Trust, Fear And Dogs

[corvus]

Ever heard of anecdotal evidence? I based a thesis on it.

Whoa there Nelly, please tell me you are joking. Anecdotes are useful to generate ideas for testable hypotheses, but never can be used as evidence to support an argument. You can't seriously expect other scientists to take anecdotes seriously, they are the reason we have strictly controlled experiments, because anecdotes are useless. I am fanatical about methods, and right now my brain is hurting. Glad I didn't get my degree at your uni. :shakehead:

Yes, I know. I'm saying I based my experiments on anecdotal evidence in order to test it. It was absolutely correct. Hurrah!

I still think it's a leap. Just because it's accepted doesn't make it true. I'm pretty confident it isn't universally accepted. My supervisor developed a theory on cooperative birds that became very widely accepted and was taught in universities all over the world. Only then he realised it didn't entirely make sense and thought about it some more until he had something that did make sense. Now that one is widely accepted, but it takes a while for it to filter down. A lot of pack theory for dogs is based on studies of captive wolves. It has since become apparent that what was learnt there rarely applies in the wild. But that's something we've all been over before.

What is your proof that dogs as a species need humans to protect them? I'm genuninely curious because I don't know. Do they need us to solve problems, either? There are a hell of a lot of dogs out there that don't have humans. Do you even have a dog? I'm curious because you've never mentioned them.

[corvus]

Corvus, did you say one of your dogs has 'fixed' her situation by staring and snapping at other dogs???? If so, I desperately hope you never come across a dog who will retaliate. I have a dog who is slightly fearful (genetically), but who was VERY fearful , and thanks to a wonderful behavourist and also to K9's seminar, we have come a very long way, so far in fact, that she is now too friendly (thanks guys )

Rather than experimenting with different dogs (and hares) it may be better all round to just ask the experts first. On another note, have you seen the bunnies doing agility??? incredible.

Yes I did. And yes we have come across a dog who will retaliate. Surprise surprise, she sure as hell didn't stare at it and snap. We've come across several, in fact. She didn't stare or snap at any of them. It's hard to explain how it's all happened because it's happened over most of her lifetime and she's an old dog, now. In general, she was attacked by some dogs that weren't interested in her submission. These dogs lived in our neighbourhood and we met them on the streets. One of them in particular lived next door and attacked Penny on the driveway. He tried it every single time we walked past. No way to avoid it as I had to go past him to get off the property. He was bloody fast and hellbent on taking her throat out. We managed to fend him off until he bit my mother and a fence went up. Big surprise, Penny got a bit fearful of large dogs. This is where I could have helped her by teaching her I would protect her. I didn't know about that and I didn't. She learnt that air snapping at a dog's face bought her space. She never once provoked a retaliation. Once she had this tool she calmed down and slowly got over her fear. She will never be the same, but she has recovered admirably from a series of terrible experiences with other dogs. Even though she is a grumpy old girl, now, she politely greets other dogs and reserves the snaps for boisterous youngsters. I know this and keep her close when boisterous youngsters are about. In her old age, it's a kind thing to do for her.

The reason why I like socialisation is because I think it increased her resilience to these experiences. She doesn't make mistakes with strange dogs. She never has. Even when she was scared of them she never made a mistake. And it's not because we didn't meet dogs that would retaliate. She just knew they would and so didn't provoke them. When I say she has never made a mistake I mean it. Never in her 13 years. It's really important because as long as I know she doesn't make mistakes the only dogs I have to fear are the ones that don't need an excuse to attack. I would like it if Kivi became this good. I think he will, but I'm not about to test it. He has a lot of proving to do before I will, and if I'm lucky most of it will happen on leash where he will be safe. But the basis of my stance on socialisation is that now I know it's possible for a dog to be so good at reading other dogs that she never makes a mistake. She might be exceptional and Kivi might never be that good, but why wouldn't I give him the opportunity?

I did ask the experts. I am asking the experts. I ask by inviting them to convince me I'm wrong.

[Kavik]

So what would she do if her air snapping DIDN'T buy her space? If the dog continued to get in her face, jump on her, body slam her, hump her, annoy her? From experience, this does happen at parks. Diesel is fairly non confrontational and will avoid a dog he is unsure about, but sometimes those dogs continue to annoy him dispite him giving off pretty obvious signals that he is not interested in interacting with them.

