Feeding

[Whisper]

okay i see that noone here agrees with physical discipline. i hope that in that case if you have children you do not physically punish them either because that would be contradictory.

i had a boxer who thought food was for her only and would growl at my papillion, sometimes going to attack, one day she took his food predominatly (not sure of spelling) implying it was hers, i therfore took it back and got bitten in the process.

i punished her with a quick slap across her nose and a loud OW!. from that day forth i had the upmost respect from her i could therefore do anything with her where as nobody else could. it obviously hurt her because she did yelp but after backing off and realising she did something wrong i never ever had the fear she would bite anyone ever again and she didn't you could do anything with her.

i understand that most people here are probably older and supposably wiser no disrespect intended from this teenager but although something worked for you doesn't mean it will work for this person. since the pup was initially punish with a physical punishment i haven't had to do it again, he has learnt to do as he is told althoug he does insist on eating pup's food when he comes into the house, but he eats my pup's so i don't care.

pup still insists on jumping and running around sometimes ignoring my command but he is getting better all i have to do is say sit now not bed and he sits then lays down nose on his paw watching and waiting for the command, i am able to walk away and he stays most of the time until i command him and allow him to eat.

i discovered since i have been watching my pup closely that the previous owners seeminly abused the dog as he is leash scared took me a week to gain his confidence to walk him on the lead, if a male raises his voice he wets himself and hides, he is very shy and timid at tiems especially when there are strangers around, so since i discovered this i immediatley warned every body involved in his training to definatley not to hit him or physically punish him at all. i said if he misbehaves to much remove his toys put him outside and if need be tether him till he calms down but watch him so he doesn't strangle himself.

whisper

[poodlefan]

Whisper writes:

i discovered since i have been watching my pup closely that the previous owners seeminly abused the dog as he is leash scared took me a week to gain his confidence to walk him on the lead, if a male raises his voice he wets himself and hides, he is very shy and timid at tiems especially when there are strangers around, so since i discovered this i immediatley warned every body involved in his training to definatley not to hit him or physically punish him at all. i said if he misbehaves to much remove his toys put him outside and if need be tether him till he calms down but watch him so he doesn't strangle himself.

Another interpretation of the leash issue Whisper is that he hasn't been on one before and lacks confidence in new surroundings. The wetting may not be fear based but can be a submissive act. I'd suggest that your dog lacks confidence in unfamiliar situations. You need to be socialising him as much as possible and ensuring that he receives positive experiences. :rolleyes:

Your emphasis on 'negative reinforcement' may be working for stopping your pup from doing things. However, I would argue that there are better methods that will not only increase the speed that your pup will learn but will help to grow a bond between you based on respect and a willingness to please rather than avoidance and potentially fear of consequences.

Dog training is like many things. Newer, better methods are being explored and tested all the time. The "clicker" is one example. Most methods these days are based on understanding dog behavior better.

To put it in simple terms, your training methods are soooo 1950's. Why don't you do some research or join a positive motivation based dog training club? "Punishment" has its place, but it shouldn't be your key method of training.

Edited to add - keep the cat away from the pup at feeding time. You want the pup to learn that he doesn't have to defend his food from potential competition because YOU will keep it safe. Your job as the "leader" is to see that he gets to eat it peacefully and without rushing. Agro from you/competition/punishment at meal times may lead to INCREASED food aggression - not the result you are looking for. Don't put him in a situation where he feels the need to defend his food. Meal time should be calm. Making him wait while the cat checks out his food will only increase his possessiveness.

Edited December 7, 2004 by poodlefan

[pgm]

Poodlefan,

not meaning to have a go at you, but I simply can't agree with the statement - "Most methods these days are based on understanding dog behavior better."

Most methods "these days" are based in one way or another on scientific behaviorism. It does not follow in the least that because you have a scientific explanation that you therefore have better understanding. Anymore than having a linguistic theory (science of grammar) will make you a better writer.

I trust practical experience far more than any theory.

[poodlefan]

No offence taken pqm. Not entirely sure of your point though. :rolleyes:

Experience is great - even better when its used to create or validate a theory.

However, experience without some kind of conceptual framework (theory) is darn hard to pass on...

If you are saying that pure theory is not as good as theory backed by experience then I totally agree.

[poodlefan]

Rereading this thread I noted Whisper's question:

is it generally the aura of the forum's to admonish and growl at a question??

It seems to me Whisper that you felt confused and hostile when your question met with admonishment and aggression. No great surprise there.

Now put yourself in your dogs shoes (or should that be paws). The dog is punished for doing something wrong even though its actions (to it) are natural and justified. It is confused and possibly fearful.

