Just wondering as there seems to be poeple who love it and people who completly disagree. Im interested to find out why people disagree with these methods. I can understand some of them like not letting your dog pass out a doorway before you as this is more of a safety issue to me as I dont want my dog barging and knocking me over. But this gesture eating thing did not workfor me, I did try it and my dog became reluctant to touch his food???

Ive heard that a lot of behaviourists are turning away from the idea of treating domestic dogs like wolves.

Would be interested in your views

Thanks

Dale

The main issue is that dogs aren't wolves - and we aren't dogs or wolves!  Amichien bonding - and pack theory in general - is based on the idea that dogs can - and will - be dominant over us if we allow them, but it's basically a myth - they recognise that we aren't the same species as them, and so dominance on their part doesn't come into it.  Over each other, certainly - but even then, domestic dog society works very differently from wild wolf society.  And, pack theory is based on studies of captive wolves, which behave differently again to both dogs and wild wolves.

I'll use your gesture eating example as an, well, example - in wild wolves, pups are allowed to eat before the adults, and that includes the breeding pair.  After all, the pups are the future of the pack - there is no sense in putting their survival at risk for social reasons.  Feral dogs - which behave as domestic ones do in terms of social structure and breeding - also put the pups first.  So eating before your pup or adult dog really doesn't serve a purpose - except, perhaps, to confuse them if it's out of character for you - this might be what's happened with your dog.  Not only that, but young pups aren't even subject to social ranking, in wild wolves at least, until they are young adults - around a year old, if I recall correctly.

The one good thing that I feel amichien bonding can provide is structure to a pup's life - especially for novice owners, it can give a clear understanding to the pup of what's required and what's undesirable behaviour, so easing potential issues further down the line.  But in terms of being 'dominant' over the pup - tosh :D  And I've not even touched on it's 'creator', Jan Fennell - how she devised her system is deeply flawed IMO, but I'll leave that one for others to discuss :)

Just quickly - some other 'dominance' regulars, such as the door thing, pulling on lead etc, just make no sense to me.  Neither wild wolves nor feral dogs tend to encounter doors, much less use them as a means to strengthen rank; indeed, top dogs/wolves don't really need to assert themselves physically, they are confident enough in their position that it is accepted by the rest of the pack.  And pulling on lead - dogs aren't dominant on the way to the park just to suddenly turn submissive on the way back after a run... :D

I don't know about the amichien theories or wolf theories but when my dog was going through a difficult adolescence (as they all seem to) someone who also owns this breed advised us to ensure we walked through doorways first, ate first and train her to 'move' on command rather than step over her.  The change in her behaviour within days was remarkable.  She was extremely stubborn to do as she was told before but after ensuring these steps she became much more mindful. 

Of course, it could be argued quite rightly, that she just needed to have some boundaries generally in terms of training and that this advice just stirred us to be more consistent.  As it turns out sticking to these simple commands can turn out to be quite practical.  She gets fed around the time that we do but these days sometimes before as we eat at odd times but also often after us because we can then add our scraps to her dinner.  I like her to wait before we go through doorways because she tears about and has knocked me off balance quite a few times.  As for moving, well I don't stick to that 100% anymore either and recently as I was stepping over her she stood up and I nearly went flying.

I can't see the logical argument in dogs behaving like wolves or being dominant but I can see practicalities in some of the theories and to be honest pick and choose what suits. 

I very much agree with setting boundaries for dogs. What I don't like is the assumption that all dogs are dominant and that every single dog is sat on the sofa waiting for its chance to overthrow the government and rule the world :D

My lot already think they rule the world from our sofa! :-D Seriously though, I agree that dogs do need to have some boundaries set - look at the It's Me or the Dog series, where as far as we get to see, most of the dogs' problems are easily solved just by setting some rules down and doing some basic training. :-)

most of our dogs would do a far better job running the country than the current government!! :-D

Rachael

I think when amichien bonding WORKS...... two possible things are happening.

1/ the introduction of boundaries and consistancy
2/ the dog is depressed due to owners who take the 'ignore your dog' thing too far and dont balance it with 'provide him plenty of attention and interaction'...

I absolutely do not believe that it works because of the specifics, gesture eating, doors etc - wolves dont have doors, they DO occasionally have to go round blind corners, through narrow gaps..... guess who theyd send first?

Well it wont be the important alpha male or female will it.... there might be something big and teethy on the otherside, so send one of the less important pack members!

