3 month old puppy showing agression to my dd - Page 2

[North_Of_60]

Originally Posted by greenmagick

there really is no true alpha as pack hierarchy is not stagnant

I agree, and disagree. There are "alpha" rolls within a pack because dogs are social and do live within a structured society. No, they're not stagnat, and resources are only considered prime or belonging to an alpha member when the alpha member is present to guard it.

What has been debunked is using this theory as it correlates to training, not that there isn't a social structure. Because there is. What we're now learning is that emulating "dominant" dogs to correct lower ranking pack members by doing such things as alpha rolling, leash corrections, poking, grabbing the scruff, etc is WAY off base from how dogs/wild dogs actually interact with each other. There's also the issue of observing "packs" that were created by humans, instead of observing groups that naturally formed. Of course if you throw a bunch of strange dogs together there might be strained relationships. We've formed a lot of biases from these observations, and have since learned that naturally formed groups interact much differently.

Dominant dogs don't have to be forceful, physical, aggressive, or mean. Which means WE don't have to be forceful, aggressive, or mean. And because dogs are social, it's only to be expected they have individual relationships and personalities. Some are natural leaders, some are naturally submissive. We've learned that dogs that are the primary breeding pair, formerly classified as the "alpha pair", aren't in that position because they're fought and dominated their way to the top, as previously thought.

A lot of people are trying to move away from "dominant" and "alpha" labels because of the associations people have made with them and their relationship to commonly held dog training beliefs. However, there certainly are dominant dogs, and there are submissive dogs. There are alpha dogs that breed more, and there are insecure dogs that act aggressively out of fear. Individual dog personalities can run the gamut within in a social pack. The mistake me made was in assuming that dominance was synonymous with leadership. It's not. With that in mind, A LOT of what people thought to be true about dog training is completely wrong. And I 100%, whole heartidly agree with that.

But I think some people are not fully understanding what has actually been debunked. No one is stating that dogs don't live within social structures, and that there aren't dogs who have more privileges than others.. call it what you may.

It's HOW that is accomplished within their group, and how that correlates to dog-human relationships that has been turned on its ear.

I DO want to be the leader of my "pack" (family, household, whatever). However, I needn't look at them through eyes of distrust, they're sole priority in life is not to take over the universe. Behaviors that were once thought to be a dog trying to assume dominance are now just considered bad behavior from a dog in need of some structure and teaching.

I especially loved this quote from one of the links you posted, and pretty much sums of my thoughts:

Since we seem to be stuck with the word alpha, how about redefining the term so it's no longer about dominance and aggression and more in line with the leadership role that good parents exhibit. It's more about intelligent discipline, following the Golden Rule, and applying it everywhere, with everybody--and that includes our four-legged family member.

I also really agreed with what you said here:

Even when a dog or wolf is perceived as "leader" they often have no problem giving up a bone etc. That is not what being a leader is about. In a dog pack who has it has it...I mean if they are chewing on a bone it is considered extremely rude behavior for another to take it away.

Precisely. Rude bad behavior, is rude bad behavior.

[greenmagick]

What I meant by no true alpha is the idea that one wolf is always the leader in a dominant way, always fighting for status...if that makes sense. My post was kind of all over the place.

Basically, any animal you put in groups is going to in a sense form a hierarchy, even humans. Take a group of kids that are friends.....I know the "pack" I hung out with in gradeschool....others looking in had very clear ideas on how the leaders and followers were...but they were very much mistaken. Social status is not static...there is a little bit of dominant and submissive behavior in all of us, and dogs as well.

I am not arguing that there is no form of hierarchy. I think the points are for me....1. We are not dogs so do not fit into the hierarchy with them. 2. Trying to emulate behaviors we perceive as "dog" behaviors are often severely lacking. 3. Dominance has little (usually nothing) to do with the majority of behavior problems...yet many use it for the catch all....and this is why I will never support cesar milan's training methods...they are all based on the dog needing to be dominated.

