# Koehler Hanging



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

On another forum I'm on there's a discussion of the KMODT (The Koehler Method of Dog Training) a method that took many techniques that had been in existence for many years and placed them into an organized step-by-step system of training a dog. 

Koehler advocated hanging a dog by his choke chain/leash, at times rendering him unconscious, ONLY in the event of an attack on the handler. Please answer this poll question based on the premise of a dog attacking the handler. This was not done for nipping, but ONLY for an all out attack. 

I have another poll question running at the same time. After you've finished this one please respond in that one. It's called, "Koehler Dunking."


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

Is this a "unexpected oh shit" moment, or a dog that you know is likely to exhibit this behavior? That would affect my reaction.

In an "oh shit" moment, I would hang the dog. If I were aware of the issue, I would consider my options for possible alternative ways to defuse the situation.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

I consider hanging the kindest correction for rehabilitating an aggressive dog. Teaching the dog self-control and conditioning the dog to perfrom an acceptable behavior ARE important for ending aggression. But if the trainer makes even one small mistake that results in aggressive behavior, the ability to end the aggression is essential.


----------



## Anna Kasho (Jan 16, 2008)

I did not vote, because I have not been in a self-defence situation and never had to hang a dog... However, this one option is puzzling me - "I would try other methods first to get the dog to stop biting me, before using hanging." 

Say I AM in a self-defence situation and the dog is attacking me - WHAT other methods can I use? I am under the impression that hanging is the safest, most effective, immediate way to end the attack.

Cyko is the only one capable of biting me for real, when he is so frustrated that he stops thinking. I can usually see that coming a mile away, and take steps to change the situation. I've been bit once by Candy - my own damn fault, and an unavoidable mistake on her part, so I don't blame her at all.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Self defence, yes! Training, no!
Self defence is a anything goes situation. 
I've said it in the past
A handler aggressive dog, that is raised from a pup , is either unstable or has been unfairly or excessively corrected. In my lifetime I've had only two "handler aggressive" dogs of my own. One was (still is) nuts, the other I created and wish I had to do over again. I was in my less then gentle training period. :grin: JMHO!


----------



## ann schnerre (Aug 24, 2006)

Mike Schoonbrood;79985}.... If I were aware of the issue said:


> what options would you consider? it would be nice to go into a situation with a known "handler-aggressive" dog; mike, you've been around the block once or twice--what WOULD you do?
> 
> if it's OT, ignore/move...


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Could those of you who selected option #3 (I would try other methods first to get the dog to stop biting me, before using hanging.) please describe what "other methods" they'd use to get the dog to stop biting them?


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Hi Lou,

I didn't pick option number three but, one method would be screaming like a banshee from all that pain might startle him off the bite!=D>


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Howard Knauf said:


> Hi Lou,
> 
> I didn't pick option number three but, one method would be screaming like a banshee from all that pain might startle him off the bite!=D>


I've tried that method and it is totally ineffective. :lol:


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Konnie Hein said:


> I've tried that method and it is totally ineffective. :lol:


 Yea, its like "look! A giant, two legged rabbit! Dammit! It's still moving! Bite harder!#-o


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

An all out, up front, I'm gonna bite you will result in a hanging for me. Not a nip, a growl, a mean-look, but an in-your-face, I'm tired of whatever is going on and you're bit type attack. I'll use that force necessary to stop that attack.

DFrost


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Anna Kasho said:


> Say I AM in a self-defence situation and the dog is attacking me - WHAT other methods can I use? I am under the impression that hanging is the safest, most effective, immediate way to end the attack.


Some people will try an "out" command if the dog has been trained to release a bite on that. Sometimes it works, I'm told. 



Anna Kasho said:


> I can usually see that coming a mile away, and take steps to change the situation. I've been bit once by Candy - my own damn fault, and an unavoidable mistake on her part, so I don't blame her at all.


With many dogs you can see the signs of the dog loading up and change what's happening to avoid it. With some dogs, the signs are too subtle. And with some dogs there aren't any or you get taken from behind and don't see it coming.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Howard Knauf said:


> I didn't pick option number three but, one method would be screaming like a banshee from all that pain might startle him off the bite!=D>


Thanks Howard. There are some people who will do this involuntarily (not me of course) cause IT HURTS! For some this "banshee scream" is immediately followed by a string of involuntary cursing (again, of course, not me). 

While screaming may work for the average pet, most properly bite dogs, especially in LE, will have been desensitized to it. Some may even bite harder as it may bring out more prey drive.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Konnie Hein said:


> I've tried that method and it is totally ineffective. :lol:


Maybe you just can't scream like Howard? Lol


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Lou Castle said:


> Maybe you just can't scream like Howard? Lol


:-k 


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

OK. The banshee scream obviously is not a real world solution to this problem. Geez](*,) Just trying to suggest that there are few non violent options in this situation. Besides an out command (which probably wont work most of the time) a ball bat or heavy tree limb upside the head is about the only other solution unless you're near water where you can use a revised version of the Kohler dunking method.

Howard


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

Offer the dog a cookie and negotiate for your hand back?????


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Cujo want a biscuit?? LOL:lol::lol:


----------



## Ian Forbes (Oct 13, 2006)

I always laugh when I hear people recommend jamming a stick up a dog's a** to stop a bite.:-o 

Where are you going to find a stick with a dog chewing you up and how the hell are you going to get round the other end of the dog? Besides which, without plenty of vaseline, I'm guessing the dog is going to be pretty p*ssed off.......


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Hi Ian,

Never heard that one before. Ya gotta be a good shot at moving targets, thats for sure. Get a friend to do it, then when the dog bites him you can return the favor and get another bite, or run like hell for the garden hose (oops! Forgot, that doesn't work either!).

Howard


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

Howard Knauf said:


> Cujo want a biscuit?? LOL:lol::lol:


Believe it or not he got "handler aggressive" (he growled) once {edited for sake of not opening can of worms} with someone for correcting him for something he didn't need to be corrected for.


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

I did beat a dog with a bucket once when he had my arm. It was just about as effective as the banshee-style screaming. This was after I tried hanging him and his collar broke. (imagine the oh shit moment there!) 

In the heat of the attack, you do whatever it takes to defend yourself and get the dog off you. In my one and only experience owning a handler-aggressive dog, repeated hanging for handler attacks didn't work. Training the dog to perform a behavior incompatible with biting me during the situations which prompted the attacks did work.

I just read the posts about the stick up the dog's rear. WTF?


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

> I just read the posts about the stick up the dog's rear. WTF?


Someone told me about a trainer a while ago that said "to get the dog to out, grab him by the balls."


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Mike Schoonbrood said:


> Believe it or not he got "handler aggressive" (he growled) once {edited for sake of not opening can of worms} with someone for correcting him for something he didn't need to be corrected for.


Mike, can you blame him? I would be disappointed if he hadn't. Good Cujo. Here's a biscuit.:razz:


----------



## Ian Forbes (Oct 13, 2006)

Howard Knauf said:


> Hi Ian,
> 
> Never heard that one before. Ya gotta be a good shot at moving targets, thats for sure. Get a friend to do it, then when the dog bites him you can return the favor and get another bite, or run like hell for the garden hose (oops! Forgot, that doesn't work either!).
> 
> Howard


:lol: 

People really do recommend this! It seems to be one of those urban myths, 'cos I'm pretty sure no-one has ever done it.


----------



## Ian Forbes (Oct 13, 2006)

Mike Schoonbrood said:


> Someone told me about a trainer a while ago that said "to get the dog to out, grab him by the balls."


I'm guessing that's pretty tricky with all dogs, but especially bitches.....


----------



## Jennifer Marshall (Dec 13, 2007)

I have and will continue to use this method for handler aggression in pet dogs. If I'm working with a pet dog that comes up leash at me I will hang it. Often I don't need to wait until the dog passes out, only until the dog calms before letting it down. But these are pets these are generally not high drive working dog types. With pets, the whole point is the dog should not be biting and there is nothing to screw up. It doesn't matter what the handler did with a pet, if the dog doesn't stop biting or showing aggression it's going to be euthanized. Different process with working dogs, more emphasis on my communication with the dog that could be triggering handler aggression as the goal is to not get bit *and* to not screw up the dog.


----------



## leslie cassian (Jun 3, 2007)

Mike Schoonbrood said:


> Someone told me about a trainer a while ago that said "to get the dog to out, grab him by the balls."


I once tried to um... manually check the reproductive status of a male dog. He gently suggested he did not appreciate that by leaving an imprint of his front teeth on my arm.


----------



## Michelle Reusser (Mar 29, 2008)

Yeah, my dog doesn't like his junk played with either. He'd bite harder probably! LOL I have kicked dogs square in the nutts and they don't care! Not like human males apparently. :-\"


----------



## Julie Hancock (Jun 7, 2008)

I'm new to the board and havn't really posted before but wanted to comment on this. I had to use this method last summer on my husbands dog(we have 2 Cane Corso). My husband had been deployed for a couple of months and Oz(the male) challenged me not wanting to go inside. I gave him a correction to heel and he came up the leash, totally shocked me!!! I gave him another harsh correction and he came back up the leash so I hung his a$$. He is as big as me standing on his hind legs so this was a challenge in itself. Once he had stopped thrashing I put his front legs back on the ground and told him to heel again, he complied and went to his kennel. He did not break my skin but my hand was very bruised and I could not use it for about a week.

To me it may look horrible while being done but I would do it again in a heartbeat if he ever tried to come at me again. Luckily that was the only time he has challenged me and not listened, I know he is handler sensitive so I try to not put him into defense mode.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I saw a fight between two Kerrys in the show ring. Both handlers were doing a lot of screaming and tugging with nothing happening. A guy walked into the ring, looked to see which dog had the best hold and told the handlers to get ready to pull them apart. Stuck his finger up the dog's a$$ and it immediately let go. Handlers then successfully pulled them away from each other. The guy walked out of the ring proudly holding his, now nasty looking finger in the air. 
It worked!


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

> I gave him a correction to heel and he came up the leash, totally shocked me!!





> I know he is handler sensitive so I try to not put him into defense mode.


Could you elaborate on this? Seems like a weird combination to me.


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

Bob Scott said:


> Self defence, yes! Training, no!
> Self defence is a anything goes situation.
> I've said it in the past
> A handler aggressive dog, that is raised from a pup , is either unstable or has been unfairly or excessively corrected. In my lifetime I've had only two "handler aggressive" dogs of my own. One was (still is) nuts, the other I created and wish I had to do over again. I was in my less then gentle training period. :grin: JMHO!


Sounds like good stuff to me! Training issues and one time pack adjustments can be done with an alpha roll if you know what you are doing. Not for everyone! My sister has an Akita and she hung it for trying to face bite her. And to think looks aren't always genetic...ooops! [-X :-o 8-[


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Howard Gaines III said:


> Training issues and one time pack adjustments can be done with an alpha roll if you know what you are doing. Not for everyone!


 I don't subscribe to that method anymore, especially with bite trained dogs. I find the hanging method gets the point across just fine plus, the chance of winning is higher and getting bit is lower. Also, the lead is still in hand in case we have to go to round two.:-o

Howard


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Howard Knauf said:


> I don't subscribe to that method anymore, especially with bite trained dogs. I find the hanging method gets the point across just fine plus, the chance of winning is higher and getting bit is lower. Also, the lead is still in hand in case we have to go to round two.:-o
> 
> Howard



yep, yep, yep. There is that occasional round two.

DFrost


----------



## Julie Hancock (Jun 7, 2008)

Mike Schoonbrood said:


> Could you elaborate on this? Seems like a weird combination to me.


