How Would You Handle A Dog That Dislikes Being Told Off?

[Are You Serious Jo]

Punishment, reward, negative reinforcement and positive reinforcement are very specific learning theory concepts and easily confused. I'm not sure you are clear on what they are corvus.

[percyk]

re the nail clipping

we minded a bugger of a dog once

i clipped his nails no problem even though he was a very dominant boy whod growl and carry on when the kids encroached on what he perceived was his space

i waited til he was tired and just sat next to him and clipped away\big rhino toes they were and i fully expected trouble but had none\\

most of our own dogs dont like the nails done but accept our leadership no probs

so go figure

[huski]

Corvus I really have to wonder why you even post here. You clearly don't think highly of most of the posters here, you don't like that DOL is a forum where we can come and talk openly about use corrections, tools like prongs and e-collars without being flamed to hell and back. You say you don't care how other people train and that you don't judge others but you come across as one of the most judgmental and arrogant posters I've seen on DOL. Do you hang around because it makes you feel good about yourself seeing how we're stuck in the past and feel "threatened by changing trends"? Do you enjoy going on other forums to have a laugh about how backwards we are and let other posters pat you on the back for being so progressive? Does it make you feel good to find posters who have been banned from DOL agreeing with you about how the trainers and behaviourists who post here don't have a clue what they are talking about? Do you really think that all the trainers and behaviourists who you detest so much don't use rewards and base all their training on the use of corrections, and chuck tools like prongs and e-collars on every dog that comes to them for training? I thought you didn't care how other people trained their dogs?

Edited September 6, 2009 by huski

[Are You Serious Jo]

As an academic (who actually teaches learning theory) I don't find the posters here to be in any way backaward or ill informed. I try to break the stereotype of how academics view and treat layman or people in other fields, so get dissapointed when there are examples of that behaviour. Please don't think all academics are judgmental, sure some are, but that is because of who they are, not because they are in academia.

[huski]

As an academic (who actually teaches learning theory) I don't find the posters here to be in any way backaward or ill informed. I try to break the stereotype of how academics view and treat layman or people in other fields, so get dissapointed when there are examples of that behaviour. Please don't think all academics are judgmental, sure some are, but that is because of who they are, not because they are in academia.

I definitely don't think that of academics at all, Jo :p

It's only Corvus who thinks the trainers, behaviourists and anyone in between who doesn't agree with her are backwards and doesn't know what they are talking about. We're afraid of change, you see.

When it comes to training my dogs, I don't think of myself as either a positive trainer or a correctional trainer. I don't know why people want to classify others into one or the other. I consider myself a reward based trainer who is not afraid of using a correction or correctional tool if that's what is appropriate for the dog. I'm not afraid of change, I am afraid of dog training becoming ultra-conservative and paranoid to the point where we can't say 'ah ah!' to our dogs without being scolded and reported to the RSPCA for animal abuse.

Edited September 6, 2009 by huski

[m-j]

I like to teach my dogs/animals to do deal with things they don't like by setting them up so they don't throw a tantrum, sometimes that idea goes pear shaped on me (I see that as a failure by me as a trainer) and so the dog/animal doesn't learn that throwing a wobbly works, at that particular moment I need to adopt the attitude "get over it" it's going to happen anyway. Having said that there have been times where I have had to go and rethink my training strategy as the dog/animal was to big and dangerous when aggravated to restrain/correct.

In regard to the dog not liking being told off and vocalising the only dog I have ever had of my own was one dog who would put in one quiet wuff when I told him to be quiet(during a volley of barking at another dog, person cat or whatever going past the property), he did that for 16yrs but in all other respects he was a very obedient dog, I initially worried but never succeeded in stopping that wuff (at the time I was an adversive trainer) after a while I got over it.

As I have mentioned in the past a saying that a very knowledgeable trainer said to me we push our dogs around because we can not because we need to. The way I see it is the dogs don't ask us to own them, we make the decision to own them. Why should they be forced into calmly accepting horrible things happening to them (with the exception of procedures that are life saving at that moment) that are possibly seen by them as life threatening due to their lack of understanding? I don't see what is so bad about a process of gentle desensitisation.

