Steve K9Pro

K9: & perhaps I have, been doing this for quite a while... K9: Because take the dogs out of the same environment & they behave completely different. I have had a few people bring me dogs that they have raised from a day old (various reasons). These are very different animals that often dont respond to the same things other dogs do. K9: In many cases it is where their thresholds to certain drives lay. A dog that has a low threshold to prey drive will find chasing things more rewarding than a dog that doesn't. These thresholds are quite adjustable in most dogs. K9: No actually they are not. They are not fed before birth, they learn they need to be fed to relinquish the hunger they suffer, later the food becomes a reward for some dogs. So it is trained through the experience, they eat to remove & or avoid hunger. K9: Your dog just might find cuddles rewarding, but it isnt genetic, its been perceived as a reward & this is what drives the desire for it.

K9: Can be either or both... Simply feeding your dog & giving it treats will not empower everyone as the Alpha with every dog. K9: when your given everything for nothing suddenly everything is worth nothing. K9: So I guess when you use the term Bee's Knee's you mean good outlet for free rewards... I would have thought Bee's Knee's would be the bee all & end all. K9: Companionship, basic pack member...? Not sure haven't seen the dog. There is a behavioural change amongst many mammals, us included that occurs just by association. Many prisoners of war in fact relate positively to their captors, I think this has been said to come about due to the prisoners have no normal point of reference & gravitate to the nearest "pack" member, even if it is a cruel hearted undesirable person. Dogs can be just the same.

Surely, more accurately a combination of natural (biological) and learned (environmental) i.e. desire for food and scavenging behaviour--natural, sitting and recognising humans as a source of food--learned. Di K9: Not sure that domestic dogs that are regularly fed have a high rate of food scavenging though...

K9: lol ok...

:cool:

K9: An example I would like to give at this point is one worth thinking about for a while. I was watching SARDOGS labs on a search through a vacant paddock, in mid search off leash in full prey drive, this dog was surprised by a rabbit that was sitting in the grass. The rabbit jumped out & ran straight across the path of the driven dog. The dog stopped looked at the rabbit & with little more than a muttered "come on" from Andrew, Gus was back on track, basically un triggered at all by the rabbit. This scenario would see many prey driven dogs (especially those with as much drive as Gus has) be off after the rabbit & the person being saught would be taking a back seat as far as the dog is concerned. Sure corrective measures could be employed to stop dogs chasing rabbitts, but corrections by design reduce drive so one has to play the balance game very carefully in these situations. I watched the same thing occur at another event when the same dog located some people who immediately offered a hand to pat that Lab, he moved straight past them once it was indicated by Andrew that they werent the people lost. That indication was a head tilt from the handler. There was no yelling, correcting or most importantly no stress, just wasnt a distraction. This is from nuetralisation & of course a lot of training.

