Early Takeoff Syndrome?

[jdarling]

I know this is difficult for someone outside of the actual context to grasp, but ...

 

Kristine, is this really necessary? Is it possible for you to find a way to get your point across without insulting the intelligence of everyone reading? Thanks.

[Root Beer]

Kristine, is this really necessary? Is it possible for you to find a way to get your point across without insulting the intelligence of everyone reading? Thanks.

 

Necessary? No. None of this is necessary. We are all here engaging in conversation by choice, not necessity. Valid based on a general failure to acknowledge that such can be the case. I'd say yes.

 

If you would like to further discuss my choice of expression, rather than the topic at hand, let's take it off the board.

[Root Beer]

Oh yes, I'm really just too dense to grasp your viewpoint.

 

Not saying, too dense. But yes, I feel that you do not actually see the point.

 

I'd say that if you would like to discuss that further, let's take it off the board.

 

As for contact lenses, popping a pair in a dog's eyes to see if it jumps better isn't my idea of a controlled scientific study of vision problems and their possible solutions

 

Nobody, including the person who posted the video on the Clean Run list, has claimed that a controlled scientific study has been done. In fact, it has been clearly stated that this is not a scientific study.

 

But it's a start. A step in that direction. An indication, in my opinion, and that of others, that more formal study may, indeed, be merited, for the benefit of those who have dogs with this issue who would actually like to make an effort to overcome the problem.

 

I don't really see where criticism of those people for "sticking things" in their dogs eyes (contact lenses, which millions of people wear every day), or for failing to quit Agility and go do something else does anything to further an effort to begin such study in a more formal, scientific context.

[jdarling]

If you would like to further discuss my choice of expression, rather than the topic at hand, let's take it off the board.

 

No thanks. Continue. It's comments like those that cause a breakdown in the communication and makes people not want to participate in the conversation. So ... help yourself.

[Root Beer]

No thanks. Continue. It's comments like those that cause a breakdown in the communication and makes people not want to participate in the conversation. So ... help yourself.

 

Again, if you would like to continue this, please take it off the board. Personal side spats, such as this, cause a breakdown in communication and make people not want to participate. It's off topic, it adds nothing to the discussion, and it serves no purpose other than to vent personal dissatisfaction with another person's point of view. I'd appreciate it if you would allow it to end now.

[Mark Billadeau]

Since corrective lenses for dogs must be determined by measuring the malformations in the eye lenses (ophthalmologist can't ask the dog if prescription #1 is better or worse than prescription #2) there would be no need for a clinical trial to determine if contacts fix ETS. If malformations in the eye (bad eyesight correctable by lenses) was the cause of ETS all that would be needed is an ophthalmological exam of ETS and non-ETS dogs.

 

I seemed to remember reading way back in this loooooong topic that eye sight was tested in ETS dogs and found to be "normal".

 

It appears to be a problem with vision and/or the dog’s perception of where the bar is in space. Many dogs with this problem have had normal cerf exams and some have even been tested for near and farsightedness (with variable results). To my knowledge, there is no test for depth perception in dogs at this time.

 

1st link in topic

 

Eye sight was not found to be a common issue in ETS dogs. Corrective lenses cannot fix a depth perception problem; if they could handlers would be buying depth preception glasses instead of amber sun glasses.

[Root Beer]

I seemed to remember reading way back in this loooooong topic that eye sight was tested in ETS dogs and found to be "normal".

 

That's correct.

 

So, does this dog actually have ETS? That is another very valid question. The lenses may well work for this dog, but may well not help most ETS dogs.

 

Although I have also heard that ETS may be caused by a currently undetectable eye problem (depth perception?).

 

Not sure if these lenses are meant to try to correct something that can not actually be found on a test or not. I don't think the person who posted the video gave that much information.

 

But yes, the dogs who are considered to be true ETS dogs have had eyes examined by a veterinary opthomologist and, with all possible testing available at this time, all has been found to be normal.

 

Not sure where bringing a human opthomologist into the picture played a part. My guess would be that something that done that isn't typically done in dogs. I don't have any further information, though.

[Mark Billadeau]

Or it could be ETS is like kennel cough (or the common cold); it is a set of symptoms caused by many things.

[Root Beer]

Or it could be ETS is like kennel cough (or the common cold); it is a set of symptoms caused by many things.

 

Maybe.

 

Going back to the original, original topic, I have to wonder if that is why there is something of a push for genetic testing to see if there is a genetic link between these dogs.

 

I'm not saying it's right or good or merited or not, but it stands to reason that there are people who would want it for that reason. If there is a genetic link between the dogs, then that would suggest (not prove, but suggest), a common cause. No detectible genetic link would leave the door more open to multiple causes.

