Aidan

Studies of time-outs have shown shorter time-outs to be more effective than longer time-outs (say, 20 seconds compared to 1 minute). Most likely because they allow for more trials (3 very short time-outs will give the dog more opportunities to learn what is causing them than 1 long time-out will). Marking the behaviour that earned the time-out also makes them more likely to succeed. I use a neutral tone of voice, angry tones of voice can make the dog anxious and less likely to learn from the experience. As you have experienced, pup "frolics" when you "BAH!", which can be a reaction to stress, in this case leading to more of the unwanted behaviour (hence, it is not an effective punisher).

Would love to see a bit of you tube footage of that Aidan. Hi Staff'n'Toller, your wish is my command: http://positivepetzine.com/loose_leash_youtube

Following on from Nekhbet's post: http://www.learning-theories.com/classical...ing-pavlov.html

Yes, definitely. There are two basic mechanisms, the chase itself is reinforcing (distance decreasing behaviour, prey) or sending the bike away is reinforcing (distance increasing behaviour, defensive).

Let's just say there would be a certain irony in seeing a smartly dressed, woman of European descent with the word "consistency" tattooed across her forehead

Ain't that the truth. Sometimes I think about having the word "Consistency" tattooed on my forehead. That would be inconsistent with the mental image I have of you

Why did these dogs want to chase? Did they display other behaviours with the chasing? cheers M-J One of the dogs was sound sensitive, he didn't like the sound of the bikes on gravel (the owner lived near popular mountain bike tracks), he was afraid of other sounds too. He was fine if the bikes were on concrete or grass. Another dog had a human bite history (person wasn't on a bike though), didn't like other dogs, other people, kids or anything really (had been severely abused in previous home). His owner started with bikes because that was all I was doing at that time (this one had a very happy ending, his owner took what she had learned and applied it to all those things with great success and even decided to have a baby which she had been putting off because of the dog). Another would bark deeply, but would only chase the bikes "away", no further. One dog was prey driven, a herder, and a bit of social butterfly also. Some very basic functional analysis was done from the start, so I had a pretty good picture even without observing attendant behaviours.

Would love to see a bit of you tube footage of that Aidan. I'll see what I can do, I have two classes that have just started (dogs with problems). I have a DOLer in one of those classes, I'll seek permission before saying anything but she has been awesome, had a real problem on week one and on week two came back with a completely changed dog. I love it when they apply what they have learned outside of class and are consistent with what they do. That consistency pays dividends, the method used is secondary to that.

Yucky. There are a lot of ways to teach loose leash walking. Pick one that you like and stick to it like you would stick to a plan to quit smoking cold turkey. I never let a tight leash get the dog anywhere, and I keep the clicker ticking over like a ratchet in the early stages. It gets faded surprisingly quickly once you start raising the criteria (taking more steps between reinforcements).

This will be a class with other dogs, right? Presumably mostly on-leash manners and obedience? If you find you need to take the edge off then a short walk to get used to the surrounds is not a bad idea initially. Reward should come after effort though, so aim to go for your walk after class (using what you have learned, on a loose leash!)

That is why I think it is better to describe the behaviour, or use a definition for the sort of aggression we are talking about. On my dog's medical record in big letters across the top it says "Caution, can be aggressive when handled (better with owner present)", which I would assume (it doesn't say specifically) refers to the growls and rare air snaps she has given when manipulating a torn ligament, palpating a distended belly during a bloating episode, and that sort of thing. You might not describe the dog (in this case) as being "aggressive", but at least one vet did. It means something different to both of you. There is always a reason (or reasons) for aggressive behaviour, it always serves a function. Avoiding physical pain is obvious, and we would expect the aggression to go away once the physical pain went away (unless it has become learned through the episode). The "overall aggressive dog" might have a brain chemistry problem, which can sometimes be corrected through diet or medication (for e.g) They are all wired up a bit differently, but there is always a cause. Some are wired up to respond to more causes than others, or at different points. The frequency of the aggression, or the likelihood of it occurring due to the dog's temperament, environment and internal chemistry is somewhere on a continuum. I don't think there is a universally accepted arbitrary cut-off point where we can say "any dog over this point is aggressive, any dog under this point is not" - nor should there be, aggression is not the disease, it is the symptom. Just my 2c. I once ran a class for dogs who chased bikes. We very, very quickly had the dogs to a point where they were reliable off-leash with bikes. We then moved on to skateboards, much more difficult! Interestingly, despite all the dogs being herding or terrier breeds, prey drive had very little to do with these particular dogs chasing bikes (although it is often a factor).

I've had this problem in the past. You need to teach a recall in water as well as on dry land. The long line will help, do lots of short recalls at the water's edge and extend his range from there as he has proven to be reliable. Don't let him get to the point where he squeals, limit his freedom and work into it.

I understand that Cavalier is "only" using a screen name here, but that is quite a serious allegation to throw around on the basis of such little evidence.

If a client came to me with a dog who didn't like to be touched about the face, and I sent them off to the vet and an abscess was discovered and treated, and the dog then had no problem with being touched about the face (within reason), I would say that dog no longer growled, snapped or otherwise tried to avoid having his face touched. In the above example the cause of the aggression is cured. But what can we say about the aggression itself?

I'm not sure that there is a clear and universally agreed upon definition, but it is used in working circles to describe that the dog will show aggressive behaviour towards people. Again, aggressive behaviour could mean all sorts of things, so the context has to be taken into account, namely that these behaviours are useful for the purposes of the sport or job. Looking at that, it's not hard to see why we often just say "aggression" but also why this means different things to different people.