We're creating and perpetuating problems.I can say this until I'm blue in the face but I'm rarely listened to.

Are you saying that using force, aversives, telling the dog/animal to deal with it doesn't?

This is not what I have found to be so, through my own and others experiences. I'm not saying it doesn't work, it does as many in this thread have mentioned it does and it has worked for me, and I do believe that using an adversive in a situation where the dog is a threat their or someone else's safety but sometimes I wonder what would happen if the animal had more "fight" in it as with your example of the dog growling over the food bin and the hit on the nose with a dust pan stopping it. A dust pan isn't much of a weapon really, it wouldn't inflict that much pain or discomfort. I have seen a dog working cattle that been ground into the ground get himself out of it and go back in harder. My brother in law's ACD when working cattle must have been tossed about 10 foot into the air when he landed he picked himself up and got straight back into the steer. I had a dog that got a leg broken in a fight when he next saw the dog he was actually keener to fight this particular dog and I could go on. Admittedly I have seen far more dogs when they have been hurt/shocked say "I'm not going there again" but as I have mentioned that always isn't the case.

I would rather teach a dog to be desensitised nicely to an unpleasant experience as I have found they are generally (not always) more tolerant to other people/strangers doing the procedure than those who have only experienced a forced desensitisation process, particularly if that stranger/other person isn't physically or mentally as strong as the owner.

JMHO

cheers

M-J

[corvus]

It's only Corvus who thinks the trainers, behaviourists and anyone in between who doesn't agree with her are backwards and doesn't know what they are talking about. We're afraid of change, you see.

No point I guess. I can say I agree with people on this board until my fingers are bleeding and I will still be accused of looking down my nose at some people I happen to disagree with on some things. The reason why I post here is because it's next to useless to post on a board where everyone agrees with me. What's the point in that? I post here more often because I'm sure to have people disagree with me. That (should) make for stimulating discussion, and I get just enough interesting discussion to make me put myself through this over and over again.

I would like to say I post here to make myself feel good about myself. That would be smart. If you think it makes someone feel good about themselves to be ignored when they say something agreeable and attacked when they try to start a discussion with a little about themselves, then I really gotta wonder about you...

[corvus]

Thank you M-J. I could kiss you right now.

[huski]

It's only Corvus who thinks the trainers, behaviourists and anyone in between who doesn't agree with her are backwards and doesn't know what they are talking about. We're afraid of change, you see.

No point I guess. I can say I agree with people on this board until my fingers are bleeding and I will still be accused of looking down my nose at some people I happen to disagree with on some things. The reason why I post here is because it's next to useless to post on a board where everyone agrees with me. What's the point in that? I post here more often because I'm sure to have people disagree with me. That (should) make for stimulating discussion, and I get just enough interesting discussion to make me put myself through this over and over again.

I would like to say I post here to make myself feel good about myself. That would be smart. If you think it makes someone feel good about themselves to be ignored when they say something agreeable and attacked when they try to start a discussion with a little about themselves, then I really gotta wonder about you...

you were the one who said we're threatened and afraid of change, and said you hoped it was true that DOL is one of the last places on the net people who use corrections/ecollars/prongs etc can come and post without being condemned. Sounds like more than a simple "disagreement" to me.

Edited September 6, 2009 by huski

[Vickie]

Wow...what a read, I just had to catch up on 3 pages.

Here's the thing. A puppy growling & biting could mean a couple of different things & we can only ever guess which one by the posters description of the situation. It could mean they are normal puppy, mouthing & growling in protest, testing waters, a vocal dog, a fiesty dog etc. It could just go away with minimal effort & reward based training...or it could turn into something not so normal if you empower that puppy through inconsistent handling make it into a serious problem.

or it could mean you have a serious problem on your hands right from the beginning. Some dogs are dominant right from the beginning & you HAVE to recognise the early signs & stay right on top of them all the way.

