Learning Drives, Could Do With Some Help

[JulesP]

I wouldn't be grabbing a dog's collar when there is a history of re-directed aggression. Good way to get chomped.

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

I wouldn't be grabbing a dog's collar when there is a history of re-directed aggression. Good way to get chomped.

I would.

But I would train collar grab as a game first.

I would also stop both dogs being out there doing this together - ie one dog at a time.

And I might get some welding gloves for the first time.

Or they might be spending a lot of time practicing being calm along the fence - on lead.

[sporti]

I wouldn't be grabbing a dog's collar when there is a history of re-directed aggression. Good way to get chomped.

I would.

But I would train collar grab as a game first.

I would also stop both dogs being out there doing this together - ie one dog at a time.

And I might get some welding gloves for the first time.

Or they might be spending a lot of time practicing being calm along the fence - on lead.

Again, they dont go off, if im there. So i wont be able to capture the behaviour, to collar grab. My dogs dont rebound onto me. Ever. The GSD in a hyped up state, will rebound onto the rottie (occasionally), who either, ignores him, or lays on him to quieten him down, doing her own, its yer choice?

Works for them. ie. i am not worried about a fight ensuing. As the GSD will back down fast. He's smart and submissive to her.

I would never separate them. As the reason their quality of life is so high, is that they have pack members to interact with all the time. I like my world like this.

There is no fighting, the pack structure is 7yrs old now. I think when they were younger, they had a few spats, and probably every 2 yrs, or when one is ill, we'll see another spat. All perfectly normal for dogs.

I realise im sounding like a owner that bleats "i cant do that because", but in this case, there is no behaviour to change, when i am around. I am aware that there is when i am not. And rarely, but it can happen, the GSD will rebound onto the rottie. But these dogs have been living together for 7yrs now, and the GSD is nearly 10. They have their own way of sorting out disagreements, that is safe. Follows dog etiquette, and I dont interfere therefore. Wee these fighters, id be more than willing to separate them. But they are not. So its not necessary. IMO

The collar grab 'its your choice' IS a method i been using for past 20yrs or so, on many dogs ive owned in that time. I love it. SImple, easy to grasp for most thinking dogs. Both current dogs understand this game to the eenth degree. They are 7 and 9. and trained in drive using Triangle of temptation. Which is the most singularly comprehensive and extensive "its your choice" style of training without conflict there is.

But the one thing "its your choice" training method requires, is the undesired behaviour, to occur in front of the trainer. Which is not occurring here.

[The Spotted Devil]

But the one thing "its your choice" training method requires, is the undesired behaviour, to occur in front of the trainer. Which is not occurring here.

^ Actually that's the beauty of IYC - trained correctly it works beautifully out of sight and at great distances. But yes there's a lot of layers in there. I am finding it easier and quicker to apply with great success as I understand it better.

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

Sporti

Are you saying that your dogs will not fence run if you're home. No matter what goes by the fence?

What if you're home and you shut yourself somewhere separate to the dogs (but where you could still see or hear if they fence run).

There can be a problem with back chaining... where if you call a naughty dog, the dog may act naughty to get the reward of being called (or getting attention).

If you've yelled at the dogs for fence running - you haven't given them the choice point that you need to get this to work when you're not there/paying attention. There must be no cue or call. Just grab.

I would not trust my dog to sort out another dog using "dog etiquette". Dogs do not always make decisions in their own best interest - consider the SWF that charges barking up to a big dog. Younger dogs will usually defer to older dogs. But at some point some younger dogs decide the older dog needs to be deposed and will fight way beyond what is safe for either dog. I don't know your dogs, maybe that won't happen. But I have seen it happen and I don't assume all dogs will act appropriately.

Triangle of temptation is sort of it's yer choice, but I got the same behaviour without causing my dog so much physical and mental trauma that TOT can cause. I think there is something different that goes on in a puppy's head when it's physically restrained from its dinner in a way that can be painful and invokes something called the "opposition reflex" than when you just stop dinner prep or fail to put the dinner bowl down (or move it back up) if the butt lifts off or barking starts.

Edited April 24, 2016 by Mrs Rusty Bucket

[sporti]

Sporti

Are you saying that your dogs will not fence run if you're home. No matter what goes by the fence?

What if you're home and you shut yourself somewhere separate to the dogs (but where you could still see or hear if they fence run).

There can be a problem with back chaining... where if you call a naughty dog, the dog may act naughty to get the reward of being called (or getting attention).

If you've yelled at the dogs for fence running - you haven't given them the choice point that you need to get this to work when you're not there/paying attention. There must be no cue or call. Just grab.

