Staranais

I thought you might have. It agree that it is a shame that some instructors don't teach the basics of how to train. Then again, most instructors are just volunteers - they have often only trained a few dogs themselves, and haven't necessarily read widely about dog training or been on any proper training courses. I also suspect that some trainers only know about types of dogs they have personally trained, and have no idea about about other methods or other techniques if they didn't have to use them for their own dogs. e.g, some trainers will have only trained smart dogs so have gotten away with sloppy training techniques that simply won't work with less motivated or less able dogs. I've found that competition trainers who have mostly worked with clever, sensitive traditional obedience breeds sometimes have no idea how to motivate or teach my "obedience" dog (a dog aggressive, slow learning, insensitive, cocky, prey driven stafford...) IMO a good obedience instructor who knows their stuff is worth their weight in gold.

It's a good one, but not so much about dog psychology per se. More about how you can apply classical & operant conditioning to teach any species. I second (third?) the recommendation for the Patricia McConnell & Bruce Fogel books.

That's precisely why I said I'd growl "uh-uh" if my dog went to break a stay, instead of saying that I'd growl "uh-uh" after he'd broken a stay. It's also why I will use "uh-uh" instead of just walking up and replacing my dog, since "uh-uh" is a bridge that can be delivered immediately upon him starting to break a stay - well within 3 seconds - whereas walking calmly up to him may take a little longer (and he may have managed to reinforce himself somehow in the meantime). Then I think we just have a problem with using different vocabulary. I would call training around distractions "training" or "proofing", not learning. IMO the dog should have already learnt the basic steps of the exercise in a low distraction environment, during the teaching phase of training, before you introduce distractions. I think I've already said above that I find constant growling to be both annoying and ineffective. Then I guess we're in complete agreement.

I haven't read this whole thread, so sorry if I'm repeating suggestions. But my advice to you would be: a) don't ever let your dogs ever get on the couch. That means, don't let them ever be round the couches unsupervised. If you have to walk them into the lounge on leashes so you can keep up with them, or close the lounge door until you are right there to let them in, then do that. If they get to have the fun of jumping on the couches when you're not around, they're never going to learn that they're not allowed on the couches. b) provide them each with an attractive, comfortable beds or crates in the lounge, and reinforce them with praise, attention, petting and/or a tossed food treat whenever they get on them. c) if your dogs do get on the couch, immediately growl "uh-uh", pick the dog up of the couch and unceremoniously dump it on its bed instead. Then reward the dog for being on its bed, as in step b). d) if you've done this for weeks and it's not working, then when the dog jumps on the sofa, growl "uh-uh" and march the dog to time out in a boring place for 5 min. i.e, make jumping on the sofa difficult and unrewarding, and make sitting on their own beds easy and rewarding. In my experience it's way easier to teach the dog that they're never allowed on the couch, than to teach them that they're sometimes allowed on the couch. My staffy isn't allowed on the sofa at my house, so he's given up on trying, and he never attempts to get on them (even if we're not in the room). Whereas at my parents house he's allowed up on the sofa by invitation only, so during the evening he's always sitting there by the sofa begging to get up, and will still very occassionally jump up without an invite.

I've used luring really successfully for heeling, since I like my dog to target my left hand with his eyes while we heel (he's so short and stocky that he ends up crabbing and forged if I ask for him to make eye contact with my eyes). I started off luring him with food in my left hand and feeding from the left hand, which quickly made him focus on my left hand. It was then quite easy to transition to marking and rewarding him watching my left hand by giving food from my right hand. Now we're working on having him heel while earning an (out of sight) prey drive reward. There are other ways you could teach targetting the left hand for heeling of course, but this worked pretty well for us. I used either part of his food ration, or additional special treats, when I was teaching this. I don't think it really matters which you use, as long as the dog is motivated enough to earn the food. Same with any type of reward, food is only an effective reinforcer if the dog wants it enough to work for it!

Well, here's an opinion from the other side of the fence. If my dog went to break a stay in class, I certainly would immediately growl "uh-uh" at him, since he knows full well what "uh-uh" means. Letting him break a stay without giving him immediate feedback on his behaviour would confuse the heck out of him. He's not the brightest star in the sky. I do use classes more for proofing than I do for learning. I figure learning is best achieved in a low distraction environment - i.e, not in a busy class environment with lots of other people and dogs. So I teach at home during the week, and come to class to proof. I know I'm not the only one who uses classes for this. If I was working near someone that was yelling all the time, I would probably get annoyed too (as well as thinking that the handler was probably not being very effective or they wouldn't have to constantly yell at their dog to keep its attention). But other trainers giving the occassional uh-uh I would regard as just part of the normal class environment. Training classes simply are a distracting environment. You dog has to see other dogs, hear barking, see other handlers with treats, hear other handlers give high pitched excited praise, etc. Many dogs find these things more distracting than hearing the occassional "uh-uh". And although you certainly can't ah-ah in a trial ring, you can't praise either, or use a clicker, or give toys or treats. I do all of these things on the training field. I think that's what training is for, practicing while being able to give your dog rewards or punishment, so that when you get into the sterile environment of a trial ring, your dog is clear about what you expect and knows exactly what he's doing without you having to give feedback. JMO.

