corvus

I met this Boxer that after 20 reps of a very simple association still seems completely unaware of it. It seems unusual to me. Every other dog so far has picked it up in half that many reps or less. Is she stupid?? I've never said that about a dog before!

I've got a bunch of scientific papers on behavioural assessment. I haven't looked at them, so not sure how useful they are, but if you're interested I can go through them and see if they have a practical use.

No, I would never have a BC. Or a GSD. Or anything that is super people focused. I've been working with some shelter SBTs in the last couple of weeks and they drive me nuts. So much as raise an eyebrow in their direction and they rush over to see if that meant you'll pat them. The Greyhound is my favourite so far. He's a steady thinker and he seems quite happy to work on his own with us watching. Don't want one, but I like him. Most of the dogs there are super people focused. It does make it easy to tell them to go away just by looking away, though. But, you know, I rarely want to tell my dogs to go away. They don't obsess about every human in the room. I appreciate that.

I second targeting. It is the best! I think where people underestimate targeting is they teach the basics, like to touch their nose on a hand, but don't follow it up with any further work. The more targeting I do the better I like it. I'm currently teaching my older boy duration targets, targeting two body parts at once, and broadening his horizons on what he can target and to keep the rest of his body still unless he has to move it to get to the target. I think you can get as subtle as you like with targeting. I originally started with my boy because he wasn't enjoying free shaping much. He enjoys it more now, but man, he sure does love that the majority of his training is targeting. He is a bit prone to frustration and it's important to keep his training sessions easy and his progression very, very slow. I find targeting just increases his confidence and therefore his persistence, as well as getting him to offer behaviours when before he was a little anxious about making his own decisions. A little frustration is aversive for him and that's where I went wrong. He was my first clicker trained dog. Free shaping is heaps of fun, though, and a skill that's useful as you get better at it. It teaches you to pay attention to small details in your dog's behaviour. I have a dog that likes free shaping and it is hugely fun to work with him on that. Yesterday at the park I spontaneously taught him to put his back feet on a log and his front feet on the ground. Not very useful, but I love that we can stop everything to spend 5 minutes learning a new skill. It's just one more thing he is likely to think of next time I'm shaping something. I love broadening my dogs' horizons.

I make it firm like a compression bandage. I tried keeping it looser across the chest as I thought Erik didn't like it, but it seemed less effective that way. Tightening it up again made a difference, I think. They should feel the pressure. The material is stretchy enough that you can put it on quite tight and they can still move fine.

Oh, they'll adore you, but that doesn't mean they'll do what you want them to or care if you're not happy with them.

Is drive different to personality? I have a pretty low drive dog and a pretty high drive dog and would be hard-pressed to say which I liked more. It's not like I can't do anything with my low drive dog. He loves training, he just does it a lot differently to my other dog. I love the way he concentrates so hard, but throws a little tantrum if he can't get it almost instantly. I have to give him a little pep talk and remind him that he's very smart and he can do this if he just calms down and stays focused. It's challenging in its own way, not boring at all. It's much harder to train him than Erik the point and shoot dog. I like finding solutions. Erik is way fun to shape, though. He's unbelievable, and I love the way he throws everything he has into everything he does. I love that he's always up for some rough and tumble and tug, and that his enthusiasm for life is so infectious. I can't say I really care whether a dog is high drive or low. I just like 'em to be clever, independent thinkers that are not especially interested in how I feel.

You know, I have said for the longest time that I would never have a Whippet, Italian Greyhound, or Greyhound because I'd be too harsh for them. Not on purpose, I just get animated and abrupt sometimes. I really quite like them, but I wouldn't make a very good Whippet owner. I don't really throw tantrums and I'm not rough or punitive on my dogs, but I do wrestle with my partner and leap to my feet abruptly, and shout at the television, and I get impatient when I'm preoccupied, which is often. I'm okay short-term, but it's not very sustainable. I had to make changes to my behaviour when I took my hare in because I was always startling him. It's like a rubberband, though. As long as I'm consciously reminding myself I'm all right, but if I stop reminding myself it's only a matter of time before I do something too fast, suddenly, or loudly. Seems sensible to just get dogs that don't care if I'm having a loud rant or have unexpectedly leapt to my feet, or am expressing my exasperation with them by holding their face in my hands and telling them all the ways in which they are not perfect dogs right now. If I do that to my dogs they give me grins and lick my face. Solves everything. Turns out they are perfect after all. And it goes the other way as well. Nothing calms me like everyone else being calm. I can't be anything but happy if I just got a happy doggy kiss. Anything described as a "velcro dog" is also out. Kivi tries sometimes, and I'm glad it's only sometimes. We don't really fit through doorways easily when he's attached to my leg. I've read Coren's book. According to that I like hounds and terriers. Love hounds as long as they are a bit reserved, but hate terriers. Really hate them. They are too intense and active and friendly for me.

