Does Desexing Really Make A Difference

[corvus]

I wouldn't bother, Cosmolo. Some folks are all bark and no bite.

[Black Bronson]

So BB, do you think trainers should be able to fix problems no matter what? Its not just about the dog. We are sometimes ask if we give guarantees- and we always say no. Its not like a plumber who comes in, fixes the plumbing and leaves and you leave the plumbing alone. There are inputs into the dog other than what the trainer does in a 1-2 hour session! A trainer can come in, influence the dog to a great degree in one session but changing people takes longer and limitations, prior learning and dynamics often have an effect.

I love e collars- but i cannot imagine using one in this situation.

It sounds like a good plan OP to have the dog crated when your partner leaves.

This is my perception Cosmolo: Your comments in regard to this thread primarily tells me that your are more focused upon an "escape route" if you can't correct the behaviour, and a trainer with this perception I would never hire or recommend as to me, it shows a trainers lack of confidence in their own ability. It wouldn't be the first time I have seen several trainers determine a dog should be PTS and for another trainer to correct the problem and save the dog's life. So what's that about???, in the opinion of some, the dog is untrainable, but another trainer has managed to rehabilitate the dog which amounts to some trainers possess a greater skill level than others in a given behavioural situation.

Should have a chat with some herding trainers that use E collars to teach excited dog's not to bite the sheep. Not a whole lot different than excited dogs biting the kids really............it's about setting the boundaries of what is permitted and what's not

Edited May 23, 2010 by Black Bronson

[stormie]

BB - strangely, I think I understand what you're saying and part of what you're saying, in terms of training methods, I actually agree with. I see it all the time with a trainer I know, who is only about 'positive' training. I have nothing against positive only, but it's interesting to see her deal with a situation which needs more, and unfortunately, she just can't. Rather than correcting the behaviour (and we're talking puppies here), it's just avoided. If two dogs are playing too rough and it gets a bit out of hand, one is just removed and distracted with food. Dogs that aren't food motivated or don't respond to the positive training by her, are classed as 'failures' with big problems, when really, I think these dogs could all do with a bit more correction to get the message across.

BUT, I don't think that's its as simple as telling the OP that this is all their dog needs, because no one other than her and her behaviourist have seen the dog in action. Perhaps it could have benefited from your style of training in the early days, but to suddenly start correcting the dog firmly, without having a professional there to show you how, could be dangerous. Because you would know, of course, that dogs don't just respond to the physicals, but also your general confidence. It doesn't matter how hard you correct, if you don't mean it with your presence, it means nothing. It's not about the pain or the strength of your correction.

[Black Bronson]

LM, is your dog crate trained? Could you possibly keep him in a crate overnight rather than the pen to ensure that this doesn't happen again?

Sounds like your daughter was just being a kid and trying to do the right thing by letting him outside, and yep it's hard to watch them all the time. A crate might help with that.

Yes, he is crate trained. He has his pen inside because it's easy to fold up out of the way, and his crate on the verandah. He sleeps in the pen, then at 5.00am or so my husband lets him out to toilet then locks him on the verandah. My daughter let him in going outside to get something. She is supposed to use the back door if he is locked up but 'forgot'.

The new arrangement is as you suggested - for my partner to crate him when he leaves.

BB- no, I don't believe it is aggressive snapping, (he has never left even a scratch or mark on anyone since he was tiny) more he is excited and reverts back to playful nipping/mouthing, which is still completely unacceptable and could land him and me in hot water if he does it to the wrong person. I'm also worried it could become something else as he learns that putting his teeth on people works. It does happen mostly in relation to his collar being held when he is already excited though. If he is not in a silly puppy bouncy mood he is very tolerant.

I am not very good at explaining things so understand you will not have a full picture of what is going on.

It sounds more like the dog is just being silly and directing mouthy behaviour towards the kids for a reaction as often young dogs do. In that instance, I wouldn't hesitate to use an aversive to set the boundaries of what the dog is allowed to bite and what it's not and people, kids, other animals are off limits. The dog IMO needs to learn that mouthing any living creature has an unpleasant consequence and as a result, the dog will learn quickly what it can and cannot do.

