Aidan

Good instructions can be found here, painless if you've got some time: http://www.dragonflyllama.com/%20DOGS/Leve...vel/2Level.html ('Crate' is below 'Come')

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgEwiH8CeUE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHgBvnQ71ss...feature=related

I realise you've only had these two for a little while but I think it's time to close the crate door and don't let them have the bones at night. I feel quite strongly that dogs should sleep all night, and during the middle of the day if they're not doing something specifically with you.

Quoted for emphasis. This is the single biggest mistake that people make with their dog who "won't play tug". http://www.clickertraining.com/node/727 (instructions for teaching 'tug' and 'out')

Good post Poodlefan! The "alpha male" is the wolf who sires the cubs. That is all.

Hopefully the behaviourist will be able to help you identify all the triggers so that you can either avoid those situations or condition new responses to them. Griffin sounds like a resource guarder to me (his crate, and you), which is not necessarily a dominance or rank issue. Submissive dogs will guard resources from the alpha, it's a question of getting what they want not necessarily trying to gain a higher rank. Sometimes we can spin our wheels implementing rank reduction programs when we could be addressing issues directly, such as teaching Griffin to be calm and relaxed while Callista approaches his crate (for e.g) If it does turn out to be a rank issue (I'm not saying it isn't), then this will address that problem also.

Crate and rotate, or use baby gates in your home. You've got a sick dog and the stress will not be helping him at all, his health is your main priority (after yours, which is even more important now! Congratulations!) Whilst you can improve the situation and get better control around your dogs, the likelihood of completely resolving this issue is very slim, particularly with the other things going on in your life. On the evidence, the techniques that you are using are not working particularly well, the problem has got worse over time. They are good techniques for making life predictable and consistent with clear boundaries, so I would not abandon them, but they will not resolve this sort of issue on their own. What suggests to you that this is a dominance issue? Based on what you have said (which is not a complete picture so I won't make assumptions) the dogs just don't feel secure around each other, which probably has something to do with Griffin's history prior to coming to you. That would be understandable. Anything you can do to improve their feelings of security around each other, or at least your control over them, will help the situation but in the meantime you will need a strategy to keep them safe and minimise stress for them both. Crate and rotate and barriers are a cheap and effective way to achieve this. An example of an exercise you can use to improve their feelings of security around each other is to have both dogs on either side of a baby gate while you alternate stroking or feeding of either, so that attention to one is a predictor of attention for the other. Having them stay in a relaxed drop while you do this is even better, if you can work towards that. It is a small, but important step.

It should be noted that the dogs in the video I posted are very high drive, purpose bred working line Malinois. We would not expect most other dogs to be able to do what was shown in the video, or at least we would not be able to train them to do it very efficiently. The process of working through things that a dog is scared of and things that a dog is distracted by for other reasons (prey drive, pack drive etc) can be remarkably similar. You have to remember that there are both Respondents (brain chemistry, nervous impulses etc) and Operants (the more outwardly observable stuff that is controlled by consequences). With fearful behaviour the respondents play a larger role, and it will usually take longer to alter respondent behaviours. We can usually change operants fairly quickly, and these will influence respondents to some extent, but it should not be assumed that just because a dog is "acting" confident or calm that he actually is. What I'm trying to say here, in plain English, is that you can teach a dog to heel past an object that he is scared of, but it may take longer for him not to feel fear while heeling past the object. But teaching him to heel past the object calmly will make some difference to how he feels about it.

I wish more people understood the great stuff that is being described in this thread. It is key to getting reliable, fluent responses in almost any situation, whether they be obedience, agility, recalls, manners, loose leash walking, aggression etc Good work! Loved the video, too.

There are some "mild" distractions in this video:

You can start adding distractions fairly early, so long as you keep on setting the dog up for success. If the dog isn't succeeding you have nothing to reinforce, so make it a little easier and try again. For e.g pretty much as soon as I've got a dog coming quickly when called I'll stand in the line between two people, so the dog can run past me. Then I have food in my closed hand. Then I open my hand. We can get most dogs to recall past food in an open hand within two sessions, usually one session. Then I break out the tennis balls...