I can use an example of my dog Marley and a dog I used to have Ed. Ed by all accounts was very dominant...was a resource guarder, stole bones, etc. Marley by all accounts was very submissive, rolls himself if you look at him too hard, was alway belly crawling up to Ed and licking his mouth, etc. However, if you watched closely, something interesting occured. Say Ed was laying on a favorite blanket, or had a favorite ball....Marley would belly crawl up and "submissively" lick Eds mouth,....I mean textbook submissive posture...Ed would growl a bit, Marley would go lower....eventually Ed would get annoyed and leave. So, by Marley being submissive, he actually won.

I just think social hierarchy is so complex and it really doesnt affect how we deal with animals.

[Tummy]

I have not read all of the replies, however wanted to quickly throw my $.02 in before rushing off to pick up DD from school


We had a similar situation with our puppy, now 5+ months old. This started when he was only, well, I believe it was around when he was 7-ish weeks. I am still not 100% that he was being aggressive in a mean/harmful way or just aggressive passive. The toddler (now 22 mo old) would love on him by laying on top of him while he was calm/resting.

We make sure the kids are not around when the dogs eat. I believe that is just a recipe for disaster period!!! The dogs are not allowed in the house while we eat, and we do not bother them while they eat.


One thing that worked really well for us (DH & I), was showing him dominance. Any time that he would growl towards any of the kids I would immediately get to him and pin him down on his side by his neck/head.

NOT in a hurtful way, but forceful way. If he tried to get up, I would continue to hold him down and talk sweetly to him until he calmed down and no longer fought to get up.

In the wild, animals/wolfs/dogs do this to show their dominance.

Our female 3yr old dog (wolf-dog) has done this with Dozer (puppy) since about 10 weeks old. She still does this with him if he gets too close to her and she does not like it. He will immediately submit to her just by a sound she makes to him. He in fact, this is funny, will NOT pass 'over her'. He will wine and wine if she is laying in his path, will not try to get around her at all.

I would tell him NO, not okay, that he has to be gentile with the babies, etc. I would have the kids come over after he calmed down and love on him while I loved on him also. I made sure the kids knew they were NOT allowed to do this with him (making him submit), however, I also told them to not let him win at tug-a-war as that is a game of dominance.

After a couple/few weeks of doing this, anytime he showed any aggression and I would walk towards him, he would immediately lay down on his side where he was.

Ok, now I am late to get DD, I will check back in after a bit and read other posts, see if there are any questions to what *we* have done with our puppy.

[North_Of_60]

Originally Posted by Tummy

One thing that worked really well for us (DH & I), was showing him dominance. Any time that he would growl towards any of the kids I would immediately get to him and pin him down on his side by his neck/head.

NOT in a hurtful way, but forceful way. If he tried to get up, I would continue to hold him down and talk sweetly to him until he calmed down and no longer fought to get up.

In the wild, animals/wolfs/dogs do this to show their dominance.

Uh, you really need to read this thread. Please do not advise people to abuse their dogs by pinning them down. You could potentially set up someone up to be injured by their dog. Using physical force to "train" a dog should only be done by a trained professional, but then, I'd question any professional who advised such treatment of a puppy who simply just needs to learn.

There are several links and discussions up thread that talk about why this type of training is so ineffective and out dated.

[greenmagick]

Originally Posted by Tummy

One thing that worked really well for us (DH & I), was showing him dominance. Any time that he would growl towards any of the kids I would immediately get to him and pin him down on his side by his neck/head.

NOT in a hurtful way, but forceful way. If he tried to get up, I would continue to hold him down and talk sweetly to him until he calmed down and no longer fought to get up.

In the wild, animals/wolfs/dogs do this to show their dominance.

.

You are lucky this didnt backfire and create fearful aggressive dog. The monks of new skete were the ones who brought the ideas of alpha rolls and such to dominate your dog and they have since recanted because it is wrong.

Seriously, read all the above posts....science has proven not only is this type of training not needed, it is actually harmful and damages the bond and trust that is imperative to owning a dog.

