Originally Posted by
Steve Wishart
Again, everyone has their preference, but seeing as you dismissed Eukanuba on
your ethnic grounds (not your dogs, as they don't have any
), I fail to see how you can successfully refute any comment of mine regarding the dogfood.
Even so, as long as your dogs are getting a balanced diet of both meat and vegatables, I again fail to see the disagreement.
Ethical grounds, not ethnic
Before the vile Proctor and Gambol bought it out, I used to feed my cats iams [ spit spit ]. Some time later they went off it. Turned out it corresponded with then P&G took it over and changed the contents. At the time I did`nt know about the take over but what they had done clearly made it a poorer food as far as my cats were concerned so I stopped giving it to them.
Knowing after that about P&G getting their nasty hands on it was enough to ensure I would never buy it from that moment on so I have never given and will never give it to my dogs. What they do eat is a very good complete food which I, and more importantly, they, are very happy on because as well as keeping them in great condition, not being full of additives etc, and being a good balanced diet, they also enjoy eating it - bonus
Fancy having a go at speaking of these flaws? Or again, prefer to dismiss it as mumbo jumbo and move onto the next point...?
The theory hasn't been de-bunked, it's just been merely brushed under the carpet by owners who would rather believe that their dog is their recently deceased grandad reincarnated (people do still think that), or by those who would much rather spend more time and money to try to use non forceful methods. With enough time, a dog can be taught to do anything, the pack theory is one that has been around for many years and is one that I have yet failed with, after dealing with 200+ different clients.
Nope, it`s been debunked, including by one of the previously staunchest proponents of it,[ John Fisher ].
Probably easier to give you the link to a thread with lots of opinions on it, [ so not just my opinion, and covers for`s and against`s ]
http://www.dogsey.com/showthread.php?t=81037
It does`nt cost me money to use non-forceful methods which are about me earning a dogs respect rather than demanding it,[ respect that is demanded is`nt respect at all anyway, its nothing more than `acceptance` and that is not respect as far as I`m concerned ]. My dogs do not have a pack heirachy between them, as previously outlined, so if they are not going to behave like a wolf pack because
they don`t feel the need to between them, [probably because they are dogs, not wolves
], I`m not going to force them to behave like one
If the dog is closest to the door, then no, he probably isn't challenging you, but if he pushes you out of the way to beat you getting from a to b, then it's something that I would make a note of.
You can make a note of it if you like but its not an issue for me or my dogs ta
However, I don't assume one dominent behaviour from a dog is enough to describe the dog as dominent, other factors would need to be taken into account.
I don`t assume behaviours are dominant anyway, a truly dominant dog is a rarity.Dominance theory is so misunderstood by most of the people who preach it that its pretty frightening.
As for taking over the world, it's not the first time I have heard someone who disagrees with the approach, exaggerate on this particular part. I never said the single action alone would mean the dog is trying to take over, I suggest you re-read what I initially said.
Your notion that a human could be an alpha over a dog is as silly to me as my comment about world take over is to you
Again, another exaggeration on my example. I also stated that a dog should be exercised mentally and I did say also that it's just as knackering to a dog as a walk. Even so, there's no sense on your part whatsoever to dismiss the importance of walking a dog, that's almost going into lazy american owner territory right there.
"It's not like he
needs to be walked" - Er... yes he does.
Whoa there, I did`nt say dogs don`t need exercise. I teach Agility, I have a reasonable understanding of the need for a dog to be fit and healthy
but having a fit dog which can`t use his or her brain will potentially lead to as much in the way of behavioural issues as a dog which does`nt get enough physical exercise for his or her individual needs.
I said mental stimulations is as important if not more important for a dogs wellbeing, and a regimented ` walk a dog this many times a day for this number of minutes` won`t make as much difference as mental work toward helping a dogs behaviour.
I think you have overlooked the reason of my thread, maybe even the important parts whereby I said that they were just tips to perhaps follow. I never said it was an exact guide that will work with every dog, it was merely a post that I thought I would share some thoughts on some behavioural matters.
I thought you were also inviting discussion on those points
There's no denying the importance of vetinary exams in assessing a problem, but seeing as I lack the ability to diagnose dogs on this site with a thorough physical exam, I thought I'd try and offer the next best thing.
You will see in lots of threads on behavioural problems that posters are asked if their vet has done a thorough check in case of a medical cause - once anything medical has been ruled out then its time to look at the behavioural - otherwise suggestions are just management.
In terms of wether or not I history take all vetinary records during a consultation, then the answer is yes.
That`s good to hear, but what if those records don`t include a thyroid panel for an aggressive dog ? That is one of the most basic first steps which should be done.
Like I said, the majority of dogs that I consult with, mainly have problems in one of the three areas mentioned, aggressive dogs are never consulted without a muzzle and I have had my latest tetanus jab in case you also wanted to know
I haven`t had my latest tetanus, I`m needlephobic - but I think it`s more than just luck that unlike Mr Milan, I have`nt been bitten by any of the dogs I`ve worked with over the years, [ mostly severely abused often aggressive dogs ].
I have no problems whatsoever with people disagreeing at all, the world would be boring and I would probably be out of a job if we didn't. But try to avoid exaggerating things and then saying that certain things have flaws without providing any examples or facts with regards to those flaws. At least gimme a decent challenge to debate on, instead of making it a bit easy
Not exaggeration, just humour - you`ll get used to me
There are many threads about the debunked dominance alpha schmalpha theory, you`ll find plenty of examples in them
Hopefully that was just as well written just as you'd hoped
Don`t agree with some of your take on dogs but I like your style of debate so far, so not a bad start I reckon
PS, none of my dogs are called Fluffy, it would`nt suit any of them at all