my puppy barking and running around like crazy...also humping his teddy bear

[fadeddenim]

ok, so my 3 month old yorkie puppy would bark and run around like crazy when i take him out on my patio to go potty. i don't know what's going on. one minute he'll be relaxed then all of a sudden he'll start running around and barking. it's kind of scary.

another thing, he's also been humping his teddy bear. does he need to get fixed at this age? he seems too young to be behaving like this.

any advice?

[xmasbaby75]

The humping is just a sign of dominance. He wants to rule that stuffed animal! Usually anytime after 6 months old is okay to have him neutered.

As for the crazy running around, we refer to that as the "Yorkie Zoomies" -- puppies just have so much energy at this age, and it has to come out somehow!

[CharBar]

Sounds pretty normal. Wall-E did the same thing at 3 months humping his stuffed giraffe... I thought the same thing- that it was too early for him to be sexually aggressive like that but then I learned its a dominance thing. Whenever he gets super hyper though, I immediately take him on a walk to let out his puppy energy or even run up and down the stairs in our house.

[bchgirl]

Best piece of advice....a tired puppy is a good puppy. Play, walk whatever...wear him out. He has lots of energy.

Mine all neutered...and we still have favorite...lovies at our house.

[fadeddenim]

phew, thanks so much for making me feel better. as you can tell, i'm a first time pet parent. i'm glad to hear that all this is normal behavior.

[bchgirl]

Originally Posted by fadeddenim

phew, thanks so much for making me feel better. as you can tell, i'm a first time pet parent. i'm glad to hear that all this is normal behavior.

We'd be concerned if he wasn't running around playing.

[xxmxaxrxyxx]

Originally Posted by bchgirl

We'd be concerned if he wasn't running around playing.

agreed!

[teddy25]

I'm a new dog parent myself and my yorkie teddy wasn't humping a stuff animal, he was humping my foot and i was cracking up because i was like teddy you are to young to be humping my foot or anything else. I'm glad that everyone is saying that humping is normal, but i will get teddy a stuff animal so that is can stop humping my foot...

[msjagg]

That's his favorite thing to do. He also loves to hump my 7 year old Papillion. Sammy lets it go so far then freaks out. Not that I blame him!!! Baron is 81/2 months old now. It's time to see the Vet for the snip snip... Baron's Mommy

[YorkieMother]

Humping is not dominance it is SEX and that is all.. it feels good. it gets attention. it feels good. it stress relief. it feels good... it intresting feeling which feels good. Got not a thing to do with a dog taking over the world or wanting to control it. Taking away the hormones wil lesen it but most likely not cause it feels good.

Wear him out with ball chase. take away that which he humps. ignore it and redirect play to what you feel ok to.

Watch the stress level.,. the more they hump the more stress is around as it a great stress reilef and it feels god.

Get it just like we tend to like it so do they it just sex.

JL

[maximpooh]

I am a first time puppy owner too. My three month does the same thing. I just noticed it yesterday. All his stuffed animals are too short for him to hump, so he just gives up. In three weeks from now, I am taking him for presurgery and he will be getting neutered at 6 months.

[pookiebear]

I respectfully disagree with your statement that humping is not dominance. But I understand that is your opinion. Humping is about dominance - no doubt about it. One dog is forcing itself on top of another dog. If the both of the dogs are ok with this then they are playing, but most of the time one doesn't like it. Whether or not it continues is determined by the dominant dog! If the dog on the bottom is able to stop the humping, he rules...he's the dominant dog....and vice versa. Just my thinkin' on that subject.

Originally Posted by YorkieMother

Humping is not dominance it is SEX and that is all.. it feels good. it gets attention. it feels good. it stress relief. it feels good... it intresting feeling which feels good. Got not a thing to do with a dog taking over the world or wanting to control it. Taking away the hormones wil lesen it but most likely not cause it feels good.

Wear him out with ball chase. take away that which he humps. ignore it and redirect play to what you feel ok to.

Watch the stress level.,. the more they hump the more stress is around as it a great stress reilef and it feels god.

Get it just like we tend to like it so do they it just sex.