[ouesi]

You know, on a forum that so clearly advocates against physical punishment of children, it really surprises me to keep comming across the outdated advice to use force to train dogs. *shrug*

One thing that worked really well for us (DH & I), was showing him dominance. Any time that he would growl towards any of the kids I would immediately get to him and pin him down on his side by his neck/head.

I'm sorry, I feel like I keep saying the same thing over and over again, but showing your dog "dominance" may appear to work short term, but is an outdated and IMO very dangerous way to train your dog. ESPECIALLY if you have small kids. Think about it - what you're doing to your dog a kid physically cannot do (nor should). Why not teach the dog to accept the kids by creating positive associations around the kids?

Whether you subscribe to alphas or non-linear packs, doesn't matter. Humans are not dogs. We don't speak the same language, we don't perceive the same things, we don't use our senses the same way.
I've used this example before. Say my boss calls me in to his office, butters me up with compliments about what a good job I'm doing, pulls out a chair and offers me a seat. I sit. Now, say you're a "researcher" who just witnessed the whole exchange and you are drawing conclusions about how humans interact with eachother. Except for one thing. You are not a human, you are an alien who can't hear spoken words. Now you deduce that me sitting was obviously submission because you already know the other human is my boss. You then deduce that the the way to get a human to sit (submit) is to hold out a chair. Well, you may get some humans to sit, (and think they're submitting) but you missed the whole sweet talking that happened before it, along with the phrase "here, have a seat".

HUMANS ARE NOT DOGS. To use how dogs interact with eachother as a means of teaching anything really doesn't make much sense. I don't sniff my dogs' butts, I don't roll in dead disgustingness, I flush my pee instead of leaving it out to announce my precence. Why, pray tell, would I try to imitate doggy discipline? There is sooooo much that happens before an alpha roll, and we're only aware of the half of it. We're talking animals that can sense seizures up to 10 minutes before they happen! How do you know there isn't some pheremone exchange that takes place before the correction? AND if you watch closely - canids don't FORCE other canids in to a roll, the dog acting out of line OFFERS the position. When we use physical force to correct our dogs, we end up looking unstable, unpredictable and just plain scary to them. At best you'll end up with a shut-down dog, at worst, you end up with a dog who decides to lash out first before you lash out at him.

Having children is what convinced me more than anything to change my training style. Positive associations, applying learning theory and rewarding appropriate behaviors is something an INFANT can do. We have two great danes who both weight well over 100 pounds (and two other large dogs). My two 7 year olds can get any dog in the house to comply with a command. From "sit" and "wait" for your dinner, to asking them to get off the sofa, to having them walk on a plain buckle collar without pulling.

PLEASE guys, stop trying to "dominate" your dogs. Teach them what behaviors you want and then reward those behaviors. Its that simple!
Don't want Rover to guard his bone? Teach him "trade". Don't want Rover to jump up? Teach him "sit" and "stay". Don't want Rover to beg at family dinner time? Teach him a "place" command. Reward for compliance with treats, attention, play time, whatever. You end up with a trusting and trustworthy companion.

[North_Of_60]

Originally Posted by ouesi

You know, on a forum that so clearly advocates against physical punishment of children, it really surprises me to keep comming across the outdated advice to use force to train dogs. *shrug*



I'm sorry, I feel like I keep saying the same thing over and over again, but showing your dog "dominance" may appear to work short term, but is an outdated and IMO very dangerous way to train your dog. ESPECIALLY if you have small kids. Think about it - what you're doing to your dog a kid physically cannot do (nor should). Why not teach the dog to accept the kids by creating positive associations around the kids?

Whether you subscribe to alphas or non-linear packs, doesn't matter. Humans are not dogs. We don't speak the same language, we don't perceive the same things, we don't use our senses the same way.
I've used this example before. Say my boss calls me in to his office, butters me up with compliments about what a good job I'm doing, pulls out a chair and offers me a seat. I sit. Now, say you're a "researcher" who just witnessed the whole exchange and you are drawing conclusions about how humans interact with eachother. Except for one thing. You are not a human, you are an alien who can't hear spoken words. Now you deduce that me sitting was obviously submission because you already know the other human is my boss. You then deduce that the the way to get a human to sit (submit) is to hold out a chair. Well, you may get some humans to sit, (and think they're submitting) but you missed the whole sweet talking that happened before it, along with the phrase "here, have a seat".

