corvus

It's both a submissive and an affiliative behaviour, which is to say it's a way for a dog to say you are an important figure to them and they want to hang with you. Having said that, some dogs do it more than others. Both my boys are face lickers, but Kivi is particularly all about faces. He loves to sneak a few big licks down your jaw. Erik will lick anywhere. I think it's more of a compulsion with him.

I reward him with... a primary reinforcer that isn't food, water or shelter. Seriously though, I think that's a problematic analogy because we don't know what a dog-human relationship IS to the dog. We don't know, so how can we say what constitutes a healthy or unhealthy relationship? We only have their behaviour to go by. I feel like a traitor to my cause because I'm the first one to consider animal emotions in behaviour, but saying that a dog should do things for you because you offer them a social reward afterwards is to me just making the assumption that the dog should value that social reward as much as you value a social reward. You can't dictate to an animal how much they will value a reward. You can reasonably assume that most dogs will value praise enough to get them by in low distraction situations when they weren't that fussed about doing it or not doing it, but you just don't know. You can improve the value of praise by pairing it with other rewards, even a stronger social reward, but only the dog can say what they find inherently rewarding and to what extent. Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing against the use of praise or saying it won't work to maintain behaviour, I'm questioning the idea that a dog should find it inherently rewarding enough to maintain known behaviours in low distraction environments. Why should it? What's so great about praise? It's a lot of squeaky noise and excited energy. Many dogs find that exciting, but if you don't have a dog that gets excited by that why should that mean they don't find you exciting or rewarding to be with? Maybe they just aren't into dancing and squeaky noises. Kivi isn't. ;) He likes a good cuddle, though. He'll perform for a chest rub. I dunno! Obviously I haven't tried it. I expect they would, but I don't know and I never will. It doesn't matter, though, as my point is what makes simple, known behaviours in a low distraction environment different to every other training scenario? Aren't you just offering a low level reward in an environment that is sufficiently boring to allow it to be enough to maintain an easy behaviour the dog barely cares about anyway? I reward because I'm in the habit of rewarding, and because my dogs don't get much for free. :p If I'm gonna hand out meaty off cuts I may as well at least ask for a sit or a hand shake or a target or a down-stay or something. They get meals twice a day. I could maintain all the things they know around the house with that, let alone the myriad other things the dogs want or like to have that I will give them if they perform for it. They do know some things they don't get rewarded for or are rewarded only with praise or cuddles, but almost everything they know can be asked for in a NILIF situation, so inevitably they get rewarded with something other than praise, and usually out of the yard as well as in it.

Swedish Vallhund. They are short, but the strongest, toughest little canines around. They are a man's small dog. Erik is fast, drivey, smarter than a BC (which can have its advantages and disadvantages!) and very owner focused. But he gets by on half an hour of exercise. He'd like an hour a day plus a bit of play at home, ideally. It is sometimes demanding keeping his brain occupied, but I do not think that is particularly typical for the breed. I think he's at the more active end of the spectrum. They are bold and outgoing, but have a few unconventional quirks, like telling you off if they don't like something. I find to varying degrees they may be a bit reserved with strangers, but it takes Erik about 5 minutes to decide he likes someone and wants to climb into their lap for a cuddle. He has been socialised a lot, though. He loves tug and will chase a ball, but only brings it back sometimes. I think this is more about the fact that when he was a puppy Kivi used to mug him as soon as he got the ball and Erik would drop it. I think he would fetch just fine if he was an only dog or if I'd actually played fetch with him more. Short, double coat, so some shedding but not heaps. They can be noisy, though, which might be a problem.

Oh. It wasn't. Is now. Although I think I'm still confused. We're not talking about teaching them, right? I take it for granted that my dogs will do whatever I've taught them to do regardless of what reward they get because they have a strong reward history for performing those behaviours. A lot of things we don't have commands for because we established habits early. So the boys don't need to be told to lie down when we are eating because they do it anyway. They don't get rewarded for it, either, but they did when they were puppies and first learning to not pester people when they are eating. There's more than one way to maintain behaviours. Some folks like to fade out rewards and others keep rewarding. I don't think one is necessarily related to a good relationship more than the other. I'm sure I sound obstinate, but it's just behaviour. To me, the relationship comes from clear communication and reward history and just plain old habit. If you train enough with a dog using rewards they tend to think you're amazing. If you spend a lot of time with them they tend to pay attention to what you are doing. If you spend a lot of time rewarding them for things they tend to expect that any time you look at them or say their name you could potentially be about to give them an opportunity to earn a reward. If they won't perform simple, known tasks around the house unless you keep rewarding it with food in particular, then surely you must have included a stronger cue into the training, like a food lure. Why else would the dog refuse to perform the task? If the dog isn't performing for life rewards, then it's the same thing. Surely there must be an extra cue that you have trained in unknowingly. In Erik's case, it may be an environmental cue I wasn't even aware of.