He is handler sensitive and we can not use a heavy hand with him, which we were use to in our old training with our rotties because they could handle it. Because I got real personal and used a hard correction, he kind of went into the I'll get you before you get me mode. In the past he would just buckle, submit and pout, not this day he came up the leash which I wasn't not expecting. I hope this explains it better sometimes I have a hard time putting what I mean into words:smile:. 

Without being there I know it's kind of hard to really tell but do you think that I miss read him coming at me as more as being aggressive towards me? If so could be a lack of respect he has for me as being above him in the pack, my husband is the alpha and has never challenged him. Always willing to learn and hear someone elses opinions.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Julie,

We would call that handler aggressive, displacement aggression, or redirected aggression. 

I have seen the scenario you describe with sweet dogs that were overly and unfairly corrected. I've seen it more often with dominant dogs. 

We would call "handler sensitive" a dog that is a) in-tune with the handler b) responsive/malleable/biddable and c) submissive.

Yes, your dog was being aggressive. Will it continue? I can't answer that.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Julie Hancock said:


> He is handler sensitive and we can not use a heavy hand with him, which we were use to in our old training with our rotties because they could handle it. Because I got real personal and used a hard correction, he kind of went into the I'll get you before you get me mode. In the past he would just buckle, submit and pout, not this day he came up the leash which I wasn't not expecting. I hope this explains it better sometimes I have a hard time putting what I mean into words:smile:.
> 
> Without being there I know it's kind of hard to really tell but do you think that I miss read him coming at me as more as being aggressive towards me? If so could be a lack of respect he has for me as being above him in the pack, my husband is the alpha and has never challenged him. Always willing to learn and hear someone elses opinions.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Lost the post!

I don't think it's aggression as much as it is fear and "I've had enough". You've pushed him past the "buckle submit and pout". He's learned that doesn't appease you and he's going right into aggression. Even a soft dog can be pushed into bitting when it's had enough of incorrect or heavey handed correction. You work correction to the level of the individual dog if correction is your choice of training. This isn't the Rottie you had before. JMHO!


----------



## Stephanie O'Brien (Sep 11, 2007)

In my experience, hanging usually diffuses the situation much quicker and more effectively than anything else when applied properly. It highly depends on the reason the dog is coming at you. The biggest mistake I find that people make is not doing it long enough. They will hang the dog very quickly and then put the dog down before he has given up/calmed down, making him either re-attack or believe he can 'fight' his way through next time. The key is to do it and make sure the dog has given up and calmed down(or passed out ) before releasing pressure and you must stay completely calm while doing it. Any reaction from you may get the dog what he originally desired: a fight to interrupt what you were doing with him. 
With your average pet dogs, most of the more gentle techniques work fine but I have dealt with many dogs that really mean business and it is truly a matter of safety at times. You do whatever works. Years ago, my introduction to aggression in dogs was a 10 day stay at the hospital including 2 surgeries, 2 metal pins, 2 broken bones, months of rehab and $40,000 in medical bills.......all courtesy of a 95lb pit bull that I never laid a hand on(redirected aggression). It was a lesson I won't forget and I am lucky to be alive.


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

Further posts pertaining to Julie H's question on handler aggression with a handler sensitive dog can be viewed (and should be responded to) here:

http://www.workingdogforum.com/vBul...n-but-soft-dogs-aggress-hard-correction-8267/

Thanks.


----------



## Jackie Lockard (Oct 20, 2009)

Bob Scott said:


> Self defence, yes! Training, no!
> Self defense is a anything goes situation.
> I've said it in the past
> A handler aggressive dog, that is raised from a pup , is either unstable or has been unfairly or excessively corrected.


I totally agree with this. If I'm being attacked and that dog is out to kill me...then I really wouldn't give a rat's behind about the dog. If one of us comes out dead then I would much prefer him than myself! If my dog is nice to me than I'm nice to him. He attacks me well hell, I'm going to attack him back!

Now if I know this is an aggressive dog and I could be attacked...then I would be prepared to deal with that situation and it hopefully wouldn't come to beating/hanging the dog to let his teeth off me.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

The technique is more effective if used with a nylon choke collar and is also referred to as isolating the behaviour. When the dog starts to react to another dog (or person) you lift their front feet off the ground till they calm down (or start to lose consciousness) and then put them back on the ground. The techique is more effective if used at the first sign of aggression and not waiting for a full on attack. The OP's description and poll question sound more dramatic, then what I've experienced in real life.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> The technique is more effective if used with a nylon choke collar


The choke chain slides just as easily under weight as a nylon choke collar. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> *When the dog starts to react * to another dog (or person) you lift their front feet off the ground till they calm down (or start to lose consciousness) and then put them back on the ground. [Emphasis added]


That's not what is under discussion. What IS under discussion is defense from *an all out attack. *If one notices the early signs of this, which you describe, that may or may not work. If you get the all out attack, lifting the dog's _"front feet off the ground"_ will probably not only NOT _"calm [him] down"_ but will probably increase his aggression. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> The techique is more effective if used at the first sign of aggression and not waiting for a full on attack.


Not everyone will recognize those signs of aggression. It's not that they're _"waiting for a full on attack"_ it's that, because they missed the first signs of the aggression, it's upon them. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> The OP's description and poll question sound more dramatic, then what I've experienced in real life.


I've seen it many times. I'm sure that many others here have seen a dog get a series of quick–harsh corrections at the wrong time and/or with the wrong dog who immediately responds with a serious bite. It usually happens with less experienced handlers/trainers, but it's hardly uncommon or unheard of. In certain parts of the world bearing the scars of your dog is considered a badge of honor. Koehler saw it often enough to devote several paragraphs to it in his book.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Since the post is back open, after more than a year, I would like to hear how the 12 people that voted "other methods" respond to a full out attack. 

DFrost


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

David Frost said:


> Since the post is back open, after more than a year, I would like to hear how the 12 people that voted "other methods" respond to a full out attack.
> 
> DFrost


Perhaps they prefer the method Bob Scott described. :-o:-o:-o


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

susan tuck said:


> Perhaps they prefer the method Bob Scott described. :-o:-o:-o



ha ha, let's see, full out attack, better be a darn good aim at a fast moving target. 

DFrost


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Lou Castle said:


> The choke chain slides just as easily under weight as a nylon choke collar.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Lou,

I thought this was a serious poll/question. I should have realized you'd have an agenda. Have a nice day


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas, it was a serious poll/question and I did have an agenda. It was to get answers to the poll question. 

I noticed that your response did not address the poll question. No problem with that but I disagreed with much of what you said and so I responded.


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Other - I wasn't in a position to hang a 120 lb dog when he had first my forearm and then my entire hand in his mouth while my finger was locked in the loop of the choke chain so I slammed his head against the wall which had some bare studs exposed. That was enough to get him to let go.

Other, again - pretty much the same result as hanging; the dog was choked out. He was up on his back legs during the attack and again this was a large dog that hanging wouldn't have worked all that well with so he was thrust down toward the ground and choked out.

It doesn't matter but these occurred with the same dog but two different people. There wasn't a recurrence after.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Lou Castle said:


> Thomas, it was a serious poll/question and I did have an agenda. It was to get answers to the poll question.
> 
> I noticed that your response did not address the poll question. No problem with that but I disagreed with much of what you said and so I responded.


Lou

I responded "other" which is why I posted the requested
explanation. The use of the term "HANGING" in the original poll was a clue to your agenda IMHO. It would be like a poll
on the use of remote trainers that asked for opinions on
SHOCK COLLARS. Isolating behavior is the same technique as "hanging" but the language is less inflammatory.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

susan tuck said:


> Perhaps they prefer the method Bob Scott described. :-o:-o:-o


 
That's aggression between dogs. If one is comming after me......well, that ain't the end I'm concerned with. :-D:wink:
An all out attack on me from someone elses dog is also another thing altogether. If It's "handler aggression" then it's my bad for not reading early signs. If there are no early sings then it isn't my dog. "Early signs" from a "handler aggressive" dog are often avioded by the dog because it knows it will create an ass whoopin. 
I don't think "handler aggression" comes out of the blue and just happens.
The dog is a spaz or the handler is incorrect or unfair in his corrections. JMHO of course! :-D:-D


----------



## Timothy Saunders (Mar 12, 2009)

leslie cassian said:


> I once tried to um... manually check the reproductive status of a male dog. He gently suggested he did not appreciate that by leaving an imprint of his front teeth on my arm.


 the correct way to do this is to tie a string around them so you can create some distance. or have the helper have a leash so the dog can't turn around


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Timothy Saunders said:


> the correct way to do this is to tie a string around them so you can create some distance. or have the helper have a leash so the dog can't turn around


 
:-s:-s "Tie a string around them"???:-s:-s
Isn't that similar to catching a bird by putting salt on it's tail? 
If it's not my dog I sure as hell want the other end on a leash if I'm going to check out his junk.


----------



## Lynda Myers (Jul 16, 2008)

I would beat the dog like it stole something!:x Back in my younger days used to unoffically rescue Rottweilers and always kept an axe handle within easy reach for just in cases. I am of the opinion that if you bite the hand that feeds you you get what you get...which could be death.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> The use of the term "HANGING" in the original poll was a clue to your agenda IMHO.


As usual Thomas when you try to attribute some agenda to me you're wrong. I had none, other than to find out what people think of the technique. As I said, the poll was prompted by a discussion on another board. That board is populated mostly by pet owners and I wanted to find out what people with more experience with working dogs thought of the technique. 

Why you persist in getting personal in these discussions is a mystery. I doubt that anyone cares that you think that I had an agenda. I find it odd that we're at nearly 50 posts before anyone brought it up and when it did come up it was YOU that brought it up. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> It would be like a poll on the use of remote trainers that asked for opinions on SHOCK COLLARS. Isolating behavior is the same technique as "hanging" but the language is less inflammatory.


I've never heard the term, _"isolating behavior"_ used to refer to _"hanging"_ so I'd never use it. Does anyone else besides Thomas use that phrase? Is this use common to certain parts of the US? I was unable to find any reference to the phrase _"isolating behavior"_ being used in place of the term _"hanging."_ Can you supply one?


----------



## Colin Chin (Sep 20, 2006)

I have a question for those PSD. If the PSD bites a bad guy and he yells the "Out" command, would generally out the PSD if he is trained to let go his bite on a out command ? On the other hand, what happens when a bad guys hand the PSD like the Koehler method did ? Will the dog let go his bite ? Thanks.


----------



## andreas broqvist (Jun 2, 2009)

i wuld say Pshhh and loo abit anoyd, If it against al ods wuldent work I wuld say Pshhh AND hit the dog with my fingers on the side. OOooo Yes


----------



## Jim Domenico (Oct 2, 2009)

I got attacked by a wild dog when I was 14, on a geese farm. Eye gouge followed up with a shot from a scoped triple 2  problem solved. Got 2 big nasty scars on my hands but when your thumb is past the first knuckle in a dogs eye socket, it lets go and backs off rather quickly in my experiences.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Colin Chin said:


> I have a question for those PSD. If the PSD bites a bad guy and he yells the "Out" command, would generally out the PSD if he is trained to let go his bite on a out command ? On the other hand, what happens when a bad guys hand the PSD like the Koehler method did ? Will the dog let go his bite ? Thanks.


We train for this. Generally, no the dog will not release the bite when the bad guy gives a command. Whether the dog let's go of the bite if the bad guy is hanging the dog is physiological. If the bad guy is choking the dog to the point he can't breathe, yes, he'll let go of the bite. Otherwise, I would expect the dog to continue the fight.

DFrost


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Lou Castle said:


> Does anyone else use that phrase? Is this use common to certain parts of the US? I was unable to find any reference to the phrase _"isolating behavior"_ being used in place of the term _"hanging."_ Can you supply one?


