Quick Question About Training In Drive

[Erny]

Erny and Huski, I'm not about to apologise for daring to say something that other people might *gasp* listen to. I sometimes fear that people will listen to "experienced trainers". I mean, I had one tell me that raw food changes dogs' behaviour.

I didn't ask for an apology, Corvus. But your posts are a bit all over the place. Without quoting you precisely, you've said in one that you have no drive training experience. In another you've told someone to avoid training in drive (which engages prey drive). In another you've said you change your mind every day. In another you reference your Zoology qualification and your animal behaviour studies (context being that you must therefore know what you are talking about, I presume, or at least in the reading of it, that is what it seems to infer.) In another you indicate that you always make disclaimers. In another you make a statement as though you know about drive training.

You've expressed frustration at some of the responses you've received to your posts. But I find it very difficult to know from yours whether you are asserting something (with the inference that you know it) or whether you are exploring by way of conversation.

Edited December 27, 2009 by Erny

[Erny]

I am not sure if a prey driven dog needs satisfaction from prey drive. I would say no at this point, as long as you play lots of drivey games instead. I think that play can be a substitute for hunting.

I think that any training if conditioned enough can hold where a dog goes into prey drive. That includes play drive.

What experience/evidence are you basing your thoughts on, Corvus? I mean, how did you come to that conclusion?

Mmm, my problem with the idea of drive intensity is that IME, a dog in prey drive is a thinking, problem-solving animal, whereas a dog over the top with play drive is not a thinking animal at all. Kivi couldn't begin to think about how to get my hare out of his cage, but Pyry does little else when he comes to visit. Kivi has lost it, but Pyry hasn't. I've seen Pyry so intense he has nearly lost it when he's going after something, but he never does. Maybe that's him, maybe not.

But, if Kivi is playing, how do you know that Kivi's goal is to get your rabbit out of the cage? Dogs learn through play - that's what they do as a litter, and many of their actions are preparatory for when they mature and need their hunting skills. So of course they "think" when in play. If they weren't thinking, they wouldn't learn.

Edited December 27, 2009 by Erny

[Diva]

Yes, I think lure coursing in general is prey drive. For most hounds. I don't know, how do you? I say they are if they intend to rip the lure into little pieces if they get it.

Corvus

You are saying then that if the dog doesn't intend to rip up the lure when they get it, they aren't in prey drive when chasing it? Can you confirm that's what you mean? thanks

[SkySoaringMagpie]

Yes, I think lure coursing in general is prey drive. For most hounds. I don't know, how do you? I say they are if they intend to rip the lure into little pieces if they get it.

An instructive video, cornering the prey is at 3 minutes and 5 seconds: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/do...dy-saluki/1326/

Diva, Jas is gorgeous and a natural. If you find the answer to this puzzle, I'd love to do some training sessions with the gang.

[Diva]

An instructive video, cornering the prey is at 3 minutes and 5 seconds: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/do...dy-saluki/1326/

Diva, Jas is gorgeous and a natural. If you find the answer to this puzzle, I'd love to do some training sessions with the gang.

Thanks ssm, brilliant video and exactly what I what I was trying to get at.

Not much use breeding a sighthound to hunt your meat if it's intent is to rip it into little pieces as Corvus suggests, unless you like minced meat. Videos I have viewed of Borzoi catching hare in Russia and Jackrabbits in the US show intact hares/rabbits at the end, and the Borzoi lure coursing events I attended in the USA and France didn't have many dogs trying the rip into the lure either. And even when used on wolves the historical reported intent was to pin and hold.

Appreciate the suggestion of joint training sessions, I'd enjoy that. I'm trying to get my head around the different conceptual frameworks people are using but there doesn't appear to be much agreement in the area of drives.

[corvus]

Let me give an example- i'd be interestd in what you say Corvus as i quite like different trains of thought, even if i don't agree. By the way this is not what i base all of my thoughts on drive training on- just an example

I trained my dog Cosmo in what i considered to be prey drive, with a tug toy. When i took her to a herding workshop, the intensity of her prey drive increased but all of my training and commands held. Many other dogs that had been trained well but without prey drive did not have their obedience 'hold' as their drive over took former training.