JL

[YorkieMother]

Yeah well dogs are not dominate.. Really truly... to label them as such is very incorrect.... they are not an either or, they are a both and it is not dominate behavior more rude and under socialized ( that be both dogs the one not telling the dog off for humping and the one doing it). Dogs are a family structure rather then an army structure or chickens which are straight line hierarchies.
I recommend reading a little more around dominance theory with James O Heare or have a look at the articles below and if you need more I can go snag a few more book titles.

JL

International Positive Dog Training Association

The Dominance Theory

By Norma Jeanne Laurette



Let me begin by saying I was taught the “dominance” theory - as it pertains to our pet dog's and their interactions with us, their guardians. Within my first year of instructing dog training classes, I stopped using choke chains, pinch (prong) collars, alpha rolls and all use of force or physical punishment because I quickly realized the potential harm the use of these tools could o to a dog. This potential for harm is not only physical and psychological, it can destroy the trust our dogs have in us, and as a result, the bond between a dog and its owner may be corrupted. Since trust and respect are sides of the same coin, I feel the dog's trust in its owner must be

protected at all cost. Along the same lines, I no longer use the word “obedience” in association with training due to its basic meaning according to The Oxford Dictionary, “submissive to another's will”.


At that point in my career, I didn't realize there were many trainers already using positive methods. I was convinced I was the only one in my city with the beliefs I held, and I felt very much alone. Since then, I have met so many of like-mind, and I've learned so much, and continue to learn everyday. I'm happy to say, my city now consists almost totally of “positive”trainers.


Although I no longer taught the use of tools or techniques that involved pushing or punishing, I did teach the “dominance” theory and the importance of “leading the pack”. Over the past few years this theory has been challenged, and as a result, I renewed my research on the subject. Because of what this research revealed, at this time, I no longer agree with the “dominance” concept. Here's why.



There is a common belief among dog owners and trainers alike, that dogs will challenge their owners in attempt to rise in rank, and lead the pack. This theory has been around for decades, and although still popular, many of the top canine behaviour experts now believe this concept to be incorrect, and assert that we have misinterpreted the dog's motivation by interpreting the dog’s behaviour in that manner.


Dog owners and trainers alike often use the “dominance” theory to explain a variety of canine behaviours. Trainers often use this theory to justify both the use of aversive tools and physical techniques designed to over-power the dog, with the objective of intimidating the dog into subservience in order to stop unwanted “dominant” behaviours. This type of “training” works by virtue of the concept that the dog becomes afraid to “behave” in particular ways for fear of punishment. Unfortunately, this has cost many dogs their lives. “Dominance exercises” have

been known to cause aggression and other unwanted behaviour that result in euthanasia. In one case, a trainer in Florida actually killed a dog while attempting to force it into submission. After muzzling the dog and sitting on it for over an hour, the dog lost consciousness and later that day, had to be euthanized due to its injuries. R10



The concept of “ranking” comes from the idea that a wolf will challenge another of similar rank, hopefully winning the challenge, thereby gaining higher status, and eventually, leading the pack. Many believe this behaviour has been passed down over thousands of years, affecting the behaviour of domestic dogs and their interactions with their human guardians. R1


In reality, only “unacquainted” wolves living in captivity behave in a manner that appears as though they are competing for “status”, due to confined artificially created territories. R7 In my opinion, this is just another example of wolves being forced to compete for limited resources, such as food and mating rights.


Wolf packs living in the wild are dominated by one alpha male and female breeding pair, who guide and protect their cubs. R9 As soon as they are old enough to mate, these cubs will leave the pack to find mates, and raise families of their own. This would mean that every wolf healthy enough, and able to find a mate, will be “alpha” at one time or another during its lifespan, but only when raising its young.