I've never heard of "isolating behavior" used in such a matter. I've isolated specific behaviors that I've either wanted to reinforce or extinguish, but that is a different application of the term.

DFrost


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

How would the bad guy be able to "hang" the dog? Presumably, the dog is sent without lead and for the bad guy to be able to snatch its collar is making me wonder. If the dog is biting its arm, it's near but the chance then of a bad guy in pain and still managing to manhandle to dog is remote, or not?


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

I've seen them grab the dog with both hands, grab them by the harness if wearing one, grab them by the choker or collar, scruff of the neck, bear hug, front legs, muzzle, lower jaw and others I just can't think of at the moment. You never know what's going to happen. Not all subjects feel pain when you encounter them.

DFrost


----------



## Jim Domenico (Oct 2, 2009)

David Frost said:


> We train for this. Generally, no the dog will not release the bite when the bad guy gives a command. Whether the dog let's go of the bite if the bad guy is hanging the dog is physiological. If the bad guy is choking the dog to the point he can't breathe, yes, he'll let go of the bite. Otherwise, I would expect the dog to continue the fight.
> 
> DFrost


Correct me if I'm wrong (because this is just an assumption, I don't have any real life experience with police or military dogs) - but, isn't this the point of muzzle fighting and other alternative training. That if the dog can't hold onto the bite, due to aggravation or assault by the subject they then continue to battle to regain control and get another good bite?


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Gillian Schuler said:


> How would the bad guy be able to "hang" the dog? Presumably, the dog is sent without lead and for the bad guy to be able to snatch its collar is making me wonder. If the dog is biting its arm, it's near but the chance then of a bad guy in pain and still managing to manhandle to dog is remote, or not?


Not everyone responds to the pain of a bite the same way. Occasionally someone will be under the influence of a pain killer, PCP (Phencyclidine) being the most common in my experience, and will not feel any pain from the bite at all. This is when the selection of the dog really comes into play. Dogs for whom the primary combat drive is prey may not do well. The crook, instead of screaming and fighting, sometimes just looks at the dog and does not otherwise react to the bite. Dogs who need the reinforcing of an active response sometimes just drop off the bite. This issue may not be able to be overcome by training on a passive decoy. 

As David said, it's not necessary to "hang the dog" to render him unconscious. I had a couple of these folks try to choke my dog manually. Since I could see their hands I was able to assist and prevent them from doing so. If the dog is deprived of air he'll eventually pass out and stop biting, no matter who it is.


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

David Frost said:


> I've seen them grab the dog with both hands, grab them by the harness if wearing one, grab them by the choker or collar, scruff of the neck, bear hug, front legs, muzzle, lower jaw and others I just can't think of at the moment. You never know what's going to happen. Not all subjects feel pain when you encounter them.
> 
> DFrost


I guess they react, more or less, as we would, faced with an attack from a dog. I'm just surprised at how similarly they react to us or am I going from the viewpoint that most criminals are afraid of dogs, apart from those that are drugged and maybe don't know fear.


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

Colin asked;

"I have a question for those PSD. If the PSD bites a bad guy and he yells the "Out" command, would generally out the PSD if he is trained to let go his bite on a out command ? On the other hand, what happens when a bad guys hand the PSD like the Koehler method did ? Will the dog let go his bite ? Thanks."



David and Lou answered this pretty well but I would add at least in my experiance that the training involved in making sure a K9 doesn't come off a bite if the badguy yells "out" isn't too labor intensive . It's more like proofing a dog . 



Now if someone has a dog that will out on the badguy's command I can't help them very well since I have never seen a PSD do this yet . 

I also tried to out another handler's dog as it was biting me . I had gotten into a carchase with a stolen . Guy crashed and bailed my K9 caught him and the guy started fighting . I could see his hands were empty with the exception of them having them full of my K9's muzzle so I moved in to help along with another K9 handler . I ended up at one point having the guy in a headlock while both of us were on the ground . The other K9 handler had left his window down and his partner came out to help and my right knee happened to be the first thing he got to . Luckily the dog some how figured out I was the wrong guy and went after the badguy . 

Good thing because me yelling out wasn't working . The short time he was on me he managed to fillet open my knee about 5" to the point I could see the muscle running over my kneecap . I had to have a tube inserted into the wound to drain it . 

I've had the same experiances as David . Both my dogs have been choked , punched , kicked , hit with all sorts of things and I even had a guy wrap his arms and legs around my K9 and bite him . I think this guy had some wrestling experiance . I have come across many badguys that feel little to no pain and their only focus at the time is getting to K9 off of them and getting away . I have seen these badguys cause a lot of damage to themselves trying to get the dog off them . All of them had also forgotten a very important thing while fighting my K9 . ME !

My current partner early on in his career engaged a suspect under a truck . Somehow during the struggle and unknown to me he got his choker caught on a rear leaf spring of the truck . He didn't let go until he passed out . 

I also agree about training for nonreactive suspects . We've set up scenerios where the decoy in a bitesuit is hidden downwind , in this scenerio we are trying draw the K9 a good distance away from the handler to see how it will react engaging a nonreactive badguy far away from it's handler . In real deployments we don't recommend letting this happen . 

When the K9 engages the decoy the decoy doesn't react at all . Most initially engage well but after sometime and with some not having their handler around they stop engaging or begin to bite all over trying to get a response(not good either way) . Some have even left to find their handler . The dogs that I have seen having this problem are mostly young dogs or PSDs from departments that haven't had many real engagements with suspects in their career .

An interesting side note to this is that as the decoy I have found that almost all of the dogs(even the toughest that I thought couldn't fight any harder then they currently were) began to fight harder when they heard their handlers approaching . It's a tough scenerio as a decoy but very educational as to PSD behavior also .


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Jim Nash said:


> All of them had also forgotten a very important thing while fighting my K9 . ME !
> 
> I also agree about training for nonreactive suspects .
> 
> An interesting side note to this is that as the decoy I have found that almost all of the dogs(even the toughest that I thought couldn't fight any harder then they currently were) began to fight harder when they heard their handlers approaching . .


Exactly. It's to our benefit suspects become so involved in the "dog" fight they forget about us. 

Passive bites have been discussed in other threads. This only punctuates the neccessity of that type of training.

I've noticed the same thing relative dogs fighting harder as the handler approaches. I've always chalked it it up to the fact the dog knew the game was about to end and wanted to get in that last good lick, ha ha.

DFrost


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Jim Domenico said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong (because this is just an assumption, I don't have any real life experience with police or military dogs) - but, isn't this the point of muzzle fighting and other alternative training. That if the dog can't hold onto the bite, due to aggravation or assault by the subject they then continue to battle to regain control and get another good bite?


Not necessarily. I believe more PSD trainers use a muzzle to ensure the dog will bite without the equipment more than anything else. At least I do. Personally, it's the reason I've never liked the stroking of the dog while biting, looking for that calm steady bite. I want a pusher and a slasher. A dog, given a passive decoy will try to bring him to you. I want a dog that holds until told to release, -- BUT -- if he's shaken, knocked off, beaten etc will reengage without hesitation. It's one of the reasons we don't really spend all that much time targeting. I like to say the dog will engage the most available area. During demos I always inform the viewers; "the dog is not trained to target the arm. The decoy is trained to put the arm in the dog's mouth". That is significant. In actual deployments the back of the thigh or the hand are frequently bitten areas. 

DFrost


----------



## Butch Cappel (Aug 12, 2007)

Other; Leather leash handle, (hand loop) or doubled up leather leash over the muzzle right between the eyes, with conviction and rapidity. 

Second question, Isolating behavior; I thought that was like, sitting in the corner picking your nose? Didn't know a dog could do that.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Butch Cappel said:


> Second question, Isolating behavior; I thought that was like, sitting in the corner picking your nose? Didn't know a dog could do that.


chuckle, chuckle.

DFrost


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Gillian Schuler said:


> I guess they react, more or less, as we would, faced with an attack from a dog. I'm just surprised at how similarly they react to us or am I going from the viewpoint that most criminals are afraid of dogs, apart from those that are drugged and maybe don't know fear.


I have a "colorful" theory on this. I think that the reason that crooks (who are capable of feeling the pain of a bite) react so similarly is because they revert to _"prehistoric man"_ when they get bitten. The part of the brain that's awakened is the primitive one, the survival one, the one that because of the situation, is capable of little beyond fight or flight. 

Often when a bite happens it's when a crook has fled the police. During these flights they often exhibit similar behavior and there are studies out of Calgary that have mapped and measured these responses. It's the primitive brain at work. Similar to the reason that some animals, when pursued closely, go up a tree, even though it means that they're now cornered and well, treed. These animals, and now the humans, are full of the chemicals that the body dumps during such times of stress and they are heavily influenced from them. 

Remember the movie _Jaws? _ I think one of the hardest facts to suddenly come face to with is that you are *not *the top of the food chain. These folks are already into the fight or flight syndrome, They're body is adrenalinized, they're cornered and now (as if they didn't already have a full plate) they're being _"eaten"_ (their perception) by a _"wolf."_ 

I think this is why I've seen some suspects actually put down a gun they held in their hand so that they can use both hands to fight off the dog. Primitive man didn't use tools and so he _"forgets"_ that he was holding a gun in his hand and reverted to what his primitive brain told him. 

Don't know if it's the truth or not, but it's fun!


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Jim Nash said:


> The short time he was on me he managed to fillet open my knee about 5" to the point I could see the muscle running over my kneecap . I had to have a tube inserted into the wound to drain it .


Don’t you hate seeing your _"inside parts"_ on the outside? LOL. 



Jim Nash said:


> An interesting side note to this is that as the decoy I have found that almost all of the dogs(even the toughest that I thought couldn't fight any harder then they currently were) began to fight harder when they heard their handlers approaching . It's a tough scenerio as a decoy but very educational as to PSD behavior also .


I've seen this happen too. I think it happens for at least a couple of reasons. The first is that the dog hears that the _"rest of the pack is coming to help with the 'kill' "_ and that's a good thing. The other reason is that the handler is coming to _"take away the prey."_ This is not such a good thing and can be a sign of conflict in the training.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Lou Castle said:


> I've never heard the term, _"isolating behavior"_ used to refer to _"hanging"_ so I'd never use it. Does anyone else besides Thomas use that phrase? Is this use common to certain parts of the US? I was unable to find any reference to the phrase _"isolating behavior"_ being used in place of the term _"hanging."_ Can you supply one?


I first heard the term used by Gene England at a seminar I attended several years ago. I'm surprised you were unable to find a reference, considering that Gene England is a legend in the Police and Schutzhund training fields.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> I first heard the term used by Gene England at a seminar I attended several years ago. I'm surprised you were unable to find a reference, considering that Gene England is a legend in the Police and Schutzhund training fields.


Not surprisingly you failed to supply A SINGLE reference to such a use of the phrase. Also not surprisingly several others have commented on your use of the term and the fact that *they too *have never heard it used in this context. 

So Thomas, we're still waiting.


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

Lou Castle said:


> I have a "colorful" theory on this. I think that the reason that crooks (who are capable of feeling the pain of a bite) react so similarly is because they revert to _"prehistoric man"_ when they get bitten....
> I think this is why I've seen some suspects actually put down a gun they held in their hand so that they can use both hands to fight off the dog. Primitive man didn't use tools and so he _"forgets"_ that he was holding a gun in his hand and reverted to what his primitive brain told him...