 

I will be very interested to see what more they learn about this, especially if more work is done with the contact lenses.

[airbear]

I know this is difficult for someone outside of the actual context to grasp, but for those who have dogs that enjoy Agility, some do have an enhanced quality of life because Agility is part of their lives. The choice to go above and beyond in some way to enable the dog to continue to play can absolutely be the right one for some, while it would not be for others. The importance of continuing really is determined by the individual in the situation.

Well, I am having trouble grasping this, and I think I'm in the 'actual context' (three agility dogs, about 42 titles amongst them). I suppose that if it were a matter of doing agility or doing absolutely nothing beyond eating, sleeping and wandering about the yard, then yeah, I guess agility can enhance the quality of a dog's life. But I think going above and beyond is for the handler, not the dog. I've seen dogs that clearly aren't having a great time and are being begged around a course, and their handlers declare how their dogs live for agility. I had one (Bear) that I had to jolly around the course and looking back on it, I wonder why I kept competing him. He wasn't miserable, I think he enjoyed having some one-on-one time with me, and he was physically able to do the obstacles and stuff (and he did well by agility standards, qualifying for 5 nationals, earning his ATChC, blah blah blah). When I retired him, he still came to trials, sat in the bleachers, mooched food, did everything but run. I don't think it changed his quality of life one jot.

 

I have two that I run now in agility that seem to really enjoy it. Wick, who is about 11, still runs upwards of 6 yards per second in Jumpers and Steeplechase, and still screams her way around a course. Rex is just starting out, but he is showing nice speed and lots of drive, and he appears to enjoy agility. Yet I truly believe if they never set foot in an agility ring again, their quality of life would not be affected because I, the owner, the one who controls the quality of life of my dogs, would find other ways to keep them engaged (such as hiking, playing ball, doing stupid dog tricks, etc.).

[juliepoudrier]

Thank you Kristi for your POV as someone who should be able to grasp what agility means for a dog. I guess my comments weren't so far off base as some would have us believe, given my apparent inability to grasp the concept of dogs "living for" sports.

 

I think what others are having difficulty grasping is the concept that any perceived joy in the dog is colored by the human's own desires, and that it's not the dog who can't fathom never doing agility again, but rather the human. Ahem, let me say it again: a dog's happiness is enhanced by being able to do stuff with its human. The dog doesn't likely care whether that activity is agility or chasing a ball out in the back yard. It's the HUMAN who makes the value judgments about what's important to the dog, and the human's own needs and desires will always color those judgments.

 

But whatever. Once the discussion turns to a person's words being parroted back to them, it's time to bow out.

 

J.

[PSmitty]

I think what others are having difficulty grasping the concept that any perceived joy in the dog is colored by the human's own desires, and that it's not the dog who can't fathom never doing agility again, but rather the human. Ahem, let me say it again: a dog's happiness is enhanced by being able to do stuff with its human. The dog doesn't likely care whether that activity is agility or chasing a ball out in the back yard. It's the HUMAN who makes the value judgments about what's important to the dog, and the human's own needs and desires will always color those judgments.

 

Amen. And yes, I'm also pretty involved in the dog sports world.

 

(sorry I brought this thread up again, guys...)

[Root Beer]

I think what others are having difficulty grasping the concept that any perceived joy in the dog is colored by the human's own desires, and that it's not the dog who can't fathom never doing agility again, but rather the human.

 

And in some cases that is absolutely true.

 

However in others, it is, in fact, the dog who truly has the love and desire for the sport. I'd actually say the same thing for other dogs with dance. Sometimes the dog does have one strong preference and no other activity measures up in comparison. Many dogs aren't like that. Some are. Maybe you have to see it firsthand to believe it. I've seen it - actually tried to make efforts to convince the dog that the activity of my preference is actually better and failed. You apparently haven't seen it. I'm surprised you would consider it beyond the realm of reasonable possibility, but be that as it may, it happens, regardless of how many times you reiterate to the contrary.

[Maralynn]

And in some cases that is absolutely true.

 

However in others, it is, in fact, the dog who truly has the love and desire for the sport. I'd actually say the same thing for other dogs with dance. Sometimes the dog does have one strong preference and no other activity measures up in comparison. Many dogs aren't like that. Some are. Maybe you have to see it firsthand to believe it. I've seen it - actually tried to make efforts to convince the dog that the activity of my preference is actually better and failed. You apparently haven't seen it. I'm surprised you would consider it beyond the realm of reasonable possibility, but be that as it may, it happens, regardless of how many times you reiterate to the contrary.

 

I think you might be underestimating people here.

 

I've had two dogs that would live and breathe sheep if given the option. It was what they were/are all about and it's very obvious to watch. And yet they were happy enough doing something else. They were happy just going in the car for a ride.