If he is not interested in interacting with them, I move away so that I don't risk something happening.

Also have come across dogs who just come up and stand over yours, hackles up, confrontational body language, even if my dog has done nothing. Now maybe your dog will put up with a dog standing over it, but some of mine will NOT, and do NOT like being so challenged. I will not take the risk of a fight because another dog wants to stand over mine and cause an issue. (one of these times the owner told me their dog just wanted to play! I don't think so!)

Also, I would not want my dog to learn to air snap at other dogs, as my experience has shown that this snapping can lead to aggression from my dog. Maybe my dogs are more 'wired' than yours, but this does not seem to me to be a good thing for them to learn at all.

[corvus]

Corvus, the difficulty I've had from the beginning with your posts is that you state them in a manner that sounds non-theoretical. You make assertions and debate issues with highly experienced, professional dog trainers that, coupled with the word "zoologist" under your avatar, lends them a tone of authority that might make a dog person here use them.

You might notice that I don't have the word "zoologist" under my avatar anymore. I took it down after the last discussion in here.

You've already backpedalled a considerable distance from your bold assertion that you didn't have to protect your dogs in encounters with strange dogs because as dogs, they had the skills to diffuse any newcomer they had to deal with. That cheers me considerably. As I said before, you're clearly not stupid.

It's "defuse". Sorry.

I haven't back-pedalled. I have answered a whole lot of "well, what if you had a dog like this..." scenarios. I'm not about to sit down and describe how I would handle every different kind of dog I could possibly find myself responsible for. I kinda thought it was obvious I wouldn't do the same thing for every kind of dog, but apparently not. This thread is about my view of fear and how it affects trust. I had a vague hope it might help people see that I would handle different dogs differently because I don't want to see them learning things through fear. I realise now I expect people to read my mind sometimes.

Whilst most posters here (myself included) do not have the academic training in zoology you have, many of us have trained mulitple species (dogs and horses for me) and know that their responses and motivations are dissimilar. I suppose to some degree what you learn from one experience you do bring to another but only from a broader perspective. I tend to want to encourage, rather than force, my dogs to do things because I learned with horses that you can't force a 1500kg animal to do anything it really doesn't want to do.. positive motivation works better. Operant conditioning does have some universal application but what motivates and rewards animals will differ. I think that is where you and I part company on a theoretical level.

The thing I love about OC is that it is applicable to all species. But, like you say, obviously the rewards will differ, and not just between species but also between individuals. I don't even use the same rewards for Penny and Kivi and they are similar dogs. My problem is that I think this is all very obvious so skip over it. I guess that this makes people think I don't know about it. Whenever I start these threads, poodlefan, you end up pretty much stating all the things I've skipped over for me. I profoundly believe that force is a great big no-no. It started from the hare as well. You can't force a hare to do much and if you do manage it he won't even look at me for several days afterwards. It really gets you thinking outside the square about ways you can do things without force. I got into the realms of environmental manipulation, which is something you can't really apply to dogs and don't really need to. Thank goodness for that. Doing anything with a hare means several days of thinking about it and several more days of getting up the courage and usually several hours or days trying to carry it out with the minimum amount of stress. Yep, I am SO glad dogs and hares are pretty different.

The domestic dog has been selectively bred for generations to seek the company of humans and, to a greater or lesser degree, to seek direction from them. Cats, on the other hand, don't give a damn about pleasing you - they do only what they consider brings reward. Hounds can be a bit like that. As a first time hound owner I'm finding differences in training Howard from any of my poodles. I don't think a 'one size fits all' approach to training works even within a species, let alone between them.

And I agree with you.

I do know that 'taming' an animal and 'training' one are not the same and that 'taming' does not change an animals instintive responses in the manner that selective breeding can do. Taming encourages tolerance. Training encourages obedience. That point alone is why I find your comparisons between a domesticated, selectively bred animal and a tamed feral animal less than convincing. I can accustom a lion or tiger to tolerate human interaction, but as the repeated tragedies involving exotic pets demonstrate, you do not necessarily engender obedience, nor do you take the predator out of the big cat, EVER. You also have to keep in mind that a hare, unless you give it no option, will never be a threat to you. You can't say that about any prey species (domesticated or not) large enough to take us on.