 Lou that's some funny stuff. I can even see someone with the brain power to do just that! The sad part is that without any education or expanding one's level, it seems that the caveman mind shines in many ways...:-k


----------



## Bill Whatley (Aug 26, 2009)

Konnie Hein said:


> I did beat a dog with a bucket once when he had my arm. It was just about as effective as the banshee-style screaming. This was after I tried hanging him and his collar broke. (imagine the oh shit moment there!)
> 
> In the heat of the attack, you do whatever it takes to defend yourself and get the dog off you. In my one and only experience owning a handler-aggressive dog, repeated hanging for handler attacks didn't work. Training the dog to perform a behavior incompatible with biting me during the situations which prompted the attacks did work.
> 
> I just read the posts about the stick up the dog's rear. WTF?


ONLY USE HERM SPRENGER. I've never had one break,and don't want to in that situation!


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Does Herm Sprenger make buckets???????????
sorry, couldn't resist.

DFrost


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Lou Castle said:


> I have a "colorful" theory on this.
> Don't know if it's the truth or not, but it's fun!


I've heard this theory, or at least one similar to it. Could have been from you. I remember the first time I heard it I thought to myself; Self, that really makes a lot of sense. In fact over the years, it's made so much sense, I've not tried to disprove it or even find where it might be disproved, because I think it's a neat theory. ha ha.

DFrost


----------



## Lynda Myers (Jul 16, 2008)

andreas broqvist said:


> i wuld say Pshhh and loo abit anoyd, If it against al ods wuldent work I wuld say Pshhh AND hit the dog with my fingers on the side. OOooo Yes


 
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL you Caesar you!


----------



## Colin Chin (Sep 20, 2006)

David Frost said:


> We train for this. Generally, no the dog will not release the bite when the bad guy gives a command. Whether the dog let's go of the bite if the bad guy is hanging the dog is physiological. If the bad guy is choking the dog to the point he can't breathe, yes, he'll let go of the bite. Otherwise, I would expect the dog to continue the fight.
> 
> DFrost


Morning David,
Am I right if I say that your PSD is trained to respond only to your command and/or the handler's ? Thanks.

Colin


----------



## Colin Chin (Sep 20, 2006)

Lou Castle said:


> This is when the selection of the dog really comes into play. Dogs for whom the primary combat drive is prey may not do well. The crook, instead of screaming and fighting, sometimes just looks at the dog and does not otherwise react to the bite. Dogs who need the reinforcing of an active response sometimes just drop off the bite. This issue may not be able to be overcome by training on a passive decoy.


Hi Lou,
Your explanation to the above is it related to genetic issue ? Thanks.

Colin


----------



## Colin Chin (Sep 20, 2006)

Jim Nash said:


> Jim saidavid and Lou answered this pretty well but I would add at least in my experiance that the training involved in making sure a K9 doesn't come off a bite if the badguy yells "out" isn't too labor intensive . It's more like proofing a dog .
> 
> Hi Jim,
> Can you share how you train your PSD not to out when 'commanded' by the bad guy ?
> ...


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

Colin it's not so much training a dog not to out on someone elses command as it is NOT causing the problem in the first place . It has more to do with choosing the right dog . I'm sure the problem could be caused by being too harsh on a correct dog during the initial stages of out training , but I haven't seen it . 

We just set up situations were a decoy tries to out the dog . So far none have listened . 

As for the dogs having problems with nonreactive suspects it depends on the dog . It could range from setting up somewhat similiar scenerios(but not too similiar) where the decoy gradually lengthens the amount of time he/she reacts after the dog engages to giving a dog a nasty suprise if it disengages to washing out the dog .


----------



## Colin Chin (Sep 20, 2006)

David Frost said:


> Personally, it's the reason I've never liked the stroking of the dog while biting, looking for that calm steady bite. I want a pusher and a slasher. A dog, given a passive decoy will try to bring him to you. I want a dog that holds until told to release, -- BUT -- if he's shaken, knocked off, beaten etc will reengage without hesitation. It's one of the reasons we don't really spend all that much time targeting. I like to say the dog will engage the most available area. During demos I always inform the viewers; "the dog is not trained to target the arm. The decoy is trained to put the arm in the dog's mouth". That is significant. In actual deployments the back of the thigh or the hand are frequently bitten areas.
> DFrost


David,
Isn't it stroking the dog while he's engaged in biting gives the dog the confidence and also to be comfortable with the handler around or next to the dog ? Some dogs will let go his bite when the handler approaches. Correct me if I am wrong. Thanks.

Colin


----------



## Colin Chin (Sep 20, 2006)

Jim Nash said:


> As for the dogs having problems with nonreactive suspects it depends on the dog . It could range from setting up somewhat similiar scenerios(but not too similiar) where the decoy gradually lengthens the amount of time he/she reacts after the dog engages to giving a dog a nasty suprise if it disengages to washing out the dog .


Hi Jim,
Hope you can elaborate a little more in details with your explanation above. Thanks.

Colin


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Colin Chin said:


> Morning David,
> Am I right if I say that your PSD is trained to respond only to your command and/or the handler's ? Thanks.
> 
> Colin


The handler's, yes sir. 

DFrost


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Colin Chin said:


> Isn't it stroking the dog while he's engaged in biting gives the dog the confidence and also to be comfortable with the handler around or next to the dog ? Some dogs will let go his bite when the handler approaches. Correct me if I am wrong. Thanks.
> 
> Colin


I just don't have this problem. Building confidence in the bite can be done without touching the dog. I really don't want the handler touching the dog. If the dog is that low on confidence, I wouldn't have continued it in training in the first place. Dogs that are letting go when the handler approaches have probably been subjected to pretty strong physical corrections/interventions by the handler. More often than not I see the results I believe Howard mentioned. As the handler approaches the dog seems to pick up energy in the bite. 

What I've often seen is the handler, calmly stroking the dog while he bites. The dog almost seems to cease movement. I've even seen where the decoy is stroking the dog trying to calm him. I just don't understand what that's all about. To me it's a hectic situation and I don't mind a little "hectic" going on around me (with the dog that is).

DFrost


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Colin Chin said:


> Hi Lou,
> Your explanation to the above is it related to genetic issue ? Thanks.
> 
> Colin


Yes, it is.


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

Colin , 

As to problem solving PSDs that are having issues with nonreactive suspects . Solutions can be setting up a hide with the dog , usually in muzzle(this seems to work best) but it's good to mix it up with suits and sleeves also . 

With these types of dogs the hidden decoy goes from in the initial stages fighting K9 as soon as it engages ,to gradually lengthing out the the time between the initial engagement ( dog biting or hitting the decoy in muzzle) to before the decoy actually starts fighting or runs away(decoy will remain still even when being bitten or engaged by K9 in muzzle for a certain period of time , it's important the decoy reads the dog well and starts fighting before the dog starts to backoff then with each progressive scenerio the decoy legthens out the time). The idea is getting the K9 to think as long as he keeps engaging the suspect it will eventually start fighting or run off , some(the suspect) may just take more time then others before they start fighting . 

If this doesn't work I have moved to (as the decoy) attacking the K9 if it backs off an engagement . This for me this is a last ditch effort . We've done everything we could to build the dogs confidence but the behavior (backing off) continues and the dog shows some promise but it is down to sink or swim so I go after the dog . If it fights back I let it win and make sure to let him win in a very big way . 

With some they don't and we've washed some that can't overcome that problem . It can be tricky I had one dislocate my jaw after backing off in a muzzle fight . We had done everything else we could with him and this behavior continued . He was a very fast Mal , hit like on ton of bricks(if you were running) but had trouble engaging still and nonreactive suspects . He backed off I went after him and he blasted me in the jaw locking it open . Unfortunately he still wouldn't stay in the fight and we washed him out of the program .


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

WOW, that sounds terrible. Like a human Pez dispenser. I bet it hurt like hell too.


----------



## Bill Whatley (Aug 26, 2009)

=D>:-|


Thomas Barriano said:


> The technique is more effective if used with a nylon choke collar and is also referred to as isolating the behaviour. When the dog starts to react to another dog (or person) you lift their front feet off the ground till they calm down (or start to lose consciousness) and then put them back on the ground. The techique is more effective if used at the first sign of aggression and not waiting for a full on attack. The OP's description and poll question sound more dramatic, then what I've experienced in real life.


I try to diffuse it, but have experienced it, more than I'd like to. Just two weeks ago a catahoula bit the lady/owner. "Do you want to stop now or let me fix it?" He's now O.K. with the whole family and me,too. I got lot's of kisses on my face from him before he went home. I guess he decided that he loved us all, after all. I probably saved another dogs life. That's what it's all about. \\/


----------



## Bill Whatley (Aug 26, 2009)

David Frost said:


> I just don't have this problem. Building confidence in the bite can be done without touching the dog. I really don't want the handler touching the dog. If the dog is that low on confidence, I wouldn't have continued it in training in the first place. Dogs that are letting go when the handler approaches have probably been subjected to pretty strong physical corrections/interventions by the handler. More often than not I see the results I believe Howard mentioned. As the handler approaches the dog seems to pick up energy in the bite.
> 
> What I've often seen is the handler, calmly stroking the dog while he bites. The dog almost seems to cease movement. I've even seen where the decoy is stroking the dog trying to calm him. I just don't understand what that's all about. To me it's a hectic situation and I don't mind a little "hectic" going on around me (with the dog that is).
> 
> DFrost


Thank you, David, I have been told so many times that my training leaves the dog in too much aggression/attack. What's the point unless you need to calm him down enough to teach something. True, he can't learn anything if too fired up, but why slow him down too much, unless to stop previous handler aggression or something?


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

*Re: Diffusing*



Bill Whatley said:


> =D>:-|
> 
> I try to diffuse it, but have experienced it, more than I'd like to. Just two weeks ago a catahoula bit the lady/owner. "Do you want to stop now or let me fix it?" He's now O.K. with the whole family and me,too. I got lot's of kisses on my face from him before he went home. I guess he decided that he loved us all, after all. I probably saved another dogs life. That's what it's all about. \\/


Hey Bill,

Diffusing is more along the lines of what I call isolating the
behavior. The time to deal with dog or handler aggression is at the first sign. The technique I described with the cotton
choke collar (Leerburg sells them as dominate dog collars for 3x the $ :-( ) has very little handler involvement. There are no verbal commands or abrupt action. Just a smooth lifting of the dogs feet off the ground when he starts getting reactive. He gets to breath (his feet on the ground) when he calms down. You can't fight if you can't breath  

Another thing about attack on handler. There is a big difference in what you do when a dog starts up the leash
vs when the dog has his teeth sunk into your flesh. Try
hanging a dog that is attached to your arm. Try hanging a dog when you're pulling against your own flesh that the dog has a firm grip on. When a bite actually happens, both dog and handler are in survivor mode. There is seldom time to think of what technique you're going to use.


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

*Re: Diffusing*



Thomas Barriano said:


> There is a big difference in what you do when a dog starts up the leash
> vs when the dog has his teeth sunk into your flesh. Try
> hanging a dog that is attached to your arm. Try hanging a dog when you're pulling against your own flesh that the dog has a firm grip on. When a bite actually happens, both dog and handler are in survivor mode. There is seldom time to think of what technique you're going to use.



What do you do when the dog is biting your flesh? That is not the time to go into survival mode. Survival mode means that you are willing to kill your dog to get him off the bite... Or seriously injure him at the minimum. When being bitten it is the exact time to stay as cool as you can.

If you try all sorts of things like the butt poke, bucket on the head, flanking etc etc etc while he's biting you, and he's a tough dominant dog...I have to say that you will recieve more damage than trying the DD collar to choke his ass out.

Now, in survival mode you are willing to take his eye out, break bones, drown etc etc etc to get him off. No, this is not the time to go into survival mode unless you really don't care if you f your dog up permanently, or kill him.

I must say, if a person goes into survival mode on an arm bite then they are either A) Newbies, or B)scared of their own dog. Now...if he has you by the throat then yes, I'm going into survival mode.