I'm wondering if a trainer would do me the favour of reading through my PhD project summary? It's aimed at proficient dog trainers, I guess. It's only about 380 words, but man, I have been trying to walk the line between being scientifically accurate and understandable to a dog trainer with this for over a week and found it absurdly difficult. Anyway, it is vitally important to me that it make complete sense to trainers and not come across snooty or patronising. I would feel so much better about it if someone or a few someones would look at it and, like, try to stab holes in it and rip it to shreds. Any takers? I don't want to put it up publicly yet and you'll have to promise not to pass it around.

I guess I'm kind of the other way. I use praise when I don't have anything else handy. I'm a bit wary of over-using it because with Kivi at least it loses impact very quickly. He doesn't get very excited by it. You can see in his face each time he's like "Was that all? I guess it'll do." Where Erik is wherever I am making himself a part of everything I do, Kivi is wherever I am lying on the ground watching. I don't think that this should be a flag that something is awry with our relationship. He just has different priorities to Erik. He gets animated if I dance around, but only if he thinks it's going to be followed by a game or some training. That's fine by me. It makes sense to me. He doesn't get up unless he thinks there's a good reason to and me squealing and dancing is not an activity he particularly wants to be involved in, so why get up? He would happily be involved in cuddles on the ground, but he doesn't have to get up for them. I thought using food a lot would diminish the impact of it as a reward, but I have not yet found that to be the case. I keep waiting for a plateau, but I don't think I train enough to reach one. Or else the expectation of food has become more rewarding than the food itself. I wrote out something and then I realised I'm talking about something slightly different to you. If Kivi didn't work when there wasn't food present, then I would consider that a problem with my cues rather than a problem with our relationship. He does what I teach him. If I teach him that he needn't do anything unless he knows I'm going to give him a treat then how is that a relationship issue? It's a training issue, surely.

Yes. All the time. I think it's often an age thing. A young dog will want to snuggle, but an older dog may not.

Sorry, I got a bit heated. ;) I mean, repugnant?? I was like I knew on some level you weren't being personal, but I just couldn't quite find that level. It's a strong word. My message still stands, though. I don't see why praise should be held up as a particularly good reward any more than any other reward. Rewards are just rewards. Some are better suited to particular situations than others. Some are better suited to particular dogs than others.

Ha! Done! I found a pro photographer locally that was selling one and picked it up this morning. It is quite heavy, but I think I'll get used to it soon enough. Compared to carrying 4 cage traps through the bush, it's a breeze! It takes very nice photos. I can't wait until I actually know how to get the most out of it. I'm already in love with it. Takes such pretty, sharp images.

Wow. I don't know where that came from. Repugnant?? For rewarding good behaviour? For basic good manners one would hope it doesn't need to be commanded because you rewarded it enough in the start that it's now a habit. I don't know why this is apparently such a hard concept to grasp. I am in the habit of rewarding behaviour I like (with food or whatever else is handy) and my dogs are in the habit of performing good behaviour as a result. We don't need the treats. I just keep banking because it only does good. I would encourage anyone with a puppy to spend some time just rewarding them for good behaviour around the house and yard. It can only do good, surely. Oh. I see. You wouldn't criticise but you find the idea repugnant. Fair enough. You have a working dog. Some people don't have dogs that automatically care about them. What are they supposed to think when people say things like the above? It's no help for anyone. It just makes people feel like they are somehow inferior owners if they don't have a dog that worships the ground they walk on. Even social animals only ever act in their own best interests. Dogs are no different. They do what is rewarding to them. Some dogs find a good word to be very rewarding. Some couldn't care less. That should not be taken as some sort of litmus test for the owner's relationship with their dog. People should not be made to feel that if they have one of those dogs that don't care much for praise that there is some mysterious "something" missing from their relationship. The relationship is built on rewards. The more you reward them the more they want to interact with you.

Er, Huski, I was offering an explanation for why what you do works so well and how it's different to what I do. I didn't realise you were only interested in talking about your dogs and your training method. I think we're on different wavelengths. The point to me is to condition my dog to do what he's asked. As far as I'm concerned every time I reward is money in the bank for the day I forget my treat pouch or something. It shouldn't matter how many behaviours I ask for without treating in between, because if it's properly conditioned it will take a fair bit to convince them that they aren't getting a treat any moment. If their attention wanes then it's not properly conditioned and my reward rate is way too low.

