What Is "effective Socialisation"?

[RallyValley]

There is also people socialisation. Where do people draw the line there? Do you have isolation from people to?

For me personally as I want dogs for the show ring my dog needs to accept strangers coing up, checking thier teeth, running thier hands all over there body, standing over them. Often these strangers wear funny hats or flappy jackets, some even come from different countries. That takes lots of people expireince.

Also how do you diplomatically ask someone if thier dog/child is really the right kind for your pup to socialise with?

PF would you say a Royal Show is a good socialization expirence for a confidant show pup? It would defianetly be a chance to meet many, many people

[poodlefan]

PF would you say a Royal Show is a good socialization expirence for a confidant show pup? It would defianetly be a chance to meet many, many people

Provided you closely supervised it AND made sure the pup didn't get over faced or tired, yep.

The only qualifier I put on socialising at shows is that, unlike some breeders seem to think, its not "socialising" if the pup never leaves the pen. IMO you need to have the pup on its own part of the time and it needs not just to see, but to do things in that environment.

[RallyValley]

PF would you say a Royal Show is a good socialization expirence for a confidant show pup? It would defianetly be a chance to meet many, many people

Provided you closely supervised it AND made sure the pup didn't get over faced or tired, yep.

The only qualifier I put on socialising at shows is that, unlike some breeders seem to think, its not "socialising" if the pup never leaves the pen. IMO you need to have the pup on its own part of the time and it needs not just to see, but to do things in that environment.

Awesome advice Just read that back and can't believe my typos... it is before 7am here!

Also for socialization what do people think of taking the puppy to the sport/s it will compete in one day and playing/training at a distance setting the pup up to succeed away from the action? Being crated on the sidelines at these events? (Something I did with the last pup)

How many children should a pup meet? Males and females? All ages?

How would you find positive socialization expirences with resources you don't have access to? I.e you don't know anyone with a beard or dark skinned?

Edited May 5, 2011 by RallyValley

[poodlefan]

Also for socialization what do people think of taking the puppy to the sport/s it will compete in one day and playing/training at a distance setting the pup up to succed away from the action? Being crated on the sidelines at these events? (Something I did with the last pup)How many children should a pup meet? Males and females? All ages?

How would you find positive socialization expirences with resources you don't have access to? I.e you don't know anyone with a beard or dark skinned?

Go to most agility and obedience trials and that's exactly what you'll find around here.. the next generation of sports dogs being gushed over by clucky dog tragics!!

You can't buy socialisation experiences as good as you can get at shows and trials IMO.

[corvus]

Corvus:

I think the very notion that a dog can have too high a value for its own species is ludicrous.

I can think of any number of breeds where that would be an issue. A dog cannot defend livestock or property, hunt or work in the company of other dogs unless it can focus on the task, not the company its in. Imagine if guide dogs had such a value on other dogs

Who says there is such a thing as a dog that has such high value for other dogs that it can't focus on a task it was bred for in their presence? It's kind of a circular argument, isn't it? If it occurred, they wouldn't have been bred from. If it occurs, they aren't suitable for the task they were bred for and shouldn't be used for it. There are always duds when it comes to working ability. Does that mean the duds are wired wrong? Or does it mean they just don't meet the specific needs of the people that oversaw their breeding?

There is always going to be loads of variation. Dogs that live for a good doggy game and dogs that couldn't care less about other dogs. No one ever seems to argue that their dog doesn't have enough value for other dogs. They defend their dog's character to the very end. And I will defend my dogs' characters to the very end. They are very friendly, sociable dogs. They have been free to develop that part of their nature and the result is they love mixing with other dogs. Good for them. As far as I'm concerned, they should have every opportunity to learn how to be a dog, and if in the process they come to love mixing with other dogs, then that's fine by me. They are dogs, after all. I sure like to mix with humans.

As has been discussed anywhere, its damn hard to train a dog in any multi-dog environment if the dog values the other dogs more highly than any motivator the handler can provide. I see this regularly.

But is it a problem with the reinforcers, or a problem with the way a dog has been handled? When Kivi was a pup he would absolutely choose playing with dogs over anything we could possibly offer him, and did so on many embarrassing occasions. But as we all know, it's not a matter of motivator pitted against motivator. It's a matter of conditioning. Kivi goes to the dog park and spends at least half the time glued to someone's leg offering a heel often while Erik is hooning around playing with another dog. He doesn't do that because he values the food we give him over mixing with the other dogs. He does it because it's a habit we have spent 3 years reinforcing in that environment.

