Aidan

I would, YMMV! Does it look like less than she would do playing of her own volition? Maybe do 3, then take a break and do another 3 later. I'd be interested in seeing some hard science on something equivalent, it's always smelled a little bit overcooked to me. Be sensible, but not paranoid. Yes, the pup runs a straight line through the poles. I don't know if it's the currently "in vogue" method for teaching them but it was always a good one I thought. You start with a nice clean channel down the middle, then bring the poles in little by little (at an appropriate age). I don't compete in agility, I seem to recall something about entering on the correct side? You might want to look into that if you plan to compete later.

That's something I've only thought about, never had a stock killer come to me. There isn't much research on this either. In theory, a Differential Reinforcement procedure should produce a very reliable response to stock. In theory. Whether we might be able to achieve this as a practical matter is unknown to me, I don't know of anyone doing it or willing to fund a study. The closest corollary I can find is wild caught dolphins being trained, in 3 months, to go on long missions in the open ocean without going off to hunt. Of course they haven't learned not to hunt EVER, just not to hunt while they are working. If you lived in an underground sea-mansion (I can dream) next to a fish farm and kept a pet dolphin (the dream gets better) you'd want to be sure it couldn't get out of your yard except when it was working...

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...

That's where you stagger the poles so your dog can go through them in a straight line. I tried to draw a diagram before but it didn't work. I'll try again, imagine the grass is X and the poles are O: OXXXX XXXXO OXXXX XXXXO I think the risks are greatly overstated. I would do them fast but keep repetitions to a minimum.

Ahh, but CONDITIONING is what is important, not the reinforcer. It's not a competition between reinforcers, it's a competition between conditioned responses. You can use some very weak reinforcers to build very reliable behaviours. That applies to both positive and negative reinforcers, hence the reason you can use a very low stim on a remote training collar to build reliable behaviours using negative reinforcement. I never use anything particularly exciting for food treats, just dog food. My dogs are rarely hungry either. "Stimulus control" does not require compulsion. Countless experiments have proven this, it is beyond dispute. The more practical matter for a dog owner (if we're talking about achieving very reliable behaviours like 'come' or 'drop') is how to achieve stimulus control in the real world in a reasonable period of time. So while stimulus control does not REQUIRE compulsion, compulsion might be a practical matter (and I would include in this the dog's tolerance for correction, some dogs learn very poorly via compulsion so it would be an impediment to stimulus control). Then it just becomes a case of balancing practical matters with ethics and what the owner's personal preferences are, taking into consideration more than just the behaviour you wish to bring under stimulus control.

Stagger them: (edited to remove pictogram that didn't work)

Don't worry, they are much stricter on checking ID to buy ciggies or booze these days. You'll be fine so long as you guard your own stash. I only recall my dogs getting better at adolescence. Until then it was all chewing and piddling on the carpet, even the odd smashed window. All got better when they got lanky.

There's nothing wrong with being bouncy and friendly, it's how they respond when politely asked to back off by another dog that counts. If they don't get the message then one remedial action you can take is to spend more time walking with older, stable dogs. You can start off on-leash, let them greet politely then start walking straight away. Let the dogs stop and sniff things together but if they start to play, start walking again. The idea is that they don't ALWAYS have to be bouncy and playful around other dogs. You can gradually allow more freedom, and introduce recalls during social encounters and that sort of thing. If you know what you're looking for, encourage backing off when asked by another dog or if the other dog looks uncomfortable.

The dogs that cause me the most grief, funnily enough, are the dogs who are on-leash, but straining. I've asked people with pulling dogs to help me with some controlled set-ups, but inevitably the dog pulls on the first pass then relaxes. Which doesn't help me much. Off-leash dogs are rarely a problem for me. My GSD doesn't put on a big display but whatever she does it works for her. I could count the number of close encounters with off-leash dogs on one hand accounting for the last 5 or 6 years (she is nearly 9), and we walk in off-leash areas almost daily. Of those encounters, all have been when I have had Sabella with me alone, for when Django my Golden is with us he expertly engages the other dog at a reasonable distance and settles them down with a polite greeting ritual. Even very reactive or very silly dogs are sent on their way peacefully. He really is a very special dog.

I agree completely. In fact I think abnormally sociable dogs can and do contribute to dog aggression problems in other dogs. They have poor social skills and lack boundaries or respect for personal space. I don't know how many dogs I've seen not back off when asked politely so the usually polite dog suddenly learns to become impolite, which leads to all sorts of problems if not handled with consideration.

Of course, or you may prefer the other method - you count their rings. That's why all dogs in shelters are 1.

You use a thermometer to check their "date".

I went through all that at adolescence too. Started smoking, drinking, staying out all night and wagging school. Stopped playing sports, let my hair grow long, stopped speaking in full sentences. And words. All I wanted to do was play guitar all day and hang out with my mates, didn't listen to a word my parents said. Wait, what? It's puppies you're asking about? Oh they're relatively easy when they hit adolescence...

I figured you were When you are shaping you withhold the reinforcer for any response that does not meet your criteria. This will typically make the response stronger temporarily. If this is what you want, you then reinforce the stronger response. If this is not what you want, you can continue to withhold the reinforcer until the dog stops offering that response or elicit a different response (either way, the unwanted response does not produce any further reinforcement). None of this involves punishment, only positive reinforcement and extinction. It is an extinction procedure and not a punisher because nothing was added or taken away contingent upon the unwanted response.

My working line girl took a full 3 years to reach her maximum size on a diet of mostly raw chicken frames. Her breeder had advised that many of his dogs take that long to develop physically. Another 8 or 9 years after that to settle down...