[Black Bronson]

BB - strangely, I think I understand what you're saying and part of what you're saying, in terms of training methods, I actually agree with. I see it all the time with a trainer I know, who is only about 'positive' training. I have nothing against positive only, but it's interesting to see her deal with a situation which needs more, and unfortunately, she just can't. Rather than correcting the behaviour (and we're talking puppies here), it's just avoided. If two dogs are playing too rough and it gets a bit out of hand, one is just removed and distracted with food. Dogs that aren't food motivated or don't respond to the positive training by her, are classed as 'failures' with big problems, when really, I think these dogs could all do with a bit more correction to get the message across.

BUT, I don't think that's its as simple as telling the OP that this is all their dog needs, because no one other than her and her behaviourist have seen the dog in action. Perhaps it could have benefited from your style of training in the early days, but to suddenly start correcting the dog firmly, without having a professional there to show you how, could be dangerous. Because you would know, of course, that dogs don't just respond to the physicals, but also your general confidence. It doesn't matter how hard you correct, if you don't mean it with your presence, it means nothing. It's not about the pain or the strength of your correction.

You are totally correct Stormie My reference is intended as a general overview from what has been provided by the OP and then what is needed from there I think, is a trainer to teach the OP how to administer the correction on the basis of that particular dog's requirements of course. It's difficult to teach a correction process correctly on an internet forum in words alone and a competent trainer is necessary for this process to be taught properly.

Purely positive trainers have a lot to offer in some areas and often I have seen "hard core" old school working dog trainers hiding a clicker in their pocket , but on the other hand, I have also seen purely positive trainers deem an out of control young dog especially working breeds, to be PTS as the behaviour is beyond that trainers ability to rehabilitate when the PP methods fail. IMHO, a good trainer is one that doesn't limit themselves to training in one method only and is prepared to use whatever methods or tools are required to rehabilitate the dog's behaviour.

[huski]

Can I just clarify that the trainer the OP is seeing is not a "purely positive" trainer by any means and would have no problem using an e-collar or prong or any other form of corrections if and when it is appropriate.

[Black Bronson]

Can I just clarify that the trainer the OP is seeing is not a "purely positive" trainer by any means and would have no problem using an e-collar or prong or any other form of corrections if and when it is appropriate.

It's obviously appropriate enough to assume what the trainer has done to date isn't working otherwise the OP would have no reason to post about it.............would she???. It's obvious the trainer is a friend of yours Huski..........how about separating friendship and training ability and you may just see a different perspective of the situation

[stormie]

Can I just clarify that the trainer the OP is seeing is not a "purely positive" trainer by any means and would have no problem using an e-collar or prong or any other form of corrections if and when it is appropriate.

It's obviously appropriate enough to assume what the trainer has done to date isn't working otherwise the OP would have no reason to post about it.............would she???. It's obvious the trainer is a friend of yours Huski..........how about separating friendship and training ability and you may just see a different perspective of the situation

I think that's maybe a bit of an over assumption. Again, I get where you're coming from because you would think if they're getting help, there'd be no need to ask a question. But I think you're forgetting that the original question was based around desexing, whether that aspect could be the cause of the behaviour, not that they were requesting help for the behaviour.

So to give my opinion to the OP's original post, I agree with what the majority have said in that desexing will not magically stop the behaviour, BUT, removing testosterone from the equation may make him an easier dog to train, with more focus going on you. I find that once entire dogs are desexed, their general behaviour, whilst still may remain the same, has just been stepped down a notch - ie its not so full on, which can help you to get control and work with them easier than you would if you were dealing with the raging hormones as well.

[Black Bronson]

Can I just clarify that the trainer the OP is seeing is not a "purely positive" trainer by any means and would have no problem using an e-collar or prong or any other form of corrections if and when it is appropriate.

It's obviously appropriate enough to assume what the trainer has done to date isn't working otherwise the OP would have no reason to post about it.............would she???. It's obvious the trainer is a friend of yours Huski..........how about separating friendship and training ability and you may just see a different perspective of the situation

I think that's maybe a bit of an over assumption. Again, I get where you're coming from because you would think if they're getting help, there'd be no need to ask a question. But I think you're forgetting that the original question was based around desexing, whether that aspect could be the cause of the behaviour, not that they were requesting help for the behaviour.