Much of what we've done with selective breeding has modified the dog's pack instincts. If we hadn't, we'd have a lot of trouble keeping dogs singly - and for some breeds I'd argue this is still the case.

I agree, and it goes both ways.

[Cosmolo]

Neutralisation is not for me and impractical for 90% of my clients- they would hate it and wouldn't do it if i tried to get them to. For those who neutralise but allow their dogs to interact with other dogs at home or safe and appropriate dogs they know- sorry but thats not really the definition of neutralisation. Neutral means neutral. Positive values even when low are still positive values, not neutral. I think blurring these lines becomes very confusing when some of us are actually talking about the same thing.

My dogs run together, play together, are a pack together and i LOVE it- if i didn't like this i would not have 5 dogs. I do understand why people like seeing happy dogs interacting together. I love the body language, i love the subtleties, i love the variation between dogs, from play session to play session and play combination to play combination. I love watching them learn from each other- acceptable behaviour, unacceptable behaviour, care giving behaviour, care seeking behaviour. There is nothing quite like it.

Also, there are ALOT of generalisations made about all off lead areas- i think that sometimes people use a handful of off lead areas in a particular area or state as the reference point for all off lead parks and there is so much variation. Facilities, demographics etc are important considerations.

And i agree with Corvus about conditioning- i believe it gives you the option to have the best of both worlds.

[megan_]

I agree with Cosmolo. I love watching my boy play with other dogs, and he loves it too. I can call him and he'll come running. I can go to the middle of the dog park and get him to do obedience exercises and he'll focus on me. Having a focused dog and a dog that enjoys other dogs isn't mutually exclusive IMO. I'm lucky in that he is naturally focused on me and likes to please me, but I've also done a fair bit of focus work.

He would live a sad little life if it was just him and me (even though he is walked twice a day and does agility twice a week). I'm away from home for 12 hours a day. When I play with him (which I often do) I can't run, dodge, jump etc like another dog can.

Re: dog parks, the dog parks often described by some sound like terrible places. My local off leash area is a shared space with joggers, bike riders, kids kicking the footy and dogs running around. 99.9% of the time it is a really enjoyable experience. There are a few dogs that I don't like and I'll leave if they come into the park but most dogs are very well behaved (they have to be given that it is a shared space. A dog that jumped on kids wouldn't last long in our park).

ETA: My boy gets an off leash run every day and plays with other dogs at least 5 times a week. I think this has helped him not value other dogs too highly - it isn's a special treat for him to have a lot of fun running around, it is an every day occurance.

If you're going to take a puppy to a "dog park" I recommend going without your puppy a few times and observing dogs and owners. Don't let your pup play with large groups of dogs (typically in the middle of the ground), don't let your pup play with owners who aren't actively focused and close to their dogs and stay on the perimeter. Don't go at peak time and don't take your dog to the park on the first sunny day after a period of bad weather - it will be swamped.

Edited May 6, 2011 by megan_

[Inevitablue]

The level of training you do should override all other things which offer value to the dog. Agree with JoeK and Huski that a dog not distracted by outside influences is faster to train. But the way I see other dogs is that it's just one of many activities I allow my dogs to do. I take my dog to a park and she gets free time, she might choose to interact with other dogs, chase a tennis ball or follow smells. It's her downtime.

Most Beagles I meet place higher value on satisfying their olfactory sense then interacting with other dogs. I have watched your videos Huski and you have done what people 10 years ago said was impossible but I'm sure she still loves using her nose. You have trained her that when you offer work, it beats everything else. That's what I am working towards, that when I offer the chance to do training it beats anything else that life could offer at that time, but when nothing is offered, and she is given her release word then she can amuse herself (within reason of course) and that might be interacting with her own kind.

Sorry this topic has strayed more towards raising competition dogs.

[JoeK]

Socialising the dog present a risk on the working folk for the value on other dogs is why most of high level sporting dogs are trained and kenneled to prevent the possibility and causing to train around the problem. It dedends on the dog, some have no problems with the socialise and maintaining focus on the handler, some dogs once they find value on another dog is very hard to brakeing the pleasure. Is true the way the socialising is done for the dog to have high value for other dogs like let them having a free for all in the dog park is what causing the high value is not foundation to train handler focus.