I think breed standards are useful, but often overrated. They primarily describe the way a dog should look - but they say very little about how the dog should act, how it should work, how long it should live, how healthy it should be. Conformation is important. Anyone who has owned a dog with poor structural conformation will agree that producing dogs with good conformation is essential if the dog is going to be able work, or even live an active life as a pet. My staffie's front legs have really poor conformation (his elbows are loose, his feet are slightly rolled over and his toes are turned out). Unsuprisingly, his front legs are becoming arthritic as he ages - whereas his back limbs, with their OK conformation, are still completely fine. If his front legs had been a better fit to the breed standard, he's be a much happier dog. After owning my staffy, noone will convince me that it's OK to breed without paying any attention to conformation. On the other hand, I don't see the point in assessing a dog only for conformation, or on breeding for conformation at the expense of health, longevity, temperament, or working ability. It seems to me that it would make more sense for a dog to have to prove itself to be above average in all important areas (temperament, working ability, health testing) before it becomes a breed champion? Even breeds that no longer have a working purpose and are kept primarily as pets (such as the staffy!) could be required to be assessed for health, temperament and/or longevity, so we end up breeding smarter, more obedient, sweeter tempered, healthier, long lived dogs. I heard of a pretty cool programme instigated by a doberman club in the USA, designed to grant awards to dogs that come from lines with above average longevity, with the aim of improving the life span (and geriatric health) of the breed. It seems like a smart idea to me, and one that should maybe be adopted by more breeds. Too many dogs seem to get cancer or other nasties at a relatively young age, so there should be a way of recognising breeders who put effort into selectively breeding dogs that stay healthy well beyond their time in the show ring.

Why do people get puppies they can't train? IMO, lots of reasons. Because they pick a dog breed based on appearance, or based on misleading advice from a petshop or unethical breeder, and don't research the probable temperament of the dog. or because they have never owned a dog before, or never owned a "difficult" breed, so simply don't understand that most dogs actually do need ongoing training. or because they get a mixed breed dog from a shelter or BYB, and end up with a larger or more fiesty dog than they expected. In a perfect world, owner education could deal with the first problems perhaps, but not really the last ones. There will always be mixed breed pups that need adoption, and that end up being bigger or more energetic than the owner expects. And even purebred dogs sometimes end up with atypical temperament quirks that the owner or breeder didn't expect them to have. And accidents do happen. What if a person adopts a young large breed dog, and then suffers an accident or injury that made them less physically capable? And please don't forget us people who adopt adult dogs, and either intentionally or unintentionally end up having to deal with behaviour problems that we didn't create. ;)

I don't know if those are very good examples, since the first IMO requires the handler to be abnormally stupid, the second requires the handler to be both abusive and stupid. So I'd like to share a story about a clicker being misused, to the detriment of the dog, by reasonably smart and well intentioned people. When I got my current dog, he was incredibly predatory, dog aggressive and disobedient, and I had no idea how to handle him. The local obedience class told me to click him when he was being good, and ignore him when he was aggressive. By following that advice, his aggressive outbursts at other dogs increased in frequency and intensity. When I pointed this out to the trainer, I was told to keep clicking, and he would eventually get less aggressive. If I hadn't gotten rather attached to my dog and felt a personal responsibility to him, I could easily have given up on him when the "training" didn't help with his scary and embarrassing behaviour problems. It's not just me. Most young dogs that get euthanised by vets are killed becase they exhibit annoying or frustrating behaviour problems, not because they are suffering from health problems. Many people just want a well behaved dog, they're not interested in years of training, and they have little patience with an aggressive or disobedient dog. A dog that misses out on learning how to behave correctly because the owner used a clicker inappropriately or incorrectly, can quite literally be killed by that incorrect clicker training. Please understand that I have nothing against clicker training. I like my clicker and use it all the time. I don't hesitate to recommend clicker training to other dog owners since I think it is a tool that is unlikely to hurt a dog (IMO giving a novice dog owner a clicker is less risky for the dog than sticking a check chain or ecollar in the hands of a complete novice). But just wanted to post this story to point out that, although IMO it is difficult to hurt a dog with a clicker, it definately is possible. No training tool is completely benign.