Wouldn't you prefer to be shown the right thing to do and rewarded for doing it? The suggestion about asking your dog to sit (assuming that it knows how and what 'sit' means) and THEN giving it its meal is the way to go. Once the sit is reliable, you increase the time of the sit and possibly the distance from the bowl. However, that bowl has to be safe from other potential diners. :rolleyes:

I'm not for a moment suggesting that a dog and a human think alike. However, I do think its possible to emphathise with a dog and to conclude that a reward based training system will encourage a better response than one based on punishment.

[pgm]

poodlefan,

children do not learn language by being taught a theory. Neither is it necessary for the teacher to have a theory in order to teach. 'Pure theory' is completely superflous - indeed, 'pure theory' is an illusion.

Having a method based on trial and error (experience) is another thing. Method is not equivilent to theory. Method can be passed on perfectly easily, and need not involve theory in the slightest.

Furthermore, theory is never pure. It is always based on some set of governing assumptions.

The difference between say, behaviorism and Koehler (to speak of the 1950's) is the different set of assumptions that each bring to the dog or animal.

Personally, I have yet to read a behaviorist that actually understands Koehler. Why? Because they seem incapable of understanding, let alone recognizing, that Koehler works from a very different set of assumptions, than does the behaviorist.

[pgm]

Poodlefan,

while I'm here, I really do not understand the following sentiment -

"Now put yourself in your dogs shoes (or should that be paws). The dog is punished for doing something wrong even though its actions (to it) are natural and justified. It is confused and possibly fearful."

Firstly, if the dog is left confused or fearful after being corrected, then the dog has not been trained properly in the first place. Corrections properly administered do not leave dogs confused or fearful.

Secondly, I can see no relevence whatsoever as to whether the actions of a dog are natural or not. It is natural for dogs to run across the road - so what? Does that mean we shouldn't correct them?

Corrections are used to teach dogs how to behave responsibly in an enviroment that is not natural. Surely that is what training a dog in the first place is all about?

[Guest Tess32]

whisper

okay i see that noone here agrees with physical discipline. i hope that in that case if you have children you do not physically punish them either because that would be contradictory.

- No, it's not, although a lot of people do apply that theory to both. Children and their treatment are not interchangeable with animals and our treatment of them. Children understand verbal language and can be talked to about their conduct, animals cannot. A child understands "mummy still loves me", an animal may not, and a child may not be backed into a corner with only his teeth to use.

The problem with using physical punishment is that you don't always know what other problems you are creating. Take it to a logical extreme - If I bash up a child for eating icecream, he may not want to ever see icecream again. It doesn't mean he knows it's wrong, it just means the associations with icecream are strong enough for him to avoid it at all costs. He might not just start disliking icecream though, he might start disliking everything cold, everything vanilla flavoured, and everything white! There is a well known experiment done with a toddler, where every time he saw a rat, a loud noise errupted. He came to hate rats. Physical punishment can simply create fear, and yes, the dog may never behave that way again, but you don't know what damage you might be doing.

What is even worse is that you admit the dog may have been physically abused earlier and thus he already has problems with timidity and submissiveness. The best thing you can do for such a pup is treat him positively, and build trust that isn't based on fear.

It's very easy to misunderstand dog behaviour - how many people arrive home to a dog that's destroyed a shoe and as it slinks away, thinks he is "guilty"? Many, but the dog isn't guilty, he just knows now that when the Owners come home, so can scary punishment.

Nat

Edited December 7, 2004 by Tess32

[Acacia]

- No, it's not, although a lot of people do apply that theory to both. Children and their treatment are not interchangeable with animals and our treatment of them. Children understand verbal language and can be talked to about their conduct, animals cannot. A child understands "mummy still loves me", an animal may not, and a child may not be backed into a corner with only his teeth to use.

The problem with using physical punishment is that you don't always know what other problems you are creating. Take it to a logical extreme - If I bash up a child for eating icecream, he may not want to ever see icecream again. It doesn't mean he knows it's wrong, it just means the associations with icecream are strong enough for him to avoid it at all costs. He might not just start disliking icecream though, he might start disliking everything cold, everything vanilla flavoured, and everything white! There is a well known experiment done with a toddler, where every time he saw a rat, a loud noise errupted. He came to hate rats. Physical punishment can simply create fear, and yes, the dog may never behave that way again, but you don't know what damage you might be doing.

What is even worse is that you admit the dog may have been physically abused earlier and thus he already has problems with timidity and submissiveness. The best thing you can do for such a pup is treat him positively, and build trust that isn't based on fear.