Neutralising a dog is NOT about putting it in a kennel and never socialising it or exposing it to anything new. It's about socialising the dog extensively like you should but socialising it to things and assigning those things with a neutral or low positive value.

I think neutralisation is a bit sad. It's basically saying that the dog doesn't get to have any reinforcement from it's environment (ie having fun) and that all reinforcement comes from the owner. I guess the dog doesn't know any better because it has never experienced anything different, but I think it's sad. Dogs should be allowed to be dogs, and have fun and play with other dogs. They are not robots that hang around for our pleasure.

You can socialise your dog and let them have fun and play with other people and dogs and still have a dog that is highly focused on the handler. It's all in the training.

And if socialising means they are slightly less focused on me (which I am not convinced of) then I would rather accept that and let them have fun than taking away their fun for the sake of getting them to focus entirely on me.

Like I said above - IMO neutralising a dog is not about not socialising it. It's all about the value you attach to new experiences when you do.

I don't understand the desire to have dogs that find playing with other dogs highly rewarding. Daisy is naturally a dog that has low interest in other dogs, she rarely wants to play with them, and when she does she never sees play with other dogs as more valuable or fun than what I can offer. I don't see how that is sad, she's "allowed" to be a dog, she gets to do far more exciting and fun things than the average dog, she's certainly not unhappy.

The average pet owner may want something different from their dog but I don't understand why it's so important that your dog plays with other dogs day in day out. We have far more fun and exciting things to do

The dog attaching the value to things from the genes is not from the handler. If the dog not liking the tug of war game or chasing the ball for the retrieve is in the dog from birth. The handler in training can improve or lessening value a little bit but most of value is natural for the dog. Some dog dont having much value for other dogs and some dogs have big value for other dogs as natural instinct, so is depends alot on the dog genes is born with.

Many of the high level sporting dog for the handler goal for winning world title are not socialised at all is true. The dog is raised on work training for the handler to being the world of the dog. Many of this dogs no one but the handler has ever touched or feeding the dog is how they are raised and most of this raising is in the dogs that win for raising a dog of high level ability. The dog is isolotated and neutralised to everythng but the handler and the game handler play with dog in the training and the dog value in training for nothing but the equipment for play like the bite sleeve and to fight the decoy who try to stop him having reward of the sleeve is how the raising is done.

The neutral raising on the sporting dog which is also pet dog too is socialising for exposure to everything possible, but restricting interacting from people and other dogs. You dont wanting people to focus on your dog, you wanting people to walking around near the dog, brushing legs on your dog but ignoring your dog and your dog ignoring them. Is when people stop and focus on your dog and want to pat him or feed him or play with him, the neutral socialise is going wrong and the dog learning people have a value, same with with other dogs. Is why some people using training vest to stop people trying to interact with your dog in the training of neutral value.

Joe

[wuffles]

Just a little anecdote... at our latest obedience trial on the weekend, we were hanging around waiting for the presentations. My girl had a great play with the winner of the Open class. The dog that placed first in Utility and gained her Obedience Champion title had a great game with an Open dog. None of these dogs had any issues with handler focus in the ring.

[Inevitablue]

The neutral raising on the sporting dog which is also pet dog too is socialising for exposure to everything possible, but restricting interacting from people and other dogs. You dont wanting people to focus on your dog, you wanting people to walking around near the dog, brushing legs on your dog but ignoring your dog and your dog ignoring them. Is when people stop and focus on your dog and want to pat him or feed him or play with him, the neutral socialise is going wrong and the dog learning people have a value, same with with other dogs. Is why some people using training vest to stop people trying to interact with your dog in the training of neutral value.

Joe

Just what concerns me Joe is that the owner of that dog now has to micromanage that dog for over a decade, making sure that a child never runs up and touches the dog on the head, keeping every offlead dog away from it, making sure the dog never needs to be handled abruptly by strangers etc etc. The dog has never been exposed to those things and therefore is an unknown quantity. Yes, no dog is 100% solid, but at least the dogs which have been correctly exposed and taught to have appropriate responses are a bit safer bet.

[JoeK]

I don't know Huski, you have more than one dog (you lucky thing!), so Daisy is constantly able to interact with them if she chooses. I think it is beneficial for dogs to interact with their own species on a regular basis. They are after all, a pack species. I personally get a lot of enjoyment from seeing my dog playing happily with another dog and other dogs give my dog the type of exercise and play I could never give her. I intend to add another dog to my house in the future.