My problem with it is when it 'appears' to work because a dog is suddenly completely shocked by the total change in rules, some of which are quite harsh, especially the withdrawal of interaction.
It assumes all dogs wish to become dominant, as far as im concerned they dont have the ability to think in that way anyway, and it assumes all dogs will react to these things in exactly the same way... which they wont.

Dominance ideas sprang from a few flawed studies done on captive wolves (ie ones that weren't blood related and had no history of being together in the normal way) so there were apparently many assumptions made which have just lasted and lasted from those minor studies - basically, there's a part of us humans that just love the idea that our dogs may be a bit like wolves, I feel it appeals to the romantic streak in us all :P

Dominance and pack theory is just that - a theory, like any other.

John Fisher, who advocated a fairly mild version in the 80's, did a big U turn on this and mentioned it in his very last book written before he died, "Diary of a Dotty Dog Doctor".

I think it speaks volumes that one of its greatest supporters had the courage to change his mind publicly about something he'd once advised himself :)

Agree dogs need boundaries - but that's just good practice at the end of the day!

Lindsay
x

I actually have a lot to thank JF for. 

Because of a particular problem with a rescue dog I went out intending to buy Gwen Baileys' 'The Rescue Dog' but it wasn't in. JF's book was endorsed by Monty Roberts (Monty, why??) so being in dire straits and impatient by nature I bought it but after several weeks became disenchanted with her methods. So I googled JF and up came a link to CD - and I've never looked back.

That's what I call serendipity!

BTW I am now formulating my own philosophy of dog training based on everything I've read and observed. I'm calling it CCCR which stands for
Calmness (me and the dog)
Clarity (me)
Consistency (me)
Respect (me and the dog)

What do you reckon - time to buy the dominatrix outfit and sports car or what??! 

Personally I did buy it on impulse in blackstones - I didn't get any further than 'ignore your dog' on your return.

For me the whole joy of owning a dog is looking at that that furry excited face when I get home, and I just won't ignore her when I get home.

Even nicer is when her head is in my lap curled up in the chair next to me when I'm watching the TV...so "off the furtniture" is absolutely off the list as well.

However when I tell her to get off the sofa she does, she'll sit and stay when I tell her to before I go upstairs to avoid any stairs congestion - this isn't because she believes I'm the 'dominant' one - they're just practical rules I've always implemented that make living with a dog easier.

Two things bug me about JF & "her"methods, like the others have said they are based on incorrect studies of wolves, which used captive wolves instead of natural wolf packs

The other is that they are one size fits all, i.e. one method works with all dogs-it doesn't. there are as many methods that can work as there are dog trainers

>For me the whole joy of owning a dog is looking at that that furry excited face when I get home, and I just won't ignore her when I get home.

can't agree more.  There's a big patch of scraped wallpaper alongside the door where she scrapes alongside the door handle in her excitement as she sees us approach.  I love the excited greetings.

What would be a good replacement for the wallpaper? :D

Absolutely, I love coming home and putting my key in the lock - because I can see Opi through the glass leaping higher than my head in excitement! :D

>What would be a good replacement for the wallpaper? :-D

LOL I've got tiles :D :D :D :D

I agree too, there is nothing better than a waggy tail, a happy face and a bouncy fluff ball just waiting to jump on you when you get home!

I also agree that every dog is an individual and what works for one won't necessarily work for another.  Having only had 2 dogs of the same breed and sex, their personalities are so different!
(bit like my daughters really) :D :D

Warning:   too many references to a certain trainer can result in legal writs being slapped abaout:rolleyes::rolleyes:

LOLOL expressing one's opinion or likes & dislikes cannot be subjected to any legal action in the UK as long as i is clearly just that

reading the paper today it seems the other site suffered from name calling.  Everyone is very polite here.  Mind you they quoted what was said on the site in the paper so will the paper be sued as well now? Shame if that site gets  closed down - my daughter finds it so useful. We have so many books out now on dog training as well as TV programmes.  It is clear that there are a number of approaches to training - it is good to make people aware of good training and I think it soon becomes obvious that no one way works for every dog (or child).  I soon found out that JF's book wasn't going to be adequate for my dog.  I found Carol Price's book - understanding the BC gave me much more insight.  Thanks to advice on CD.

Tile as I have had to put by the door in the kitchen that got jumped on and gouged.

I think it's the same old thing that there are some good points as well as others and you just take out of it what is useful or what works for you and your dog.Some of it I have found useful as it helped me to understand how a dog thinks/reacts.

