Hiya wasn'y ignoring you, yes i have tried to get her interested in treats and toys over the years, and its really weird she will play with a toy for a short while but then the ground becomes more interesting again and off she goes, and as i carry treats at all times for the others then its always there as an option, and they all get treats at the end of a walk when the lead goes on, this can be liver, liver bread, plain old gravy bones, walm chicken and sausages as well. The only time that Moll will take one is right at the end when she has her lead on, the others come for them at regular intervals.

Oh and none of mine stay that close i wouldn't expect them to, they are what they are and there greatest joy is to be ferreting about in the undergrowth

We'll never agree on the subject Ailsa, I lead my dogs and I don't dominate them, domination and submission are open to interpretation as you well know. Dominant= leader, submissive= follower.

I know we won't but it doesn't stop me wanting to discuss it! 'Specially with you!
I have no doubt at all that you don't dominate your dogs. I have no doubt that your dogs are well treated and loved Trouble. I hold you in the highest regard.
I have no problem with calm and assertive.
I have huge issues with dominance. Try to watch the clip.

I agree that you would think that if you understand dogs then you would be able to train them, but as to whether you have to know how to train them in order to be able to understand them - I'm not sure that you do.

Do all child counsellors/psychiatrist teach?

All educational psychologists do....

The actual words he says are

"but you do have to dominate. Dominate in the animal world is healthy. It's how they keep things balanced."

and I have to say that is a complete load of bullocks! It is a complete misunderstanding of all animal behaviour that it is all about domination, it isn't. In fact I would go as far as to say that no animal uses domination.
Someone stated in the dog press recently that the Elephant herd was led by the most dominante member, incorrect, the herd is led by the most knowledgeable female which allows the herd to prosper in good times and survive in bad times because their age and wisdom means they know where the food and water is, nothing to do with domination. The Lion pride was cited as anothe example, again incorrect. The pride is made of of related females with unrelated adult males who protect and patrol their territory. No dominance there. The wolf pack, it has been proven time and again that the breeding pair are just that, the fittest and most able to breed, the remainder of the pack is usually made up of family members, in fact we should really lopok at groups of animals as family groups because in the main that is what they are made up of, either males staying together and females moving groups of the males leave the groups when mature and seek their own groups.
When animals fight it has nothing to do with dominance and all to do with survival of the fittest. That which is strong and powerful enough to see off rivals goes on to produce the next generation.
In groups of primates, they go on about the dominante male but the reality is that there is usually more than one at the top and the males are supported by females in a group. Again males protect and patrol the territory and that is usually done by ALL the older males in the group not just those that are deemed 'dominant'. It has also been shown that not all offspring in primate groups are sired by the male that humans deem to be the boss and the girls chose the one they fancy if they can get away with it!
Becky

I'm not saying that I wouldn't have preferred to see other methods used. But I do think there are certain situations where positive methods are not going to work - possibly in this case the owner didn't have the time or ability to carry on any training given. Is that fair on the dog, no. But the dog didn't seem to have a bad life and overall I think it was possibly better to use this method and let the dog carry on living there.

(I say possibly as I'm still open to persuasion)

I know that and it's mutual but there seems to be no such thing as a reasoned debate on here where CM is concerned, it's always been difficult to discuss him but these days it's just not worth the effort it's all snippy comments with the reasoned debate overlooked and ignored and I just can't be ar$ed.

ive heard this said before re CM....he doesnt train the dogs, he trains the owners, etc ,etc

but i think thats disingenuous and just a marketing statement.
he is training dogs and training owners to train dogs, which is what dog training is.

and even if he were just training the owners, he is still dog training, as all dog trainers are supposed to (and most usually do) train owners to train dogs, not really train the dog for them.

CM isnt any different to other dog trainers in these respects.

But not all counsellors/psychiatrists do, so it must be possible to deal with behavioural issues without training/educating the dog/person.