If you're working with dominant aggressive dogs you better be ready with a game plan for whatever comes. It's too late to figure out what you're going to do after he's latched onto an extremity. Just sayin'

Howard


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

*Re: Diffusing*



Howard Knauf said:


> What do you do when the dog is biting your flesh? That is not the time to go into survival mode. Survival mode means that you are willing to kill your dog to get him off the bite... Or seriously injure him at the minimum. When being bitten it is the exact time to stay as cool as you can.
> 
> If you try all sorts of things like the butt poke, bucket on the head, flanking etc etc etc while he's biting you, and he's a tough dominant dog...I have to say that you will recieve more damage than trying the DD collar to choke his ass out.
> 
> ...



The most serious bite I've ever received was a few years ago.
My Dobermann was fence fighting with my wife's STD Poodle  I reached in to grab him by the collar and he sunk his teeth into my arm. The strange thing is, I remember thinking what a nice calm full mouth grip it was. I told him to out and he did. It was only after I got him in the crate that I noticed how much I was bleeding. The punctures were deep, but could have been a lot worse if he had
of done the Dobermann shake thing. The hardest dog to handle once he went off, was a Dutch Shepherd. Little nips on the arms and legs but no permanent damage

I try not to challenge dominant dogs and don't recommend 
working dogs in defense. Decoys or handlers that like
dominant dogs should learn how to read the dog. Very few bites come without warning. I think the Koehler recommendation of "hanging" the dog is more as a preventative to getting bit when the dog comes up the leash.
I don't think it is very effective once the dog is actually biting?


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

If they have their teeth sunk into my flesh, the first thing is to keep them from the violent head shake mine do. The second thing I am going to do is choke him until it is done permanently. Has nothing to do with being green or afraid. I have raised all my dogs from puppies. They turn on me and they better win the fight because they are done. I would consider them unstable. Guess the different circunstances are going to determine the view one takes.
If you are getting paid to correct an aggression problem for someone else, it is a whole different thing.


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Thomas said..."Very few bites come without warning. I think the Koehler recommendation of "hanging" the dog is more as a preventative to getting bit when the dog comes up the leash.
I don't think it is very effective once the dog is actually biting?"

If the dog is on me then there are very few options in stopping the biting (on a bite trained dog..not a pet dog). Koehler's method will get the job done...and you have control of the dog once he releases.

Don said..."I have raised all my dogs from puppies. They turn on me and they better win the fight because they are done. I would consider them unstable. Guess the different circunstances are going to determine the view one takes."

Don, what breed are your dogs and what training have they had? A high drive, bite trained dog with just a splash of dominance will eventually try you. How far he thinks he can go depends on your relationship. If you've been soft he wont be when he goes to correct YOU in certain circumstances. You can't kill a thoroughbred because he runs too fast and throws you. To say you would kill your dog at the first sign of handler aggression, and to blame it on instability is, IMO a bit premature.

Howard


----------



## Dennis Jones (Oct 21, 2009)

I picked other, my 'working dog" would also be in my home. I'd find another handler and fully disclose the situation, even if I wanted to I don't have a private enough area out of sight of concerned citizens. If it were just a family dog and bit me with the intent of really hurting me and outrank me, its PTS time


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

Howard, they are airedale terriers. Training, very little past basic obedience and load up. I use them for hogs personally but they do a lot of things for others. They are extremely dominate dogs.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Diffusing is more along the lines of what I call isolating the
> behavior.


Thomas we're still waiting for you to supply some reference to anyone else using the term _"isolating behavior"_ in place of _"hanging."_ Last time you were asked you failed to show us even ONE such reference. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> The time to deal with dog or handler aggression is at the first sign.


If one sees it that is. It takes a perceptive and experienced handler to recognize it. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> The technique I described with the cotton choke collar


I still don't see the advantage of the cotton choke collar over a quality chain collar. You're lifting a good part of the dog's weight by the leash and I think that the chain slides smoothly enough. The fact that someone has made such a tool and given it a specific name strikes me as nothing but clever marketing. 

Unless you've anticipated the aggressive behavior (and why you would want to proceed if you know that what you're doing will result in aggression from the dog?) or you use the cotton collar all the time, you have to stop what you're doing, get the collar, put it on and then go back to what you were doing. Seems to me that the proper course of action would be to find some other way to get the behavior than to use something that's causing such an extreme reaction from the dog. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> has very little handler involvement. There are no verbal commands or abrupt action. Just a smooth lifting of the dogs feet off the ground when he starts getting reactive. He gets to breath (his feet on the ground) when he calms down. You can't fight if you can't breath


_"Little handler involvement?"_ Lifting a dog such that he can't breathe takes _"little handler involvement?"_ For the smaller handler, especially women (yes sexist, I know) who often lack upper body strength, lifting a dog's front legs off the ground AND HOLDING HIM THERE, it seems to me, takes *a lot *of handler involvement! 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Try hanging a dog that is attached to your arm. Try hanging a dog when you're pulling against your own flesh that the dog has a firm grip on.


The arm goes up with the dog's head as his feet are lifted off the ground. There's no need to pull against your own flesh for a bite on the hand or arm, where many attacks on the handler occur. Leg bites are of course, another story. With them I suggest keeping the dog on the ground with one hand and using the other to pull the dog's collar tightly around his neck (with the leash) to cut off his air. The faster and more effectively this is done, the quicker the dog will let go. This can be done even if the handler has fallen to the ground. Hopefully this occurs when others are present and can assist. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> When a bite actually happens, both dog and handler are in survivor mode.


The only time that _"survivor mode"_ is appropriate is if the dog has you by some body part that could result in death if the bite was not stopped quickly. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> There is seldom time to think of what technique you're going to use.


I'd suggest that people keep their head. Going into _"survivor mode"_ is what crooks do when they become _"primitive man"_ who does not use tools. This can result in the dog staying attached a lot longer and doing a lot more damage than if he's simply hung until he either releases the bite because he wants to breathe or passes out and has no choice.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> I think the Koehler recommendation of "hanging" the dog is more as a preventative to getting bit when the dog comes up the leash.
> I don't think it is very effective once the dog is actually biting?


The first part of this is right. The second part, not so much.


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

Don and Howard what happened to the clicker snaps? :mrgreen: Yeah being a prick! Bite the hand that feeds and get a foot to the...](*,)

*I still don't see the advantage of the cotton choke collar over a quality chain collar.* Lou it does less damage to the fur! This way Fluffy can still look good with a correction...


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

I should have written _"I still don't see the advantage of the cotton choke collar over a quality chain collar *in the context of hanging a dog that's trying to bite the handler" * _ 

It shouldn't be happening often enough so that there would be any noticeable effect on Fluffy's fur.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

As an instructor at the MWD School it was a technique we taught students to prepare them for that exact possibility. We called it "stringing up" rather than hanging, but the principle was the same. It was purely a defensive move. When students were prepared for it, it seemed to lessen the number of bites. This was particularly noticible during the late 60's, very early 70's when the military was retraining all the sentry dogs to patrol dogs. There were occasions where an instructor had to remove a dog from a student. From pesonal experience there were a few instances where a students dog had to be removed from an instructor. Koehler's hanging or the MWD version stringing up are one in the same and purely a defenensive move. Because of sheer numbers, I've seen this technique employed many times. Done correctly, and as it was taught in the MWD, the dog is raised off it's front feet. The leash would be grabbed about 6 inches from the snap. The arms would be raised until the hands were at eye level (average sized dog) the handler then turns in a clockwise direction. Performed properly, it's quick, the dog calms down and much more often than not, the dog is dropped back to it's feet, given a command and that scenario is forgotten. The handler and dog were usually put on break for a few minutes. 

dFrost


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

*Cotton Choke Chain vs Fur Saver*

[QUOTE

*I still don't see the advantage of the cotton choke collar over a quality chain collar.* Lou it does less damage to the fur! This way Fluffy can still look good with a correction...[/QUOTE]

Howard,

The use of the cotton choke chain is more for smoothness and quietness of operation. Most handlers use large link fur saver collars not the old AKC style choke chains. It is hard to
give a correction of any kind with a fur saver


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

*NOT interested*



Lou Castle said:


> The first part of this is right. The second part, not so much.


Lou,

My replies were to Bill and Howard. I have NO interest in engaging in a debate or discussion with you. I've been down that rat hole too many times on too many lists in the past.
If you will ignore my posts. I'll do likewise with yours.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

David Frost said:


> As an instructor at the MWD School it was a technique we taught students to prepare them for that exact possibility. We called it "stringing up" rather than hanging, but the principle was the same. It was purely a defensive move. When students were prepared for it, it seemed to lessen the number of bites. This was particularly noticible during the late 60's, very early 70's when the military was retraining all the sentry dogs to patrol dogs. There were occasions where an instructor had to remove a dog from a student. From pesonal experience there were a few instances where a students dog had to be removed from an instructor. Koehler's hanging or the MWD version stringing up are one in the same and purely a defenensive move. Because of sheer numbers, I've seen this technique employed many times. Done correctly, and as it was taught in the MWD, the dog is raised off it's front feet. The leash would be grabbed about 6 inches from the snap. The arms would be raised until the hands were at eye level (average sized dog) the handler then turns in a clockwise direction. Performed properly, it's quick, the dog calms down and much more often than not, the dog is dropped back to it's feet, given a command and that scenario is forgotten. The handler and dog were usually put on break for a few minutes.
> 
> dFrost


David,

Hanging or Stringing up, it sounds like the same technique to me. Gene England called it isolating the behavior. In Gene's version it also works in other applications like Table work.
Gene wants the dog to turn on and turn off (TOTO) to appropriate stimulation. He would agitate and reward. Then he would return in a neutral non threatening manner and if
the dog showed aggression, he would string the dog out (isolate the behavior) until the dog was quiet. I don't know how many people on the WDF have had the pleasure of working with Gene England (he isn't as active in dog training now) but he was/is the man on reading dogs.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

I'm actually pretty familiar with Mr. England.

DFrost


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Thomas Barriano said:


> David,
> 
> In Gene's version it also works in other applications like Table work.
> .


How so?


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Awww geez Howard did ya have to ask that, ha ha. I'm not afraid of giving my personal opinion, I just won't talk bad about other trainers. I know that's odd seeing how all trainers are so agreeable. I will say I think if a person has to use table training, they have shitter and it's the only way they get the dog to do anything that resembles aggression. When the fear biter tries to bite the nearest person, the handler, how difficult do you think it would be to stretch a dog out between a leash and being affixed to a table. Yeah I'm familiar with the technique. It has nothing to do with the original question of would you hang a dog as means to stop an direct attack. 

DFrost


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> The use of the cotton choke chain is more for smoothness and quietness of operation.


Why is it important to be quiet during this? Do you think that the dog does not know where the correction is coming from? 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Most handlers use large link fur saver collars not the old AKC style choke chains. It is hard to give a correction of any kind with a fur saver


Most handlers that I've seen, and I've been from coast to coast across the US, use pinch collars or choke chains, rather than fur savers. Perhaps in your corner of the world the fur saver is more common. But I wonder since most of those folks probably use corrections with their leashes to train, why would they use something that's as you say, _"hard to give a correction"_ with? 

Pinch collars aren't as good for the _"breathing interruption technique"_ as choke chains but the technique of lifting seems to give good results, but the choke chain that I've mentioned repeatedly works just as well as the cotton leash that you keep referring to. AND one needn't switch equipment in the middle of training to use it.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Lou,
> 
> My replies were to Bill and Howard.


In your post # 106, you quote me. As far as I'm concerned that's a reply to me. 