I often find dogs from multi-dog households are much more relaxed with other dogs and do not have a high value for them, probably from living with another dog all the time.

Mindy is a labrador, a breed known to have a high value for other dogs, but because she sees and plays with other dogs every day (despite not living with one) she generally does not behave in a stupid manner around them, doesn't drag me toward them and is happy to be called away from them (calling her off a scent or a rabbit chase is a different matter though. We are working on it ).

She was one of the few very handler focussed dogs (apart from one other puppy who lived with another dog) at her guide dog sessions and was capable of working and focussing for the handler in very close proximity of around 20-30 other labrador puppies (who were going nuts!) which I think was pretty good.

We are starting agility this weekend and I hope she can behave herself there too! We will see...

Corvus- Erik wouldn't like Mindy then lol She loves the bitey face game!

Sorry I disagree that your Mindy girl behaves because she sees dogs and plays everyday. Her behaving come from her genes you see as a puppy she could focus around other puppy from beginning and her focus is born in the dog. Is not about the playing with other dogs causing this, she have the focus value already born in her genes, so saying your dog working the way she is doing because of the soclialise is wrong. She working like that becuase she is a good dog naturally and adpating easy for what you need her doing.

Joe

Joe

[JoeK]

The neutral raising on the sporting dog which is also pet dog too is socialising for exposure to everything possible, but restricting interacting from people and other dogs. You dont wanting people to focus on your dog, you wanting people to walking around near the dog, brushing legs on your dog but ignoring your dog and your dog ignoring them. Is when people stop and focus on your dog and want to pat him or feed him or play with him, the neutral socialise is going wrong and the dog learning people have a value, same with with other dogs. Is why some people using training vest to stop people trying to interact with your dog in the training of neutral value.

Joe

Just what concerns me Joe is that the owner of that dog now has to micromanage that dog for over a decade, making sure that a child never runs up and touches the dog on the head, keeping every offlead dog away from it, making sure the dog never needs to be handled abruptly by strangers etc etc. The dog has never been exposed to those things and therefore is an unknown quantity. Yes, no dog is 100% solid, but at least the dogs which have been correctly exposed and taught to have appropriate responses are a bit safer bet.

I talk on the raising and training on the dog to get him where he needing to be first, and when we achieving this is when we can introducing other things. By that time, the handler has pretty good knowledge on the dog and know how to control and focus the dog, so he can take the social skill further then. Is difficult to incorporating so many things together in the raising and training to end up with good dog and most of the pets is too hard for the owners and they giving up and accept the dog is not much chop for the controlling of him or her becuase my opinion most do it wrong in the first place and causing their own lacking of focus and control.

If the dog is temperament weak on nerve or sharp and defensive drive, you can tame the beast, but you cant trust him like child interaction so micromanage on this dog is needed for life. If the dog is strong on nerve and lay back on the tempermanet with no reactive from fear, this dogs is the best pets for interaction and social skills developing I am thinking. A lot of this depending on the actual dog and what genes he brings to the table for pet suitability and ability to learning the social skills nicely, is not all about how the socialise is done on raising is my point becuase some dogs of the wrong genes for pet adapting doesnt matter what is done in the socialise or training, anti social temperament is born in the dog. Is not about how the dog is socialised and raised to have nice dog, is about more important to buy puppy from a breeding that produce the nice genes for a pet dog.

What I meaning is my opinion is wrong to thinking that if you buy a puppy and you do this A B and C on the socialise formular will garantee nice dog in the end, becuase for A B and C to be working for plan, the dog needs the genes for this to be working.

Joe

Edited May 6, 2011 by JoeK

[Kitteh]

Guys , can we please get this back on topic? I'm sure there's a lot of puppy owners out there, like myself, who just want some info,guidance and maybe answers to questions they may have in regards to socialisation.

Thanks

[Inevitablue]

Kitten, while it all seems like it's a debate, there is relevance to every puppy owner.

Do you chose a puppy school that allows for unchecked puppy rumbling, or one that teaches the puppy to ignore other dogs and just focus on you?

[wuffles]

Kitten, while it all seems like it's a debate, there is relevance to every puppy owner.