Nat

do some speaking lessons/ public speaking and you will find that 90% of what is comunicated between animal/human human/human fly/sea gull is done through the way you comunicate not what you say .ie if you use a soft or a hard voice, you can say i love you all you liek to a little kid in a corey tailor voice( slip knott) and im sure hes gonna feal loved.

and what i find more amusing is that at the start of your post you said it was completely different hitting a child to hitting a dog then latter on you say that it does the same thing?!?!?!?!? but i thought you could tell a child (using your slip knott voice)

It's very easy to misunderstand dog behaviour - how many people arrive home to a dog that's destroyed a shoe and as it slinks away, thinks he is "guilty"?  Many, but the dog isn't guilty, he just knows now that when the Owners come home, so can scary punishment.

no(unless you hit you dog every time you come home) its reading your body language, im not saying hitting your dog is the best thing to do but it sounds like you think its ok to hit you children and not your dog?!?!?!?!

[Guest Tess32]

"

and what i find more amusing is that at the start of your post you said it was completely different hitting a child to hitting a dog then latter on you say that it does the same thing?!?!?!?!? but i thought you could tell a child (using your slip knott voice)"

No, I used "beating" of a child to illustrate the strength of negative associations, not smacking, and I paired it with a normally pleasant behaviour.

"o(unless you hit you dog every time you come home) its reading your body language, im not saying hitting your dog is the best thing to do but it sounds like you think its ok to hit you children and not your dog?!?!?!?!"

It's not *just* reading body language. The body language is part of the situation. If the last time you came home, and there was a destroyed shoe, and you stooped down and had your arms out and then you gave the dog a smack - it will associate the situation with the coming punishment and will display submissive behaviour like slinking away. Or, if every time you are about to hit them you bend down aggressively, it will try to thwart the punishment by again, acting submissively.

As for saying it's ok to hit children and not the dog...um, where do you get that from? I said it's not necessarily *hypocritical* to smack a child and not a dog, because they are not the same creature.

And no I don't agree that body language truly compensates for what we cannot explain to our dog.

Nat

[Staff'n'Toller]

i working in a vet do know how to control my animals and am not ignorant in their training. since i wrote the first letter on here my pup sits and stays, he waits to command is given to eat, the other puppy and the kitten can now eat out of his bowl and he is less likely to attack them and i never read any of this advice.

i have trained him to mat, so when his food is coming out he sits and or lays on his mat and waits as does he if he comes in the house, sitting on the mat only.

i thank you all for the imput but do appreciate being growled at. i have never taken any of my dogs to dog school only trainig them myself and the always are obedient well trained dogs.

So if you had already decided that at any cost you wanted the kitten to eat out of pups bowl, and that you never have (or by the sounds of it) never will take a dog to training, and you can train your dogs at home to an obedient standard.......then why did you ask for advice in the first place!!!!!

Sorry but at the risk of sounding like an unintellectual, if one day your cat gets chomped by your dog, who was defending his bone/food bowl and decided on *that day* he did not want to share, consider yourself pre-warned.

I'm not trying to have a go at you.......and really to be honest no-one else particularly was either.....there's a great world of positive dog training to be had out there, we were just trying to introduce you to it. I hope maybe one day you'll find it.

Mel.

[NorthernStarPits]

I"M not trying to have a go either,if anyone is to keep animals and be a good animal husbandman/woman some serious reaserch and study into natural animal behaviour and actions/reactions is the only thing you can do, otherwise it is very eazy to "ruin" a good dog through forced negative unnatural learning patterns..the addage of "spare the rod spoil the child(DOG)" is rubbish;if a kid is constantly belittled and hit he/she grows into either fearfull or agressive adult..it is only 1 of those two things nothing else,and dogs are no exception...

[Rusky]

My first post but this thread compelled me to register.

Whisper there has been some really good advice given to you.

My 2 cents are

don't smack your puppy

feed dogs and cat separately, always and forever.

get puppies food ready

leave food on bench

bring puppy in on a lead

ask puppy to sit on the mat

reward with a pat, good puppy.

ask puppy to wait. good puppy.

Get the food put down slowly, again ask puppy to wait ( is still on a leash) make the distance and time short. Time just a few seconds, distance a couple of feet only.

Give a release word like 'OK eat' or ok dinner. or whatever.

Please whisper take your puppy to obedience class, you will enjoy and so will your pup, you will learn and have fun.

[poodlefan]

PQM writes:

Having a method based on trial and error (experience) is another thing. Method is not equivilent to theory. Method can be passed on perfectly easily, and need not involve theory in the slightest.

Furthermore, theory is never pure. It is always based on some set of governing assumptions.

PQM you are making my head hurt. I'm happy to agree to your views on the difference between theory and method.

Don't see how this helps Whisper though.