C: I don't either, but it's nice all the same! It's certainly nothing to complain about. K9: Unless it is killing the reliability of your dogs obedience which is most common. C: Well, I was thinking more about to the exclusion of all else. It doesn't take much for most dogs to think you're the bees knees if you feed them and give them treats, let alone if you are nice to them, offer direction when they are looking for it, and give them tools to actually communicate with you and ask for things. The power of bridging the species gap in communication is quite something. K9: Well the exclusion of all else strongly displays the contrast between the Alpha & all else. The way of thinking that if you feed a dog & give it treats it will think your the bee's knee's is pretty outdated though, I don't know a dog owner who doesn't feed their dogs & give them treats but many are far from seen as the Bee's Knee's... C: Mmm I described it in human terms, but liking snuggles and interactions with others is not exclusively the domain of humans. I'm sure you know about the Arctic Fox study where they were trying to simulate the domestication of dogs and selected just the cuddly fox cubs to breed from. There is more to cuddles and pats than just "getting good things". It releases chemicals in the body and even affects physiology, as shown by the little fox cubs that came out with blue eyes or looking like Border Collies. So yes, my Lapphund is a natural snugglebum. Otherwise he wouldn't be thinking snuggles were a good thing in the first place. K9: The rewarding aspect of "cuddles" or any reward bfor that matter will always trigger chemical flows, but it is the reward that is sought, that is what generates the behaviour in the first place. I really dont think that your dog is a "natural" snugglebum, natural meaning its a gentic feature of Lahounds or your dogs lineage, I would suggest its a learned experience. And no, not familiar with the Fox study. C: He's not a squirmer or a licker, as it happens. He just leans, circles and whines, but that's beside the point. K9: lol, many would just call it (dominant) demanding behaviours created to gain rewards, chemical or otherwise. It is only a slightly different action than the dog running up to people jumping, yours has just learned that leaning, circling & whinning works. C: What decides what a dog does is what they find inherently rewarding/aversive. Food, toys, play, pats.... whatever it is, whether you take control of it or not it's still natural to the animal and not anthropomorphic. K9: Snuggles are the human trait that I was speaking of, you domnt see a dog snuggling another unless its is seeking warmth. C: Well would you find a human you had conditioned to adore you above all things particularly attractive? There's a name for people like that. It's not very flattering. K9: when you try & mix dog temperaments & human personalities you will often find yourself confused as they vary greatly. I am simply answering a question or two & as for what is desirable differs for everyone. C: Yes, he would walk off with whomever was providing the highest reward at the time, but on the other hand, it's not like he isn't bonded to us at all. K9: I am not suggesting he isn't bonded to you, just more bonded to the rewards & if you owned those rewards, he wouldn't be walking off. C: If someone beside us is handing out steak, you can bet they find they have an extra dog sitting politely at their feet and that's because he tried that once when he was a pup and discovered it worked with other people as well combined with the value of the treat on offing. K9: which means this is a learned behaviour, not natural & that could have been avoided. C: But if we walked away it's not like we've lost our dog to the person with the steak. He would come after us because we are his people, we give him his meals, his water, take him for walks and play with him. K9: have you tried it? Someone has a big juicy steak & giving him pieces, you simply walk off & you think he will follow leaving the steak? I am not saying he wont, I am just asking if you have tried it. C: To me, it sounds like as usual, picking a line straight down the middle is probably the most sensible. K9: Thats true, if you have fairly easy goals to achieve with your dog & the dog isnt high drive, that will work just fine.

K9: As long as your aware that, allowing a dog to gain a value for say chasing cars then training the dog not to chase cars isn't neutralisation as far as my program goes, its probably just called obedience training. Neutralisation is not letting them develop that value in the first place. K9: as I mentioned earlier, this can get complicated & lengthy to explain but for example in your above statement, its not desirable in many cases to teach the dog to be calm in all cir cumstances, for example t get the most out of a dog you wil want to inspire drive & utilise drive to complete the work your looking for. Teaching a dog to be calm will compromise that. I have a thread on it thats a good read. Prey Drive Control & Focus Thread Also the original Socialisation Thread is here too Socialisation & Neutralisation

K9: sure, consider that Neutralising is a term I use to make sure people know my form of socialising is different to the generic form. Neutralising is not allowing your dog to over value anything other than you, your family, your training motivators. K9: I view it as eliminating your dog from things, which I call elimination not teaching, but either way as long as the message gets across. K9: No defence here, I just want to ensure that people know a few things about my socialisation program. 1. You don't have to do it. 2. It wont cause problems. 3. It is easy. 4. It does work & very well. Thats why I started the thread on it ages ago. Yep you probably are doing something similar? K9: then basically its the same, just as a behaviourist, I need to explain it in detail to clients so they don't go off in the wrong direction if I can help it. We as trainers/behaviourists also need to be cautious of what we write, I would not be half surprised to hear in 12 months that after reading the following, someone would say that I suggest breaking a dogs leg as part of socialisation, some people take the written word very literally.

K9: Yes this is 100% true. I have a scale which I have added here so one can see the variables we allow, hope this helps. Any values under positive or negative 3 are acceptable as the dog isnt operating in the high end of its emotions or drives, this not interfering with training progress.

K9: I guess its like meeting someone who doesn't eat fish for example, do they lead less of a life not enjoying the great taste of seafood, not at all but if you were a lover of seafood it is hard to accept that another cant see the same benefits. (swap the seafood/fish for any food to make the scenario make sense with your food preference) After using a strict neutralisation program on many working dogs, I can tell you first hand that they don't miss out on anything & training dies flow much smoother/faster/easier & I am yet to find one downside, keeping in mind that I dont have dogs for other people, I only have them for me. K9: It is a lot easier than you think. A simple jacket on the dog that says "please don't pat me Im working" will stop 99.9% of people & as a side note, its not forever, its whilst your puppy is trying to figure out what it can get from strangers. We have shown some pups as little as six strangers over 3 days & the pup from there on in decided strangers dont bare any goodness& just ignored them after. Some take longer but as you know, no two dogs are exactly the same. K9: Could happen, I dont see a lot of breeders taking litters out though, & if I am picking a pup for myself, I would try & advise the breeder what I didnt want done. As an example, when I was in Victoria, I think it was Ballarat doing a Training in drive workshop, one of the dogs we called out was very well trained & had great drive, super focus on the handler. I think I remember the lady bred this dog, but it was a while ago (& many thousands of dogs & owners ago too) Later when we talked about Neutralisation, she piped up & told the story of this dog she had with her at the workshop. That it was the best one she had bred, but what happened to this dog when it was a pup was that, it had suffered a broken leg & was kept indoors & missed the socialisation process. I remember the lady thinking this pup would turn out terrible without socialisation but in fact it was the best one she had. It was the most bonded, focussed & obedient dog that she had (bred) from what I remember her telling me. She inadvertently neutralised this dog, used her previous training experience & was herself impressed on just how good this dog come out.

K9: & thats where we differ, I see no benefit in strangers receiving affection from my dog/s. K9: Yep but for many people this can be hard to achieve or sometimes just never happens. K9: & not walk off with them when your calling it back, & not run over to people to say hello, & not want to go sit with them when they are having a picnic for example, & not ignore your commands as the dog is already recieving rewards from someone else. The list can go on & sure these can be trained out of the dog I just dont see the point of training them in so they can be counter trained later. I would say the only reason that people really believe that dogs should assign a high value to strangers etc as that is what they grew up believing was the right way. K9: Sure they do, but in most pet homes, they are not getting that balance. K9: Yes of course, you would just be aiming at your dog having a low to medium value of strangers.

K9: if you stand there and allow it yes, it seems your putting forth the reasons that this wont work when I don't think (from your posts) that you have tried it, and disregarding the fact that I have hundreds of clients that have successfully achieved this without issue. K9: Then a dog that come to me with this value system is one that has already been socialised, had a value assigned to what ever it chasing. This dog would not then be neutralised but trained not to chase through another training program. There is no one singular program that does everything, neutralisation is just one step in raising a dog. K9: & its your call if that's why you have a dog. I don't have dogs to please others, to give other big warm fuzzy cuddles & I dont choose a breed of dog based on what other people think or like. And again there is no arm twisting here, Neutralisation is what "I" feel is best, you can do what ever you like. K9: Yeah I think some people call them Alphas. The one that beholds all rewards & information will attract the most respect in a dogs eyes. K9: These are human traits your describing & I dont feel Anthropomorphism is an accurate way of deciding why a dog does what it does. My feeling would be that your dog knows what works, squirm around the feet of a person, lick them perhaps & I get good things. K9: I wonder if a human companion was the same would we think it so attractive? As long as you have the right bribe, you will have their attention... This provides quite a good argument for neutralisation in my opinion. If your dog wasnt food driven the I guess you wouldnt be able to win him over & he would just walk off with whomever was providing the highest reward at the time.

K9: Well I am not saying my world is perfect but it happens just that way here. People who would come up to my pup would be asked not to pet the dog, only interaction in the beginning the pup has with people are my set ups. The dog is not off leash until it has a solid recall. K9: Its a bigger subject than a few answers will do justice but, the dog will never be released to get the rabbit, when the dog desires drive satisfaction, I will provide it for work completed.

K9: that is the correct theory, but in reality it doesn't always play out that way. You have a dog that you allow to chase rabbits for example, using all of its prey drive & reaping the rewards for it. You also train with a prey item, training will mean that the dog, for a less than desirable performance may not get that prey item, may have to do more than one formal (thought requiring) task for it. When you have a dog that's tossing up the options of chasing a rabbit which will be prey drive satisfying for sure & your toy, sometimes that toy will look unachievable or "too expensive" to the dog & you have lost. yes you can then employ corrective measures but of course its 2 steps forward & one step back then. S: yes of course, as I mentioned earlier, its one more thing that has to be taught, trained & ultimately proofed as opposed to just not training it in the first place. K9: Yes it does need to learn this, but learning can be inhibited when you over socialise & looking at my booking list, whilst they must learn these things, they are not doing it. K9: In a perfect worlkds, no, in ours, yes. K9: Agreed & neutralisation is a sure step in that direction. K9: when its done fiorst, its called nuetralisation. K9: Its not training the dog not to ant to, its blocking a natural reward path that later on will delay training & keep in mind you don't have to be sure about it, because I am. K9: The best of both worlds? are there only two worlds? K9: What I am saying is that I take a different approach to socialisation, that in itself is training. K9: This means to me that the pup didn't find the keys stimulating, not much else. if the pup doesnt see the keys as a trigger to any drive, your not achieving anything.

K9: no of course not, but they have to be trained not to race up vs them not wanting to race up... Neutralisation prevents distractions before they become distractions. No where do I say to anyone including clients that they have to neutralise their pups, its just a recommendation & it works very well. I dont see a benefit in having a dog assign a high value for strangers vs a low value, no benefit but plenty of downside.

K9: well yes & no, no to play with things you cant control, such as people, dogs etc, yes to play play play with things you c an, like toys, you etc etc.. K9: Thinks everything might be a play item, neutralisation shows the pup that everything isn't a play item, only you & your toys are.

K9: you don't allow interaction that ends with your dog gaining big rewards out of the experience. Writing out the complete program would take a long, long time.

K9: If one has a weak nerved dog, they will probably need help in any case, & making the transition from say negative 4 to zero is always going to be easier than positive 8. With those dogs that are born with weaker than desirable nerves, I prescribe more leadership than socialisation so the dog can rely on the Alpha, that's a more bankable "rock" than variable experiences. K9: first there is no reason to only teach a dog that other dogs will be calm, not bouncy, just teach the dog how to recat in al cases (that are common) and for those not common, look to the Alpha. Also neutralising does not mean you need a dog that has no reaction to yours, just conttrol the outcomes. K9: This would be an incomplete program, regardless of whether the goal was to socialise or neutralise. K9: if you have a dog with a high positivbe valuye for people, & it goes into high drive to interact with those people & a bad experience is the pitcome, your unlikley to change the value dog has of those people, but you also have a dog that goes into high drive for people which really isnt desireable. In most cases however, a neutralised dog doesnt interact by desire with strangers, less interaction less problems really. The positive 2's & negative 5's are just my way of adding a value so people can understand. To look at a dog that falls into the realms of - 3 to + 3 is like looking at the same dog. I explain it that bway so were not trying to train dogs by decimal point if you know what I mean. K9: I think thats the idea but it is the long way around, but lets say you have set the value of strangers to zero, neutral. A stranger turns up at your home, your dog neither wants to go to the or walk away from them, it just has no interest. The reward of interacting with strangers never was presented so you never have to train to sit before a pat. The whole program is un nccessery. K9: no, the neutralised dog would not desire to play. Your looking at the same results (desires by dog owner), but achieved through training. When you say the dog "must" ignore when on leash, must or what? Be dealt a correction such as removal of the reward or physical correction? Some would distract the dog with a motivator, which is competing between the distraction & the reward, all to hard. There is no need for corrections when your dog isnt by your side because it "must", it just wants to be there.

K9: Yes I believe that too. Not as concerned about flooding as much as I am concerned that when trying to seek out dogs to socialise the weak nerved dog with, your probably going to come out with a worse outcome attempting to get a positive value. K9: This will happen if you take any pup, weak nerved or not to a park & it gets a hard time by other dogs, weak nerved dogs are just more prevalent to becoming fear aggressive without much help. K9: yes most likely but neutralised to strangers of course, not neutral to everything. K9: I draw a circle around the zero in a graph, that circle will encompass -3 to +3, anything in these ranges is ok to me. Just nothing over the top. K9: I used to only neutralise working dogs but with such risks completing generic socialisation methods & higher demands existing now on pets, I prescribe it to all dogs working ir not now. Working dogs to me need to able to comply with a known command under a higher level of distraction, of course neutralisation reduces distraction so this comes easier.

K9: If you have a dog with weak nerves you will have to be very careful or you will mess it up, whether you neutralise or not.

K9: Ok, so one would ask, why train something you will have to over ride? K9: Yes because it reduces the chances of the dog gaining high end negative values for items such as dogs creating fear aggression etc as the dogs are not over exposed to many dogs & it also makes training flow a great deal smoother & faster. K9: correct. It can be patted it just doesn't die to be patted by other than the Alpha. K9: The values don't change, your looking at this like a mathematical equation such as: - Socialised dog has met 4547 friendly people so it will take 4548 aggressive people to revert to fear aggressive, that's not how it works. K9: It wont have any effect if the dog is to take people negatively after a certain event. Another example is: Someone may have been driving cars for ten years. In that time they have travelled through 20 000 sets of traffic lights without incident. On the 20 001st time someone runs a red light & crashes into them. They are badly injured & when they recover & start to drive again, they are nervous around traffic lights. 20 000 good experiences & one bad = still have the value changed if the event is serious enough. K9: Could be, could also be a waste of time to teach your dog to love something then teach it to ignore it...

K9: All our training programs now advise neutralisation. Some people are nervous of this as they feel it will be: - More work - its not Difficult - its not Will cause their dog to be fearful - it wont Will cause their dog to be unfriendly - it wont Some think that no socialisation or lack of socialisation is neutralisation when in fact that is not true either. Neutralisation is simply socialisation renamed to indicate the value we want dogs to have of certain things. Socialisation to me is "showing your dog something new & assigning a value to it". Neutralisation is just the same only the value is zero or close to zero. This avoids the current problems of your dog being attacked in an off leash park whilst attempting generic socialisation programs & deals with dogs that would otherwise run off leaving their owners to go to something of greater value. That something with greater value was probably given greater value through their socialisation program. What some people don't understand is that values work in both positive & negatives. EG: They get a pup with weak nerves that is concerned about meeting strangers for example. They don't realise that their dog has a value of strangers to the tune of possible negative 5. So it isn't neutral to begin with. A program needs to be designed to achieve a neutral value of strangers for this dog would be to increase the positive value of strangers to this dog. If they keep their dogs from interacting positively with strangers they wont make the problem worse, it just wont get any better.

K9: Well done Ruth, it really makes me happy when all these people are getting such great results in a short time with my programs, sounds like your reaping the rewards of your hard work, I am sure your dogs will be happier for it! Thanks so much for sharing...!

K9: Nah nothing worth mentioning.