I would not trust my dog to sort out another dog using "dog etiquette". Dogs do not always make decisions in their own best interest - consider the SWF that charges barking up to a big dog. Younger dogs will usually defer to older dogs. But at some point some younger dogs decide the older dog needs to be deposed and will fight way beyond what is safe for either dog. I don't know your dogs, maybe that won't happen. But I have seen it happen and I don't assume all dogs will act appropriately.

Triangle of temptation is sort of it's yer choice, but I got the same behaviour without causing my dog so much physical and mental trauma that TOT can cause. I think there is something different that goes on in a puppy's head when it's physically restrained from its dinner in a way that can be painful and invokes something called the "opposition reflex" than when you just stop dinner prep or fail to put the dinner bowl down (or move it back up) if the butt lifts off or barking starts.

YES. I am saying this. Not if anywhere on the property, inside, outside, stood next to them, or sat in my car in drive way. No barking full stop. They dont need to, im home, they stand down as guards.

I am also stating i really like collar grab, and use it currently, for anything im not keen on. It works. But as there's no barking here, i dont get to collar grab.

I agree, TOT is not for every dog, and certainly will cause some temporary discomfort for a weaker nerved dog. And even then (temp discomfort, that the dog can work through easily enough), i am happy to let any dog ive owned so far, to sort it out and work through the anxiety and come out the other end. But for say some of the pet dogs in my extended family, this would be too much pressure. And i am no cruel trainer. So wouldn't go there.

But neither would i 'go there' on purchasing such a dog these days. I am in my last, or 2nd to last dog in my lifespan if dog has 10yr life span. For the last one, or 2 dogs if i am lucky, id like to start playing with a great hand!

[sporti]

This an interesting paper I came across on "drive", you might find it interesting :)

http://www.auf-den-hund-gekommen.net/-/paper3_files/drive_1.1.pdf

Wow, Buzz made it to Australia! :D He is notorious in some circles. We used to be friends, but I went and said something about formal dominance hierarchies in dogs and he never did get over that. I am just the worst.

I think that perhaps a functional assessment is more useful in these cases. What is the dog trying to achieve? Is it distance increasing behaviour or frustration? What is contributing to the arousal? These are questions we can answer to some extent, by observing how the dog's behaviour changes when we change the consequences, and will be useful in treating it. Get the arousal down and you're usually halfway there with this kind of thing. Prevent practice, reinforce an incompatible behaviour, make sure the dog is getting suitable outlets etc.

thanks for the link to what is proving to be a great article. The reference section alone, will take me months. I am probably a rare person, in that im likely to read this plus referenced articles within the article.

My 1st reaction: anyone that starts a behaviourism artcle quoting freud, is discrediting themselves. Freud is not highly regarded as a scientist.

In layman's terms: i can see the different drives being called upon, activated, deactivated, switched, vamped up, cooled down. Its a crude descriptor, but a community communicates in common language. Most advanced trainers can have therefore, conversations, about 'drives' and understand where the other is coming from. So the language for me has utility. Im doing IPO, where drives are spoken of, as facts. where they are not fact. As this article indicates, i still get what the trainer is talking about, can amend my behaviour accordingly, and change the outcome as desired. So in the absence of having a 'real' agreed language, drives will do.

Once again, cheers. Terrific article.

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

IPO is still catching up to the current animal behaviour and training science (including human behaviour).

There are some trainers that are right up there and some that are still talking stuff that doesn't make any sense any more.

Collar grab isn't only about interrupting a behaviour you don't want - tho it's very handy for that. There's a whole lot of other uses for it.

Susan uses it both for preventing or interrupting undesirable behaviour (like breaking a stay) but also winding her dogs up and getting them excited about something (eg restrained recall).

You must keep putting the grab "cookies" in the bank for it to be at its best or the dog will start to duck when you reach for it instead of shoving its neck into your hand (woot).

I don't know how you're going to train your dogs not to bark at the fence if you can't get the behaviour happening when you're there to train something else. I think I'd try to set things up so they thought you were out (eg take your car out then walk back close to the fence then send friend with trigger along the fence)...

But - you'd need to do one dog at a time and would one dog fence run if the other wasn't there? Would be useful information.

[sporti]

IPO is still catching up to the current animal behaviour and training science (including human behaviour).

There are some trainers that are right up there and some that are still talking stuff that doesn't make any sense any more.

Collar grab isn't only about interrupting a behaviour you don't want - tho it's very handy for that. There's a whole lot of other uses for it.

Susan uses it both for preventing or interrupting undesirable behaviour (like breaking a stay) but also winding her dogs up and getting them excited about something (eg restrained recall).

You must keep putting the grab "cookies" in the bank for it to be at its best or the dog will start to duck when you reach for it instead of shoving its neck into your hand (woot).