So based on this, despite the fact that Cosmo did look quite different playing tug and chasing sheep (she's not the dog i was referring to before), i would be inclined to suggest the physiology behind both exercises was the same given that all of the training held. I know with certainty that the herding was predatory (couldn't mistake it) which leads me to believe that the tug was predatory too because if i had never trained using that drive, i don't believe you're likely to get responses (to commands etc) when the dog enters that drive on its own. Thoughts?

ETA in the above example- think about training once the dog is IN prey drive, not ABOUT to enter prey drive ( the latter is where i think your conditioning answer is accurate)

Here's what I think, although I don't know if it's the response you were after...

Let's assume that regardless of whether tug and herding are predatory or play, the important thing is they are the same for Cosmo.

When you train a dog to control themselves when they are very excited/aroused in order to perform a behaviour to gain a very high value reward, you're priming them to not only be able to think through excitement in general, but to choose the course of action that has been heavily reinforced. That already puts them streets ahead of a dog that has been trained with positive reinforcement but only in low to medium levels of arousal, for example. Kivi is a great example of this, because he very rarely goes to high levels of arousal. Most of his training has therefore been at low and medium levels of arousal. If I call him when he's in the middle of chasing a bird, he will most likely stop chasing it and come back because he wasn't chasing it in a high level of arousal. But there's a little tiny section at the peak of arousal that he displays where he has rarely been responsive to a command. This level is rare, so we haven't really practised obedience while he was that aroused. Practising at more common levels that are still high for him set him up for success at higher levels, but it's still a bit hit and miss compared to Erik. Erik goes high with little help, and so has practised being operant at that level of arousal far more than Kivi has. As a consequence, when he gets excited it is generally reasonable to expect him to still do what he's told. Training in drive creates high levels of arousal and allows you to teach your dog to think through it, which is why I think training in drive is a fast track way to reliability in high levels of arousal.

I disagree that you are unlikely to get responses to commands when the dog enters that drive on its own because I have seen evidence to the contrary. My mother has lately been training Pyry to come when called using Leslie Nelson's Really Reliable Recall method. For the first time in his 7 years of being a hunting fiend, he will go so far as to drop a live animal to come when called. I honestly doubted how far that method could penetrate a dog in prey drive, but there's the proof.

However, Pyry is a thinking hunter. It seems to me that a lot of dogs with "prey drive" to spare want desperately to chase something, dig it up, or in the case of a herding breed, stalk it. None of those things necessarily end in the animal getting ripped to pieces, and the Whippet cross we had when I was growing up was a good example of a dog that gets into one of these incomplete parts of prey drive and pretty much stops thinking until the chase is over one way or another. I've seen the same thing in a terrier that found my hare one day. I'm not sure what to make of incomplete prey drive yet. Still thinking about it. I would like to not call it prey drive, but I doubt that's going to catch on any time soon.

Diva and SSM have brought up good points about sighthounds not actually intending to rip up the lure, and this is where it gets grey for me. It's certainly an aspect of prey drive, but it doesn't really run with what I think of as prey drive, which is the full suite of behaviours: seek, stalk, chase, grab, kill. That's why I'm harping on about intention and a dog actually killing or wanting to kill an animal. Maybe that's what I'm seeing when I talk about crossover areas between prey and play but not really either.

[Cosmolo]

Interesting

Here is another question-

Dog A only wishes to chase and stalk the prey

Dog B wishes to stalk, capture and kill the prey

Dog C wishes to stalk, capture and eat the prey

Do you think for each dog, that the physilogical responses and the way the dog feels is different to each other because of the point at which they stop? My answer is no- because drive satisifaction is achieved for each animal, its just that what constitues drive satisfaction is different for each dog.