This is all true. Butbutbut.... There are aspects of taming that are really very much like training. You are teaching them what is scary and what is not. Even when you try to teach them nothing is scary you end up teaching them some things are. The difference is what you can expect in terms of obedience. My hare does a cute trick where he stands on his hind legs on signal. My dog does a cute trick where he gives me his paw. My dog is always happy to give me his paw. It's very rewarding to him and there's no reason for him to not give me his paw. My hare doing what I suggest is always going to be a hit and miss affair because there are so many reasons not to come out and stand in front of me in the first place. IMO, you must accept the limits to your animals' capabilities. I could expect things of my domestic rabbit that I never could of my hare. I could expect things of my dogs I never could of my rabbit. I can expect things of Kivi that I would not expect of Penny. This all goes without saying.

There was a fellow on tv a while back that trained cats to perform. He said in order to succeed the cats must NEVER be frightened while they are performing. I wish that people had that attitude about every animal. Why is it okay to frighten an animal that will get over it and still perform for you?

Satisfying the food needs of a wild predator never takes the hunter out of the animal. Similarly providing safety to a prey species doesn't remove prey responses. Startle a horse and you'll see what I mean.

Yes, and you have gone through and listed all the differences very nicely.

The similarities are in two places:

1. A wild animal and a domestic animal will both try to increase the good things and decrease the bad things. As you say, these can be wildly different between species. My point is, the bare bones of it are the same.

2. A wild animal and a domestic animal will behave the same way when very frightened. Like Zero. From Shell's description, she had a big floofy hare with sharp teeth in her house for a while.

Now here's where I see an important difference: Fear is common to all animals. The differences are, I used to think, what you can get away with before they become afraid. My revelation with Penny was, sometimes the difference is the dog will not clearly tell you when you are frightening them. They just quietly don't trust you as much. It's easy to tell with a hare or even a cat because they won't stand for it. Many dogs do stand for it, but that doesn't mean they weren't affected. So better, I think, to try valiantly not to frighten them at all. But how do you do that if there's a possibility they don't tell you when they are afraid? Why not use what you have learnt from animals that do tell you loud and clear? Just to be safe?

[Lablover]

Temple Grandin

Googled Temple Grandin. Suffers from Autism. Focuses on cattle. Interesting.

Cattle certainly spook with new stimuli. Stress causes poor meat quality. Sound research as cattle products are widely used!!

My long suffering husband was involved in cattle matting. No dogs in process yards, used any longer due to stress.

I gained paddock access to a turn out paddock (the farmer does not live on the property) due to conditioning the stock to stress, via dogs and my presence.

Friends sell us beef who are humanely culled in their paddocks. The resultant meat, (abet after bleeding and hanging) certainly seems to taste better.

[Are You Serious Jo]

What is your proof that dogs as a species need humans to protect them? I'm genuninely curious because I don't know. Do they need us to solve problems, either? There are a hell of a lot of dogs out there that don't have humans. Do you even have a dog? I'm curious because you've never mentioned them.

Yes, those are called "wild dogs". When you take your dog to the local dog park and some aggressive out of control larger dog attacks yours you might listen to the trainers on here. A lot of dogs do not have the wiring of their wild ancestors and do not obey the social behaviours such as stop attacking a submitting dog, but I guess your dogs will learn the hard way for you.

Yes I have dogs, that is why I joined all those years ago, and you know what, despite the fact I have a decent amount of experience with canine cognition I always listen to the trainers on here as I know they have considerable experience that can compliment mine.

I know you have pointed out other people's typos before, so thought you might want to know, genuninely is actually incorrect, it is genuinely. Thought you might appreciate the help.

[persephone]

Friends sell us beef who are humanely culled in their paddocks. The resultant meat, (abet after bleeding and hanging) certainly seems to taste better.

fear and stress do horrible things to muscles

We have two sheep carcasses in the chiller today... these two were actually sleeping in the sun when shot... should be good meat

[persephone]

despite the fact I have a decent amount of experience with canine cognition I always listen to the trainers on here as I know they have considerable experience that can compliment mine.

*nods*

Everyone has something to teach ..........

[SkySoaringMagpie]

I have just read this whole thread and was reminded of something Uta Bindels said at the seminar about ensuring that a dog is confident in a new environment before attempting to train. What I got out of the seminar was a strong message about observation - is the dog frozen, is the dog over-aroused, is the dog unsure? The approach for each dog is different.