That's very interesting, I might ask Kellie about this because I'm not sure how far she goes these days (we haven't discussed it for a while), it wouldn't be fair of me to comment without knowing what she does once she gets past this point. OK, I asked Kellie. She said she brings in new dogs and repeats the process.

Hi SSM, I've noticed you've not had a reply. I suppose the question I would ask is "when are you planning on seeing a qualified behaviourist about this?" I would also want to know if any of the other dogs in the house are upset or displaying any obvious avoidance around the bitch in question? If so, do they bloom when either separated from the offender for a few days, or if the main handler is gone for a few days? The basic process is to identify the antecedents (triggers), then safely manage the offending bitch and immediately begin work towards bringing her under effective control in those situations. Also to address her need to resource guard, for e.g being patient when handler giving attention to other dogs will be reinforced with attention.

Indeed "no" must mean "no". I take a different approach, your son isn't going to be able to growl him away and yelping can make a dog with any drive get very excited. If you find you aren't able to use either effectively this thread has some alternatives: http://www.dolforums.com.au/index.php?showtopic=183894

Apparently I've given a false impression of myself, probably the name dropping If you saw my dog sometimes you'd think twice about listening to anything I have to say on the topic, but she's given me a lot to think about and more importantly, work on and learn from (good and bad). I am working on putting something together, something of a 'sport' that allows for reactive and aggressive dogs to participate and progress, and for their owners to learn key concepts and hone their skills.

That's very interesting, I might ask Kellie about this because I'm not sure how far she goes these days (we haven't discussed it for a while), it wouldn't be fair of me to comment without knowing what she does once she gets past this point. Kellie makes a fairly strong argument in favour of controlling the environment but has also expressed disappointment at how difficult she has found it to achieve, so I would be interested to hear what she has to say about this now. I believe that if you own the DVD you can join her "5th Quadrant" discussion group. I caution against the use of distraction techniques except when necessary, and there is a very narrow range of scenarios where they are useful in my work. Either you can control the environment (or consequences) in some small way, or it's completely out of your hands and distractions aren't going to help at all. If you can control the environment even a little, you can reinforce operants. If you can't, then you probably can't distract the dog either. The small margin between those two pages doesn't allow a lot of room for doodling, but if you can avoid a potentially explosive situation by tossing some food around then that is better than losing the plot completely. People like their margin of safety, particularly clicker trainers who don't feel that they have any options if the dog isn't interested in their food any more. One of the challenges for me is to get people to keep moving forward, to at least approach the knife edge if not walk along it. The trick is to keep the dog in the game. Distractions work if you use them early enough. The problem with that is that it reinforces that sort of behaviour in the owner (or trainer), not moving forward calmly, competently. I actually hit upon this idea when I read "How Dogs Learn" by Burch and Bailey. They told the story of the dog who acted up in class, the instructor told them to step outside to settle down, then they found it happening more and more. "Hey - that's what I do!" Just not in class... Cosmolo and others have said they also use something similar to CAT. I am a strong believer in using some "rough and ready" functional analysis to identify actual reinforcers or punishers, rather than relying on my own interpretations. If nothing else it feels good to know I'm right In fairness to Kellie and Jesus I would have to say that I do not use CAT, but I do use proximity of stimuli to reinforce/extinguish behavioural responses. I also use a couple of kilos of meat and enough clicking to be attractive to cicadas and crickets. I do have a dog in a class at the moment who I will be using something more along the lines of CAT with though. For the record, I have no trouble finding suitable decoy dogs. They just have to be LESS reactive than the dog we are working with

