HELP! - Terrorised by 9 week old Pup!!

[Cob-Web]

Again not meaning to sound funny but maybe Molo was an easier than average pup?

I certainly did not experience the same level of exasperation as some COLers did - I was pleasantly surprised, I must admit, as I expected far worst

It is fair to say that the whole family revolved around Molo the first few months - and in particular I was dedicated to him and his training - but we had anticipated and planned for it, so it was not unexpected (although OH still says never again  )

I don't know if I spent more one-to-one time with him than others do - but if I answered the door, popped upstairs to the loo, or needed to respond to my daughters needs (she was three) then Molo was popped into his puppy-pen until I came back; he was never left unpenned in a room until I was confident he would succeed  He was slowly given the "freedom" of the kitchen over the first year, first for a few minutes, then while I took a shower etc until just after his first birthday he got given the freedom of the kitchen while we are out.

He still does not have access to the living room when we are not here - he barks out of the window - and it is only in the last few months I am happy to leave him sleeping on the sofa in the living room while I am upstairs for any length of time 

a) A pup goes to chew a table leg and you notice just as he's about to wrap his mouth around the leg and you distract him with a squeaky toy which makes pup come away from the table to you to investigate the squeaky toy, what has the pup learnt from that?

b) If a pup is going to chew the table leg and you notice just as he's about to wrap his mouth around the leg, you say "ah ah, No" then give the pup one of it's toys and praise him as he puts it in his mouth, the dog has learnt that the table leg shouldn't be in his mouth and his toy should. 

IMO, method a) is valuable as he has never gained the reward of chewing the table leg and finding out how good it feels; method b) runs the risk of him chewing when you are not there to correct him as he knows it feels good, but knows you will correct him if you are there 

In relation to the taking hold of a dog and staring it into submission - all dogs respond differently to training techniques; and confrontational methods carry risks that I would prefer not to take - positive methods do not carry the same risk of dangerous *side effects*

[Densil]

In situations where a dogs natural behaviour is likely to put it at risk or causes damage, such as chasing livestock or chewing furniture, I would avoid putting the dog in the position where it could display the behaviour in the first place, rather than correct it once it had *failed*.  Much of this behaviour is self rewarding anyway - so it's better that a dog isn't given the opportunity, surely ?

Rachel, I know you have answered the issue of chewing furniture.  How do you deal with the livestock issue?, or nipping at strangers?  Avoiding the situation must put some considerable limitations on where you can go with your dog.  If you found yourself following a footpath which took you through a field of cows what would you do?   

[Cob-Web]

If you found yourself following a footpath which took you through a field of cows what would you do?   

I regularly do (the IoW meet route is through a field of cows) and I keep him leashed.....doesn't everyone???  It's private land, with private livestock, so not only do I do it to ensure Molo doesn't behave inappropriately - but out of respect for the land-owner 

[Densil]

If you found yourself following a footpath which took you through a field of cows what would you do?   

I regularly do (the IoW meet route is through a field of cows) and I keep him leashed.....doesn't everyone???  It's private land, with private livestock, so not only do I do it to ensure Molo doesn't behave inappropriately - but out of respect for the land-owner 

That is very responsible.  What would happen if Molo wasn't on a lead?

[Densil]

This is an interesting post which has been circulating around the internet and has featured in previous threads. It makes a good analogy.

TO ALL THE KIDS WHO SURVIVED the

1930's 40's, 50's, 60's and 70's !


First, we survived being born to mothers who smoked and/or drank while they
carried us.

They took aspirin, ate blue cheese dressing, tuna from a can, and didn't get tested for diabetes.

Then after that trauma, our baby cribs were covered with bright colored
lead-based paints.

We had no childproof lids on medicine bottles, doors or cabinets and when we
rode our bikes, we had no helmets, not to mention, the risks we took
hitchhiking.

As children, we would ride in cars with no seat belts or air bags

We drank water from the garden hose and NOT from a bottle.

We shared one soft drink with four friends, from one bottle and NO ONE
actually died from this.

We ate cupcakes, white bread and real butter and drank soda pop with sugar in it, but
we weren't overweight because

WE WERE ALWAYS OUTSIDE PLAYING!!

We would leave home in the morning and play all day, as long as we were back
when the streetlights came on.

No one was able to reach us all day. And we were O.K.

We would spend hours building our go-carts out of scraps and then ride down
the hill, only to find out we forgot the brakes. After running into the
bushes a few times, we learned to solve the problem.
 
We did not have Playstations, Nintendo's, X-boxes, no video games at all, no
99 channels on cable, no video tape movies, no surround sound, no cell
phones, no personal computers, no Internet or Internet chat
rooms..........WE HAD FRIENDS and we went outside and found them.

We fell out of trees, got cut, broke bones and teeth and there were no
lawsuits from these accidents.

We ate worms and mud pies made from dirt, and  the worms did not live in us forever.