"Cured" to me suggests that aggression is thought of as a disease. Aggressive behaviour is closer to a symptom, it might be caused by a disease or ailment (if you're lucky it will be one that can be cured!), but it is not the disease in itself. So, my humble opinion, we need to be careful using the word "cured". It would probably help to define or at least qualify aggression. Aggressive displays, ritualised "fights" and inhibited bites are normal canine behaviour; not always tolerated though. So where appropriate we should probably make some attempt to describe the behaviour itself if referring to something specific. A dog who is doing some excited lunging on the leash is quite different to the dog who has just sunk teeth into your arm and torn flesh. Both have been described as aggression.

... someone who doesn't like to kid themselves, or their clients. I commend them.

No, you are completely incorrect. My dog HAS civil aggression, but this has never been a problem and I would not walk her on the opposite side if a human alone were passing as she is under control and does not display those behaviours inappropriately. My only concern is other dogs who lunge, which is a problem if they are close. Every dog has a right to self-defence in nature, but not in the laws of man. If you had genuine concerns for me you would have raised it in a PM. If you wished to have a public discussion or even debate you would have started a new thread. You, Diablo, are all about cheap shots at people you know nothing about to make yourself look superior. No amount of cutesy smiley faces or "oh, sorry, I don't know why you got upset?" will hide that fact. I suggest you change your name and try to do better next time, but if history is anything to go by I doubt you will.

I quite like this video: The specifics are different but the process is the same and it is explained quite well. Have her with you on-leash, and go to touch the light-switch, immediately give her a treat, repeat until she looks forward to your hand going towards the light-switch. Then actually touch the switch, treat, repeat. The turn the switch on, treat, off, treat, repeat. Doing this with the light switch is pretty harmless, it will give you an insight into the process of changing an emotional response. The next step is to transfer it to the fan, which is a pretty big leap. If you just turn the fan on VERY briefly (on then immediately off again, on the lowest setting) it shouldn't cause too much alarm. Repeat until you start to see a new response (happy, not fearful). Then gradually increase the time that you leave the fan on for. If she freaks out at all, write back. Don't force it. There are a few ways to handle this, the suggestion I have made is the easiest to understand and implement that usually gets quick results, IMHO.

I'm not sure what sort of indication you are using or the exact set-up, but I would click as soon as she indicates and before she has a chance to destroy anything. Then immediately set her up for the next trial and repeat. It may help to use a stronger target.

Definitely separate, train a great recall, but don't forget to also get him to spend lots of time doing CALM, normal things with the lambs. Work him beside the paddock. When you are reliably getting his attention and are able to have him sit, drop, heel (all the normal things you would do with a dog anywhere else), take him into the paddock on-leash and work on those things there. I guess it's a bit like having dogs co-exist with cats, they have to get used to being around each other, learn how to behave around each other. If your dog isn't chasing the lambs are less likely to run, and vice-versa. Ideally, if he should escape (or the lambs get into your yard, it happens), it would be great if he didn't chase or torment the lambs (or worse). The first thing I would work on is to just have him sit or stand on a loose leash, able to look at the lambs without trying to get to them. I would use a clicker and a lot of food, just click and treat every time the leash is loose. Click if he looks at them without trying to get to them. Use a high rate of reinforcement (click and treat as often as you can) at first, then start asking for specific things, sits, drops etc, then start moving closer to the lambs.

Brain injury can cause all sorts of changes :p That terrifies me, she hit it literally head on, cut her eyebrow fairly deep. And that was the first day she ever showed aggression. Oh gosh, make this very clear to your vet so they can investigate fully. I have my fingers crossed for you.

Thanks for your input Diablo. My dog does not have a problem with civil aggression, that is an incorrect assumption. Diablo, I have been very upfront about my journey with Sabella, describing all my faults and my journey in detail very publicly. I haven't hidden my identity and I don't use multiple accounts. It is all there if you want to find out the real story, you don't need to wait for me to "drop my guard" and you don't need to fill in the blanks yourself.

I hope this helps: http://www.clickertraining.com/node/1556 It is difficult to give advice about separation anxiety responsibly over the internet, the above article might give you some guidance and the exercise it provides towards the end is beneficial and safe to use if sensible.

If aggression doesn't remain a relevant factor in a working-line GSDs behaviour at any time you would have to wonder if the earth was still spinning. Never mind the myriad of different factors involved in dog behaviour, let alone the behaviour of dogs who have inherently lower thresholds and who would find themselves in trouble with the authorities for the most minor infraction simply because of their breed's reputation. But I promise you, as soon as I effect the "complete cure" of her aggression that you seem to think is reasonable, I'll start to work on that cure for cancer too. I don't know whether to be flattered that you think I'm capable of this, or stunned that you think you are capable of this. Not that I have ever claimed to be "purely positive", but if you are unaware that dogs are passing Schutzhund and obedience tests using those methods, then you must have been living under a rock. Efficacy is no longer the question, rather the level of environmental control and self-discipline that you are willing to demonstrate is the big question and I would begrudge no-one the choice to go whichever way they chose. My dog regularly walks with other dogs, some of which I know she would love to have a crack at. She has a considerable amount of freedom on these walks, as much as I am willing to give her. More than a lot of sport dogs that I know of. I trust her more than I trust the unknown dogs that we might pass, but you and I know that the GSD will always get the blame. I also have a young family, two businesses, play three types of rugby, train daily for powerlifting, and spend too much time here. I train far less than most people here, I am sure of that. So when you decide to ask this question on a public forum, OFF TOPIC, hijacking someone else's thread, complete with the "eek" emoticon and without any qualification whatsoever - I think I am right in assuming that you are just stirring up trouble. Combine this with your public cheap shot at Mark Singer's reputation recently, and I am starting to form a picture. Don't play coy with me.