And something to try as well. I seriously doubt it would bring out a responce, but it is definetly viable. And worth trying only on a test basis only. (just so you know Jennifer if would involve you accosting Luc to see if Teagan helped you.)

I thought about that myself but when I see the way she describes the situation. I just don't see this as the deal. If she would have described dogs that are killing and chasing everything they see, then maybe. But at this point, I think it all boils down to humanizing what the OP believes to be something that it isn't. I have been wrong before and will readilly admit being wrong again.

Hi Jennifer,

Just a thought, but could it be Teagan reacting to any inconsistancies in leadership/corrections? What I mean is, if she did the same behaviour as Luc did, would she have got a firmer/quicker correction?

If she sees a 'lower rank' dog getting away with more than she is allowed to, might it cause an issue?

I'm just thinking laterally too, but I could be talking rubbish!

Rob

Teagan would kill and chase down everything she sees if she got the chance to.

I had someone come in to assess her after the first time she bit me and with respect to her prey drive - this is a guy with a couple of Leerburg dogs, so I doubt he's totally unfamiliar with it - he was taken aback, especially b/c she is, as he noted, 'set on kill'.

Ok, after reading this.....

I can't know for sure, but depending - I've tried taking Luc by the collar before, but in a friendly way, just to pull him closer for a pet or something, and he reacts with 'agghhh!'. But then I just get him to close to me by old fashion asking. (yeah, sometimes I'm dumb) I think if it reached the level of his shaking around and getting noisy, Teagan probably would run at him the same way. But I'm not sure.


And then after reading this:

When Luc was found under the trailer after slipping his collar, Teagan growled at him. When I was told about it, I thought maybe she was telling him 'dumbs you're not supposed to be under there' but as she was fairly amped up from being stopped from attacking the dogs back, maybe that's why she growled.

I think you really need to evaluate the way you think about dogs. I don't mean this in away to be bad. I just think that you are trying to compensate for something you don't understand. It's not a bad thing. Just something you need to think about. Stop thinking about why dogs do what they do and start concentrating on what you want them to do. Be assertive in what you want them to do, and be assertive in what you think you want them to do. So, what I am saying is..... be assertive. Stop wondering what they are thinking and just start concentrating on what it is you want them to do.

 Quote: Rob Bruce

Hi Jennifer,

Just a thought, but could it be Teagan reacting to any inconsistancies in leadership/corrections? What I mean is, if she did the same behaviour as Luc did, would she have got a firmer/quicker correction?

If she sees a 'lower rank' dog getting away with more than she is allowed to, might it cause an issue?

I'm just thinking laterally too, but I could be talking rubbish!

Rob

I wondered that as well - b/c I definitely treated Luc differently than I would her if she had done that. B/c they're different dogs, but there is an inconsistency there and she might react to it.

I do think that maybe I should treat them more consistently....do most people w/multiple dogs do this?

I might be overthinking this, but it's b/c Teagan has had a lot of aggression and rank issues and I want to make sure I stay on top of any possible issues.

 Quote: Chris McMahon

I think you really need to evaluate the way you think about dogs. I don't mean this in away to be bad. I just think that you are trying to compensate for something you don't understand. It's not a bad thing. Just something you need to think about. Stop thinking about why dogs do what they do and start concentrating on what you want them to do. Be assertive in what you want them to do, and be assertive in what you think you want them to do. So, what I am saying is..... be assertive. Stop wondering what they are thinking and just start concentrating on what it is you want them to do.

I'm generally pretty assertive with them. Especially with Teagan, I've had to learn to be.

But as my first dogs, they're interesting to me (I presume subsequent dogs will be too), and I want to learn as much as possible about them. Learning why they react certain ways has actually helped me to be a better leader.

Edit: You said it yourself....when I mentioned Luc has fear issues and you discussed how he should be corrected then. If I didn't try to look at what was behind his behaviour, I might correct his in a different way.