During the socialization period of development, a puppy is imprinted with recognition of its own species. As a result, dogs do not identify humans as “canines” or “pack members”, because we smell, think and behave differently. R2 According to John Fisher, because we are not perceived as dogs by dogs, they will not compete with us for rank. R3 With “alpha” position comes the responsibility of providing for the pack and because we provide everything the dog needs, such

as food, shelter etc., it would be counter-productive for a dog to challenge us for “alpha” position. R4


According to Coppinger, R6 dogs became isolated from their wild ancestors long ago resulting in a new species, the Canis Familiaris - the domestic dog. Although some wolf-like behaviours remain in the domestic dog, since they are a different species, it's not realistic to assume all dog behaviours will be the same as those of the wolf. However, if we choose to compare domestic dogs' behaviour to it's natural ancestors, it only makes sense that we should compare it to the wild

wolf, not wolves attempting to survive in the face of human interference. R5


Every behaviour blamed on “dominance” is normal in canine terms and can be explained by simple motivation and reinforcement. It's quite simple, dogs want good things. R11 If you saw a $100 bill lying in the street would you not pick it up? Why then is a dog helping itself to your dinner “dominant”?, when they are scavengers by nature. It's not a “dominant” dog that takes your food, it's a normal dog doing what comes naturally to its species.


This is what I believe now; one of the few commonalities between dogs and humans is – some are more assertive than others. Dogs that are more assertive will try harder to obtain valued resources, be it attention, food, comfortable sleeping places, freedom to run and explore etc. Dogs that are less assertive are quicker to relinquish the resource to a more assertive dog or human. Since it's about the resource, it stands to reason – if you can control what the dog values, you can control the dog. An assertive dog is more of a challenge to train, but it has nothing to do with dominance.


Although it may seem as though we are “splitting hairs” with terminology, the main difference is this. According to The Oxford Dictionary, “Dominance” means “in control over a group” and “assertive” means “to insist”. An assertive dog is challenging a person or another dog to win resources that it wishes to control, not in order to control the other person or dog; therefore, a dog’s competing for a desired resource has nothing to do with ranking.



The bottom line is this: if we want dogs to behave in a manner that is not natural to it's species then we have to control the environment to prevent the natural - yet unwanted behaviour. In order to do so, we have to teach new behaviours and reinforce them. Although dogs need guidance to be good companions, “dominating” them has proven to be counter-productive at the very least, and extremely abusive at its worst. It's time for us to teach those around us, dog owners and dog trainers alike, to stop blaming, labelling and punishing dogs with a “dominance” tag. When the world becomes aware that it is not only easier, but also more productive, to teach instead of punish, only then will the world be a more humane place for dogs.


References

R1 - Dominance Fact or Fiction?, Barry Eaton 2002, Page 4 – Dominance: Where Does It Come From?

R2 - Dominance Fact or Fiction?, Barry Eaton 2002, Page 4 – Pack Theory

R3 - Diary of a Dotty Dog Doctor, John Fisher 1997

R4 - Dominance Fact or Fiction?, Barry Eaton 2002, Page 5 – Pack Theory

R5 - Dominance Fact or Fiction?, Barry Eaton 2002, Page 7 – Origins Of The Pack Rules

R6 - The Domestic Dog, Edited by James Serpell 1999

R7 - Dominance Fact or Fiction? Barry Eaton 2002, Page 6 and 7 – Origins Of The Pack Rules

R8 - Dominance Fact or Fiction? Barry Eaton 2002, Page 7 – Origins Of The Pack Rules

R9 - Alpha Status, and Division of Labor in Wolf Packs, David Mech, 2000

R10 - http://www.palmbeachpost.com/pbcentr...ddog_0719.html

R11 – The Power of Positive Dog Training, Pat Miller, Howell Book House, Wiley Publishing Inc., 2001

[YorkieMother]

I had to do a second post as it would not take all this at once.

Number ten and number one are the two that apply.

Top ten myths

http://ca.lifestyle.yahoo.com/pets/d...s/e/behaviour-
training/dogsincanada/61/fairy-tales/1

Fairy tales
Provided by: Jean Donaldson, Dogs in Canada
The Top 10 dog behaviour myths
There are a lot of myths about dog behaviour so I whittled it down to
ones that were pervasive and that made myth criteria, which are:
a) there is no (zero) scientific evidence supporting the contention;
b) there is scientific evidence against the contention and/or
scientific evidence supporting alternatives.

1) Dogs are naturally pack animals with a clear social order. This
one busts coming out of the gate as free-ranging dogs (pariahs, semi-
feral populations, dingoes, etc.) don't form packs. As someone who
spent years solemnly repeating that dogs were pack animals, it was
sobering to find out that dogs form loose, amorphous, transitory
associations with other dogs.

