the womans dog-sense, knowledge etc. I know when I open my big mouth in a similar situation I usually regret it. Though it doesn't usually stop me.. Maybe the woman saw a potentially dangerous situation and all she could think of was just getting the hell out of there before something erupted. Since she was the one with the pit-bull, everything would have been construed as "once again killer pit-bull..................."

[MARYDVM]

Actually my post was merely an attempt to point up a different attitude about training. Having a working dog as a true partner is something that goes way beyond the "you'll do it because I said so" that a lot of middle level trainers fall into. There are no actions without consequences. Would an SAR handler, or a top OTCH or ScH competitor put their dogs in this compromising situation and then crank on their necks when they showed discomfort at being molested by three strange dogs? Not if they hoped to turn in that obedience performance showing "utmost in willingness and enjoyment" or wanted their dog to work diligently and independently to find the lost child. Very few dogs can maintain their drive in obedience if given heavy compulsion in a confusing/unsettling situation. If the owner wanted to help the dog through this, she could have halted. With the dog's rear on the ground, and still maintaining heel position, the three unruly dogs could have been ignored much more easily than while trying to walk with three noses up his butt.

In any event, there was no point in saying anything to the handler. Whether she knew what she was doing or not, the reaction would only have been negative.

[Rottlva]

Originally posted by MARYDVM
Very few dogs can maintain their drive in obedience if given heavy compulsion in a confusing/unsettling situation.

:( It would be unfair for us to ask them to do so!

[Mattweiser]

Originally posted by MARYDVM
...Very few dogs can maintain their drive in obedience if given heavy compulsion in a confusing/unsettling situation....

Agreed, and those are the rare dogs that we look for.. ;)

[Mattweiser]

Originally posted by MARYDVM
... Would an SAR handler, or a top OTCH or ScH competitor put their dogs in this compromising situation and then crank on their necks when they showed discomfort at being molested by three strange dogs? Not if they hoped to turn in that obedience performance showing "utmost in willingness and enjoyment" or wanted their dog to work diligently and independently to find the lost child.

.. so is it your contention that top level SchH competitors do not involve fairly high doses of compulsion in their proofing phase??

[Mojave's Mom]

Personally I feel the owner did the right thing. It seems, especially lately, I've run into ZILLIONS of dogs off-leash whenever I go out on walks who start trouble while their owners just scream up at me "ohhh don't worry, mine is friendly!" ... if it wasn't for my dogs being trusty on the "leave it" and "heel" commands, no doubt some dog fights would not have been avoided. When I'm out with my dogs, I expect them to listen to me over ANYTHING else in their path....everytime, everywhere. Period.

Just last week I was up at a regional park and a Lab ran up full force on my two youngest. I asked them to sit/stay while I called up to the clueless owner to come and get her dog. Meanwhile the dog is shoving his nose up Diablo's @$$ and this boy does not tolerate that well....I popped him and told him "leave it" and even though he continued to protest, he held the position I asked for. If I'd have kept moving, I KNOW Diablo would not have been able to fight off the urge to tell the other dog off....and I do not want dog fights when I'm trying to enjoy a walk :o

My point is I can't control what other's dogs will or won't do. I CAN control what mine will do. Now if another dog came up snarling and biting, you betcha I'd be doing everything in my power to keep them off my dogs.