[corvus]

You've expressed frustration at some of the responses you've received to your posts. But I find it very difficult to know from yours whether you are asserting something (with the inference that you know it) or whether you are exploring by way of conversation.

For future reference, I'm exploring by way of conversation about 98% of the time. My job at the moment is to advise a senior scientist, but in all the talking we often swing from literature to conjecture to supposition, back to literature, and off into wild speculation. The safest bet for figuring out exactly where we're at if we need to is to double-check. "So have there been studies on that?" I usually try to put "I think" in front of anything I'm going to say that isn't backed up in the literature, but I forget to sometimes when I'm caught up in the telling of a story of whatever research journey I've been on since we last spoke.

When it comes to dogs, the only time I'm going to pull the zoology card is either if I've read literature that backs me up or I'm making a behavioural observation. Those things I had to be trained how to do.

But, if Kivi is playing, how do you know that Kivi's goal is to get your rabbit out of the cage?

It's not, and that was my point. He just wants the hare to run. Pyry wants to kill it.

Dogs learn through play - that's what they do as a litter, and many of their actions are preparatory for when they mature and need their hunting skills. So of course they "think" when in play. If they weren't thinking, they wouldn't learn.

There's contention about whether play that simulates hunting serves only to prime hunting skills. From what I read about it there's probably more to it than that, in the form of social skills at least. At this point you also have to consider that many dog breeds are specifically bred NOT to kill things. Retrievers, herders, and even hounds as we have learnt. Therefore, play to develop hunting skills is actually going to hurt them rather than help them.

I think it's simplistic to think that all dogs that are playing are able to think. Both my recent puppies have frequently got the zoomies. They can't think much when they're doing that. Leslie McDevitt calls it a sure way to know that a dog is over threshold. By your reasoning, if dogs learn prey drive from play, and they can always think through play, then they can always think through prey drive as well. When DO they stop thinking?

I forgot to mention establishing operations in my Google Scholar search as well. That one was super interesting, thanks Aidan!

[corvus]

Interesting

Here is another question-

Dog A only wishes to chase and stalk the prey

Dog B wishes to stalk, capture and kill the prey

Dog C wishes to stalk, capture and eat the prey

Do you think for each dog, that the physilogical responses and the way the dog feels is different to each other because of the point at which they stop? My answer is no- because drive satisifaction is achieved for each animal, its just that what constitues drive satisfaction is different for each dog.

Good question!

I don't know. I would certainly like to, though. ;)

I can only speak from my experience with Erik. Erik wishes to chase and capture a toy. If I let him do that quickly, it's a game to him and he loves playing it. He catches it and we have a little tug, I let him win and he puts the toy down and downs for me to signal he's ready for another go. If I keep the chase going and going, there's this point where he gets serious about what he's going to do to that toy when he gets it. He's going to sit down and skin it. When he gets it, he feels very satisfied, so in a sense I would agree with you that drive satisfaction has been achieved.

However, I don't think that this feels the same to Erik. If I take Erik's toy away from him when he has crossed into wanting to skin it, he gets very upset. Seems to me that taking it away cheats him of his drive satisfaction. Where does that leave me? Do I have to wait for him to skin it and lose interest in it before I can engage him again? It certainly seems that way. Either I wait him out or take it off him. There's no way to take it off him without force, because once he's skinning it he's not interested in any identical toy, or food, or another game. He's done. Now I could condition an "out" that is strong enough to overcome his desire to skin the toy, but then what have I achieved? Maybe all I've done is changed the aim back to catching it and tugging rather than sitting down to skin it. Or I've perhaps succeeded in diminishing his desire for the toy. I may as well stick with the original game and keep my chases short. He has fun, he enjoys engaging with me, we can keep the game moving so there's a high rate of reward, and I don't have to upset him or sacrifice a toy.

Perhaps what I should be trying to communicate rather than prey versus play drive is end behaviours versus... active behaviours, for lack of another word. Whether Erik is in play drive or prey drive, wanting to skin his toy is what I would call an end behaviour in that that's where the game ends, while wanting to catch his toy and tug is something that can go over and over again without his condition really changing.