Yes, I interrupt Erik. Kivi doesn't care in the slightest, but Erik is very prone to routine behaviour and I'd rather he didn't routinely hump something whenever he gets a little perturbed considering it's not widely accepted by possible humping targets.

What about a corgi or Swedish Vallhund? Tough, as active as you want them to be, happy to do whatever you're doing whenever you're doing it, easy to transport, coat care very easy, easy to train, good with kids and other dogs. They are both vocal breeds, though.

I was fascinated reading the thread about Malinois and GSDs by how many people like these kinds of dogs. Sounds like my worst nightmare. My last dog was quite sensitive to my moods and I hated it. We weren't good for each other sometimes. Lots of feeding off each other's states. I sometimes found it a lot of pressure to be her owner. My current dogs are more... buffered, for lack of a better word. They generally don't give a toss about what I want them to do. They do what they want to do and things like "The Tone" don't really work on them. Works a little on Erik sometimes, but if I get cross he takes off and there's no convincing him then. Just have to walk away, take some deep breaths, and come back with a clear head and a plan. I can do that. It's better for everyone. I find I am a lot happier relying on training and conditioning than on my dog's inherent sensitivity to me. I don't really get frustrated much when I'm forced to think things through and don't get that instant gratification of frustration resulting in behavioural outburst resulting in dog doing what it's told. So I like smart, steady dogs with a streak of independence. I like dogs you can't sweet talk or just take for granted they will gather what you want of them and do it. I like dogs that need a reason. I'm good at providing reasons, and it keeps me steady as well, which is what I like to be. I would love to hear why you like the kinds of dogs you do. What about them suits your personality, and why are you good for them?

I have to admit I really am not a Jean Donaldson fan. I don't really have a problem with her, but I rarely find I am in full agreement with her. In this article, I think she has missed some of the social nuances in play. I see when young dogs (less than 12 months) hump during play, it usually looks like rehearsal to me like Donaldson says. But I think play has a secondary purpose at least in dogs to rehearsing serious behaviour and that is learning about being a social animal. I always consider that a dog humping another dog is at that moment very close to the other dog and in a position where the dog underneath often can't easily get away if they want to. Little wonder there are plenty of dogs out there that really DON'T LIKE being humped. It tends to end play sessions and so I guess dogs learn to exclude it from their play repertoire. If that were the case, in play I would expect to see it reserved for dogs that know each other pretty well. I can't say I definitely see that pattern, though. Erik and Kivi are BFF and humping is about the only thing they don't do in play. None of their canine pals do it to them and they don't do it to their canine pals they don't live with, either. Possibly all those dogs got snapped at often enough for humping that they no longer do it in play to anyone, but Kivi and Erik have never really been play humpers. Why would they "rehearse" every other FAP in play, but not humping? Erik humps Kivi when he is feeling social anxiety. Example, I do something Erik doesn't really like that he also can't control, like going outside to feed the hare without him, and I come back and he's humping Kivi. I train Kivi, or brush him in front of Erik and Erik often tries to hump Kivi. It is displacement behaviour to me. I am quite confident this accounts for a lot of humping in play as well. It's easy for play with a playmate that is not well known to abruptly plunge a dog into the realms of unsurety. If the other dog is not giving them enough play signals, how are they to know what this dog means? And, the presence of humans can surely also create moments of uncertainty, especially if the dog's owners roused on them for something during play and they weren't quite sure what. So I guess I agree that dominance has little to do with it, and that humping in play is fine if the other dog is okay with it, but I don't necessarily think it is all about sex. I think maybe it's mostly about sociality.

Very cool. I guess maybe it's a little inevitable to end up in shelters if you're an animal welfare researcher interested in dogs. I originally wasn't going to do much with shelters, but they seem to want to do stuff with me, and who am I to say no? Of course I want to help them if I can. I've just started a pilot study with shelter dogs and it's been quite an eye opener for me. I guess knowing how many dogs get euthanised and actually seeing dogs disappearing from their kennels are two different things. I'm a practical person and I can accept that there just isn't anyone to help most dogs that need a little help, but man, it is still hard.