HUMANS ARE NOT DOGS. To use how dogs interact with eachother as a means of teaching anything really doesn't make much sense. I don't sniff my dogs' butts, I don't roll in dead disgustingness, I flush my pee instead of leaving it out to announce my precence. Why, pray tell, would I try to imitate doggy discipline? There is sooooo much that happens before an alpha roll, and we're only aware of the half of it. We're talking animals that can sense seizures up to 10 minutes before they happen! How do you know there isn't some pheremone exchange that takes place before the correction? AND if you watch closely - canids don't FORCE other canids in to a roll, the dog acting out of line OFFERS the position. When we use physical force to correct our dogs, we end up looking unstable, unpredictable and just plain scary to them. At best you'll end up with a shut-down dog, at worst, you end up with a dog who decides to lash out first before you lash out at him.

Having children is what convinced me more than anything to change my training style. Positive associations, applying learning theory and rewarding appropriate behaviors is something an INFANT can do. We have two great danes who both weight well over 100 pounds (and two other large dogs). My two 7 year olds can get any dog in the house to comply with a command. From "sit" and "wait" for your dinner, to asking them to get off the sofa, to having them walk on a plain buckle collar without pulling.

PLEASE guys, stop trying to "dominate" your dogs. Teach them what behaviors you want and then reward those behaviors. Its that simple!
Don't want Rover to guard his bone? Teach him "trade". Don't want Rover to jump up? Teach him "sit" and "stay". Don't want Rover to beg at family dinner time? Teach him a "place" command. Reward for compliance with treats, attention, play time, whatever. You end up with a trusting and trustworthy companion.

Yes, yes, yes!!

I often compare training dogs to how zoo keepers teach their animals to comply with the myriad of things that must be done to care for such large and unpredictable animals. They don't "dominate" an elephant, but they surely can teach it to hold its foot up so it can be trimmed by a vet.

They don't "dominate" a tiger, but they surely can teach it to walk through a gate so it can be fed.

They don't "dominate" orangutans, but they surely can teach them to lay on their back so they can have receive an ultrasound.

We need to switch the paradigm from correcting dogs for what they do wrong, to start teaching and rewarding them for what they can do RIGHT.

I think there are times when aversion training might be useful, but it seriously makes me when people talk about using such physical force and FEAR to work with PUPPIES. They are so willing to learn and 99% of the time simply don't know any better, that I can't possibly understand why anyone would think SCARING a puppy is better than actually teaching it something!

[Tummy]

First off, I stated

IMO

Second of all, I do not appreciate having digs at me for what WORKED FOR OUR FAMILY!

I replied to this thread with what worked for us to get our puppy to NOT be aggressive in a possible negative manner.

It does not matter what anyone else said in previous posts, not everyone is going to agree. That is the wonderful thing about this place, we all have different ideas, different choices/decisions/etc and it is great to be able to have a HEALTHY debate about such. However, I do not believe that many of the replies to 'my post' have been respected.

I was stating MY OPINION about what worked as far as the safety of my children with our puppy who *could* have been showing aggression towards the children.

Stopping my puppy/dog from showing aggressive behavior toward anyone in my family by showing him *MY* dominance is NOT abusing him!

I in no way shape or form "advised anyone to abuse their dog!"
Where did you get that from?


One more thing, I specifically stated that my children do not do this!

Also, by showing my dominance to my dog, it is not physical punishment. He is not beat, he is not threatened, he is not talked down to.
Perhaps the words "pin him down" were the wrong words to use, I do not hold him down so he his 100% unable to move, do not put my body weight on him restricting. I simply get him to submit by putting my hand on his head/neck/shoulder area so he would stop the growling noise that he was making.