I know what hard lessons feel like, and how imperative they feel, but a hard lesson with one dog does not necessarily apply to the next dog. You really have to look and see what is going on with each dog.

[corvus]

When you take your dog to the local dog park and some aggressive out of control larger dog attacks yours you might listen to the trainers on here. A lot of dogs do not have the wiring of their wild ancestors and do not obey the social behaviours such as stop attacking a submitting dog, but I guess your dogs will learn the hard way for you.

I guess that either you don't read half my posts or really don't understand what I say. This has already happened and more than once. Only it wasn't the dog park it was our driveway and on the streets. What can you do when a dog charges you and tries to grab your dog and shake it? As far as I can work out, stay cool, watch it come, and jerk your dog out of its path at the last minute. Then hope to hell you can either get out of its way before it recovers for another round or its owner is there and can do something. These things happen with no provocation. I don't know what the trainers on this forum have to say that can possibly stop it. K9 says the neutralised dog wouldn't be there in the first place. This happened ON MY DRIVEWAY. It happened out of the blue when walking down the street. At least if we are in the dog park there's a good chance the owner will be there and might be able to do something.

And I'll say it one more time. My dog does not provoke dogs that might attack her. She has never started a fight by air snapping and she's been doing it for many, many years. I am glad that she is more relaxed these days and no longer snaps nearly as much, but she has still never made a mistake.

Kavik, you asked what happens when snapping doesn't buy her space. It's a hard question because I can't remember it ever really happening. Sometimes at the dog park she insists on standing in the middle of a boisterous game and growling when inevitably she gets buffeted. She has a Ruff Wear web harness that is awfully useful for lifting her out of the way and I plonk her between my feet where she stays and grumbles about youngsters to herself. If it did happen I'm not about to stand by and watch. Kivi sometimes goes back for more when he's been snapped at because he's still young and enthusiastic. I call him away.

I'm not sure how this came to be about dog parks or comparisons with wild animals. Both things are kind of beside the point. I'm intrigued that K9 has disagreed with me about trust and everyone else has more or less said they think any kind of fear discourages trust. Is that right? Are people disagreeing with K9??

I agree, anita. My point is, when you know it's possible you can guard against it. I don't think Kivi is nearly as likely to lose trust in people as Penny has been, but I know what I'm looking for, now.

[huski]

I guess that either you don't read half my posts or really don't understand what I say. This has already happened and more than once. Only it wasn't the dog park it was our driveway and on the streets. What can you do when a dog charges you and tries to grab your dog and shake it? As far as I can work out, stay cool, watch it come, and jerk your dog out of its path at the last minute.

I think the point some are trying to make Corvus is that you have said yourself that you don't always see a dog that is acting in an aggressive manner as aggressive (i.e. hackles up, snarling, posturing, chasing a smaller dog and trying to pin it down etc). Some of us would take action to avoid a dog like that and stop our dogs approaching it the instant we see signals from it that make us uncomfortable. There would be no 'jerking the dog out of its path at the last minute', we would be removing our dogs the instant we see it whether it is charging at us or not. You don't think that dogs that display aggressive signals are always going to attack, and you're happy to let your dogs approach them just to see what happens as you think they have the skills to diffuse an attack. I think the point some of us are trying to make is that we won't take that chance.

[Kavik]

I don't want my dog to be in the middle of boisterous dogs snapping and growling. That means they are uncomfortable with that situation. If they are uncomfortable, things may escalate.

So every dog Penny has snapped at backs off? They don't continue to try to play with her? None of them try to hump her? None of them take offence and tell her off?

Maybe the dogs you encounter are much better at reading body language than the ones I see, as I regularly see dogs bouncing all over others when the other one has clearly shown it is not appreciated.

[Are You Serious Jo]

...or really don't understand what I say.

[Erny]

I'm not sure how this came to be about ... comparisons with wild animals. Both things are kind of beside the point.

..... But you're always the one who is making that comparison - frequently (even though we suggest it isn't always or often the best comparison to draw parallels to in many instances).

Edited May 5, 2009 by Erny

[m-j]

Googled Temple Grandin. Suffers from Autism. Focuses on cattle. Interesting.