2) If you let dogs exit doorways ahead of you, you're letting them be
dominant. There is not only no evidence for this, there is no
evidence that the behaviour of going through a doorway has any social
significance whatsoever. In order to lend this idea any plausibility,
it would need to be ruled out that rapid doorway exit is not simply a
function of their motivation to get to whatever is on the other side
combined with their higher ambulation speed.

3) In multi-dog households, "support the hierarchy" by giving
presumed dominant animals patting, treats, etc., first, before giving
the same attention to presumed subordinate animals. There is no
evidence that this has any impact on inter-dog relations, or any type
of aggression. In fact, if one dog were roughing up another, the laws
governing Pavlovian conditioning would dictate an opposite tack:
Teach aggressive dogs that other dogs receiving scarce resources
predicts that they are about to receive some. If so practised, the
tough dog develops a happy emotional response to other dogs getting
stuff – a helpful piece of training, indeed. No valuable conditioning
effects are achieved by giving the presumed higher-ranking dog
goodies first.

4) Dogs have an innate desire to please. This concept has never been
operationally defined, let alone tested. A vast preponderance of
evidence, however, suggests that dogs, like all properly functioning
animals, are motivated by food, water, sex, and like many animals, by
play and access to bonded relationships, especially after an absence.
They're also, like all animals, motivated by fear and pain, and these
are the inevitable tools of those who eschew the use of food, play,
etc., however much they cloak their coercion and collar-tightening in
desire to please rhetoric.

5) Rewards are bribes and thus compromise relationships. Related to
4), the idea that behaviour should just, in the words of Susan
Friedman, Ph.D., "flow like a fountain" without need of consequences,
is opposed by more than 60 years of unequivocal evidence that
behaviour is, again to quote Friedman, "a tool to produce
consequences." Another problem is that bribes are given before
behaviour, and rewards are given after. And, a mountain of evidence
from decades of research in pure and applied settings has
demonstrated over and over that positive reinforcement – i.e.,
rewards – make relationships better, never worse.

6) If you pat your dog when he's afraid, you're rewarding the fear.
Fear is an emotional state – a reaction to the presence or
anticipation of something highly aversive. It is not an attempt at
manipulation. If terrorists enter a bank and order everybody down on
the floor, the people will exhibit fearful behaviour. If I then give
a bank customer on the floor a compliment, 20 bucks or chocolates, is
this going to make them more afraid of terrorists next time? It's
stunningly narcissistic to imagine that a dog's fearful behaviour is
somehow directed at us (along with his enthusiastic door-dashing).

7) Punish dogs for growling or else they'll become aggressive. Ian
Dunbar calls this "removing the ticker from the time bomb." Dogs
growl because something upsetting them is too close. If you punish
them for informing us of this, they are still upset but now not
letting us know, thus allowing scary things to get closer and
possibly end up bitten. Much better to make the dog comfortable
around what he's growling at so he's not motivated to make it go away.

8) Playing tug makes dogs aggressive. There is no evidence that this
is so. The only study ever done, by Borchelt and Goodloe, found no
correlation between playing tug and the incidence of aggression
directed at either family members or strangers. Tug is, in fact, a
cooperative behaviour directed at simulated prey: the toy.

9) If you give dogs chew toys, they'll learn to chew everything. This
is a Pandora's box type of argument that, once again, has zero
evidence to support it. Dogs are excellent discriminators and readily
learn with minimal training to distinguish their toys from forbidden
items. The argument is also logically flawed as chewing is
a `hydraulic' behaviour that waxes and wanes, depending on
satiation/deprivation, as does drinking, eating and sex. Dogs without
chew objects are like zoo animals in barren cages. Unless there is
good compensation with other enrichment activities, there is a
welfare issue here.

10) You can't modify "genetic" behaviour. All behaviour – and I mean
all – is a product of a complex interplay between genes and the
environment. And while some behaviours require less learning than
others, or no learning at all, their modifiability varies as much as
does the modifiability of behaviours that are primarily learned.

[CharBar]

YorkieMother- very interesting information. Thanks for posting. I like reading both sides of the spectrum.