Have you lot never seen 'the wolf man'???
JF's bonding method is humain, tried and tested and works!!
You are all putting your dogs through unnecessary stress by letting it be your leader. My dog was perfect when trained with JF's methods. She was happy and health and relaxed.
No stress on her being the boss. I have always used JF's method and never had a problem. You are doing the dog a favour using her methods.

Suppose you all also believe the KC is the dogs danglies too???!!

> Suppose you all also believe the KC is the dogs danglies too???!!

I do :)  Although I can't see the connection

http://www.clickersolutions.com/articles/2001/dominance.htm
http://www.4pawsu.com/dominancemyth.pdf
http://www.mmilani.com/hollistic-animal-behavior2.html
http://drsophiayin.com/philosophy/dominance/?/dominance.php

Just a few articles to get on with.

How odd.  Someone joining to add to a 5 year old thread! 

Seems to be a few about this evening.

Boy am I glad to read this thread, I train and wanted to see what Jan Fennel was all about. By about page 20 I had had enough and couldn't read any more, I just wanted to scream. Pretty much any time I hear pack theory/dominance mentioned I want to roll my eyes.

Nikita, also to back up what you said about wild animals not encountering doors, leads etc......Last week I had a one to one with a dog that had been rescued from the Cayman Islands. The dog was a stray, but I wouldn't be surprised on seeing him if he has been fed by people in the past, whether this was a regular occurrence or just bits from here and there I don't know. Anyway long story short, loves people, okay with other dogs, but tried to bite people when they tried to put a lead on him - this I believe is because fight or flight and restraining him takes away one of his life saving options......blah blah......long story even shorter, I got a lead on him using positive reinforcement and I can almost definitely say that had any body gone in and done the pulling on the lead, dominance, etc to get him to walk the outcome would have been very different! Sorry rant over!

Haha, I hadn't even noticed that! Strange!

Blimey ! this is an old thread, says it was started in 07 !.

JF...money for old rope, have to hand it to her though, she's a good business woman .

> I got a lead on him using positive reinforcement and I can almost definitely say that had any body gone in and done the pulling on the lead, dominance, etc to get him to walk the outcome would have been very different!

Anyone who hasn't seen what can be achieved with a suspicious or fearful dog, patience, a clicker and a few bits of food is missing out on one of the most rewarding and bonding things that can be achieved within the human-dog relationship.

Whether it's using shaping to get a dog like mine, who was so wary of his new raised bed that he initially left the room when I set it up, to laying on it comfortably after 15 mins of clicker work... or working with a stressed and traumatised dog to accept a lead... it's the same mechanism.

I do train mine to wait for me to go through a door first, but that's purely for practical reasons so they don't drag me around and so they don't rush out if the door is open for some other reason, not because I need to leave first to go hunting. :-)

Lol I do get thats my dogs have a natural pack but if I started woofing at them and being all bossy they'd think I'd gone mad and would probably wonder at the cheek, dogs are dogs people are people I have no intention of being a dog :-p

Yep, I've seen the 'wolf man' - he's an idiot.  He lived with a captive pack, who won't behave as a wild pack; and he's a human, so dominance and submission wouldn't apply between him and them anyway.

> You are all putting your dogs through unnecessary stress by letting it be your leader.

Assumption much?  I don't buy into any of the dominance BS at all; my dogs go on the furniture, in bed with me, so on and so forth, and yet I am in charge, I make the rules and they live by them.  I don't let them be the leader - they can't in any case, because dominance is about control of resources - and I control the food, the shelter, heating, back door etc.  By the very nature of our environment and living situation, I am, by the definition of it anyway, "dominant".  My dogs are happy - one of them in particular, is considerably happier since coming here, out of an environment where dominating and enforcing leadership was the way.  She finds that approach so stressful that it makes her physically ill.

As for Jan Fennel - she based all her observations on her own pack, which a) would behave as neither a feral dog pack or captive or wild wolf pack and b) of her own admission in her first book, had behavioural issues, therefore wouldn't behave as a 'normal' pack anyway.  So right from the off, her theory and methods are flawed because the founding observations are irrelevant.

And Amichien bonding?  Don't make me laugh.  It works because it gives the pup a clear set of rules to follow - not because of 'dominance'.  Pups have no concept of dominance, they feed first, not last; all the usual dominance guff does not apply even within a proper pack, never mind between people and pups.