I thought this was an interesting article on mounting behaviour in dogs: http://www.dogsincanada.com/oh-behave-love-and-mounting What do you think of it?

Well, there are a host of symptoms that aren't detectable unless you video the dog when they are alone. Pacing, lip-licking, panting, whining, drooling... any sign of stress, really.

You're all mad. I can't handle a dog that actually cares how I feel. It is weird and unnatural and it makes me anxious! Give me the casual disregard of a spitz any day. ;) That I understand.

What about an Italian Spinone? ETA I've never met a calm Vizsla! But then again, I only see them when they're running off their excess energy. Their owners assure me they are not that bad at home.

Getting a puppy sure helped. Fills that hole and gave me something else to think about. We held a wake of sorts for her. We went to a chocolate cafe with those who loved her and drank Spanish hot chocolates to her name. I found it to be very helpful to spend time grieving with loved ones.

I am a little bit horrified at the thought that some people are somehow not entitled to a balanced view being presented of themselves. That is backwards logic at best. Whether they deserve it or not is beside the point, though. Presenting one side of the story doesn't tell anyone anything except the writer's opinion on the issue. It's kinda hypocritical to get upset about the likes of Pedigree Dogs Exposed, but not be terribly bothered to produce a balanced view of pet shops, for example.

This is not technically true. You can't "reinforce fear". Fear is an emotion that drives behaviour. Reinforcement acts on behaviour only. It's kind of a two-way street between behaviour and emotion, but we know for a fact that you generally can't reinforce fearful states because of counter-conditioning. I'm pretty sure it was Pavlov who paired electric shocks with food with dogs and they eventually came to like electric shocks. Loopy, but that's classical conditioning for you. It is very powerful. It works on emotional states where operant conditioning does not. Unless there is an element of classical conditioning in the operant conditioning, of course, but that's starting to get complicated. Suffice to say you can't be fearful and happy at the same time. One wins out. That's why counter-conditioning works. When you make the association positive, positive emotional state follows. Fear is most certainly not a positive emotional state. "Coddling" is not necessarily a reward. If you make a fuss of a dog that is scared, they are all together likely to interpret your fuss as another sign that they are right to be worried because you sound worried to them. I like some easy training exercises for jollying a dog out of anxiety. It gives them something to focus on and a sense that they are in control. Fear comes from not being able to control things.

Erik tried drinking the water once. Then he went 10m down the beach and tried again. Then he went 20m down the beach and tried again. Then he tried a puddle of sea water on the sand a couple of metres from the ocean. He's a wee bit optimistic. I thought he must have been hugely thirsty, but he didn't drink much tap water when I offered it. That's my Erik. Always gathering information. Yes, the water is salty everywhere on the beach.

Isn't that what she said???? Those are two sides of the same coin. I know a few that started out well and ended well. No "badly" or "disaster" in sight. Not saying they are more common, but they certainly exist.

I don't wash my dogs after they go to the beach. They rarely get wet above their tummies, but I just let them go and brush the sand out later on. Doesn't seem to do them any harm. We go once a week in the summer, usually.

Wouldn't it be more balanced to look at pet shop puppy stories that turned out well along with those that turned out badly? Otherwise you're only presenting one side of the story. How does anyone then know how bad the situation is? I sure as hell am not ever interested in just one side of the story. That's for people that watch ACA and Today Tonight. I stopped watching those sorts of shows when I fancied I could actually feel brain cells dying while I was watching.

I disagree irrelevant would not be a better word. I believe being open to all possible scenarios gives a greater understanding and better chance for solving this problem. In the world of both animal and humans medicine history gives you 90% of the answer to any presenting problem. If history is unknown all possible scenarios are considered. But as Greytmate pointed out, this is speculation, not a known history. All possible scenarios may be considered all you like, but as long as you're speculating what are you going to do about it? To me, it doesn't matter why a trigger is a trigger. It just matters that we treat it as such. I don't treat a trigger differently if I know how it became a trigger. The best that knowledge might give me is a more detailed understanding of exactly what the trigger is. If I have to guess at that I'm no better off than if I didn't know at all.