And in this post, your #107, you quoted me a second time. AGAIN, that's a reply to me. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> I have NO interest in engaging in a debate or discussion with you. I've been *down that rat hole *too many times on too many lists in the past. [Emphasis added]


Thomas I have no problem in staying polite and professional in my responses to you. It's a shame that the same can't be said for you. I notice that some of your earlier rudeness was redacted by a moderator. Now here you are with the same behavior again. I'd have thought that you'd have learned a lesson, but I can see that I was mistaken. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> If you will ignore my posts. I'll do likewise with yours.


I see no reason why I should ignore your, or anyone else's posts for that matter . I really don't care if you respond or not. I think a great deal of the information that you put out is quite off–base and when I come across such information, if I feel like it and I have the time, I'll say so. 

When you post publicly you stand the risk that someone will disagree with you and further, that they'll respond publicly. You are free to do as you please. If that means that you'll ignore my posts, so be it. Somehow I'll learn to live with it.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> David,
> 
> Hanging or Stringing up, it sounds like the same technique to me. Gene England called it isolating the behavior.


Can you cite such a reference in any of Mr. England's work? 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Gene wants the dog to turn on and turn off (TOTO) to appropriate stimulation. He would agitate and reward. Then he would return in a neutral non threatening manner and if
> the dog showed aggression, he would string the dog out (isolate the behavior) until the dog was quiet.


This is NOTHING that we're talking about here. How you link the two is a mystery. To remind you, the title of this thread is *"Koehler Hanging."* Koehler used that technique ONLY for aggression towards the handler. I believe that is the way that Mr. Frawley intends for his rope collar to be used as well, for aggression towards the handler. I've not seen him discuss it for anything else. 

Mr. England is the first trainer I've heard of who uses it for undesired aggression *towards the decoy. *I'm wondering if you have this right because I think this is a completely inappropriate use of choking a dog for extended periods. The phrase _"extended periods"_ here relates to the fact that during a correction a dog is deprived of that ability for only an instant, certainly less than a second/correction. You're describing something that goes on for a much longer period of time, _"until the dog was quiet."_ That might be until he passed out. If it lasted that long, I'd consider it to be abuse. 

I think it's only appropriate to deprive a dog of breathing for such an extended period during times of *self defense *or as David described, during that very short period when he's swung around as the handler spins. This would only for an instant and then it's done ONLY to prevent an imminent attack. 

*Extended choking SHOULD NOT be used as a training method, it's a self–defense technique. * There's a significant difference. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> I don't know how many people on the WDF have had the pleasure of working with Gene England (he isn't as active in dog training now) but he was/is the man on reading dogs.


I'm sure that many have heard of Mr. England here. Some may even have worked with him. Interestingly *NOT ONE of them* supports you in your claim that he uses the term _"isolating behavior"_ in place of _"hanging."_ Also not sure what Mr. England's expertise at reading dogs has to do with this discussion.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

*Table work*



Howard Knauf said:


> How so?



Howard,

I already explained how the TOTO system is used on the table, with isolating behavior. Table work is controversial. A table is a piece of equipment. When used by an idiot it can be dangerous. That's the fault of the trainer not the equipment.
I saw Gene England work 20 dogs on a table at a seminar in Albuquerque New Mexico, all of them were helped, NONE of them were adversely affected in any way. If someone wants to condemn a piece of equipment based on rumours and hearsay, not having seen it used by someone that knew
what they were doing. Then that is their problem.


----------



## Mike Scheiber (Feb 17, 2008)

*Re: Table work*



Thomas Barriano said:


> Howard,
> 
> I already explained how the TOTO system is used on the table, with isolating behavior. Table work is controversial. A table is a piece of equipment. When used by an idiot it can be dangerous. That's the fault of the trainer not the equipment.
> I saw Gene England work 20 dogs on a table at a seminar in Albuquerque New Mexico, all of them were helped, NONE of them were adversely affected in any way. If someone wants to condemn a piece of equipment based on rumours and hearsay, not having seen it used by someone that knew
> what they were doing. Then that is their problem.


Gene's table work hasn't evolved with out collateral damage he has prolly destroyed more good/great dogs than any one in the world but he has it working now his losses is all our gains.


----------



## Anita Griffing (Aug 8, 2009)

Gene England, whether you like him or not, knows an incredible amount about dogs. He has been successful with his training style and he has helped others be successful. JMO

IMO a good tool to have in a training bag is a collar you can make yourself with the plastic
covered tie-out metal cord. (not real thin) You just bend back the ends about 2 inches and 
clamp them and you have a strong slick choke collar.  
AG


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

Lou Castle said:


> In your post # 106, you quote me. As far as I'm concerned that's a reply to me.
> 
> And in this post, your #107, you quoted me a second time. AGAIN, that's a reply to me.
> 
> ...


Well, I for one hope you learn to live with it pretty quick Lou because it is pretty obvious that you got a burr up your ass when it comes to Thomas....even if you say "regards" at the end of each nit picking petty post you have made it is pretty obvious. I am pretty surprised he hasn't told you to go f yourself already.....but I honestly think that is what you are trying to get him to do and I have to wonder why. You ought to give it a rest. I don't know about anyone else but your wearing on me big time with your bullshit.
Kind regards


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Lou Castle said:


> ]or as David described, during that very short period when he's swung around as the handler spins. This would only for an instant and then it's done ONLY to prevent an imminent attack.
> 
> *.*


*

Just to be clear; when the a dog is "strung up", only his front feet are removed from the contact with the ground. The handler turns in a clockwise manner to keep the dog off balance. Absolutely correct, it's very quick and only to defend against an attack.

DFrost*


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

*Re: Table work*



Thomas Barriano said:


> If someone wants to condemn a piece of equipment based on rumours and hearsay, not having seen it used by someone that knew
> what they were doing. Then that is their problem.


I would certainly agree it's their problem. In fact, how in the world could someone condemn a piece of equipment or training methods they've not seen. Doesn't make sense to me.

DFrost


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

*Re: Table work*



Mike Scheiber said:


> Gene's table work hasn't evolved with out collateral damage he has prolly destroyed more good/great dogs than any one in the world but he has it working now his losses is all our gains.



Mike,

There are a lot of rumors about Gene England, especially his work in the early 80's. When you actually go to the trouble of tracking down the rumors, very few can be substantiated.
There was even a video that supposedly showed a dog being killed on the table. I saw the rest of the video where the dead dog came back to life, he went unconscious, that's all.
Gene is a great trainer and very successful at training several people to obtain V scores with their dogs. Successful
people often have petty jealous little people nipping at their
heels.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Don Turnipseed said:


> Well, I for one hope you learn to live with it pretty quick Lou because it is pretty obvious that you got a burr up your ass when it comes to Thomas....


I notice that you've somehow managed to overlook the fact that Mr. Barriano is the one who is unable to control himself in this conversation. He is the one who's engaged in rudeness and name calling. It is HIS posts that the moderators have removed rude comments aimed at me from, not the other way round. 

There are a few people who I think sometimes put out bad information. I make it a point to comment whenever I see them do it. You may think it's "a burr." I think it's just correcting bad information. 



Don Turnipseed said:


> even if you say "regards" at the end of each nit picking petty post you have made it is pretty obvious.


What you call "nit picking" and "petty" I call *attention to detail. * If you don't like my posts, please feel free to join Mr. Barriano in ignoring them. My feelings won't be hurt in the slightest! 



Don Turnipseed said:


> I am pretty surprised he hasn't told you to go f yourself already.....


He's tried on several lists but usually moderators stop him from getting that rude. It really doesn't bother me. I just point out his lack of control and professionalism and go on criticizing his comments and correcting his errors. 



Don Turnipseed said:


> I don't know about anyone else but your wearing on me big time with your bullshit. Kind regards


Wondering if you have anything to say on the topic or are you just about the personal attack? I notice that NOT ONE WORD of what you wrote had to do with the topic it was all about me! Anytime you think I've written "bullshit" you're free to point it out. in fact, please do. I welcome your on–topic comments. The rest is just a waste of time. 

I'll give you the same advice I give to Mr. Barriano when he does the sort of thing that you've just done. Please get off the personal attack and get back on the topic. It's posts like this one from you that gets topics locked.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Lets ALL stay on topic folks!


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

*Re: Table work*



Thomas Barriano said:


> There was even a video that supposedly showed a dog being killed on the table. I saw the rest of the video where the dead dog came back to life, he went unconscious, *that's all. * [Emphasis added]


_"THAT'S ALL!!!!"_ Why on earth would anyone need to choke a dog into unconsciousness on a training table? 

* Choking a dog into unconsciousness is a self–defense technique, not a training method. *


----------



## Mike Scheiber (Feb 17, 2008)

*Re: Table work*



Thomas Barriano said:


> Mike,
> 
> There are a lot of rumors about Gene England, especially his work in the early 80's. When you actually go to the trouble of tracking down the rumors, very few can be substantiated.
> There was even a video that supposedly showed a dog being killed on the table. I saw the rest of the video where the dead dog came back to life, he went unconscious, that's all.
> ...


I train with a couple of people that have been through Gene's tracking system back in the earlier years allot of what they learned has been passes on to our club and still being used.
I also train with Greg Doud who gives allot of credit to Gene for teaching him many of the methods he uses in his training system he uses. The guy directly or indirectly has influence nearly all the top Schutzhund handlers/trainers in the country and some big guns in Germany and Belgian.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

*Staying on Topic*



Bob Scott said:


> Lets ALL stay on topic folks!


Bob,

That is difficult when Mr Castle continues to have my name in his mouth after I politely asked him to ignore my posts.
When he makes false claims (that any of my posts have been deleted or redacted) When he falsely claims I have done any attacking or name calling. When he claims as justification for his replies that I quoted him. I quoted a paragraph in one of Howards post where he quoted ONE
sentence by Lou Castle. Now he is attacking Don T who has
dared to object to Lou's heavy handed tactics. We also see
Lou Castle, who has never done anything dog related out side the Internet, criticizing the training techniques of an icon in the police and sport dog training world.

Unless the owners and moderators of this list have abdicated their positions, then Lou Castle is just another poster and has NO authority to demand replies or explanations from anyone.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

This is for no one in particular and everyone in general.

Anyone can put anyone else in this (WDA) forum on their ignore list. If anyone objects to another's post then put that individual on the ignore list. 
There are many people here that can and do ignore other's comments.
Some really enjoy baiting others into a "discussion". 
Some are better at resisting being baited into a "discussion". 
Some can "discuss" without feeling insulted or dissed even when strongly dissagreed with and even if they know they are being baited.
They are only words!
"THE WORDS OF A FOOL OFFEND ONLY ANOTHER FOOL!

Again, this is for no one in particular and everyone in general!


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Earlier Bob Scott wrote,


> Lets ALL stay on topic folks!





Thomas Barriano said:


> Bob,
> 
> That is difficult when Mr Castle continues to have my name in his mouth after I politely asked him to ignore my posts.


Your request was anything but polite Mr. Barriano. It contained a reference that responding to my posts was going down a _"rat hole."_ It would appear that we have a different definition of "polite." But, in any case, how does what I do, affect anyone's ability to do as Bob requested and to stay on topic? I apologize for this divergence from the topic but I can't allow such nonsense to go unanswered. You could have sent this post via PM to a moderator but you chose to make it public. And so that's where I'll reply. 

In any case if you don't want to respond to my posts because you're incapable of being polite and professional, that's not my problem. ONCE AGAIN, your post has nothing to do with the topic and is ONLY about me. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> When he makes *false claims *(that any of my posts have been deleted or redacted) [Emphasis added]


Back on the 22nd I received a PM from a moderator stating that one of Mr. Barriano's posts had been "edited" and that a comment that Mr. Barriano had written (that I'd quoted in order to respond to it) had been removed from my response. Sure enough, when I checked, my quotation had been removed and so had Mr. Barriano's rude comment that I'd quoted. 