So to give my opinion to the OP's original post, I agree with what the majority have said in that desexing will not magically stop the behaviour, BUT, removing testosterone from the equation may make him an easier dog to train, with more focus going on you. I find that once entire dogs are desexed, their general behaviour, whilst still may remain the same, has just been stepped down a notch - ie its not so full on, which can help you to get control and work with them easier than you would if you were dealing with the raging hormones as well.

Some do however, get a bit carried away with the magical improvement perspective of desexing. I recall a trainer a few years ago who would "demand" a male be desexed before she would even look at any behavioural aspect which I thought was a bit left of centre There were a couple of fear aggressive GSD's I have come across in the past that were desexed to improve their behaviour which effectively made them worse. They were predictably stranger aggressive, hated everyone and after desexing became unpredictable. They would accept some strangers giving the impression they were calmer and more relaxed, then out of the blue the dog's would fire up suddenly at someone who had been in their company for the last hour. I think the testosterone in these dogs provided more stability in their fear response, than the post desexing behaviour

[huski]

Can I just clarify that the trainer the OP is seeing is not a "purely positive" trainer by any means and would have no problem using an e-collar or prong or any other form of corrections if and when it is appropriate.

It's obviously appropriate enough to assume what the trainer has done to date isn't working otherwise the OP would have no reason to post about it.............would she???. It's obvious the trainer is a friend of yours Huski..........how about separating friendship and training ability and you may just see a different perspective of the situation

Oh please, it's behaviour that has only just started showing itself again, the OP had yet to contact the trainer for advice when she posted this thread and wasn't asking for advice on the behaviour specifically but wondering how desexing would assist with it. She's said more than once that she's happy with the trainer. This isn't about friendship, but the fact that apart from the OP I am the only other person in this thread who has the first idea about the competency of the trainer. How you could possibly have vaguest idea on the knowledge or expertise of the trainer from tiny information the OP has given us is beyond me.

You've made many incorrect assumptions in this thread already BB, give up before you continue to make yourself look like even more of a condescending idiot

[corvus]

Rather than correcting the behaviour (and we're talking puppies here), it's just avoided. If two dogs are playing too rough and it gets a bit out of hand, one is just removed and distracted with food. Dogs that aren't food motivated or don't respond to the positive training by her, are classed as 'failures' with big problems, when really, I think these dogs could all do with a bit more correction to get the message across.

It's sad and a little bit frustrating to hear stories like that. I have quite a pushy, outspoken little dog that is 11 months old and I could count the times I've physically punished him on one hand. I certainly did "avoid" problems that I felt were likely to get me told off by a certain stroppy puppy. It's just working under threshold. Avoiding triggering a dog is fine as long as you work on the problem through more subtle means. I made the conscious decision when Erik was 9 weeks old that he wasn't a dog I would want to physically correct directly because he reminded me strongly of the 12 week old puppy that tried to have me when I did that. It's just not very smart with some dogs. But that doesn't mean your only other option is to let them do what they please. You just have to teach them to want to do what you want them to do. I find that with Erik at least, he has such drive to "win" that it's generally remarkably easy to gain his cooperation if you frame the situation as something he can win by doing what you want him to.

[Black Bronson]

Can I just clarify that the trainer the OP is seeing is not a "purely positive" trainer by any means and would have no problem using an e-collar or prong or any other form of corrections if and when it is appropriate.

It's obviously appropriate enough to assume what the trainer has done to date isn't working otherwise the OP would have no reason to post about it.............would she???. It's obvious the trainer is a friend of yours Huski..........how about separating friendship and training ability and you may just see a different perspective of the situation

Oh please, it's behaviour that has only just started showing itself again, the OP had yet to contact the trainer for advice when she posted this thread and wasn't asking for advice on the behaviour specifically but wondering how desexing would assist with it. She's said more than once that she's happy with the trainer. This isn't about friendship, but the fact that apart from the OP I am the only other person in this thread who has the first idea about the competency of the trainer. How you could possibly have vaguest idea on the knowledge or expertise of the trainer from tiny information the OP has given us is beyond me.