[Diva]

For future reference, I'm exploring by way of conversation about 98% of the time. My job at the moment is to advise a senior scientist, but in all the talking we often swing from literature to conjecture to supposition, back to literature, and off into wild speculation. The safest bet for figuring out exactly where we're at if we need to is to double-check. "So have there been studies on that?" I usually try to put "I think" in front of anything I'm going to say that isn't backed up in the literature, but I forget to sometimes when I'm caught up in the telling of a story of whatever research journey I've been on since we last spoke.

With all due respect Corvus, one of the challenges in science communication is remembering that the whole point is to communicate, not to just get caught up in your own journey - and I say that as someone one of whose recent jobs was to review the relevance and impact of a major national research program. ;)

At this point you also have to consider that many dog breeds are specifically bred NOT to kill things. Retrievers, herders, and even hounds as we have learnt. Therefore, play to develop hunting skills is actually going to hurt them rather than help them.

Lost me again - did you mean to say killing skills, rather than the stated hunting skills?

There is a lot more to hunting than the kill, and those skills do need to be honed in play. The muscles, reflexes and decision making used in the hunt are developed in play.

Edited because I misspelt 'communicate' - which is really rather ironic

Edited December 28, 2009 by Diva

[corvus]

With all due respect Corvus, one of the challenges in science communication is remembering that the whole point is to communciate, not to just get caught up in your own journey - and I say that as someone one of whose recent jobs was to review the relevance and impact of a major national research program.

That's fair. But there's informal communication and formal communication. If I were making a presentation I wouldn't be on a discussion board.

I'm a selfish communicator in informal discussions. Consider me chastised. ;)

At this point you also have to consider that many dog breeds are specifically bred NOT to kill things. Retrievers, herders, and even hounds as we have learnt. Therefore, play to develop hunting skills is actually going to hurt them rather than help them.

Lost me again - did you mean to say killing skills, rather than the stated hunting skills?

There is a lot more to hunting than the kill, and those skills do need to be honed in play. The muscles, reflexes and decision making used in the hunt are developed in play.

Okay, assume that by "hunting skills" we mean the full suite: seek, stalk, chase, grab, kill. If we have a pup just practising chasing and grabbing, that's fine if they were a breed developed to use only those aspects of hunting skills. But if we have a puppy practising the full suite when we can't have him killing things, then perhaps we would not breed from that pup, right?

Muscles, reflexes and decision making are not just exclusive to hunting. For an animal that plays into adulthood and uses it as a social tool, these things are equally important to learn for that reason than for hunting. It's also important in contest with other dogs over resources.

[Diva]

Okay, assume that by "hunting skills" we mean the full suite: seek, stalk, chase, grab, kill. If we have a pup just practising chasing and grabbing, that's fine if they were a breed developed to use only those aspects of hunting skills. But if we have a puppy practising the full suite when we can't have him killing things, then perhaps we would not breed from that pup, right?

So the full suit doesn't include ripping apart? That's what I thought you were saying before, that prey drive included an intention to rip apart the prey. Which is different, of course, from the action of killing it. But to stop being a pedant for a moment, I agree with your general point. I doubt sheepdog trainers deliberately breed from dogs that kill sheep etc. I also doubt they make those decisions on pups, but I'm not sure what age range you meant by that and think maybe the whole breeding choice issue is a red herring in this thread?

I don't agree that it's not prey drive being demonstrated when the dogs stop somewhere along that seek, stalk, chase, grab, kill sequence. I think my sighthound courses out of a prey drive motivation. The body language is not play body language. The level of satisfaction she gets from it is deeper than from any form of play.

And as you have said (I think?) that prey drive can't be utilised for obedience training, only play drive , then you'd suggest I'm better of not going there with her?