Apologies if I've written that already, everyone - I can't be bothered to look back to find out :-P

I wanted to put my part across on this. Before I knew any better(many years ago) I contacted the JF school or whatever it is and was directed to one of her trainers in the area. I paid a fortune for this trainer to come down and tell me what to do, never showed me. She had a bit of paperwork to give me and that is it. She wasn't interested in the dogs and told me that I could call her anytime if I had any questions.

I did put what she said in place but it made no difference to the behaviour in the dog I was experiencing and as such called her on the phone. She asked me if I was doing what she said and I told her I was, well she said I clearly wasn't doing it right was I as it would work!! It was then that I knew they were a waste of time, as there was no leeway and we all know that one type of training doesn't fit all dogs for all situations.. What I was told wasn't harmful to the dog, it to me now when I look back basic obedience and obviously the 'pack leader' syndrome..
I finally found a good behaviourist and we worked with the issue and tried and tested different things until we eradicated the problem.

''As for Jan Fennel - she based all her observations on her own pack, which a) would behave as neither a feral dog pack or captive or wild wolf pack and b) of her own admission in her first book, had behavioural issues, therefore wouldn't behave as a 'normal' pack anyway.  So right from the off, her theory and methods are flawed because the founding observations are irrelevant.''

The breed she' adopted ', her children , her husband-all in her first book  show the above statement to be soooo true .I am intrigued as to why Monty invited her on stage , he knew she was  following his methods...case of better the devil you know ...?

suejaw - I've heard that from a lot of people who've had one of her 'trainers' in.  In fact Soli's old owner did a 2-day course of JF's - that was her sole attempt at learning anything about dogs or dog behaviour in 5 years - and all she seemed to have learned was to shut the dog out for barking for attention (only Soli wasn't doing it for attention when she got shut out when I met her - she was doing it out of anxiety at the strange person and dogs present, sos he got shut out for being upset :-().

Reading J F's first book I seem to remember that she had her first dogs put down for sheep rustling or something else behaviour wise. Unfortunately, Dog World have her as one of their speakers at their forthcoming Rescue seminar. No way would I pay to go to listen to someone who knows as litttle as she does. How can anyone respect someone who put her own dogs to sleep for behaviour problems which were due to her own inadequacies?

I agree word for word with everything Nikitta has said as her sentiments echo mine! Far too much emphasis is placed on the fact that all dogs are just waiting to outwit us and become the dominant pack leader.

Dogs need routine, good diet ,exercise (both mental and physical) structure and above all kind positive training which rewards the good behaviour

I don't believe any dog deliberately sets out to cause us grief but see it from their point of view,a lot of them live with people who keep changing the rules,speak an alien language and expect them to just know how to instantly be perfect .

Old thread asides, the more these things are discussed the more I believe that the dominance theory malarkey perpetuates itself.. because...

If you DO follow those schools of though, and you do train a dog in such a way as you put a strong emphasis on bullying/confrontation/domineering/physical strength/aggression... it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy...

WHEN you do those things, THEN it does become important to a dog where the weaknesses are, who is stronger, who is more aggressive, etc etc.

Granted, not every dog will respond that way, in fact most dogs won't - BUT - the dogs that were bred for high working drive, those dogs bred to use aggression easily, ie, the dogs bred and owned and sought after by the people who came up with the dominance/punishment based style of training, those dogs often will... and so those people wrote about those methods and saw them as necessary.

Asides from the fact that, even with dogs of that type (and very very few of those exist in comparison to average, normal, pet dogs) positive reinforcement works not just better but SAFER (excuse my grammar), most people sucked into training this way do not have the necessary skills to see this, nor to realise that their dogs are responding out of fear in many cases or because it offers a greater degree of consistency which dogs like, in many other cases - so again it APPEARS to work... and so it continues.

Um - that is all, I haven't any other point but wanted to write that down. :)

Seriously then, if JF is so off the mark, can I get some alternate ideas on how other posters have gotten your dogs to obey and behave? What training did u utilise? What do you actually recommend? That would be far more productive than just going over the problems with other programs.

Positive reinforcement - set your dog up to succeed - reward the behaviours you want. Manage the dog properly so that the behaviours you do not want are prevented, can be pre-empted and the dog distracted so that the habit of performing behaviours you do not want never forms.

I would recommend you look at www.dogstardaily.com, www.clickertraining.com,  youtube also has some really great videos, I particularly like those by Zak George, and by Kikopup.

There are plenty of excellent books on positive training and other trainers and websites and I am sure someone else will link a further selection (but right now I have a blinding headache, sorry!)