We had a nice cool day yesterday so I got to try out my new scooter that cost me $4.40 from the tip-shop (I talked them down from $5). It was worth every penny. My dog already knows how to stop, unfortunately my scooter does not. But we had fun, and both came home panting heavily.

Just a point about withholding an expected reinforcer (e.g not giving a treat, or not opening a door): if the reinforcer is maintaining the behaviour and is now NOT being given (withheld) for the same behaviour, that is an Extinction Procedure. It is not a punisher. Extinction procedures do not require the response to be diminished or strengthened, although either may happen (typically, on an "extinction curve"). If the response does diminish, it is still not due to punishment. The "Quadrants" give the impression that there are only four mechanisms for changing operant behaviour. This is not true, they are simply the four possible "consequences". Extinction is a failure to provide a previously given consequence so it cannot be placed within the quadrants, but it exists and is different to a punishing consequence. Negative Punishment occurs where behaviour is diminished as a result of taking something away. The "something" does not need to be a functional reinforcer (but often is). The organism must have "had" the "something" in the first place. The grey area (not really a grey area but it does cause confusion) is where an "opportunity for reinforcement" is removed. In this case you do something that is functionally identical to putting the dog in a time-out, except the dog is left where he is and you leave the room, taking your ball with you. In this example the dog didn't have the ball, but he did have the opportunity to earn it up until he did whatever he did that made you leave so suddenly taking it with you.

I've seen a couple of dogs that will not work for anything ... and the suggestion has been made to starve them until they will work for food. The type of suggestions I see here. Reducing rations by 20% for a 2 week period is tantamount to starving an animal in your view? If you ate 2000 calories per day, it would be the equivalent of skipping a muffin and not having sugar in your coffee It's not even close to what a wolf (for e.g) would regularly encounter at different times throughout the year, in fact actual starvation is closer to what a wolf would encounter in the wild - a 100% reduction in calories for several days at a time. A different perspective for you - every single creature on this planet has evolved to work, in some capacity, for food, water, shelter and even affection. It is actually highly UNnatural for a dog to get food for free. I would be very unhealthy and unhappy if I didn't have to work for the things I want or need. If I had no reason to get out of bed, why should I?

Sorry, I couldn't tell whether you were replying to myself or Tiki? Cheese is generally OK for dogs in small quantities. Too much lactose will cause problems, though. The fat can be an issue if the dog is overweight or suffers from pancreatitis. You can use very small cubes of cheese, and mix it in with other treats at whatever ratio keeps the dog working for it.

No problem at all, it's not usually a difficult thing to TEACH someone to do this but the trick is to keep them doing it consistently. I often think the value in coming to classes is to remind the owner over and over what they need to do consistently before their dog will assume a loose leash without frequent reminders. The double-ended leash will be fine with a big, strong dog. Persephone gave a pretty good description and some important caveats. The basic idea is to have the chain running freely along the cable so that he can at least move around beyond the radius set out by the chain. This page gives some tips: http://www.unchainyourdog.org/Trolley.htm Shade, shelter and access to water are obviously very important, especially with the weather we're having at the moment. The cable I have is very strong with good strong crimps at either end, not sure how long it is though. About 5m I guess. I've got stoppers and shackles. Have they got a tree or suitable post? What have we got to work with? I haven't been to the Dog's Home for a while, but one of the ladies there is involved with Mastiffs and has an English Mastiff that was rescued from a dog fighting ring. No doubt she would know people with a soft spot for big slobber gutses.

Not sure if they are legal to use or not, but I know for certain that you can't import them into the state. The GL is more likely to be used effectively than the check chain (check chain requires more skill) but my suggestion is to also get a "balance leash" (double-ended leash), the heavier end should be attached to a collar (I usually recommend a martingale for this sort of dog but a check will be fine). That way the GL isn't over-relied upon or abused, it's safer (in case the dog somehow slips a poorly fitted GL), and you can phase out the GL very simply this way (or just have it there for emergencies). I can send you a cable if you think they will use it? Slightly better than being tied out. I'll ask around, Labs are always popular and I would be willing to work with anyone in Hobart gratis to get them started if you find anyone.

Canine Defence League "Lost Dog's Home", Scott Rd, Risdon Vale. This is the official "pound" in the Greater Hobart area. Worth giving them a call, he might pass the temperament test to be rehomed.

:D Good place to leave the discussion I reckon.

Corvus, it's worth remembering that any discussion of drives lacks universally accepted definitions. They are not technical terms, more a 'short-hand' representation of collections of behaviours, both operant and respondent, that are common across broad populations of domestic dogs. I suspect your definition of 'prey drive' is different to what most dog trainers would be referring to.

A dog does not have to "appear" to be highly motivated by a reward. All that is important is that we get more of the responses that have been reinforced. One approach that can work quite well if responses are not being reinforced with food is to reduce TOTAL RATIONS (which includes training treats) by around 20% for a 2 week period while training using short, frequent sessions every day. If people can find time for at least 2 x 5min training sessions every day as a minimum (the more the merrier), this approach can teach a dog to be more grateful for food and that it is something to be worked for (it is unnatural not to work for food). Attention to the dog's bodyweight should be paid, including a starting weight. There should be some weight loss, but nothing excessive. It's easy to underestimate how many calories per day a dog has been used to getting. Let common sense prevail, and consult a vet if necessary. If reduced rations are held for too long the dog will adapt to lower energy intake, so 2 weeks is about long enough to maintain this program.