We were given BB guns for our 10th birthdays,
made up games with sticks and tennis balls and although we were told it would happen, we did not put out very many eyes.
 
We rode bikes or walked to a friend's house and knocked on the door or rang
the bell, or just walked in and talked to them!

Little League had tryouts and not everyone made the team. Those who didn't had to learn to deal with disappointment. Imagine that!!

The idea of a parent bailing us out if we broke the law was unheard of. They actually sided with the law.

This generation has produced some of the best risk-takers, problem solvers
and inventors ever.

The past 50 years have been an explosion of innovation and new ideas.

We had freedom, failure, success and responsibility, and we learned


HOW TO
DEAL WITH IT ALL!

And YOU are one of them! CONGRATULATIONS!


You might want to share this with others who have had the luck to grow up as
kids, before the lawyers and the government regulated our lives for our own good...

and while you are at it, forward it to your kids so they will know how brave their parents were.


Kind of makes you want to run through the house with scissors, doesn't it?!


In recent years the "clever people" came up with whole new ideas on how things should be done.  Does anyone agree that they might have got it just a little bit wrong?  (or has the ASBO had to be introduced for some other inexplicable reason)

[PennyB]

If you found yourself following a footpath which took you through a field of cows what would you do?   

I regularly do (the IoW meet route is through a field of cows) and I keep him leashed.....doesn't everyone???  It's private land, with private livestock, so not only do I do it to ensure Molo doesn't behave inappropriately - but out of respect for the land-owner 

That is very responsible.  What would happen if Molo wasn't on a lead?

Recall (as I thought Rachel said she'd have him leashed and wouldn't be oflead in this sort of environemnt in the 1st place, no doubt as per the countryside code)? Not sure what the point is here really

[ClareB]

I would have Milo on a lead, too.  If he was already off-lead, I would recall him and put his lead on.  You usually get signs up as you enter private land where livestock are present, requesting dogs be kept on leads or under close control.  It's the farmer's legal right to shoot any dog which is worrying any of his livestock, and although Milo's never shown a tendency to chase, I certainly wouldn't be taking any chances.     Plus, I've seen the results of livestock having been attacked by a dog/dogs and it's not pleasant....

[PennyB]

In recent years the "clever people" came up with whole new ideas on how things should be done.  Does anyone agree that they might have got it just a little bit wrong?  (or has the ASBO had to be introduced for some other inexplicable reason)

Widely off topic really so I can't see the point this is more for the anything goes forum really

[CraftySam]

a) A pup goes to chew a table leg and you notice just as he's about to wrap his mouth around the leg and you distract him with a squeaky toy which makes pup come away from the table to you to investigate the squeaky toy, what has the pup learnt from that?

b) If a pup is going to chew the table leg and you notice just as he's about to wrap his mouth around the leg, you say "ah ah, No" then give the pup one of it's toys and praise him as he puts it in his mouth, the dog has learnt that the table leg shouldn't be in his mouth and his toy should. 

IMO, method a) is valuable as he has never gained the reward of chewing the table leg and finding out how good it feels; method b) runs the risk of him chewing when you are not there to correct him as he knows it feels good, but knows you will correct him if you are there 

Rachel I am confused by your comments.  

In method a) and b) the dogs are at exactly the same point. Both with their mouths about to be wrapped around the table leg, therefore both run the risk of him chewing the leg, but neither have yet.

In method a) the pup doesn't learn anything, he hasn't learned that a table leg is not for chewing. The pup was distracted at that point in time but will probably head back to the table leg to attempt to chew it later because he doesn't know that he shouldn't do it.  
In method b) the dog is made aware that it shouldn't chew the table leg and is shown what he should be chewing and when he does he is rewarded.

You have two dogs, one who knows he's not to chew the table leg and one who doesn't.  In the long term who runs the greater risk of chewing the table leg?

I have been in a very fortunate position to be able to give my pups the majority of my time. But no one is able to watch their every move when they are out of their crate/pen, we may turn our back for a moment to fill the kettle etc.  In that split second your back is turned they may start to do something they shouldn't, distracting them will yes get them to stop what they're doing, but they don't learn that what they were doing was wrong and that they shouldn't do it again.

With all of my pups, if they've been seen to or about to mouth/chew an item they shouldn't they have been corrected with "ah ah no" and immediately been given one of their toys to chew and praised when they do. This has resulted in them very quickly knowing what is for them to chew and what isn't. Both Sapphi and Max totally ceased to mouth/chew anything other than their toys within a few weeks.  Barney attempted to chew the drawer knobs on my coffee table about three times are they are just at his level. He also attempted to nibble the corner of the harth a few times.  He was corrected and he hasn't attempted to mouth or chew anything he shouldn't for over six weeks.  Thats not to say he won't in the future, I don't want to tempt fate.   B ;)ut I have begun to leave him in the lounge whilst I do nip to the loo etc for a few minutes without any problems.