You've made many incorrect assumptions in this thread already BB, give up before you continue to make yourself look like even more of a condescending idiot

Huski, behaviours that resurface do so because the appropriate behaviour isn't conditioned properly, or the unwanted behaviour hasn't been dealt with appropriately and the dog is confused where the boundaries are. It's either innapropriate training or the owner/handler failing to carry out the trainers instructions correctly. Bottom line is, it's not the fault of the dog.

You may believe that the training process of this dog is correct............I believe it's incorrect and could be handled more effectively using alternative methods. If the next step towards correcting the behaviour is desexing prior to corrections, E collars and aversives being administered which I believe is the better approach for this behaviour, I seriously question the trainer's competence I am sorry to say. If the OP is happy with her trainer and the way things are progressing with the dog's rehabilitation as I mentioned previously, she wouldn't be posting about it.

Maybe I am an idiot thinking that only unhappy dog owners post about behavioural issues they havn't fixed

[Cosmolo]

BB- you're way off the mark in terms of what kind of trainer I am! My whole point in this thread is that its not just about the dog- its about the owner, the family- the complete picture.

Physical aversives should not be recommended when an owner is unable to apply them, unwilling to apply them or would apply them inconsistently. The trainer who has seen the dog in this case has made that call and i don't believe second guessing them- given that they have seen the dog AND that they are NOT a 'purely positive trainer' (not open to correct use of aversives) - is the right thing to do.

BB- "Huski, behaviours that resurface do so because the appropriate behaviour isn't conditioned properly, or the unwanted behaviour hasn't been dealt with appropriately and the dog is confused where the boundaries are. It's either innapropriate training or the owner/handler failing to carry out the trainers instructions correctly. Bottom line is, it's not the fault of the dog. "

This is my whole point- you are assuming that every owner can be clear and consistent with the use of aversives and my experience tells me that just isn't true. Doesn't mean they shouldn't be used. Does mean care should be taken- especially when you advocate things like choking a dog out on a public forum when you don't know the dog OR the handler. EDIT to clarify- i don't think choking a dog out is EVER appropriate but thats not the point i am making here.

ETA- i have used and continue to use e collars and so don't feel the need to go and talk to a herding trainer about how an e collar works. I have recommended a dog pts ONCE in my career and resent the insinuation that i am an 'escape route trainer' who would recommend this on a regular basis. You sure do make alot of assumptions BB!

Edited May 23, 2010 by Cosmolo

[corvus]

Choking a dog out is downright cruel. It is abuse, plain and simple. I would run a mile if a trainer I was talking to even mentioned it as a valid training method, and then I'd call the RSPCA and notify them. Choking an animal is the worst thing you can do to them. It engages the panic mode. There is no place for the panic mode in training or behaviour modifictation. I often say about my hare that the only thing he can learn by going into panic mode is to go into panic mode the moment he perceives anything remotely related to the last time he went into panic mode. And maybe to be on high alert more often. It's so very damaging to anything I might be trying to achieve with an animal.

[Black Bronson]

BB- you're way off the mark in terms of what kind of trainer I am! My whole point in this thread is that its not just about the dog- its about the owner, the family- the complete picture.

Physical aversives should not be recommended when an owner is unable to apply them, unwilling to apply them or would apply them inconsistently. The trainer who has seen the dog in this case has made that call and i don't believe second guessing them- given that they have seen the dog AND that they are NOT a 'purely positive trainer' (not open to correct use of aversives) - is the right thing to do.

BB- "Huski, behaviours that resurface do so because the appropriate behaviour isn't conditioned properly, or the unwanted behaviour hasn't been dealt with appropriately and the dog is confused where the boundaries are. It's either innapropriate training or the owner/handler failing to carry out the trainers instructions correctly. Bottom line is, it's not the fault of the dog. "

This is my whole point- you are assuming that every owner can be clear and consistent with the use of aversives and my experience tells me that just isn't true. Doesn't mean they shouldn't be used. Does mean care should be taken- especially when you advocate things like choking a dog out on a public forum when you don't know the dog OR the handler.

ETA- i have used and continue to use e collars and so don't feel the need to go and talk to a herding trainer about how an e collar works. I have recommended a dog pts ONCE in my career and resent the insinuation that i am an 'escape route trainer' who would recommend this on a regular basis. You sure do make alot of assumptions BB!

Cosmolo, that's where I disagree...........it's about the dog first and foremost not the whole picture as the priority and is the reason I prefer "old school" trainers who have the experience and ability to make dog owners do as they are told. I know some owners have certain things they like and dislike, but a good trainer when someone prefers not to use a check chain for example is to educate the owner and convince them that the check chain is the best tool for the application and NOT recommend a Halti as a consolation to suit the owners misunderstandings which happens too often. Training is more about teaching owners how to train their dog with the most appropriate tools and methods for the application as you are no doubt well aware. A dog owner hires a trainer because they don't have the expertise to train the dog themselves, and the trainers job is to provide the education required that is best suitable to reshape the dog's behaviour.

It's not about formulating a compromised system to suit an owner who are unwilling to apply the required techniques, if they know how it should be done, why hire a trainer in the first place

[Cosmolo]

So you don't think an owner's ability/ willingness etc should influence the training done with a dog? I used to think that too- but my experience leads me to disagree with you on that one.

[Black Bronson]

Choking a dog out is downright cruel. It is abuse, plain and simple. I would run a mile if a trainer I was talking to even mentioned it as a valid training method, and then I'd call the RSPCA and notify them. Choking an animal is the worst thing you can do to them. It engages the panic mode. There is no place for the panic mode in training or behaviour modifictation. I often say about my hare that the only thing he can learn by going into panic mode is to go into panic mode the moment he perceives anything remotely related to the last time he went into panic mode. And maybe to be on high alert more often. It's so very damaging to anything I might be trying to achieve with an animal.

That's how the people think who PTS when there perceived humane training systems fail. You wouldn't find too many police K9's that haven't had a choke out or two just for the record

Edited May 23, 2010 by Black Bronson

[Black Bronson]

So you don't think an owner's ability/ willingness etc should influence the training done with a dog? I used to think that too- but my experience leads me to disagree with you on that one.

It's like the choker, some owners don't like them............ok, if the dog in the opinion of the trainer is best trained with the use of the choker (check chain), the trainers job is to educate and convince the owner why the choker should be used for their dog, and re-educate them as to why. I wouldn't respect a trainer that just said, "we won't use a choker then", because at the end of the day when the re-training fails with use of inadequate tools, the owner will slag the trainer off anyway when the dog's behaviour isn't corrected. As a trainer, if you have to compromise the dog's rehabilitation to suit the owner's desires of what methods and tools should be used..............is the job really worth doing in that case???.

[Luvmy4]

sorry if it's been asked before what breed is Banjo? what age did you get him? just wondering with they way he acts to the kids and the trainer not includiing them seeing his a "family dog" are yous showing him? (just asking i've never had show dogs) I find it wierd kids being excluded if hes a family dog. but i've always trained my own dogs

Edited May 23, 2010 by Luvmy4

[Lucy's mama]

BB_ As much as I would love to be 100% consistent in what the trainer has asked me to do, I am a human who is learning along with the dog. My older dog and other dogs I have owned have not required this level of time and training. I am not 100% all the time. I forget things, make handling mistakes, sometimes have poor timing, get distracted blah blah blah. Only time will improve that. The trainer can't magically give me perfect handling skills.

Luvmy4 - He is an Australian Shepherd. The kids can be and are included at home. I will try take some video of him sitting, dropping and staying for my 4 year old after work this afternoon. It's very cute!

The club we go to for obedience does not permit children under 12. He is a pet, not a show dog. The trainer does not actually do all the training. She observes, handles him for a short time, shows me how to carry out the methods she recomends, and teaches me what to do and why.

Anyway, back to the original purpose of the thread. I have tentativly booked him in to be desexed next Tuesday. I want to see trainer before I confirm because I respect her oppinion. I am still not sure desexing before maturity is a good thing. I'm also not sure he is testosterone driven as he still squats to toilet and doesn't mark everywhere. But my desexed girl does mark so I'm not sure that is even indicative of hormonal surges. And it could stop things getting worse when testosterone does kick in?