I'm getting confused

Edited December 28, 2009 by Diva

[SkySoaringMagpie]

Okay, assume that by "hunting skills" we mean the full suite: seek, stalk, chase, grab, kill. If we have a pup just practising chasing and grabbing, that's fine if they were a breed developed to use only those aspects of hunting skills. But if we have a puppy practising the full suite when we can't have him killing things, then perhaps we would not breed from that pup, right?

Muscles, reflexes and decision making are not just exclusive to hunting. For an animal that plays into adulthood and uses it as a social tool, these things are equally important to learn for that reason than for hunting. It's also important in contest with other dogs over resources.

I'd rather include a dog who could hunt in a breeding program than I would a resource guarder. I'm not really sure what you're getting at here. When a puppy picks up a soft toy and shakes it hard, is that a problem?

[Erny]

What I am puzzled by, Corvus, is that there are hundreds of examples of dogs trained using prey drive who exhibit exemplary obedience and behaviour.

There are also many around who, with the use of training using prey drive, have been rehabilitated from other less desirable behaviour (including aggression to other animals; chasing; etc). Have you not included these in your research?

Yet, as a zoologist who has studied animal behaviour, you are arguing that training that utilises prey drive is dangerous because if prey drive is utilised then we are teaching our dogs to kill ???

Or are you arguing that all these dogs "trained in drive" that I've referred to above are not actually utilising prey drive, but are playing/in play drive?

I'm bringing this one in as I think that your "journey in communication" is steering away from your first conjecture here.

Edited December 28, 2009 by Erny

[PAX]

Corvus, I just think you need to meet more dogs.

[OSoSwift]

Out of interest - a dog clicker trained with food rewards or a ball thrown for them to chase and retrieve as a reward - Are they training in any sort of drive?

[huski]

Out of interest - a dog clicker trained with food rewards or a ball thrown for them to chase and retrieve as a reward - Are they training in any sort of drive?

It would depend on the dog and how you are using the reward, IMO. There is a difference between using a drive reward (i.e. throwing a ball after the dog has completed a command) and training in drive. In the former situation the dog may not be in drive when he's working but he is rewarded in drive (if that makes sense - it probably doesn't, lol) and that's two different things.

I use a marker word with Daisy because I'm too lazy to use a clicker, but I'm sure there are people out there who TID and also use clickers.

[OSoSwift]

Nope that makes sense, thanks.

Would you dog potentially go into to drive when training if you had there tug toy in plain sight and they knew when released was their reward?

Sorry for the questions just trying to understand how you get a dog into drive!

[huski]

Nope that makes sense, thanks.

Would you dog potentially go into to drive when training if you had there tug toy in plain sight and they knew when released was their reward?

Sorry for the questions just trying to understand how you get a dog into drive!

How you get a dog into drive depends on their level of drive and their threshold.

Daisy is pretty easy to get into drive, she's so food driven and her threshold to food is so low that she gets into drive quite quickly. I don't need to show her food to get her into drive, as she knows our drive command word means she'll be getting a food reward.

My prey driven dog will go into drive at the sight or sound of a squeaky toy, or his ball.

One way people maintain drive during trials is to release the dog to the reward once they've left the ring.

It's not black and white as what works can differ for each dog, depending on the training you've done with them and how you've built their drive. Once you know what signs to look for it's easy to see whether a dog is in drive or not.

ETA: don't know if it helps explaining the above at all, but here is a video of Daisy responding to the 'ready to work' command we use for training in drive. I haven't shown her any food, I don't have any food on me, but she still gives me a reasonable bit of drive in response to the command word (excuse my terrible handling and her crappy obedience - oh and the barking, she was SO excited, she rarely barks during training! LOL.).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHsjFxhrYu8

Edited December 28, 2009 by huski

[OSoSwift]

Okay thanks Huski, the whole idea of drive training intruiges me, but I have no idea how to recognise it, or how to train it.

ETA I have seen a couple of dogs training in drive posted on here, but haven't yet seen any on how to create it.

Edited December 28, 2009 by Rommi n Lewis