I own that. Click to calm is quite a good resource if you have a dog who is aggressive because they're a bit nervous or scared of other dogs. It concentrates on teaching "good" behaviours with clicker and food, then getting the dog to practice them progressively closer and closer to other dogs, until the dog isn't scared of other dogs anymore (basically it's desensitisation and counterconditioning). Might be good for your Brittany. Although I have to say that the author kind of annoyed me too with her "all punishment is abusive" preaching (the background story is that her adolescent male dog started to get a little stroppy around other dogs, she had no idea how to assert leadership kindly so she allowed a professional trainer to completely abuse him with very severe mistimed prong collar corrections - which escalated the aggression tremendously - and from that she concludes that all punishment is abuse and all aggressive dogs are really just fearful and can be cured by clicker. Just struck me as a bit illogical and closed minded, and IMO not really true.) To answer the thread question though, I quite like the book "Schutzund obedience, training in Drive" by Dildei and Booth. It's not just for schutzhund obedience, a lot of the stuff can be applied for regular kennel club obedience too. Loved Steven Lindsay's three big "Handbook of applied canine behaviour and training" books, but definately they're not a casual read, they're more like huge reference books. Also loved "the other end of the leash" by Patricia McConnell. It's not strictly a training book, doesn't teach you how to train a dog, but it does have lots of information on dog behaviour and communication that is relevant to training. Also rather like "Play Training your dog" by P G Burnham, though that's less of a step-by-step training book, and more of an entertaining read for people who happen to like obedience trialling. And as a free resource, a lot of the articles on the Leerburg website are IMO really good. Like some of the previous posters, I was unimpressed by Behan's "Natural Dog Training" and by Jan Fennell's books.

Big brag for us too! Me & my staffy just entered our first two public obedience comps, and won both of them. It wasn't our best performance ever, they were both small classes, and just very low level ribbon trials, but I was still very proud of my boy. Especially considering that when I adopted him three or four years ago he was not only completely untrained, but very dog aggressive. We didn't have a single growly episode at the comp, despite the huge number of dogs there, so I guess in some ways it's a double brag.

Debrathomas, if you can't get another trainer in to help you out (or even if you can), have you considered asking a few other vet clinics if you can sit in on their puppy classes, just to observe and learn from them? You could learn a lot that way, and some of the clinics would probably be happy to have you come and observe their puppy classes (especially if you ask the vets that aren't in your immediate local area so they don't feel as if you're directly competing with them).

I think another reason that people leave a club is that they're not getting results. The dog might sit in class - but doesn't do it on the street. The dog might recall in class - but won't do it at the dog park. So IMO, if you don't do so already, that might be something to focus on. Introduce more distractions to class, and teach people how to train for reliability around them. I've talked to people who have left obedience because it was "boring" - too much sitting around. So if you don't do it already, IMO you should try to have smaller classes, with a good rapid pace, try to organise classes so there is more action and less sitting around waiting for your turn! Also, I'd say make sure your instructors are competent, helpful, and that know about a good wide range of techniques and tools, so that no dog is left behind. Some dogs need food, some need toys, some need crazy praise, some need correction collars. A good trainer, IMO, has a basic working knowledge about all of these tools, so they can recommend the tools that are best suited to each dog and handler team. Perhaps you could give an anonymous survey to club members, and ask them what they'd like to see more of in class? Some might be totally disinterested in trialling or competitions, just want a dog with good, reliable obedience. Others might just like to train tricks. Others might be keen to trial in obedience or tracking, but have no idea how to start doing so. You might find you need to split your classes into a couple of different ones in order to keep people interested.