 

Sheesh, it took me 3 months to convince Kipp that it was fun to play with a ball/frisbee and even longer to teach him that it was highly rewarding. He had his heart set on chasing cats and squirrels (or sheep, he would have taken sheep work, too!). Now he ignores cats, squirrels and deer (and even sheep!) as he hunts for the person with his frisbee. It didn't automatically happen, I built the desire by making it a rewarding experience for him. I'm positive that he still prefers stock work, but he is happy and satisfied in life without much of it.

 

Just because a dog prefers something, doesn't mean that they can't be happy and fulfilled doing something else. Yes, dogs have natural benst and drives, but good trainers and handlers channel those and find something the dog can use them for if the dog is limited in other ways.

[Journey]

Just because a dog prefers something, doesn't mean that they can't be happy and fulfilled doing something else. Yes, dogs have natural benst and drives, but good trainers and handlers channel those and find something the dog can use them for if the dog is limited in other ways.

 

Maralynn....you must be mistaken or you just don't grasp the situation very well. Maybe you've seen this but it simply isn't factual

[Mark Billadeau]

Just because a dog prefers one activity of two or three activities this dog has sampled does not mean that you have found THE activity it REALLY loves to do (it's mearly showing a preference of the things you have allowed it to try). Nor does that mean this dog won't be fulfilled if it could never do that activity again.

[jdarling]

Maybe.

 

Sometimes.

 

But not other times.

 

And not all dogs, either.

 

Just some.

 

Or one.

[Journey]

Just because a dog prefers one activity of two or three activities this dog has sampled does not mean that you have found THE activity it REALLY loves to do (it's mearly showing a preference of the things you have allowed it to try). Nor does that mean this dog won't be fulfilled if it could never do that activity again.

 

But that's not true Mark, you can see it, in the joy, the drive, the enthusiasm. Of course you have to be an accomplished owner and be able to read the dog and the body language.

[jdarling]

Sort of. It depends.

[Pearse]

 

 

Yet I truly believe if they never set foot in an agility ring again, their quality of life would not be affected because I, the owner, the one who controls the quality of life of my dogs, would find other ways to keep them engaged (such as hiking, playing ball, doing stupid dog tricks, etc.).

 

I agree with Kristi and the same is true of many sheepdogs. They love working stock but if they never saw another sheep or cow/steer they could live perfectly happy lives.

 

It's why I think the people who are doing stockwork to make their dog happy, more complete, less neurotic are barking up the wrong tree. A Border Collie who doesn't work stock every day can be a perfectly healthy happy Border Collie. A Border Collie who works stock every day, can be happy as a clam or completely miserable depending upon who he/she is working with (not that different than the rest of us come to think of it).

[juliepoudrier]

Mark, Pearse, et al.

None of you has the context to be able to grasp whether a dog truly finds joy in doing only one thing (even if that one thing is of the owner's choosing) vs. any other thing. You're hopelessly out of touch with the border collie psyche.

 

J.

[Journey]

Julie,

 

I know this is difficult for someone outside of the actual context to grasp, but for those who have dogs that enjoy Agility, some do have an enhanced quality of life because Agility is part of their lives. The choice to go above and beyond in some way to enable the dog to continue to play can absolutely be the right one for some, while it would not be for others. The importance of continuing really is determined by the individual in the situation.

 

We're all out of touch and wrong. Afterall we don't do agility so therefore we've no basis to say the dogs won't wither up and die if they are forced to leave the sport

[Root Beer]

Just because a dog prefers something, doesn't mean that they can't be happy and fulfilled doing something else. Yes, dogs have natural benst and drives, but good trainers and handlers channel those and find something the dog can use them for if the dog is limited in other ways.

 

Regardless, it really is up to the handler to decide, for his or her particular dog, what really is most appropriate and to discern what really will be the best decision for the dog in question.

 

If the dog thoroughly enjoys the game, contacts don't bother the dog, and the dog can play with contacts, I don't really see any good reason to retrain the dog to do a completely different activity that he or she may or may not enjoy nearly as much. Why do so? Because others, who don't know the situation firsthand, are positive that the dog hates the contacts and the handler is just so bent on winning that he or she can't see that the dog is suffering? To me that simply doesn't make sense.

 

It really is possible that different solutions will suit different teams and that for some continuing with Agility, even when going to some extra length to make that possible, is perfectly fine.

[Maralynn]

This also begs the question - if it is so important then why not modify the game for the dog rather than the dog for the game?

[Root Beer]

We're all out of touch and wrong. Afterall we don't do agility so therefore we've no basis to say the dogs won't wither up and die if they are forced to leave the sport

 

 

Right, because that's exactly what I said. Wither up and die. I challenge you to quote me on that. And include post number, please. And this one doesn't count. :lol: