Aidan

Without judging anyone for their methods, and never having met your dog, I would dispute this as a fact. I have no doubt that my working-line GSD would be perfectly suited to security work (all her littermates are working), and certainly if I were to "wave food around under her nose" in the early days with another dog around it would have been a waste of time, so I'm not doubting you on that point. Yet I have got her to a high level of obedience around other dogs using food, even playing with some other dogs and off-leash walking with selected dogs. How you set the dog up to learn is very important, you can't take a ham-fisted approach with a fistful of ham and an aggressive dog (sorry, I had an urge to pun). And again we come back to the strength of reinforcers ("no matter what reward") - it is the history of reinforcement that matters, the strength of a reinforcer is just one of the small variables to be accounted for in the dog's history of learning. You can take the best reward your dog has ever come across and still not reinforce anything with it because you didn't set the dog up to learn.

No argument from me, Erny. MonElite had made the statement "if they are not corrected for doing wrong then they dont know its wrong" which is misleading because it implies that you can't stop a dog doing something without a correction. There are many ways to stop a dog doing something wrong, not all involve corrections.

Is he still using the newspaper? Certainly in my experience problems like this are more common where the dog is allowed to toilet (even somewhere acceptable) inside the house. I wouldn't read too much into it, take him out more often and teach him to stay on the floor unless invited onto the couch (if at all). Coprophagia (poo eating) is a problem that has no certain answers. The only sure way to stop it is to pick up immediately every time he empties his bowels. Other than that, food that is more digestible is less likely to encourage coprophagia. A raw diet, e.g BARF, has a very high success rate. Premium foods such as Royal Canin are usually pretty good though. The addition of raw pineapple to the diet can help as the enzymes help to digest the proteins more thoroughly (the same reason pineapple can be used as a meat-tenderiser prior to cooking).

That sounds good in theory but of course it's not the whole story, I've taught dogs "not" to do plenty of things without ever correcting them for doing it. Dogs just do what works for them at the end of the day.

I'm glad you said "half"! I must be in the other half But to be completely honest, you cannot possibly use 'purely positive' methods with any fear or aggression case, there is necessarily an aversive involved in whatever the fear-inducing stimulus is. We actually have some "purely positive" trainers in SA Aidan, that won't do any jobs relating to aggression and eject dogs/owners from their training classes if any aggression surfaces. Some also reject training applications from GSD, Rottweiler and Doberman owners and crossbreeds of That "half" I would question their training ability in general???. The "good" trainers will do any job presented and have the experience and methods at hand to deal with the specific situation required. A good trainer does the best thing by the dog and it's family, my opinion. Nearly all of my clients are referred from other qualified people who feel that the dog would be better with me at that time. I don't think they are bad trainers at all, they just have different skills. Same as I would be a terrible agility or obedience trainer, I just don't have any high-level experience with those activities and have decided not to focus my efforts there. If someone came to me looking for those skills I would refer them on.

Reliability is a result of conditioning. Reliability is not dependent upon which "quadrant" is used, but practical matters may influence which quadrant is used to achieve reliability.

x2, good advice indeed.

I'm glad you said "half"! I must be in the other half But to be completely honest, you cannot possibly use 'purely positive' methods with any fear or aggression case, there is necessarily an aversive involved in whatever the fear-inducing stimulus is.

I'm fully aware of that SAS. The fact is my dog has not attacked another dog in over 6 years (other than my own, and not while muzzled ever). We had an awkward situation once while she was not muzzled and on a 6' leash, there was a dog following us on-lead, growling at us. Then another group of dogs were ahead of us, also on-lead and straining and barking. I ducked down to the shore to get away from both groups, slipped and fell dropping the leash. The situation could not have got much worse. Yet I called her and she came immediately. Just one of many risks which we mitigate with training, behaviour modification, and tools like leashes and muzzles. If I can't see what is coming I hold the leash, if I'm unsure I hold the leash. We're all prone to mistakes, at least if I make a mistake no-one has to suffer a bite. Could you say the same? Not having a dig, just putting it into perspective. I am confident to walk her dragging a line and muzzled because the truth is if she were off-leash and unmuzzled there would be little chance of an incident so long as I kept my wits about me. It's just a 'belt and braces' approach.

The simple solution is to let dogs attack skateboards. Then either kids will stop riding them on the streets or evolution will take care of business I sound so old...

Entire dogs are welcomed at obedience clubs. Depending on how serious the reaction towards other dogs and new things is you might need some help. She sounds poorly socialised, and given that she is now 3.5 years old it might take some time for her to get used to new things. I would see a behaviourist, an obedience club might be too much for her but it's impossible to say without seeing her. Begin with some basic obedience using positive reinforcement methods. This will help in many ways. I would especially begin by teaching her to touch things with her nose ('target training').

I've always found it depends more on the practitioner than the method.

I agree with that principle but I should add that I once ran a class for dogs who were bike chasers, some of whom were very aggressive in their pursuit. You might be surprised at how quickly this can be done. We ran the classes for, from memory, 8 weeks at which point every dog passed an off-leash test with a bike at high speed coming very closely coming from both in front and behind them. This was a total of not much more than an 1h:20m actual training for each dog (about 10min per week). We used no compulsion at all. Handlers used food, nothing else. Handlers were nearly all novices. It should be noted that for some dogs the bikes themselves were aversive, so there was no way to avoid using -R, so for those dogs it was used to our advantage. Another reason it is silly to worry about which quadrant you are using all the time. But there were no collar corrections, verbal reprimands etc I'm still in touch with all these dog's owners and they regularly walk along bike tracks or tracks used by mountain bike riders, off-leash. If I'd had any thought in my head that I would have to "compete" with the reinforcement the dogs got from chasing the bikes I wouldn't have even begun the project. Instead I focussed on the real issues and got very reliable results, very quickly. +R is often the faster, more reliable option. The funny thing is we were never able to address the skateboard issue. Skateboards are a different kind of evil Actually the problem there was finding someone to ride one for us. Even if you pay these kids they still don't turn up, they are skaters!

Are we allowed to use management throughout the process (a leash, for e.g)? Can we settle for 99.9% reliable? I think that for some dogs this would be very easy to achieve quickly, for other dogs it would take longer, and other dogs would never learn it reliably. For a workable model see: http://www.clickertraining.com/node/2409

I do use a muzzle and it greatly adds to my DA dog's quality of life. As previously mentioned, we do nearly all our walking in off-leash areas (not heavily populated play parks but designated off-leash coastal or bush tracks). The muzzle has allowed me to do things in training her that she is capable of but that I would never attempt without a muzzle. I bought a Jafco clear PVC muzzle which is readily modified so that I can use food easily. She can pant, drink, bark, sniff, follow a scent etc although I would not use it for extended periods in warmer weather. It is mildly inhibitory, but not heavy or uncomfortable so she can put up with it. She lets me put it on her willingly as it always means we're going to do something fun. Her favourite thing in the world is to play with a soccer ball while muzzled so there is that association, and I also introduced it slowly and made it a predictor of fun things. We choose to walk in off-leash areas, and I have her effectively off-leash (dragging a tracking line attached to a harness). If we were to run into another dog unexpectedly it would at least limit any damage my dog could do, and with that comes a reduction in liability. I accept that other dogs can still bite her, but at least in a fight between two dogs if one is muzzled you can focus on pulling the unmuzzled dog off the muzzled dog, you don't need to wait for a second party to turn up. The public reaction to seeing her in a muzzle has been, surprisingly, very positive. I've not had a single negative comment to date. Maybe people are just happy to see a well trained, well behaved dog handled responsibly and understand that in this day and age, one bite can have very serious consequences. My dog is DA but she is capable of being around other dogs (now) within reason. I think that's a very important distinction, and I can't really see a lot of point in muzzling a dog who is on a 6' leash walked around the streets. Horses for courses, just thought I'd share my positive experience with muzzles.

Just so we're clear - you know I'm with you both on this one, right? I've said so explicitly, it's a practical matter. I thought (possibly mistakenly) that MonElite was wondering how it might be done, if you were to try using purely positive methods so I was offering suggestions as to how this might be done given a rich, eccentric client I believe there are variables to this ie, depending on how often the action has been reinforced (self reinforced), depending on whether the dog has successfully achieved full predatory drive sequence and/or whether it's just the thrill of the chase with no killing involved. It would be extremely difficult (albeit not impossible) to compete with a dog which has fulfilled the entire predatory drive sequence. Yes, I would think so too If behaviour has hugely reinforcing consequences it might be very strongly conditioned. Conditioning a competing response might prove to be difficult considering time available, proximity or safety. This can also be true for behaviours that are linked to very weak reinforcers, sometimes you just need to stop something now before someone gets hurt. The point I'm labouring on and on is to not confuse the issue of competing conditioned responses with the issue of competing reinforcers as these [reinforcers], on their own, do not prohibit the conditioning of an alternative response that is under stimulus control.

If your dog isn't pulling much with no other dogs around then build up a nice, strong behaviour with no other dogs around. When he does pull, stop, AS SOON AS he starts to slacken off the leash or turns to look at you, click and treat. You might need to take a step back if he really doesn't get it. You want him to learn that if you stop he has to loosen the leash immediately and fall back into step with you. Do this until he really, really gets the idea with no other dogs around. This is a lot easier to learn with help from someone who knows how. Then enlist the help of a friend with a dog. Go somewhere with lots of room. Have your friend walk up and down the paddock with you with however much space between you is required to keep your dog walking on a loose leash. Then bring them in closer together, little by little. Keep him succeeding, without success there is nothing to reinforce and if you're not reinforcing you're not building a stronger behaviour. So pay attention, if he's struggling give them more room, if he's doing it too easy, bring them a little closer. The policy on head halters in my classes is that they are only used when the dog is able to over-power the handler, in which case they provide leverage for safety sake. An alternative is a front attaching harness which is easier to fit and usually more comfortable for the dog, but does not provide quite the same margin of safety. In either case I recommend a "balance leash" attached to a flat collar or martingale, and this is what the dog is walked on. The halter or harness is only there for leverage when required. Different people use them in different ways but that is what I teach.

That rings alarm bells. Was this dog otherwise trainable? I should explain, I asked this because there are certain conditions that inhibit learning through aversion. OT, I apologise.

Not saying it would present a workable solution (management is probably the only solution in this case), but you would need to start a long way from chickens and ducks in order to reinforce an alternative response. As far away as you need to be, only moving closer when the alternative response is fluent at that distance. e.g my GSD would get very wound up if another dog were chasing a ball, I had a friend toss a ball for her dog at the other end of a football field. That worked OK, but we got quicker results bringing them in closer and having her toss the ball in the air to herself, then tossing it in the air and letting her dog get it, then just rolling it to her dog and proceeding that way.

That rings alarm bells. Was this dog otherwise trainable?

Not even close, if I looked at total "clicks" I would say about 25:1 in favour of my GSD. The GSD is the more challenging dog.

Roast chickens? But seriously, it's really not about finding a "better reward" than whatever other reinforcers are out there. Unless we're talking about bribery... Roast chickens OK, lets say the dog finds chasing and killing chickens ultimate reward, it has killed several of them, what do you do? (other then of course prevent the chasing and killing from happening) And lets stick of dogs not some other animals This is actual stock killing and that's not fair on the owner, the dog and certainly not the chooks so I personally would stick with what has been demonstrated to work quickly in the past, and that is a remote training collar. Preferably getting an experienced person in to do it (not my area of expertise), or at least to consult first if they couldn't be there to do it. The unique thing about this scenario is that lives are at risk, both the chooks and the dogs. But this is a discussion, not a real situation as far as I know, so let's indulge ourselves. First up, the problem is not that killing chooks is so inherently reinforcing that we will never compete with it. That's a furphy. There are dogs who chase wallabies that find that just as reinforcing as a lot of dogs who kill chooks and they can be trained to recall using purely positive methods with far lesser rewards, it's been done and done and done. There are bigger issues. This needs to be 100%, whenever the dog has access to chooks (Kelpie-i mentioned a dog that would suffer severe lacerations to get to chooks so "whenever the dog has access" could have a very broad definition). It needs to be reliable when unsupervised. Day or night. There are a whole bunch of antecedents that would need to be proofed for. It needs to be done within a time frame, most likely a short time frame. There are probably other issues I haven't thought of that would be encountered if one were to attempt this. All that aside, I would pick a minimum number of alternative responses. Beginning with protected contact I would teach and proof each response, putting any hunting behaviours on an extinction procedure. Then I would move to leashes, muzzles etc Then off-leash. Then protected contact unsupervised, then unprotected unsupervised. The alternative responses would be either avoidance behaviours (invisible force field type stuff), or nurturing, protecting behaviours. Although it would be trickier, I think the nurturing, protecting behaviours are a better option because I have personal experience with this and trust my GSD with my cats completely as a result. I believe you can start to effect an emotional response, pack drive, through teaching this sort of initially artificial behaviour. Someone might come up with a better idea. It would have to be a much better idea to bother... It might work quite well in conjunction with an e-collar ("I've got to look after these electric chickens!") The other things is we must be careful not to pretend that aversives are somehow magical. The laws of learning still apply. I think people put too much faith in an absence of punished responses, and make assumptions about how it generalises. What you don't see doesn't hurt you, until you see it again!

I believe that 'In theory' it might sound as though it could work, but once a dog achieves self reinforcement and satisfaction from chasing and more importantly, killing stock, the only good place for food treats, balls and other rewards is on the ground as you suddenly drop them to chase after the dog in an attempt to get him back. Sorry Aiden, but unless I actually see it being achieved with a dog who has killed stock, then I just cannot believe it, no matter how fancy the terminology sounds on paper. Sure, don't get me wrong. If a stock killer came to me and I couldn't find someone with the experience to deal with it I would do it the way we know can work. I certainly wouldn't be putting that person, dog and livestock in the position of being my guinea pig but I wouldn't be surprised if someone came up with a reliable +R approach one day.

Well done Spottychick, sounds like you've handled it really well and opened up some eyes. Who knows how far this will spread in your sleepy little town? She won't be the only person you reach, whether you know it or not.

Your dog is not abnormally social and you sound like a very responsible dog owner.