I love absolutely all of Rom's ideas, but especially these two. Explaining that not every other dog in the world will love their puppy, and suggesting that they should ask before letting their dog randomly approach other dogs since some dogs are aggressive towards or intimidated by other dogs, would be really good information to share. Dog owners who have never owned an aggressive or shy dog often simply don't realise that not all dogs are brave and friendly. And many owners do seem to mistake their dog's rude or inappropriate greeting behaviour as "friendliness". Something related would be explaining the new dog owners' legal and ethical obligations, e.g leash laws, scoop the poop laws, registration, legal obligation to have your dog under verbal control even when it's in an offleash area, etc. Also pointing out the pluses and minuses of dog parks would be useful information to share. Lots of people don't realise that dogs can pick up diseases there, or get intimidated or injured. They might still choose to use the parks to exercise their dog, but I think they should have enough information to make an informed choice. I've also heard of people attending puppy classes where it was a big "free for all", with puppies getting scared or hurt or learning to bully each other. So I'd remind your friend to keep a close eye on the puppy play too, make sure all the puppies are having a positive experience. I wonder if she could include a brochure with the names and contact details of some really good local behaviourists, in case the clients ever have problems with their dogs later on? You could explain that these are the behaviourists with a really good reputation that are recommended by the vet clinic, which would maybe stop the clients wasting their money and time with a crappy "I've read one book now I'm a dog whisperer" behaviourist if they have a problem later on. (Do I sound bitter? Yes, I've wasted money on trainers with few skills but good advertising! I'm sure lots of people must do the same, and it's both frustrating for the owner and bad for the dog.) Edited to add - perhaps also give them an introduction to positive-only food reward training, give them a few handouts about clicker, etc? So if they choose not to attend obedience school later on, they still have some idea how to train a dog to do basic things around the house. I've noticed that a lot of novice dog owners seem to have no idea how to even start to teach a dog anything. Giving them some info on reward based training will hopefully prevent some of them from punishing the puppy out of sheer frustration because they don't know how to teach it.

Does that mean that you took the dog in for a vet check for possible causes of the behaviour change? If medical issues have been totally ruled out, then I'm wondering if there is any chance your dog had a bad experience when you weren't around? Getting bailed up by another dog, having kids throw rocks at him over your backyard fence, someone yelling at or kicking the dog when it was tied up somewhere, etc. Any bad experience like that could explain his new fearful attitude around strange people. Also, I was wondering whether you know if the parents or siblings of the dog showed similar behaviour when they were that age - have you asked the breeder if they have seen this problem before in their dogs? My advice though is to see a good behaviourist, best to get help to nip this in the bud before it becomes a serious issue.

You're welcome.

Only two - one for competitive obedience, one for tracking. We'd do weightpull too if we could, but sadly my boy's conformation isn't up to scratch and he'd probably do himself an injury. This would make a good poll!

Something topical I learnt in a vet school lecture the other day! Shyness is apparently one of the most heritable temperament traits in dogs, i.e, it's one of the temperament traits that a dog is most likely to pass on to its offspring. Which makes breeding from a shy dog a pretty silly idea, as statistically speaking the puppies will be more likely to inherit the fearfulness than to inherit any of the dog's more useful temperament traits. They also told us that researchers have found it reasonably easy to breed genetically "shy" lines of huskies and genetically "nervous" lines of pointers. Some of these poor dogs are so fearful that no amount of socialisation and habituation will make them comfortable in new situations or make them happy to interact with their human handlers, and it's all due to their genetics. So while I'd never underestimate the importance of socialisation, genetics also often plays a huge role in whether a dog will be bold or fearful.

IMO, yes, chuck them as soon as they dry out. Bones that dry out become tougher, more likely to splinter, and more likely to chip your dog's teeth (this is especially true of big weight bearing bones like marrow bones).

Well done!

Sounds to me like she's just scared, BittyMooPeeb. And there's no cure for that except earning her trust again, and that will take patience, patience, patience and lots of positive reinforcement. Take her right back to the beginning like the other posters suggested, and only ask her for stays that she can comfortably do. Don't ask her to do anything that makes her upset or stressed (displacement behaviour = a sign of stress). Reward the heck out of her for succeeding. Re-teach her that the stay is a safe & rewarding place to be. JMO but if I were you, I wouldn't count on competing soon. I think you have a lot of groundwork to redo before you're ready to have your dog staying in a lineup with strange dogs. When you do finally get round to working near other dogs and other people again, go slow, and whatever you do always protect your dog. When I said before "get your dog if it looks like another dog will approach it", I didn't mean you have to wait until the other dog actually approaches your dog before you get your dog. As soon as another dog gets up, even if it's down the other end of your line, you can collect or recall your dog (I take it you have a fast, solid recall?) Mistakenly recalling your dog from a stay when you didn't really need to is a way better mistake to make than letting your dog get scared again because you were too slow to recall her. I'm in a slightly different situation to you (my dog is dog aggressive, not fearful) but I still can't have any dogs coming right up to him when he's on a stay. If we're doing a stay and another dog gets up, even if it's at the other end of the line, I recall my boy out of there so fast his head nearly spins. :p Took me a few attempts to find a school that was OK with that, but it was worth looking. No obedience title is worth making your dog more scared or more aggressive. I hope it works out for you.