Apparently it's not an issue in the short-term, but I just have lingering doubts about what happens in the longer term. Dogs do get pretty adept at picking up little signals about what to expect (or what you expect) when you put them into a controlled set-up if it's too obvious (like in CAT). All reports are that they DO continue their new patterns in uncontrolled environments so far, but this is fairly new. If you don't maintain a change at an operant level, or fail to make a change at a respondent level (and maintain it), what happens when the dog is pushed a little too far and barking/lunging work for him again? At least when you use a non-functional reinforcer (e.g food) you always have control over that reinforcer, and can continue to maintain those operants with those reinforcers. The point of controlling the functional reinforcers is very valid, but it's the hardest thing to control. I think it helps to be done early on, but you can't just rely on that forever. But that IS a controlled environment You're always moving ahead with CAT, as fast as the dog and trainer are capable. You do go into those situations, and it's a relatively quick process doing it this way. The trainer needs to be prepared for that, btw. Once you've started, you don't stop. I haven't seen the video, I'm not sure how in-depth they go? Consider that when the dog is responding appropriately to other dogs, most other dogs he meets will also respond appropriately and his new behaviour will work for him - at least most of the time. However, let's not pretend that the sort of dogs who end up needing CAT aren't genetically predisposed to learning aggressive behaviours and experiencing anxiety around other dogs. If they've learned it before, they can learn it again, particularly if you haven't addressed the respondents as well (which is currently an UNKNOWN factor in CAT). While we're on that topic, this is why I don't use corrections with these dogs, unless I have a good reason (like someone will be hurt if I don't suppress that behaviour promptly). Something to be very careful of, it should not be assumed that just because we conditioned new operants, or suppressed unwanted aggressive operants, that we made broad-reaching changes to respondent behaviours. We may have, or we may not have. Why do we make the assumption? CAT isn't popular within Australia, I'm sorry I don't know of anyone doing it in Melbourne. Kellie and Jesus differentiate between reinforcers that are currently maintaining the operants you are working with, and reinforcers that have been introduced. I can see their point, but it really is context-specific which can make things confusing. In the case of a dog who would benefit from CAT with other dogs, the other dog is a functional reinforcer. Let me just clarify because this often trips people up, in a negative reinforcement procedure the aversive is the reinforcer, so if an operant is reinforced when it makes another dog go away, the other dog is a functional reinforcer. The function of the behaviour is to make the other dog go away. If we come in with some food and reinforce a different behaviour, that reinforcer is functional for the different behaviour, but was not functional for the original behaviour. So if we're referring to the original behaviour, the food is not a functional reinforcer for THAT behaviour. Giving the dog food to reinforce an alternative behaviour does not put the unwanted behaviour that we seek to replace under an extinction procedure in itself, for that matter. I haven't explained that very well, sorry!

I know Kellie Snider reasonably well and have had several discussions with her about this procedure from the beginning. Functional Analysis is ALWAYS undertaken as this procedure only works for "distance increasing" behaviours. One of the fears I have for this procedure now that it is popular is that very few people are competent with FA so the method is vulnerable to blame shifting. It will not make the aggression worse if done correctly. If done incorrectly it can make it worse. One requirement for doing this correctly is that you have a lot of time to complete the procedure, however long that takes, hours. It is definitely not flooding, however I personally believe (and Kellie Snider disagrees) that there is a lot of habituation going on. It is (or should be!) a Differential Reinforcement of Alternative Response procedure, allowing unwanted responses to extinguish (reasonably quickly) while other responses are reinforced via negative reinforcement. "Spontaneous Recovery" is mitigated to some extent, although there is very little data on this and I think some of the claims need backing up. Because it is a long procedure where you essentially attempt to "finish the job" in very few sessions, running into uncontrolled dogs should not be an issue. In theory. I have my doubts, and I believe that handlers should be trained in using "non-functional" reinforcers to maintain the alternative responses, but Kellie and Jesus disagree with me on this point. Some personal criticisms: 1. studies were not long enough to make claims regarding long-term efficacy of procedure 2. habituation and other effects have not been proven to not take place, leading to questions about long-term efficacy 3. no measures of respondent behaviours were taken, therefore no indication of biochemical or nervous system state other than outwardly visually observable phenomena Criticisms aside, it is an excellent procedure if the practitioner is skilled and has a solid practical ability with functional analysis, putting aside their own interpretations of behaviour. It does have more to offer than the basic use of functional reinforcers which are nothing new to the behaviour world.