I don't know how you're going to train your dogs not to bark at the fence if you can't get the behaviour happening when you're there to train something else. I think I'd try to set things up so they thought you were out (eg take your car out then walk back close to the fence then send friend with trigger along the fence)...

But - you'd need to do one dog at a time and would one dog fence run if the other wasn't there? Would be useful information.

I think IPO has caught up. From what im seeing.

Rare to see a compulsion trained dog at the top of IPO trials. Old methods show in the end result. And its not pretty. There's no joy.

[The Spotted Devil]

IPO is still catching up to the current animal behaviour and training science (including human behaviour).

There are some trainers that are right up there and some that are still talking stuff that doesn't make any sense any more.

Collar grab isn't only about interrupting a behaviour you don't want - tho it's very handy for that. There's a whole lot of other uses for it.

Susan uses it both for preventing or interrupting undesirable behaviour (like breaking a stay) but also winding her dogs up and getting them excited about something (eg restrained recall).

You must keep putting the grab "cookies" in the bank for it to be at its best or the dog will start to duck when you reach for it instead of shoving its neck into your hand (woot).

I don't know how you're going to train your dogs not to bark at the fence if you can't get the behaviour happening when you're there to train something else. I think I'd try to set things up so they thought you were out (eg take your car out then walk back close to the fence then send friend with trigger along the fence)...

But - you'd need to do one dog at a time and would one dog fence run if the other wasn't there? Would be useful information.

I think IPO has caught up. From what im seeing.

Rare to see a compulsion trained dog at the top of IPO trials. Old methods show in the end result. And its not pretty. There's no joy.

Exactly sporti! You nailed it

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

IPO is still catching up to the current animal behaviour and training science (including human behaviour).

There are some trainers that are right up there and some that are still talking stuff that doesn't make any sense any more.

Collar grab isn't only about interrupting a behaviour you don't want - tho it's very handy for that. There's a whole lot of other uses for it.

Susan uses it both for preventing or interrupting undesirable behaviour (like breaking a stay) but also winding her dogs up and getting them excited about something (eg restrained recall).

You must keep putting the grab "cookies" in the bank for it to be at its best or the dog will start to duck when you reach for it instead of shoving its neck into your hand (woot).

I don't know how you're going to train your dogs not to bark at the fence if you can't get the behaviour happening when you're there to train something else. I think I'd try to set things up so they thought you were out (eg take your car out then walk back close to the fence then send friend with trigger along the fence)...

But - you'd need to do one dog at a time and would one dog fence run if the other wasn't there? Would be useful information.

I think IPO has caught up. From what im seeing.

Rare to see a compulsion trained dog at the top of IPO trials. Old methods show in the end result. And its not pretty. There's no joy.

This is true but some of the old school are still training newbies the old ways. We've got this in obedience and agility too (even tho Agility forbids it - I still see dogs getting yelled at or yanked around in a choke collar - by people who get to instruct). I still see FB posts from IPO and trainers from military / police backgrounds trying to insist you MUST use force - maybe not all the time but some of the time. And the times they suggest you must use force - are probably the worst times, ie with an angry and upset dog.

[JulesP]

I trained a couple of dogs the 'old way'. Can't say I did much yelling or yanking around. That is just bad training.

[persephone]

I trained a couple of dogs the 'old way'. Can't say I did much yelling or yanking around. That is just bad training.

Agree. I trained dozens of guide dogs 'the old way' :)

[huski]

Yes it is rare to see a dog completely trained with compulsion, but all of the top IPO competitors (world wide) use a mixture of methods and tools and they would never claim to be 100% positive only. Mario Verslijpe, Mia Skogster, Bart Bellon, Uta Bindels... the list goes on, openly talk about using various methods including corrections. Like anything, using reward OR correction (or a mixture!) to get amazing results takes skill. When we talk in a competitive sense, it is entirely possible to use corrections in training without removing the joy from the work.

Certainly doesn't look joyless to me...

The idea that using any kind of correction means the dog isn't working in drive is as old fashioned as the dogs that are trained with heavy handed compulsion and plod along next to the handler. For some high drive working dogs, using something like a prong collar correction can actually increase drive.

Edited April 30, 2016 by huski

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

Well there is the blurry line where when the dog doesn't get the reward it was expecting and is really upset about it - that's definitely not positive from the dog's point of view.

There's always a swing between the dog training you or you training the dog.

The rate of fail with guide dogs trained the old way is sufficiently high that most are transitioning to the new way.

http://thebark.com/content/guide-dogs-blind

About guide dog training - the thing that puzzled me was they wouldn't even try to train a dog before it was 12 months old. Before that it would live in some foster carer's place as a family member and receive very little training. No shaping practice, no learning to work through frustration or try new things. Or any foundation skills for things that guide dogs need to be good at.

Can't say I did much yelling or yanking around. That is just bad training.