I am willing to bet Eric is the former. Maybe we are all overreacting. Maybe he is a normal puppy but if I hear puppy & growl in the same sentence, I am always alerted...and if that growl is serious or escalates then I would be seriously concerned. You cannot blame people in this thread for worrying, you give very little description of how normal or how dominant he is. Even if you did give a full description, people will interpret it in different ways.

Either way, the end result can be the same...a normal puppy from the start can be every bit as bad as the bad puppy in the end, depending on how they are treated. Either way, a "let's see what happens & I'll deal with it if it gets bad" attitude can be very dangerous.

Edited September 6, 2009 by Vickie

[Nekhbet]

I don't see what is so bad about a process of gentle desensitisation

if you have a working family coming to you with a couple of small children who the puppy is regularly munching - what do you do?

The pup will be in the pound or rehomed faster then you can say boo if you told them "well in about 2-3 months it may stop'

life is not perfect. It would be nice to live everything with cotton wool but we cannot.

Why should they be forced into calmly accepting horrible things happening to them (with the exception of procedures that are life saving at that moment) that are possibly seen by them as life threatening due to their lack of understanding

because they are dogs. Yup. 4 legs, tail, lick their own genitals, dogs. If we let THEM make decisions about everything it's not a pretty sight long term in many instances. It is up to you to make decisions about reactions and perceived threats for them.

Are you saying that using force, aversives, telling the dog/animal to deal with it doesn't?

If done incorrectly ANY training method will cause problems. Not every dog is the same. The problem is people say 'oh with my dog blah blah blah worked'. I own 3 dogs at the moment who have 3 different methods of training due to their personal differences. Some dogs need to be pushed, some dogs even need to be forced in order to achieve a more balanced life. The problem is some people see it as 'cruel' or 'hurting of doggy feelings' Force for the sake of force is ego and cruel - yet force coupled with behavior and training can sometimes be right for a particular animal to get over its problem and lead a more normal life and for the owner to enjoy life walking the dog again.

I think you do misunderstand my way of training. I do not hurt dogs, I do not inflict pain unless (the time when one particular dog was about to take my face off was another matter) and I do not terrorise them. I get them over their mental hurdles and I support them the whole way through so when they come out the other side it's not 'OMG I'M NEVER DOING THAT AGAIN WITHOUT FORCE' they think 'err wow. That wasnt so bad, HEY I EVEN GOT GREAT THINGS I WANNA DO THIS AGAIN!!!".

As for the ACD a dog working in high levels of drive thinks much differently to one not. Of course an ACD can be kicked by a cow and keep going it would fail as a worker if not. My own dogs trained in bitework have been hurt, one kneed straight in the ribs and yelped - she kept going with what we later worked out was a damaged rib.

Your reaction is scaled to the dog, its genetics, its nerve, its drive level at the time. No dog is treated the same and to say one size fits all is wrong.

I have been involved in Schutzhund and security/PP dogs as well as helping average pets. I see all ends of the spectrum including high drive trained dogs that flip you the bird and dare you to try and teach them anything.

stresses are a part of life. We have exams, deadlines, bosses who breathe down our necks etc. We dont all float through life doing what we want and it all being hunky dory. The difference is some people swim without help and others need that old 'You can do it' from someone else, hell some need the proverbial kick in the pants to get on with it. Dogs are no different - some are a breeze and some need more then just the kid glove treatment.

Edited September 6, 2009 by Nekhbet

[corvus]

I am willing to bet Eric is the former. Maybe we are all overreacting. Maybe he is a normal puppy but if I hear puppy & growl in the same sentence, I am always alerted...and if that growl is serious or escalates then I would be seriously concerned. You cannot blame people in this thread for worrying, you give very little description of how normal or how dominant he is. Even if you did give a full description, people will interpret it in different ways.

I gave very little description because I was just trying to use it to get the ball rolling. I wasn't asking for advice. Just wanted to know what other people do out of curiosity and started with my own approach as an ice breaker. I think it's important to recognise the individual personality of your pup. I saw something in Erik that reminded me of a far more aggressive pup. This was a warning bell for me to be careful how I go, just in case. Even though I could see plain as day that he's not like that aggressive pup in other ways. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. But it got me to thinking how other people's experiences might have shaped how they would approach it. I should have communicated that better.