Do you chose a puppy school that allows for unchecked puppy rumbling, or one that teaches the puppy to ignore other dogs and just focus on you?

Or somewhere in between?

[Inevitablue]

Or somewhere in between?

Fully agree, that's been the theme of what I like. It's the type of questions that new puppy owners need to explore.

[Kitteh]

Oh I understand it's a discussion, but it's veering off into other territory, ie: whether someone wants their dog to be neutral and what neutral really means etc.

Questions like the one you've posed seem much more relevant.

So, to answer your question, no, I don't want my puppy class to be an uncontrolled free for all, that's why I chose train a pup here in perth.

I think puppy class is a chance for the dog to learn how to play with other dogs, but most importantly, it should give the owners some insight into dog behaviour. ie: what to look out for during play, what's acceptable, what isn't, grooming, handling etc.

[huski]

Neutralisation is not for me and impractical for 90% of my clients- they would hate it and wouldn't do it if i tried to get them to. For those who neutralise but allow their dogs to interact with other dogs at home or safe and appropriate dogs they know- sorry but thats not really the definition of neutralisation. Neutral means neutral. Positive values even when low are still positive values, not neutral. I think blurring these lines becomes very confusing when some of us are actually talking about the same thing.

My dogs run together, play together, are a pack together and i LOVE it- if i didn't like this i would not have 5 dogs. I do understand why people like seeing happy dogs interacting together. I love the body language, i love the subtleties, i love the variation between dogs, from play session to play session and play combination to play combination. I love watching them learn from each other- acceptable behaviour, unacceptable behaviour, care giving behaviour, care seeking behaviour. There is nothing quite like it. ;)

Maybe it stems from having dogs that don't place high values on play but I still don't see why it's considered imperative or necessary that a dog finds play with other dogs as highly valuable and rewarding

I am more than happy for my dogs to interact with and even play with others when I deem it appropriate but I don't understand why someone would want a dog that wants that all the time.

And re neutralisation - just explaining it the way it has been explained to me :D

Most Beagles I meet place higher value on satisfying their olfactory sense then interacting with other dogs. I have watched your videos Huski and you have done what people 10 years ago said was impossible but I'm sure she still loves using her nose. You have trained her that when you offer work, it beats everything else. That's what I am working towards, that when I offer the chance to do training it beats anything else that life could offer at that time, but when nothing is offered, and she is given her release word then she can amuse herself (within reason of course) and that might be interacting with her own kind.

Thanks for your compliment ;) and I agree, I would hope most beagles would find scenting the most or one of the most rewarding things they can do, that is what they have been bred for and I hate to see a scent hound with a low scent drive.

I don't want to sound like my dogs never have down time or are never allowed to "be dogs" because that is very far from the truth, but ultimately I can't see myself owning a puppy and seeking to teach it that play with other dogs is highly rewarding. It makes more work later on when you have to train them to ignore what you have socialised them to see as highly valuable.

Just what concerns me Joe is that the owner of that dog now has to micromanage that dog for over a decade, making sure that a child never runs up and touches the dog on the head, keeping every offlead dog away from it, making sure the dog never needs to be handled abruptly by strangers etc etc. The dog has never been exposed to those things and therefore is an unknown quantity. Yes, no dog is 100% solid, but at least the dogs which have been correctly exposed and taught to have appropriate responses are a bit safer bet.

Just on this Jakemon, I think it's really important to note that neutralisation and socialisation are not mutually exclusive. A dog that you are 'neutralising' is not a dog that is never exposed to things outside of the handler. It's a dog that is taught that valuable things like attention and rewards from other people and other dogs etc is never going to be as satisfying as what the handler can provide. For eg - my next pup will be exposed to LOADS of people but she will be taught that they are pretty boring and never as exciting or rewarding as I am.

[Staranais]

I was very careful to try to make sure my dog didn't have an overly high value for other dogs (or for chasing stock or wildlife) when raising her. She was not allowed to play with exciting dogs when she was growing up, although she met a fair amount of boring ones.

However, now that she's an adult she plays with other dogs reasonably regularly, she meets people all the time, & she's my pet as well as my working buddy.

Ideally, I would not want a working dog that had to be kept kenneled in order to work effectively. If a dog needs to be permanently isolated in order to be persuaded to work, I see that as a flaw in the dog. Perhaps it is just not suitable for the job you are trying to make it do.