Dogs losing interest in training?? Can't say I have that problem. You know, what you've done, Huski, is set up a strong sense of anticipation mixed with a bit of safe uncertainty. That's basically why we pay money to go on roller coasters. And why you can't tickle yourself, interestingly. It's a good way to get a mean dopamine hit. My dogs have the anticipation, but with more certainty. That's a dopamine hit as well, but probably not as strong. That's why they don't lose interest. They know they are going to win sooner or later. They like knowing what to do to win, but because we do shaping they don't always know. For all I know that creates a similar anticipation mixed with safe uncertainty scenario.

I like Dog-E Treats: http://www.dog-e-treats.com/ The biscuits are all very popular here. We stock our treat pouches with L'il Bits and Seafood Dots and usually they have these little dried rissoles, I think they call them nibbles. They didn't have them this time and I had to get larger dried meatballs. The dogs think they are amazing, though. Edited to fix link.

Most of the time I reward for every cue successfully followed, but sometimes I guess we string them together. I honestly don't know. I just tell 'em to do stuff and they do it and I reward them. If I have food handy, I reward them with food. :rolleyes: It's about the easiest reward schedule possible.

We found a bed with sides for our car sick dog to lie in pretty much solved the problem. He just couldn't handle the moving around. The bed was soft and small so he would screw himself in a tight little ball inside it and not move around. A bit of T Touch really helped settle him in there as well. It's good to try to pounce on it early. With him, he learnt to get worried about getting in the car and that just made it worse. Once we got him relaxed in the car he stopped getting car sick. He now sits up and watches out the window most of the way.

Just curious Corvus - is this every time they do something you ask or is it just for training sessions? I know a lot of pet owners who don't want to use food because, rightly or wrongly, they believe that their dog will only "perform" when given a treat. A method that meets the needs of the owner and the dog is what is needed, and this would suit some pet owners. Every time I ask them to do something. It took a bit of learning to remember to have treats all the time, but now it's a way of life. Usually check the treat bag before we go anywhere. At home it's more likely to be a NILIF situation, so the reward is more flexible. I found it was easier to just carry treats than to wean them off treats. Even if I take them for a run and I'm not taking the treat bag I often pop something in my pocket if I have one, but more because I never know when they're gonna do something I will want to reward rather than because they won't behave without the treats. There's always the bridge to fall back on ("good boy"). That and a couple of times I ran with Kivi when he was in a fear period and had to employ some quick counter-conditioning. When you have them on you, you find uses for them all the time. I get that not everyone can be bothered with treats. That's fine. If Nek has good results with her method, that's fine. I'm not arguing. It was only a couple of years ago that I suddenly decided to teach myself to carry treats with me. I remember how much of a drag I thought it was going to be. It wasn't. It just wasn't, and I wasn't to know that until I tried it. Just took a little reorganising and learning a couple of new habits.

Okay, the 70-200 with a TC makes sense. Should I go for f4 with IS or f2.8 without IS?

Thanks kja. I am thinking if I got a macro I probably wouldn't take it on holiday. Holidays would be the wide angle and a long lens. Seriously, that's all I take photos of on holidays. Oh wait, inevitably I find a lizard that I need to photograph. And I've just realised we are going to Kakadu where we will inevitably find a myriad of small reptiles, insects and frogs that I will want to photograph. Gah! Maybe I just keep the point and shoot handy for a walk around camera. It takes some nice photos as long as the light is good and nothing is moving. And there are no twigs in the way to confuse it.

Oh right, budget. That's a hard one. I just got my leave from my last job paid out, and it was around 2 grand. So I guess I've got that much to play with at least.

You know, if you reward a dog with food enough and are just the teensiest bit clever about how you deliver it, your dog comes to associate you with food and then interacting with you becomes a secondary reinforcer in itself. I don't wean my dogs off food treats. They can expect one every time and usually get it. On the odd occasions that I don't have food with me, miraculously all my training doesn't instantly fall apart. The dogs perform just as well as when they know I have food on me. Thing is, it's easy to have food on you most of the time. The time you don't they are so used to doing what they are told and getting rewarded for it that they just do it anyway before they consider whether you have food or not. Obviously you will, so why would they ever question it? They don't. Even when you don't reward them for a whole outing they still just do it. Conditioned I guess. My answer to anyone who has a dog that only performs when you are dangling a piece of food in front of them is to put it in your pocket and then ask for the behaviour. They know you have the food, so if they want it they'll perform. You're just taking the extra cue out of the equation. Do it enough without the lure and the problem will go away.