Nekhbet, I ain't a normal working family that will send my pup to the pound rather than do some work with him. IME desensitisation doesn't take long. Barking Mad once had a dog that went from hysterics if a hot air balloon went over the house to being able to calmy sit right next to one in a field in 2-3 months of desensitisation. That blew my mind! It doesn't have to be a long and tedious process, especially if you do start early. Like, before the problem has even surfaced, which is what I'm talking about. I'm talking about pre-emptive desensitisation. On the off-chance that a problem arises sometime down the track if you did nothing.

[Staranais]

As I have mentioned in the past a saying that a very knowledgeable trainer said to me we push our dogs around because we can not because we need to.

I push my puppy around because I need to. If I don't 100% insist on her respecting the boundaries of our relationship now, I hate to think how she would be acting in a few months time.

She does have time off to be a puppy. I do teach her new things in a purely motivational manner. But when I ask her to do something simple and she growls at me or talks back instead then yes, I do get hold of her (no matter how long that takes) then I calmly make her do it.

I'd rather make her learn that commands are non negotiable now when I can deal with it in a low key, matter of fact fashion, than wait until she's physically big enough to fight me and win.

I don't care if that's "positive" or "aversive" or whatever. I just think it's a necessary part of raising a high drive puppy.

Edited to add - I should probably add that I do desensitisation as Corvus describes too, for things I know she has a big issue with, like me taking her bones away. But I don't pander to her when she all of a sudden decides that she's going to talk back when I tell her to get out of the drivers seat and into the back of the car or tell her to stop harassing the cat, etc. When she does that she's trying to work out how much she can get away with. And it's my job to calmly show her that the new behaviour she's trying isn't going to work round here.

Edited September 6, 2009 by Staranais

[JulesP]

Corvus I tend to try and act how another dog would act in this sort of situation. If one of my youngsters talked back at Fern she would squash them. It is not nasty or aggressive. So if they did it to me they would get the same response. This is what dogs understand. I would do as much as I had to get the desired body language. Starting softly and escalating. I would never walk away from a situation. Because my dogs are clear on boundaries I can be a positive trainer during our obedience, agility etc.

If you think this little pup might be a handful I would be using my NILIF and TOT training now. Assuming you have had the beastie a couple of weeks.

[Are You Serious Jo]

I don't see the point of an argument/discussion/disagreement unless something can be learnt. I don't like to argue for the sake of arguing, so I don't bother entering threads and posting lots unless there is a chance the other parties can take on board new information or I can learn something new. Stimulating discussion is great if there is progress, but if there is the same old I disagree and won't change my mind it is a waste of time.

I guess my dogs are either really well behaved or I am on top of them as I don't have any problems with mine and I do adopt a my way or the highway with them, poor things

[corvus]

OMG! I just realised I made a big boo boo. :D

I said I used R-, but I don't, I use P-. Man, what colour is red?

ETA Thanks to NO ONE for picking up on that! Jdavis, if that was what you were referring to earlier, it might have been nice if you'd actually said that.

Edited September 7, 2009 by corvus

[Are You Serious Jo]

No, I'm talking in general about learning theory, but I am sure you don't agree with me

[Kelpie-i]

Punishment, reward, negative reinforcement and positive reinforcement are very specific learning theory concepts and easily confused.

Too right jdavis, someone on this forum was trying to tell me that extinction training is part of the reinforcement quadrant schedule..............never mind!

[Are You Serious Jo]

I hate learning theory to be honest, drives me nuts!

[corvus]

I hate the quadrants. And useless, vague criticisms from jdavis.

I've read so many damn descriptions of those quadrants and I still get them mixed up. That's why I try to stick to "rewards" and "punishment" as much as possible. :D I suspect sometimes I forget that it can't really be anything until there's a measurable change in the behaviour of the animal.