I personally left mine out of their crates way before they were one like Molo.  Sapphi was six months and Max was 8 months.  I was confident that my training methods had worked and I could trust them and I didn't have any bother from them.

[Densil]

If you found yourself following a footpath which took you through a field of cows what would you do?   

I regularly do (the IoW meet route is through a field of cows) and I keep him leashed.....doesn't everyone???  It's private land, with private livestock, so not only do I do it to ensure Molo doesn't behave inappropriately - but out of respect for the land-owner 

That is very responsible.  What would happen if Molo wasn't on a lead?

Recall (as I thought Rachel said she'd have him leashed and wouldn't be oflead in this sort of environemnt in the 1st place, no doubt as per the countryside code)? Not sure what the point is here really

Penny, the first rule of quoting, is ensure the quote is accurate.

This is the Countryside Code

By law, you must control your dog so that it does not disturb or scare farm animals or wildlife. You must keep your dog on a short lead on most areas of open country and common land between 1 March and 31 July, and at all times near farm animals.

You do not have to put your dog on a lead on public paths as long as it is under close control. But as a general rule, keep your dog on a lead if you cannot rely on its obedience. By law, farmers are entitled to destroy a dog that injures or worries their animals.

If a farm animal chases you and your dog, it is safer to let your dog off the lead – don’t risk getting hurt by trying to protect it.

Take particular care that your dog doesn’t scare sheep and lambs or wander where it might disturb birds that nest on the ground and other wildlife – eggs and young will soon die without protection from their parents.

The second paragraph is the one I was aluding to and I think you have answered the question for us

[Cob-Web]

You have two dogs, one who knows he's not to chew the table leg and one who doesn't.  In the long term who runs the greater risk of chewing the table leg?

Neither, or both  - you use one method with your dogs, I used another with mine and we achieved the same result If distraction works for you, then great -  but if my prefered method works too, am I wrong to suggest it when someone asks for advice ?? 



Densil - if you allow your dogs to run free in livestock fields, as you are happy with the close control that you have, then good for you - I wouldn't let Molo do it any more than I would leave him off-leash on a busy road - which is something I have seen criticised in many COL threads and is no different, imo 

[Densil]

In recent years the "clever people" came up with whole new ideas on how things should be done.  Does anyone agree that they might have got it just a little bit wrong?  (or has the ASBO had to be introduced for some other inexplicable reason)

Widely off topic really so I can't see the point this is more for the anything goes forum really

Not off topic at all, it has been posted to demonstrate that not all modern thinking has positive results.

[Jane S]

In recent years the "clever people" came up with whole new ideas on how things should be done.  Does anyone agree that they might have got it just a little bit wrong?  (or has the ASBO had to be introduced for some other inexplicable reason)

Widely off topic really so I can't see the point this is more for the anything goes forum really

I Agree. If Densil wishes to discuss this wider topic, I'm happy to branch this thread and start a new one on the Anything Goes board but please keep this thread on topic.

Thanks

[Densil]

Densil - if you allow your dogs to run free in livestock fields, as you are happy with the close control that you have, then good for you - I wouldn't let Molo do it any more than I would leave him off-leash on a busy road - which is something I have seen criticised in many COL threads and is no different, imo 

The point I want to make here is that by putting him on leash you are clearly aware of the potential for “unwanted behaviour”.  In this instance you have chosen not to ignore that behaviour, but to do something to prevent it happening.
 
My dogs in the past have been gradually conditioned to behave in the presence of livestock.  It was absolutely vital that they were obedient and reacted without hesitation to my instruction (oops, requests).  How else could I trust the dogs to go out into the field and bring the livestock to me?

Yes I would trust my dogs to stay at my side while walking through land containing livestock and if I found myself on someone else’s land, which contained sheep, then I would comply with legislation and keep the dog on a leash.  (For what it would be worth as the lead would be hanging loose)

[PennyB]

Densil - if you allow your dogs to run free in livestock fields, as you are happy with the close control that you have, then good for you - I wouldn't let Molo do it any more than I would leave him off-leash on a busy road - which is something I have seen criticised in many COL threads and is no different, imo 

The point I want to make here is that by putting him on leash you are clearly aware of the potential for “unwanted behaviour”.  In this instance you have chosen not to ignore that behaviour, but to do something to prevent it happening.
 
My dogs in the past have been gradually conditioned to behave in the presence of livestock.  It was absolutely vital that they were obedient and reacted without hesitation to my instruction (oops, requests).  How else could I trust the dogs to go out into the field and bring the livestock to me?

Yes I would trust my dogs to stay at my side while walking through land containing livestock and if I found myself on someone else’s land, which contained sheep, then I would comply with legislation and keep the dog on a leash.  (For what it would be worth as the lead would be hanging loose)

Idle curiosity but can you keep them under the same control if say a rabbit or squirrel crossed your path (the reason why mine are leashed by the side of a road)