I like most of what Temple Grandin has to say in the books I've read , she thinks outside the square. In my experience Autistic people do, not a bad thing at all imho.

cheers

M-J

[Erny]

Agree, M-J. Reading that book had me envious of the ability autistic people have when it comes to their usually natural and often accurate 'connection' with animals a talent that, because of our functioning frontal cortex (isn't it?) we don't possess.

[corvus]

There would be no 'jerking the dog out of its path at the last minute', we would be removing our dogs the instant we see it whether it is charging at us or not. You don't think that dogs that display aggressive signals are always going to attack, and you're happy to let your dogs approach them just to see what happens as you think they have the skills to diffuse an attack. I think the point some of us are trying to make is that we won't take that chance.

Firstly, you can bet I'd be removing my dog from a charging dog before jerking it out of the way at the last minute if I had that option. Charging dogs don't often give you options.

Secondly, this all has not happened through me going "Oh, let's just see if this dog trotting towards us with its hackles up and staring at my dog is actually going to attack." I never took those chances. I discovered Penny's ability to defuse (not diffuse!) a situation when there were no options to remove ourselves. I was still trying to get between them and control the situation until one day when Penny dug her heels in and I looked at her and realised she seemed to know something I didn't. So I trusted her, gave her leash some slack, and she defused what I thought was a risky situation. She did it fast, she was comfortable, she was not the least bit worried. My little eyes widened as I went "Wow, that was amazing." And from then on I paid a lot more attention to her rather than being wholly fixated on the other dog and trying to control the situation. If she can control the situation and I know her aims are to avoid conflict, then surely I'd be mad to try to come in and take care of it myself? I could be the one that triggers it to turn ugly. Me tugging on the leash, for example, creates an oppositional reflex in my dog. They stiffen to resist. How is the other dog going to interpret that? If I get in front of my dog, and the other dog just wants a clear view of this strange dog approaching their territory, can I be sure that this tense dog is not going to become more tense if it can't see my dog properly? Everything you do when you insert yourself into these tense situations can easily add to the tension. It can even be a trigger. To me, letting Penny handle it is a surer bet. She's a dog, she's brilliant at dog body language, she REALLY doesn't want to get into conflict with a strange dog and most importantly, she is confident and unafraid. She is more confident than I am.

Having said all that, if there is an option to avoid the situation all together, I sure as hell would take it. I'm talking about when you're walking your dog and suddenly an off-leash dog appears out of someone's front yard. You can't always avoid it. You can try chasing the other dog, and it will probably work, but I don't want to be teaching my dogs that whenever we see a dog displaying aggressive signals we chase it off. I can't very well leave them where they are and chase the dog on my own. Inevitably it includes them. Penny doesn't like chasing aggressive-looking dogs. I listen to her.

I only brought up my hare in this thread because it was instrumental in me discovering the lack of trust in my dog. You can ignore it if you like. It doesn't make any difference to the point I'm trying to make. It's just background info.

We still seem to be discussing my approach to "aggressive" dogs. Can we please discuss the topic?

[huski]

If she can control the situation and I know her aims are to avoid conflict, then surely I'd be mad to try to come in and take care of it myself?

Once again it goes back to risk, I believe it is up to me to protect my dogs not let my dogs try to protect themselves.

To me, letting Penny handle it is a surer bet. She's a dog, she's brilliant at dog body language, she REALLY doesn't want to get into conflict with a strange dog and most importantly, she is confident and unafraid. She is more confident than I am.

So, she goes into avoidance, and is not always comfortable around other dogs, yet she's confident? From your posts it doesn't sound like she really enjoys socialising with other dogs and isn't interested in playing with them either. Why force her into situations where she has to interact with other dogs if all she wants to do is avoid them?

[Are You Serious Jo]

Again, you are assuming that the other dog will act appropriately to Penny's signals that she is submitting, do you not realise that some dogs ignore those signals and attack anyway? It might sound very noble to say I trust my dog to sort it out, but the reality is that there are times you need to protect your dog, or she will get attacked. It is a matter of time from what I can decipher from your posts.

[Miranda]

We still seem to be discussing my approach to "aggressive" dogs. Can we please discuss the topic?

I would if I could, but I don't understand the topic All I've ever managed to decipher from your posts is that you aren't concerned about your dogs' interactions with others as they can sort it out themselves, the rest of what you say goes right over my head.