And yet that's exactly what the chief instructors at my old dog club were teaching. And yes - massive fail with my current dog. Hence me being forced to learn the new ways.

[huski]

Many of the things you may call "new" aren't really new methods. I started learning about training in drive 10 years ago, and how to use it in competition. Steve from K9 Pro who taught me had been developing his TID program for 20+ years prior to when I started learning about it. I'm not sure what you refer to when you said some IPO handlers still need to catch up to "new" methods, on a world level the quality of obedience in IPO is extremely hard to beat in any venue. Each successful competitor has their own take on how to train a winning dog, but you'd be hard pressed to find many top winning handlers who don't use any aversives including tools like ecollars and prongs. There are many ways to use different tools.

[corvus]

Denise Fenzi and Shade Whitesel might be notable exceptions. Neither use aversive stimuli to train their dogs in IPO, and both are competitive. Shade has been pretty successful. Denise seems pretty busy with her dog training courses these days, but her blog is fun to follow. She goes through some of the troubleshooting she has done to fix problems without aversive stimuli. It suggests what it takes to succeed in any sport at high levels without aversive stimuli, which might explain why it's not common. She is coming to Australia next month.

I think it's disingenuous to suggest IPO is an enlightened field these days. Maybe in the same way Obedience is. Or field retrieving. Which is to say, there are plenty of people using a lot of rewards, and plenty of people that are probably creating trouble for themselves with an over-reliance on aversive stimuli, and many of those people have learnt from instructors that don't necessarily understand learning theory and arousal/emotional states. There is still a culture in working dogs (not necessarily unique to working dogs) whether it be security, police or military that puts a lot of responsibility on the dog that should lie with the trainer. I expect dog selection is a factor as well.

Regarding the original question, the fact that this only occurs when no humans are present makes me think the dogs are creating their own stimulation. Can they have treat dispensing toys when unsupervised? If a busy dog does not fence run, the answer seems straight forward, although not necessarily easy.

[Willem]

Denise Fenzi and Shade Whitesel might be notable exceptions. Neither use aversive stimuli to train their dogs in IPO, and both are competitive. Shade has been pretty successful. Denise seems pretty busy with her dog training courses these days, but her blog is fun to follow. She goes through some of the troubleshooting she has done to fix problems without aversive stimuli. It suggests what it takes to succeed in any sport at high levels without aversive stimuli, which might explain why it's not common. She is coming to Australia next month.

I think it's disingenuous to suggest IPO is an enlightened field these days. Maybe in the same way Obedience is. Or field retrieving. Which is to say, there are plenty of people using a lot of rewards, and plenty of people that are probably creating trouble for themselves with an over-reliance on aversive stimuli, and many of those people have learnt from instructors that don't necessarily understand learning theory and arousal/emotional states. There is still a culture in working dogs (not necessarily unique to working dogs) whether it be security, police or military that puts a lot of responsibility on the dog that should lie with the trainer. I expect dog selection is a factor as well.

Regarding the original question, the fact that this only occurs when no humans are present makes me think the dogs are creating their own stimulation. Can they have treat dispensing toys when unsupervised? If a busy dog does not fence run, the answer seems straight forward, although not necessarily easy.

I guess in this case (presence of owner prevents barking / fence running) all what's needed is an introduction of a CS that's associated with the owner?...could be music, voice from a tape, visual signals...

[Willem]

Yes it is rare to see a dog completely trained with compulsion, but all of the top IPO competitors (world wide) use a mixture of methods and tools and they would never claim to be 100% positive only. Mario Verslijpe, Mia Skogster, Bart Bellon, Uta Bindels... the list goes on, openly talk about using various methods including corrections. Like anything, using reward OR correction (or a mixture!) to get amazing results takes skill. When we talk in a competitive sense, it is entirely possible to use corrections in training without removing the joy from the work.

Certainly doesn't look joyless to me...

The idea that using any kind of correction means the dog isn't working in drive is as old fashioned as the dogs that are trained with heavy handed compulsion and plod along next to the handler. For some high drive working dogs, using something like a prong collar correction can actually increase drive.

the trainings efficiency will depend on the potential of the 'reward system' - e.g. a less favoured treat might not achieve the wanted result, replace it with a treat the dog like most and the effort of the dog will increase to get the reward. In this case the potential (I guess you would be able to measure this via the amount of dopamine and the like released in the brain) was increased by switching the treat. The potential can also be increased by adding noxious stimuli. I guess the key is to use the potential that just works - if the potential is too big you would 'waste' it. Preverably the right potential should be achieved with positive reinforcement, however the potential that is achievable with positive reinforcement might not be always big enough (depending on the individual dog and task and scenario) and it might be required to stretch it by adding noxious stimuli.