Mr. Barriano's post that was had rude material deleted was #74. My post that quoted it (that had the same material removed) was #75. I still have the original that Mr. Barriano wrote and will supply it privately to anyone who'd like to see his rudeness. Since it was removed from the forum by a moderator, I don't think it's appropriate to reproduce it on the forum. 

So much for what Mr. Barriano, called a _"false claim."_ My statement that some material of his had been removed because it was rude *was perfectly accurate. * And this recent statement of his just shows how far he'll go in his quest to make me out to be the bad guy. My claim was not false but his statement clearly was! 

That moderator who told me in a PM that he'd edited Mr. Barriano's post also said that he'd told Mr. Barriano to take any problem that he had with me to PM's. Mr. Barriano has not done so. Instead he wastes the time of everyone who reads this with this constant complaining. All the while refusing to respond to simple questions. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> When he claims as justification for his replies that I quoted him. I quoted a paragraph in one of Howards post where he quoted ONE
> sentence by Lou Castle.


Yes Mr. Barriano, quoting one sentence that I wrote is "quoting me." In any case, I told you that I had no intention of ignoring your posts. Had I said that I'd do so, you might have a point. As it is, you don't. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> We also see
> Lou Castle, *who has never done anything dog related out side the Internet, * criticizing the training techniques of an icon in the police and sport dog training world. [Emphasis added]


Mr. Barriano I love it when you tell this lie. I was a dog handler for my police department for 5 1/2 years. I would have stayed longer, but on my department all assignments rotated, except for the position of Chief. After that I was the in-house trainer for most of the next 15 years as I worked various assignments. They did not hire an outside maintenance trainer, as does just about every other small and medium sized LE agency in this area, until I was injured and could no longer do that work. 

Additionally, I've done 43 seminars and workshops in 18 states, 33 cities, 3 foreign countries (Canada, The UK and Spain); 13 of them repeats (done for the same seminar organizers). One of them repeated three times. For someone who's _"… has never done dog related outside the Internet"_ that seems to me to be a good bit of work. Since you made this accusation, could you tell us how many seminars YOU'VE done? 

It seems that you think that Gene England, is above any criticism. I disagree. I think that if what you have told us is true, that he choked a dog into unconsciousness on a training table actually happened, that is abuse. I don't like the idea of choking a dog into unconsciousness for *ANY *reason. In a self–defense situation it may be necessary to prevent or limit injury to the handler if the dog is coming up the leash or he's hanging on the bite and won't let go, but I think that's the only time it's permissible. I don't see how this situation could occur on a table and I doubt that's what occurred. If it had been the case, I think that you'd have told us. Apparently you think this is perfectly OK to do as a training method. I disagree and I bet I'm not the only one. 

Can you show us some reference in ANY training book that says that choking a dog unconscious is a legitimate training response for undesired aggression towards a decoy? 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Unless the owners and moderators of this list have abdicated their positions, then Lou Castle is just another poster and has NO authority to *demand replies or explanations *from anyone. [Emphasis added]


I've _"demanded"_ nothing Mr. Barriano. I've simply asked some questions; the same as anyone else. You've made statements that I disagree with and that no one here has supported and so I've asked you to supply references for them. I don't care if you choose not to answer, I leave it to the forum members to decide which of us has credibility.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

*Enough!*



Lou Castle said:


> _"THAT'S ALL!!!!"_ Why on earth would anyone need to choke a dog into unconsciousness on a training table?
> 
> * Choking a dog into unconsciousness is a self–defense technique, not a training method. *


ENOUGH of your nonsense Lou. There is NOTHING in my original post about Gene England using the technique of isolating the behavior to "choke the dog into unconsciousness" Don't put words into my mouth. The dog in question panicked and fell off the table. He could have reached the ground with his rear feet if he had not panicked.
He went unconscious. Which is EXACTLY what happens when you hang or string up a dog.

"going down a rat hole" is an expression used when a conversation goes off topic. Which happens often when you are involved. You are the only one so thin skinned and egotistical that you'd consider it a personal insult. I don't recall what was removed from my post 74 and your 75.
It likely was as personally insulting as the rat hole comment

Your brag about the amount of seminars you've given and
your career is more fiction then fact.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Earlier I wrote,


> _"THAT'S ALL!!!!"_ Why on earth would anyone need to choke a dog into unconsciousness on a training table?
> 
> * Choking a dog into unconsciousness is a self–defense technique, not a training method. * [Emphasis original]





Thomas Barriano said:


> ENOUGH of your nonsense Lou. There is NOTHING in my original post about Gene England using the technique of isolating the behavior to "choke the dog into unconsciousness" Don't put words into my mouth.


Here are your exact words,


> There was even a video that supposedly showed a dog being killed on the table. I saw the rest of the video where the dead dog came back to life, he went unconscious, that's all.


 YOU are the one who described Mr. England's training whereby a dog was choked unconscious on a table. YOU are the one who brought up this video, not me. I didn't put those words into your mouth, Mr. Barriano, YOU did that all by yourself! 



Thomas Barriano said:


> The dog in question panicked and fell off the table. He could have reached the ground with his rear feet if he had not panicked.
> He went unconscious.


But you tell us that HE DID panic and that he was rendered unconscious. Interestingly, until just now you failed to tell us this little fact. Also interestingly, this part of the story, about the dog ONLY being choked unconscious because _"he panicked" came out ONLY after you were called on it. 



Thomas Barriano said:



Which is EXACTLY what happens when you hang or string up a dog.

Click to expand...

Conveniently you overlook the obvious and significant differences. You consider two dogs that have been choked unconscious and say, "Oh they're exactly the same!" 

But you're quite wrong! Koehler advocated and I agree that hanging a dog is ONLY to be used as a self–defense move when the handler is attacked by his dog. YOU have described choking a dog into unconsciousness for unwanted aggression TOWARDS A DECOY. I'm sorry that you're unable to see the difference, but it's crucial. In the case of the handler attack there's a very real chance of serious injury. In your case it's just a training issue. No one is in danger and there's no chance of injury. 

I'm talking about choking out as self defense to avoid potential serious injury and a trip to the Emergency Room and you're talking about a training method to fix a minor issue. 



Thomas Barriano said:



"going down a rat hole" is an expression used when a conversation goes off topic. Which happens often when you are involved.

Click to expand...

Usually it happens when people behave as you have; taking comments made about training, personally. Your comments to me have been personal ones, aimed NOT AT MY WORK but AT ME PERSONALLY. AGAIN, and this conversation has been done before, you demonstrate that you're incapable of responding and NOT getting personal. Even when I plead for it and even in the face of a warning and being censored by a moderator you lose your professionalism start responding with personal attacks. My comments are directed at training methods not at you personally. But you are incapable of recognizing or maintaining this distinction. 



Thomas Barriano said:



You are the only one so thin skinned and egotistical that you'd consider it a personal insult.

Click to expand...

Well Mr. Barriano I'll have to disagree. A moderator thought that your comment was so much a rude personal attack that he deleted it. I didn't ask him to, he did it on his own! Additionally he said that he told you to take any problem that you had with me to PM's. You've refused to comply with that directive. Instead you continue to try and antagonize me, apparently in the hopes that I'll respond in kind so you could loose a torrent of personal attack. 



Thomas Barriano said:



I don't recall what was removed from my post 74 and your 75.
It likely was as personally insulting as the rat hole comment

Click to expand...

No matter. A moderator thought it was insulting too. That's why he deleted it. I notice that NOW you agree that your post WAS edited by a moderator. Just last post you called my reference to it a *"false claim."* I also have noticed that contrary to your word that you were going to ignore my posts, you've failed to do so. 



Thomas Barriano said:



Your brag about the amount of seminars you've given and
your career is more fiction then fact.

Click to expand...

The only reason that I mention my history or my seminars is when someone questions my credentials. I'm happy to supply references to anyone who doubts my record. Mr. Barriano you've told these little stories several times now. It seems that you think that the best way to divert attention away from your shortcomings and failings in this discussion is to point the finger at me personally! 



Thomas Barriano said:



IF you continue with your nonsense I request permission from the moderators to
post a pointer to the World Famous Frawley Castle Website where Steve Leigh documents your "career" and your behavior on other lists

Click to expand...

This is the same path that you've gone down for a few years now Mr. Barriano. Here's how it goes. You post some tidbit of training information. I disagree with it and state my reasons for doing so. I ask questions which you refuse to answer. This happens a few times and then you turn to personal attacks on me because you can't stand to be disagreed with or to be questioned. I don't respond in kind but merely point out your rudeness. Perhaps this emboldens you, because you continue in the same vein, usually escalating as we progress. Occasionally a moderator will try to stop you, but you refuse. Instead you continue with the personal attacks. Then you attack my credentials completing the fundamentals of the as hominem attack. . 

It's a classic debate technique. "If you don't have the facts, attack your opponent personally." You've been doing it for quite some time now on various forums and lists. It's disruptive, it's beneath contempt and it's disgusting. But none of that stops you or even slows you down. People seeing these personal attacks are hesitant to post for fear of getting the same treatment from you and so the effect on the entire forum is chilling. 

Here's the chronology this time. You entered this thread with post #43. Your very next post, #48 accused me of "not being serious" and of "having an agenda." BOTH comments were personal attacks on me. I'd written NOTHING about you, but I'd replied in response to your comments. I assured that I was serious and that my agenda was to get answers to the poll questions. You next post #51 continued to argue that I had an agenda. 

A couple of posts later I mentioned that you were getting personal and said that why you always did this "[wa]s a mystery." My hope was to get you to stop. Instead, your post #74 was so rude that a moderator, acting on his own, deleted part of it. You've gotten worse as the thread progressed since then. 

I'll try it AGAIN. Please stop the personal attacks and return to the discussion._


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Unless there are comments directly related to the question asked in the poll, the poll will be closed.

DFrost


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

I would use hanging FIRST in a self-defense situation. If a dog were coming up a leash at me, I figure for the dogs good and mine, he may as well learn them rules right off the bat so we can get on with productive training. Hanging does not mean he has to be held to the point of passing out. If they have to be held until they pass out they are just to stupid to bother with anyway.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

*Close the poll*



David Frost said:


> Unless there are comments directly related to the question asked in the poll, the poll will be closed.
> 
> DFrost


David,

The sooner the poll is closed the better IMHO


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Don Turnipseed said:


> I would use hanging FIRST in a self-defense situation. If a dog were coming up a leash at me
> Hanging does not mean he has to be held to the point of passing out. If they have to be held until they pass out they are *just to stupid to bother with * anyway. [Emphasis added]


LOL. Thanks for the response Don. I've had some stupid dogs then. One needed choking out a couple of times. But when he learned that aggression towards his handler was not going to be tolerated, he settled down and turn into an excellent dog.


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

I don't see equipment as the real training issue. Sure it is important for the task that you are doing, but a correction is more than slinging, yelling, or dropping a boot in the backdoor. The dog needs to understand PACK ROLE. It follows and handlers lead...nothing more and nothing less. When the challenge to that role comes, the handler BETTER be willing and able to show who is the boss and dole out the correct and correct amount of "awareness."

ANY thoughts after that from Mr. K-9 means you weren't comunicating effectively on a level that the dog FULLY understood, a small window said, "I can over-ride that position." I see a good correction as a leadership directive. If the workers are 24/7 telling the boss how the business NEEDS to be run, then THEY don't understand business and need to find a new job. If the dog must be called to the carpet, if a hanging/slinging is used, then don't half-a$$ it!!!