Lessen the distance. You want to work at somewhere around 80-90% success rate. Let's say you ask for 1.2m (use little bits of tape on the ground if you need to), do 5 trials. Click when they hit 1.2m, then have them come to you for the treat and to set up the next trial. Do five trials in a row, if they hit the 1.2m at least 4 out of 5 times, increase to 1.3m and try another 5 trials. If you're not getting 4/5 at 1.2m, lessen the distance to 1.1m If we ask for the most amount of behaviour we can get every time, we tend to get stuck. The rate of reinforcement drops off, the dog gets confused.

Yup, do that and consider it to be "immunisation" against the dogs that cross your path in a negative way.

A friend of mine bred Borzoi for many years and my experience with them is that they have extraordinary levels of prey drive, similar to a working line GSD (I own one of these). Yelping will indeed make them very excited, even compulsion (scruffing etc) will only serve to increase drive once they are in the zone. The approach that has worked for me is to END THE FUN in a meaningful way as soon as biting starts and to mark the event very clearly so that there is no confusion about what it was that caused the fun to stop. In a NEUTRAL tone of voice, as soon as the mouthing starts say "too bad" then get up and leave the room, closing the door behind you. Leave pup to settle a little, as soon as he begins to settle, come back into the room. When you do want pup to be excited, have something LEGAL for him to mouth. If he mouths the legal thing (tug toy, chew toy etc), play the game with him. If he mouths skin, immediately "too bad" then get up and leave, closing the door behind you, wait until pup settles. Mouthing chew toy = fun Mouthing human = fun stops Make it black and white, don't push him away as he follows you to the door nipping at you (one of the many things he is very likely to do). Just walk off quietly and shut the door behind you, wait until he settles. Playing tug can be a very useful game for this sort of pup, and will only enhance the message that you are attempting to get across, see: http://www.clickertraining.com/node/727

Hi Kris, I suggest you get in touch with the Siberian Husky and Malamute Club in SA who should point you in the right direction. There are some breed-specific traits for northern breeds, and what you might get away with with a German Shepherd or Golden Retriever is going to get you the proverbial "middle finger" with a Malamute. Not that I would ever condone the so-called "alpha roll" (dangerous, and a completely backwards approach to what dogs do). He isn't trying to become "alpha", don't worry. But he will do what works for him, so you need to learn how to direct him into behaviours that you find acceptable, and to make those "work for him" instead.

8' high weld-mesh fencing with a 3' deep concrete trench and barbed-wire overhangs. That way you get to keep your beautiful garden beds looking beautiful. For a novel, training-based approach have a look at this: http://www.clickertraining.com/node/2409 ...personally I rely on fences! If you really enjoy training it could be an interesting project to take on though. I made up some steel "domes" out of weld-mesh to protect young plants outside the fenced areas until they are established (2'x4' piece of mesh, bent into a half-round). I only plant hardy species, once they are established they are on their own. The flowers are in the front garden, or in pots.

It's a good thing he's just a pup. Guess who would win if he wasn't? This isn't really so much about him stealing stuff, or barking, or even biting. It's about the fact that you try to tell him off and he can bark at or bite you if he doesn't like it, he's found a weak boundary. Sure, you can up the ante and use a consequence that is actually meaningful, but my question is - why isn't he trying to figure out what you would like him to do? Rather than trying to figure out how far he can go before you get serious? You solve the shoes/underwear/rubbish problem by putting them behind closed doors or in secure bins. You teach him to come to you and trade so that when one of the kids gets lazy and leaves their shoes by the door he isn't chewing them or burying them, he's bringing them to you so you can swap them for something he is allowed to chew or bury. That is an example of him figuring out what you would like him to do, rather than trying to figure out what he can get away with. Chances are, if you do effectively punish him for stealing stuff he will just steal stuff when you're not around. He's learned to look for the things he can get away with. My suggestion is to turn that around and teach him to look for things he can do to please you, to seek out the rewards.

Sure, no problem. It was only a suggestion if you're using the same toy/tool for two different outcomes, you can either use a cue or a different toy on the end. </bewilderment> It would actually be good to see the exercise that you described earlier if you have a clip of that?