If anyone feels that is ABUSE, that is your right, you may feel that way. However, no one on this thread has the right to chastise me or my words.

Not everyone agrees with the same parenting skills/ideas/philosophy, same goes for animal parenting.

[greenmagick]

Why does pinning work...do you know?

It is NOT about dominance and submission...it is NOT natural....and it very often does cause more problems. You are suppressing behaviors not actually modifying them.

I used to train that way....I used to think it was all about dominance and being alpha...I learned I was wrong.

Dominance training does often work....its the whys that are unacceptable to me...and the fact that there are much better ways.

I know you are not letting your children do this...the point is you are teaching your dog to listen to force..meaning not to listen if force isnt threatened.

[North_Of_60]

Originally Posted by Tummy

Stopping my puppy/dog from showing aggressive behavior toward anyone in my family by showing him *MY* dominance is NOT abusing him!

But you're not showing him you are dominant. You are showing him that you're bigger, meaner, stronger, more forceful, and more aggressive. You didn't teach him anything but to be fearful of bigger, meaner, stronger, more forceful, more aggressive people. Those methods only work as long as someone is willing to continue exerting themselves over their dog. Ever wonder why it was coined a "life style, not a training method" (and hey, I've been guilty of saying this exact thing, probably on this very forum!)? Because you have to do it forever in order for it to work. Why? Because dogs are opportunists and they will do what works, when it works. If you or other "dominating" figures are not present, they'll do what works for them. If they haven't LEARNED through some sort of conditioning exercise what is expected and appropriate behavior, you'll have to keep "dominating" your dog until the day it dies.

Last year I almost put one of my dogs down for a whole slough of issues. While I've never alpha rolled him or pinned him or done anything else physically aggressive with him, I did hold a lot of common dominance theories and applied them to our training. I used a lot of aversion techniques. I ended up calling in a board certified veterinary behaviorist at the last minute and she changed my world. Literally. My dog did a 180, and so did all the others in our household. I was doing it ALL wrong. He's 6 years old and has learned more in the last year than he has his whole life, and I don't consider myself a lay person when it comes to dogs.

I didn't give him enough credit when it came to teaching him appropriate behaviors. I was too focused on correcting the wrong ones. I'm glad I finally woke up, I could have lost him to "irreparable damage" when it was really my mistake all along.

Having said that, I do still believe in a lot of pack theories, and so does my BCVB. It's just how they are carried out in the real world and how it correlates to dog training that were very, very wrong. I'm the leader, but I've earned the position through hard work and motivation. Not fear.

[Ola_]

Originally Posted by sarah_bella1050

I know that everything will be fine as long as I am there supervising them. The problem is that I want a dog my kids CAN play with.

Honestly I'm not sure that this is a realistic expectation given how you described your DDs behaviour around the dog. I would not leave them alone if she is wanting to hug or kiss the dog as that can cause even the most even-tempered dog to get annoyed.

Originally Posted by Tummy

This started when he was only, well, I believe it was around when he was 7-ish weeks. I am still not 100% that he was being aggressive in a mean/harmful way or just aggressive passive. The toddler (now 22 mo old) would love on him by laying on top of him while he was calm/resting.

Allowing a child to lie on top of a weeks-old puppy (esp. one that sounds like it was removed from it's littermates too young and thus missing some important social skills) is a very bad idea. The puppy wasn't being aggressive, it was defending itself and quite possibly being hurt by your child.

Originally Posted by Tummy

One thing that worked really well for us (DH & I), was showing him dominance. Any time that he would growl towards any of the kids I would immediately get to him and pin him down on his side by his neck/head.

Originally Posted by Tummy

After a couple/few weeks of doing this, anytime he showed any aggression and I would walk towards him, he would immediately lay down on his side where he was.

I would gently suggest that you read some of the earlier posts to learn some better and safer dog training techniques. Alpha-rolling (the term for what you are doing) is a very good way to get bit and make your dog afraid of you. And by your description, he is afraid already.