This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Mithuna on 27 January 2016 - 13:01
Here is a beautiful summary about the GSD from a user on that site , just wanted to share it here:
Mod deleted as per our TOS
14.post any material on PDB from another forum without the express permission of that forum's site administration or copyright owners.
by gsdstudent on 27 January 2016 - 13:01
by joanro on 27 January 2016 - 13:01
Where does that poster endorse a dog 'running throughout the house, upstairs included, barking itshead off', after a friendly visitor exited?
Have fun. You give a scenario of your dog's bad behavior, we give opinions, you don't like the opinions, so you hunt for the forum that will give you what you are looking for.....did you find a vet who will put up with your dog?
by Mithuna on 27 January 2016 - 15:01
Joan I posted that other poster's piece because I think that person has a nice understanding of the working GSD. I never made the claim that this post was a complete treatise on all possible dog behaviors/motivation. You mentioned that a dog barking at the stranger's scent is based on fear...even of a person's scent. I gave an example from my younger days that in the dead of night our dogs would chase the scent of a nocturnal game animal and chase it up a tree. The dogs will be barking all the while and this is how we were able to locate the dogs/ game animal/ and tree. My brother would lance the game which fell of the tree and the dogs would immediately grab the animal and I had to take it from them before they completely destroyed it. Barking at the scent , until the animal was captured the dogs showed absolutely NO fear of the animal. And now you ( and your so called " we " ), are demanding that I accept that the CAUSE of the OBSERVABLE EFFECT of my dog barking behind a remnant scent in the house is fear. My own response is NO . I cannot accept this idiom of yours, because I can identify other classes of OBSERVATIONS in which dogs pursue a scent while BARKING but show NO FEAR of the source of the scent , but in fact ends up killing that source ( the game ). Additionally , I mention that the test of a good theory is that it must be able to account for a wide class of observations; clearly your explanation does not meet this standard, and it is probably better suited to those who are satisfied with understanding things around them by simple ( and probably unquestioned ) verbal testimony of others.
Thank you for sharing your understanding.
by Mithuna on 27 January 2016 - 15:01
by joanro on 27 January 2016 - 15:01
by Hundmutter on 27 January 2016 - 15:01
"The(re?) are users across there with dogs with identical behaviours and they manage the dogs without problems." _ Mithuna.
So why can't you find one of those users "across there" (wherever that is) to tell you which veterinarian they use ?
by Mithuna on 27 January 2016 - 15:01
" No body cares....."
So now you have become the spokes person for everyone on PBD. Was it by nomination or vote?
by joanro on 27 January 2016 - 15:01
HM, evidently finding a vet to deal with his dog is not why he came here, lol. From what I see, it was to learn to read coyote temperament from a pic, to talk about hunting dogs, and to equate 'head not screwed on right' with 'fearful'. And to attempt to convince the members here that hound dogs baying at game up a tree is equal to a dog running around the house barking after a friendly human visitor exited the home. Lol.
by Mithuna on 27 January 2016 - 15:01
Humans and game animals ..of course. But in both cases VISIBILITY was constant ( at home the person had just left , and in the forest it pitch black ( only by reflection of light from their eyes can you see these nocturnal animals ), so SCENT was REASONABLY ISOLATED in both situations.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top