I think there are sensitive dogs out there. My old flatmate had a dog that I would class as very sensitive. If you corrected her (even just very mildly verbally) she would immediately try to appease you with extremely submissive behaviour. When corrected she'd immediately forget what it was she was doing, and throw herself flat on her belly in order to make amends. E.g if you asked for a sit and got a down, and gently said "uh", as soon as she worked out you were unhappy then she'd immediately grovel to appease. She hadn't ever been hurt or abused or beaten, BTW. Didn't get much in the way of formal training or exercise, but was a well loved dog. Perhaps if she had better "leadership" or more training during her puppyhood, her personality would be different? Or I guess it could just have been superstitious behaviour (perhaps when she was told off in the past she groveled and the scolding stopped, so she figured that whenever a human was upset it had nothing to do with her behaviour, it was just that they wanted her to grovel?) I guess we'll never know.

I think clicker training can be one of the best ways to teach a dog without prey drive to retrieve, as long as the dog is food driven. You can teach the dog to retrieve the boring dumbell in exchange for exciting food. And clicker was certainly useful when teaching my very prey driven stafford to retrieve, since it let me precisely pinpoint the bits of the retrieve I did and didn't like (e.g, communicating to him that while I did like the holding, I didn't like the mouthing). I agree with you that people that "only" clicker train often run into problems at some point when they meet a dog that doesn't respond. But I think the same can be said of people who are close-minded about any method (people who won't use food, or who only use food not toys, or people who refuse to correct, or refuse to use certain types of tools, etc). And certainly it's true that methods can often be successfully combined (e.g, gently holding a dumbbell in a dog's mouth and clicking as a first step in a "clicker" retrieve) so it's not as if it's all or nothing.

I'm not an expert, but I've struggled with the same problem for years, so hopefully can help a little. There's really nothing worse than walking your aggressive or reactive dog down the street (responsibly on leash!) and being accosted by some offleash uncontrolled "friendly" dog, and having to try to deal with the whole situation so no one gets hurt or stressed. A lot of people will say "get your dog to sit behind you while you ward off the other dog", but IMO that's sometimes easier said than done. Asking your dog to sit or down stay so that you can ward off the other dogs is IMO only a good idea as long as you are sure he will be able to hold the stay and you are sure you can chase off the other dog before it reaches him. Most aggressive dogs can't hold a stay when confronted with offleash dogs - it's simply too exciting or too stressful for them. And of course, if you're not sure you can prevent the other dog from reaching your dog, then the last thing you want to do is order your dog to sit or down. Insisting your dog holds a submissive position while the strange dog gets in his face is going to stress him out, which is not what you want to do, since it will possibly make the problem far worse. Best thing I've found to do when confronted with a friendly but uncontrolled dog is to tell your dog to "heel" and walk briskly in the opposite direction. Keep his attention on you and off the other dog, if necessary by baiting him with treats, toys (unless these are triggers for aggression when around other dogs), verbal praise or punishment, or with gentle collar pops (not hard enough to hurt or upset him, just as a behavioural disrupter). Walking very briskly will help keep his attention on you instead of on the other dog. Walking very quickly also means that the other dog will generally be sniffing your dog's butt and hindquarters instead of his face, which many aggressive dogs find easier to handle. Don't stop walking until the other dog gives up following you or the other owner manages to collect their dog. If they get pissy about having to run halfway down the street to catch up with you, who cares? Perhaps they'll think twice next time about letting their uncontrolled dog offleash. Then when you are a sufficient distance away, release your dog and reward, reward, reward him for his heeling with a very special toy or food.

Having your dog attacked or scared by other dogs during group stays is one surefire way to make her stays really unreliable. If you put your dog in a vulnerable position (which you are doing by asking her to sit or down in the middle of a group of other dogs), and she feels forced to disobey your command because she is scared, then she has just learned that disobeying you is safer than obeying you. That is not a good thing for her to learn. It can have serious repercussions for her obedience in stressful situations, as well as being very damaging to your relationship. Your dog relies on you to keep her safe during group stays. If another dog breaks during a group stay and looks like it will approach your dog, then IMO you should not hesitate to immediately collect your dog or recall your dog before the other dog can reach her. Doesn't matter if the instructor doesn't like it. Keeping your dog safe and happy is much more important than passing the test. I agree with the other posters who say you should start your stay training again from the beginning. You'll need to go back to basics and teach your dog that the stay is a safe place to be, and that you will protect her while she is holding a stay. Lots of reward, and only increase distraction levels as fast as she can cope with - under no circumstance should you put her in a situation where she is so stressed tat she breaks the stay. If the school has a problem with that, I suggest you find another one.