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Don Turnipseed said:


> I would use hanging FIRST in a self-defense situation. If a dog were coming up a leash at me, I figure for the dogs good and mine, he may as well learn them rules right off the bat so we can get on with productive training. Hanging does not mean he has to be held to the point of passing out. If they have to be held until they pass out they are just to stupid to bother with anyway.


 Hi Don,

In a previous post you commented that you would basically kill any of your dogs if they successfully latched onto you. In the above quote you are willing to string em up to set em straight. The only difference between the two scenarios is that in one there is a successful bite, while in the other there is an attempt.

Basically, just to be clear where you stand on this....you are willing to kill a dog because you didn't see the signs of an imminent bite and your reflexes were too slow....or, you are willing to save a dog because you were on your game that day and didn't actually get bit?

Seems to me that the intent of the dogs in both scenarios would be identical with just a different outcome. How is one saveable, and the other discarded? Just trying to understand.

Howard


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

Howard, the last post was theoretical in the sense that had I raised dogs to bite, I would expect them to try so I would also handle them differently and consider the attempt as a successful breeding....possibly.LOL. The dogs I have....I would be bitten if they decided to because they would catch me totally by surprise since it has never happened in 20+ years.


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

OK. Now I understand the statement about them being too stupid to bother with anyway. Thanks

Howard


----------



## Mike D'Abruzzo (Oct 6, 2009)

I chose other - because generally you would know if you were working with a dog that would be prone to handler aggression.

I used to get attacked all the time when i first started training (dealing mostly with green german shepherds being trained for security work). I didnt use a choker but a pinch (safer on their neck) and would just hold there front feet off the ground (not the whole dog) and spin a little to throw them off balance and calmly ask again a simple command such as sit and try to end with praise and a good note. the process might be repeated a few times before the dog obeyed.

But, through the years i learned to build a relationship first, put my self in the correct social position through more positive based training, structured play, and leadership exercises before doing the types of exercises (mostly correction based) that would potentially cause a bite from. Most dogs that attack the handler or either confused from a correction or dont respect the handler as a leader - i find this is easily preventable if you go through the proper steps. Dogs just dont bite for no reason. If I'm ever still in doubt i will prepare by training with a comfortable basket muzzle so if i misjudge the dog i can stay calm and calmy follow through with the exercise which seems do be more effective in maintaining the relationship and show that you are not even slightly intimidated.

This has worked very well for me personally. I have also occaisonly wore a bite suit when training very aggressive (mostly fear based) dogs that I havent yet built a relationship with or get used to a muzzle first. I would just stay calm if the dog went to bite and feed an arm. With the fear based ones this really throws them for a loop kind of like if you punched a guy with your best shot and didnt react at all. I usually follow through by petting them with long strokes on their body, to also reasure them that I am not about to fight with them (and invite them to bite again for no reaction). I understand that this subject isn't necessarily about these types of dogs though...

In a nutshell, I believe if you plan ahead enough generally there shouldnt be a reason to hang and if you do it should really be because of a serious misjudement by the trainer and you have no other choice to save yourself. Definitely wouldnt take it personally from the dog - usually you can explain what happened and make a plan to deal with it in a matter that you can be more proud of. It must have been at least 10 years since i had to do a "modified hang" for self defense going by this plan and I deal full time training in-kennel mostly aggression rehab and personal protection dogs.


----------



## Butch Cappel (Aug 12, 2007)

Mike,
Very well thought out and informative post. I would agree with all you said. In the Guard dog business my lessons in dog training went pretty much like yours are going now.

Thanks for a well written post.


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

*Koehler Method...*that doesn't happen to have anything to do with bathrooms and K-9 potty training does it?8-[


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Howard Gaines III said:


> *Koehler Method...*that doesn't happen to have anything to do with bathrooms and K-9 potty training does it?8-[


Absolutely no potty questions. I think they make washerless faucets too though

DFrost


----------



## Skip Morgart (Dec 19, 2008)

Howard Gaines III said:


> *Koehler Method...*that doesn't happen to have anything to do with bathrooms and K-9 potty training does it?8-[


You have to hang the male dog if he doesn't put the seat back down.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Skip Morgart said:


> You have to hang the male dog if he doesn't put the seat back down.


 
:-o DANG! I think my older sisters were Koehler trainers even before it was popular!


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

Having grown up with 2 older sisters . Lived with my fair share of women and worked along side many more , I have never gotten why it is the males responsiblity to put the seat back down . 

They should be happy we put it up in the first place before doing our business .


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Jim Nash said:


> Having grown up with 2 older sisters . Lived with my fair share of women and worked along side many more , I have never gotten why it is the males responsiblity to put the seat back down .
> 
> They should be happy we put it up in the first place before doing our business .


 
I agree 100% Jim but it didn't keep my older sisters from whippin my ass......specially when I'd suggest they learn how to do it standing up. Never went well for me. 8-[8-[ :lol:


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

Same here . That's why I'm so bitter and it wasn't just my sisters . Got beat up by a nurse one day . That was embarrassing . If you want to see the definition of fight drive it's an angry nurse with a wet butt .


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Don't know why I'm laughing so hard. That's causing me flashbacks! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## ann schnerre (Aug 24, 2006)

ok guys, here's the reason it's YOUR responsibility to put the seat down: if you don't, and your favorite female's back gets thrown out due to the 3'" difference between what she was expecting vs what she GOT, well....just don't act all suprised and innocent. doesn't work


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

That late night 
"KERPLUNK" sound and "DAMN YOU BOBBY" raised the hair right up on my neck.
Then my "TURN THE LIGHT ON AND WATCH WEAR YOUR SITTING" would get me another ass whoopin from my sisters.
Wimmins got no sense of humor!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: 
It did break me of the habit though before I got married. :wink:
7 kids in a two bedroom, one bathroom house lerns ya lots of lessons....most of them hurt too! :lol: 
Just move into my first two holer two years ago. Life is good! \\/


----------



## ann schnerre (Aug 24, 2006)

and me sitting here laughing at a frickin' laptop is starting to concern Ike  

i'll go get the broomstick...


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

My wife just shakes her head when I start laughing at the new fangled typewriter.


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

A female officer I started with trained her husband to sit while taking a pee . Can't remember if she said she used a pinch or an e-collar for that . Sorry Bob , she said the pizza rolls he loves just weren't working . 

Anyways , they got a divorce not long after . What a shocker .


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

That's one mean, cold hearted wimmins to do that to a guy! 
I'm afraid I'd have to get the Saran Wrap out on her! 
If they had that stuff when I was a kid...well...it's doubtful I'd be typing right now. :lol::lol::lol:


----------



## ann schnerre (Aug 24, 2006)

saran wrap=you WOULD be dead!! 

i tried to make it simple and clear for you guys, but you're evidently not "getting" it...

i'll consult w/connie for back-chaining


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

My brother had a girlfriend that did the same thing with the very e-collar I was talking about . He kept saying " I don't think this is a good idea ? " and as women often do she got her way and BAMM !

Dog training's fun isn't it . You surely don't get these kinda stories collecting stamps for a hobby .


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

So you guys let chicks put e-collars on you ?? I put the e-collar into the toilet and leave the seat up. That way I can train them to pay attention.

I turn it way the hell up, as they don't pay attention otherwise. THen I make them sleep on the couch, as they are nasty potty girls. Most of the time you send them home.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> So you guys let chicks put e-collars on you ?? I put the e-collar into the toilet and leave the seat up. That way I can train them to pay attention.
> 
> I turn it way the hell up, as they don't pay attention otherwise. THen I make them sleep on the couch, as they are nasty potty girls. Most of the time you send them home.


Does anyone else get the feeling the "Man Song" was written for Jeff?

DFrost


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

ann schnerre said:


> saran wrap=you WOULD be dead!!
> 
> i tried to make it simple and clear for you guys, but you're evidently not "getting" it...
> 
> i'll consult w/connie for back-chaining


Nope, you confused the situation Ann. I have been confused since you said, " if you don't, and your favorite female's back gets thrown out due to the 3'" difference between what she was expecting vs what she GOT, well....just don't act all suprised and innocent." Up till then I thought we were talking toilet seats....now I am not sure.....although it may explains why the wimmins can put shock collars on their hubby's.


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

Jeff , 

Never allowed any e-collars on me . My bro didn't either . She put it on her leg and ordered him to shock her . Dirty girl I guess . But that was more then she expected .

Ann , I really have to say if there's a possiblity of fallin in the toilet I really think it behoves the woman to look first . As you know us guys have to sit on occassion . I always look first . 

But like Bob says that's an unwinnable battle after the fact . 

Don , I can't believe I missed that ! This is going downhill fast .


----------



## ann schnerre (Aug 24, 2006)

don, i'm proud of you! i was starting to think NONE of you guys was going to catch that


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

GUYS: It's kind of like farm etiquette. If you pass through an open gate, leave it open, it it was closed, close it after you walk through.


----------



## Cate Helfgott (Feb 16, 2009)

susan tuck said:


> guys: It's kind of like farm etiquette. If you pass through an open gate, leave it open, it it was closed, close it after you walk through.


yes! =d>


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

Ok so what about when we have to take a pee it's down we have to put it up then down when we are done . Why, it shouldn't be our problem ? 

WE look when we have to sit . I don't get why a woman wouldn't either since they take that risk more often . 

I say f#@* it . Guys should just leave the seat down all the time . That way the women won't fall in anymore . Doesn't mean their butts won't get wet . Just means it will just be a little warmer .


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Jim Nash said:


> Ok so what about when we have to take a pee it's down we have to put it up then down when we are done . Why, it shouldn't be our problem ?
> 
> WE look when we have to sit . I don't get why a woman wouldn't either since they take that risk more often .
> 
> I say f#@* it . Guys should just leave the seat down all the time . That way the women won't fall in anymore . Doesn't mean their butts won't get wet . Just means it will just be a little warmer .


Careful buddy, we wimens has ways of making yuz guys pay, like hiding the toilet paper, and the last thing you want is to be........................
STRANDED - STRANDED ON THE TOILET BOWL.....WHAT WILL YOU DO WHEN YOUR STRANDED AND YOU DON'T HAVE A ROLL???? mmmwaaaaahhaaahaaaaa haaaaa haaaaa


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

Susan , very true and it's been those evil ways that has kept most men from fighting back . Around my house the girls have their own and my son and I have our own . If one of my girls uses our bathroom they make sure to put the seat back up . If we use the girls we put the seat down when done . 

I was thinking about the ettiquette thing . If you truely looked at that situation , in reality we would have to leave the gate open because the women would be blindly walking into it if we closed it .

It's kinda how I look at the toilet thing . Ettiquette should be it's always left up . That way it's everyones responsiblity to make sure it's down when it needs to be . BEFORE you find out the hardway .


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

Yes....and where is the dog gonna drink when it is down. Works better if it is up!


----------



## leslie cassian (Jun 3, 2007)

Shouldn't y'all just be closing the lid so the dog doesn't drink from it?


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

leslie cassian said:


> Shouldn't y'all just be closing the lid so the dog doesn't drink from it?




Poor thirsty dogs ..... :-(


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

I clicked on this thread to see how the Koehler discussion was going. 

Good thing, too. Saved some dogs from dehydration, I hope ....


----------



## ann schnerre (Aug 24, 2006)

i know--me too!! but i kinda feel good about possibly saving a dog from dying of dehydration AND hanging and perhaps even a "relationship" by giving some males a "heads up", hahaha. 

i was thinking earlier about mentioning Koeher's method of food refusal training on that thread, but now i'm afraid if i do, we'll all just end up with fat dogs, LOL


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

DANG Don! I must really be getting old to miss that one! 
That dog drinking bowl was another point of contention when I had Kerry Blues. That beard could sure haul some water......all over the house. :-o:-o


----------