Too late, the fungus lens has been on the camera for years. Kja, I would say I like versatility (who doesn't!), but I think if I had to choose versatility over better quality shots of specific types, I'd choose the latter. Here are the types of things I want to take shots of in order of priority: * The doggies, obviously. I love action shots when they are playing. Mid-leap is awesome. They will play literally anywhere, on the couch to up and down a beach. * Landscapes. I love those wide lens landscape shots where everything is crystal clear and it looks like you can walk right into the photo. I am a bit weird. I also like to take photos of random patches of bush or forest. I like to imagine weird little critters in there. Sometimes I even draw them in. OH likes taking pictures of clouds. * Wildlife. I am a birder at heart and cannot walk past a bird without trying to photograph it. I've never had a camera with anything less than 10x optical zoom because at least half my photos are taken at 300mm. Some of them even turn out! I have steady hands from years of looking through 10x binos. * Macro for insects and other little critters. I definitely like taking photos of fungus. That's pretty easy at the moment with the fungus lens! I like closeups of things like feet or eyes, and scales, feathers and fur in minute detail make me happy. ETA I spoke to someone at the camera service centre in Elizabeth St about the fungus and they said there's no way to tell how much it would cost to clean it without looking at it and that costs $45, which gets deducted from the cleaning price if you go ahead with it. They also said there's no reason to be concerned about the fungus spreading to the camera body unless there's evidence that it is there, which doesn't seem like there is. From what I know about fungus, the spores are everywhere, literally everywhere. But they need the right conditions to grow.

I wouldn't dare presume to answer for Nekhbet, but I can offer my thoughts on the subject for the sake of discussion. IMO it doesn't have to be as simple as "what the dog works best for". Sometimes dogs don't know that they're really gonna love something until you spend a bit of time encouraging them to discover a love for it. There is value in having different types of rewards available for use in training, partially because it makes for quick generalising, partially because it keeps the dog interested, and partially because different rewards become associated with different levels of arousal. To me, arousal is a big factor in what behaviours are likely to occur at any given moment. So if you want a very physically active behaviour, it's helpful to have the dog very aroused. But if you want a calm, quiet behaviour, it's helpful to have the dog at low arousal. This is a bigger deal for some dogs than others. I don't clicker train any quiet or calm behaviours for Erik because it's like shooting myself in the foot. He's just gonna get excited. Same for active play rewards, unless I want to teach him to ramp up his arousal and then drop it back down again in a short time frame. Now throw into the mix that with some dogs especially different drives can be suppressive to each other. If I'm playing crazy tug games with Erik and I want him to calm down, starting a sit-stay game with food as a reward is a very quick and efficient way of doing that. I know a few people that use food to bring a dog down in arousal to a more workable level. So if you have a very prey driven dog and you want them to be at a high arousal level, food is probably not the best choice, although food is one of those lovely reinforcers that is usually quite adaptable. If you have a dog that wants to chase cats, I'd be tackling that with play rewards. Unless the dog was SO aroused by the cat that they couldn't hear an invitation to play and then I'd be using click/treat. Then again, if we were talking about my own cats indoors I wouldn't use either because I'd be aiming for calm behaviour, not just bringing them down a bit or distracting them with a legitimate outlet. So to me, it depends on what behaviour you have and what behaviour you want. My low drive dog works beautifully for food, but there's no way he was ever going to learn that he can jump without somehow raising his arousal more than food does, so I used toys to teach him to jump and then he realised it was an option in food training as well.

I could add one to my hund collection. That's a breed that BADLY needs some careful out-crossing. I know it's controversial, but they are so rare they have their own special disease and they all have it to varying degrees from what I can make out. Who wants a dog that's almost certainly going to have gastrointestinal problems that can't be cured? It's especially tricky because they are so weird, though. Presumably if they bred those traits into a dog type once, they can do it again.

On the photos I've taken, the fungus shows up mostly at long focal lengths or when the background is light. It looks like a grey tree root crawling into the photo and seems to also cause some slight lens flaring where the fungus itself isn't very visible? It's pretty awful, but I understand it takes a while to get that bad. Considering the lens is about 7 years old and is rarely used, it's not all that surprising. Thanks Rappie, that does help as it happens. I've been trying to decide whether to replace the fungus lens with another zoom or just get primes. I guess a zoom is pretty useful, but realistically I only use it when I'm too lazy to get closer or farther from the dogs when they are hooning around. I think I might go with primes and see how it goes. The zoom is still usable in some conditions as long as I don't use it at full length.

We got ours from Erin as well. Unfortunately, Erik's tended to breakaway a bit too easily. After loosing it several times at the off leash park and around the house when Kivi would be chewing on his neck, we gave up on them. The boys are now naked and have their ID attached to their harnesses when we go out. I was sad. I relly prefer them to have ID on all the time.