I feel the need to post a warning.

[pgm]

Poodlefan,

I doubt my comments help Whisper in the slightest. As to that, I m not qualified, so I don't offer advice on particular problems.

I simply find myself reacting to what strikes me as an overreaction whenever somebody mentions using physical corrections on dogs.

So I will say it again, physical corrections when properly administered and applied do not create fearful, aggressive or confused dogs. Bad training does that, not physical corrections in and of themselves.

Unlike most people here, I am of the opinion that in the long run it is better to instruct people on the proper techniques when using corrections than laying huge guilt trips on people such as saying the following:

"What it comes down to is this - if he is not doing what you want, it's your fault. You are the trainer and you haven't trained him properly. If you can't make him do something without force, you are being a weak trainer".

By the way, these coments are not directed at you Poodlefan - whilst we clearly hold different philosophies in regards to training I don't find your responses to be an overeaction. I just disagree, that's all...

One more thing - why is that people imagine that if one uses physical corrections that one is therefore 'constantly' abusing the dog. What on earth prompts people to say the following? -

"if a kid is constantly belittled and hit he/she grows into either fearfull or agressive adult..it is only 1 of those two things nothing else,and dogs are no exception..."

That is an overeaction. If people disagree then perhaps they could direct me to a method that instructs handlers to 'constanty belittle and hit the dog'. Such a method does not exist - only the ignorant think otherwise.

Edited December 8, 2004 by pgm

[Whisper]

blinks blinks blinks.

blinks again and half of that made not the least amount of sense whatso ever was i supposed t be able to understand that??

anyway i never agreed nor disagreed with the cat eating out of the dogs bowl, but as myself and my fiance work shift work, the cat may of finished, (should of finsihed) it's breakfast before we get home, therfore if it gets hungry i think it should be okay for the cat to eat the dogs biscuits that are always filled and not be fearful of being chomped into sausage meat .

why must one take a pup to dog training classes when we see different methods of training.

i get the impression from people that they think i am naive and maybe a little dumb. or something to this effect.

i live on a campsite on the beach where customers come to stay etc, so i need a well trained dog that listens to only us noone else. from my experiences form dog training is that they become like robots (remembering this is my opinion) and whosoever tells them the command they obey.

i disagree with this as i have taught my dog some basic agility and basic commands such as: sit, lay down, shake hands, high five, scratch, over, through, open mouth, stay sought of (a work in progress) gentle, friends, come when called. stop and cross the road at the roadside when safe.

i don't think one needs an obedience school to train a pet, as i think one is capable of preforming such a task to a high degree amongst themselves as long as they are willing to partake the time and effort that will be required trainign the dog each and every day. slowly but surely you will get there in the end.

i also do not want to go to obedience classes or puppy classes what ever, i socialise my dog at the dog beach with and without the lead. i taught him friends and gentle whilst on the leash before we were able to let him off as he tries to dominate anything that moves but i broke that habit after only two visits tot he beach.

i feel like i am not welcome to ask for others opinions on this site as always seems to be the case. not wanted never have been if it wasn't for the fact that i could focus on training my puppies well who knows... that is why i train myself rather than dog schools. i never actually decided that the cat could eat form the dogs bowl i just didn't want an aggrssive dog if it was the case and was asking opinions of this incase the cat did happen to eat out of the bowl whilst i wasn't home, i never wanted to come home to a dead cat and a dog that had the taste for blood.

i was guesing that people on this site would be more experienced with dogs as i got the opinon that most go to training or breed etc. i have only ever owned a boxer who was submissive anyway as at a few weeks old she was hit and almost killed by a car she went MIA for a week and was skin and bone when i found her as my other two pups died at a few weeks old from parvo. i have never had this breed of dog before and wasn't sure of temperment etc so was therfore only asking opinions.

the fact i was growled at for asking a question when answering a question was rather hurtful and upsetting.

oh well live and learn if thats possible, remeber we are all only human noone is perfect we all learn from our mistakes and the fact i hit my pup once may or may not of been appropriate but we all learn form mistakes as i have form watching my pup and his actions it struck me that probably wasn't appropriate but i can't undo it and if it works then so be it.

Whisper.

[Whisper]

i found a pic of my rebellious pup under another post. "my pup is a wolf not literally under this section Training obedience etc now that was helpful it worked all that advice.

i do not know how to put the picture in here as it was done form another computer.

whisper

[aatainc]

I find it interesting that you think dogs from obedience schools are robots that obey anybody - how can you have formed this opinion when you've never been to one?

At an obedience school YOU and you only will handle your dog. A dog that comes out of obedience school will certainly not be robotic and hardly any dogs will obey a new person without doing some training with that person.