Ok.... I will lay off you but I don't think you understand what I am saying.....So here is what you said and I will make this my last explanation. I will try to make it well understandable but I am a dog guy and not much of an English Major. Here is what you said:

But as my first dogs, they're interesting to me (I presume subsequent dogs will be too), and I want to learn as much as possible about them. Learning why they react certain ways has actually helped me to be a better leader.

Edit: You said it yourself....when I mentioned Luc has fear issues and you discussed how he should be corrected then. If I didn't try to look at what was behind his behaviour, I might correct his in a different way.

So, on that note... here is the deal... A leader doesn't really care and they don't analyze why you are reacting the way you do. A leader reacts to what is going on and then moves on. A leader does not dwell on what happened a few minutes ago. A leader does what he/she wants and expects the followers to follow. A leader deals with conflicts how they want the outcome to be. And a TRUE leader just leads.

It's all words, I know. But think about it. And don't think of dogs as 'beings' that rationalize and understand what we are saying. What I typed was for your benefit only. I hope it helped and didn't offend you.

not offending me at all!

i do get what you're saying.

i guess, to me - i corrected teagan last night and didn't allow the behaviour. so i feel i did act and was assertive.

i'm asking the question, b/c one thing i find really helpful, is to stop a behaviour before it starts. i'd rather be proactive than reactive. and understanding - as closely as i can - what the triggers are will help me do that.

does that make sense?

Well, some people have the ability to see and understand what a dog is thinking (or read the dogs body and know what they are going to do) and some people don't. It doesn't mean you can't learn I suppose. But for some people it comes naturally. So if you can't tell what your dog is doing before it does it, then you have a lot of book work and people studying to catch up on. The problem that you have, and again I am only going by what you have typed out... is due to a conflict in leadership. To me it sounds like it's a pretty open and shut case but... I am only going by what you are typing out. There could be more or less to it. Nobody can give sound advice over the internet. It's a good way to communicate the little things but complex problems require more than just a few sentences on how to fix a problem. So, on that note I will stick to my guns and say that you have a leadership deficit. And I know you will come through and fix it.

 Quote: jennifer coulter

I just can't really wrap my head around the fact that Teagan thinking that you are not doing a good enough job keeping Luc in line and that Teagan needs to take matters into her own hands (paws/teeth). Seems to anthropomorphic and contrived to me.

Question for the OP (Jennifer Mullen...too many Jennifers! ): Is this what you were thinking happened? Or is this what people were thinking *I* was saying? It wasn't! And I didn't think that's what the OP meant either.

Maybe I'm reading everyone wrong, but I think we're all saying the same thing: Regardless of whether it's prey driven or not...it is less likely to happen if Teagan sees Jennifer as a stronger pack leader and if Jennifer sets the rules for what is allowed and what isn't.

We have a known dominant dog and a known submissive dog...with Jennifer somewhere in the middle (no offense, Jennifer! )and so it seems pretty clear to me that if there are scuffles...the one with the strongest "leadership qualities" (if you don't like the word dominant) is going to be the one who steps in to address things. In this case, it was Teagan but it should have been Jennifer.

So does it matter what Teagan was thinking? No. This is a dog that has inclinations to want to be in charge so it means Jennifer has to step it up a notch. To not correct Luc for the same thing she would correct Teagan for is inconsistant leadership, IMO. It's not that Teagan is thinking, "Oh, how come HE gets to get away with it." It's that the conflict/excitement level in general has been allowed to escalate and that will cause a dominant dog to try to get in the mix. A submissive dog would likely not even get involved.

Sure, she should tell Teagan to back off if she tries to get involved. But she also cannot allow Luc to throw the same crap at her because a true leader would not accept that behavior from either dog.

So whether it's prey drive or anything else, control and leadership are more important when you have a more dominant dog in your household. Jennifer has to be the one to deal with issues with either dog in order to be a clear pack leader. Teagan shouldn't be the one to do it...regardless of the reasoning behind why she got involved in the first place. Isn't that what we're all saying?