Socialisation & Neutralisation

[Steve K9Pro]

Q: They did actually keep her at home until she was about 18 weeks

K9: be careful with the keep her at home part of the equation, this isnt neutralisation.

I have cut & pasted this section (before someone else does).

my plan is to take my dog everywhere I can when it is around 8 - 14 weeks, I run it up stairs platforms & teach it to ignore people & other dogs etc.

I make noises bang things & so on train all the moves, develop the drives I want.

The next 8 or so weeks I keep the dog at home when its in the first fear period, this enables me to help my pup avoid the pitfalls in public.

K9: I keep the dog at home due to the Fear period not the neutralisation.

[Quickasyoucan]

Q: They did actually keep her at home until she was about 18 weeks

K9: be careful with the keep her at home part of the equation, this isnt neutralisation.

I have cut & pasted this section (before someone else does).

my plan is to take my dog everywhere I can when it is around 8 - 14 weeks, I run it up stairs platforms & teach it to ignore people & other dogs etc.

I make noises bang things & so on train all the moves, develop the drives I want.

The next 8 or so weeks I keep the dog at home when its in the first fear period, this enables me to help my pup avoid the pitfalls in public.

K9: I keep the dog at home due to the Fear period not the neutralisation.

Yes I was only mentioning that because they happened to do it anyway due to fears that she would catch something at the local park, I guess what I was saying was she was at home (as it happened not due to following any advice or training pattern in particular) during what would have been her fear period. But as I said she has always been nervy.

Just about the keep it at home thing, though, you would be doing things with the dog at home I assume but in a controlled environment, interaction with dogs/people/etc but where you could control the situation? Can you expand on the keep it at home in its first fear period (or at least find me the quote where it is expanded upon!).

Edited November 6, 2008 by Quickasyoucan

[Erny]

E: I'm glad you mentioned this MonElite. I'm often concerned that people hearing of (3rd hand, for example) or even reading of "neutralisation" but not fully understanding it, will take it to extremes.

K9: This is true, it is one of the reasons that it can become difficult to offer any advice on any forum for fear of people getting it wrong.

There are many forums that as soon as a problem is presented, it is pasted as the standard answer "go see a behaviourist".

I am glad were not there yet.

K9 - my post was not intended as a criticism of the 'neutralisation' program and I hope you didn't take it that way. What prompted my post was a previous poster mentioning that she'd had dogs before in a country atmosphere with little socialisation and no problems, yet she's now socialised her current dog and has problems. I was concerned that her (and anyone reading) perception was now to not go out and socialise the dogs at all.

Whilst I agree that I have visited forums where "go see a behaviourist" is given more commonly than not, I put my hand up to say that I am not innocent of having done the same. And there are many occasions when "go see a behaviourist" IS the best advice that can be given over the net.

Edited November 6, 2008 by Erny

[Steve K9Pro]

Q: Just about the keep it at home thing, though, you would be doing things with the dog at home I assume but in a controlled environment, interaction with dogs/people/etc but where you could control the situation? Can you expand on the keep it at hom in its first fear period (or at least find me the explanation!).

K9: some dogs when going through the periods of fear will really suffer, some wont change much at all, there are many variables that effect this.

We do a Puppy raising course to help guide people through this potential mine field.

I keep the puppy at home, I practice crate training, TOT, NILIF & some drive work if the pup isn't suffering too badly in this period.

But I keep it mainly at home, steer away from anything I cant predict with a good degree of accuracy.

Before this period I spend a lot of time getting my neutralisation template in place, like I said, if my dog had a natural fear of anything, I would working at improving that feeling from a negative to a neutral or possibly slightly positive.

The first 4 - 4.5 weeks (from 7.5 weeks to fear period one) are the best times to get your ground work done.

[Steve K9Pro]

E: K9 - my post was not intended as a criticism of the 'neutralisation' program and I hope you didn't take it that way.

K9: No no of course not, I was agreeing that taking just the written word can lead to problems...

What prompted my post was a previous poster mentioning that she'd had dogs before in a country atmosphere with little socialisation and no problems, yet she's now socialised her current dog and has problems. I was concerned that her (and anyone reading) perseption was now to not go out and socialise the dogs at all.

k9: Yep of course.

Whilst I agree that I have visited forums where "go see a behaviourist" is given more commonly than not, I put my hand up to say that I am not innocent of having done the same. And there are many occasions when "go see a behaviourist" IS the best advice that can be given over the net.

K9: I think & hope we all do especially if the topic is aggression.

The thing to remember also is what socialisation is "show your dog something new & assign a value to it".

Snake proofing is a form of socialisation, show you dog a snake & assign a high negative value to it, meaning your dog will go into avoidance at the sight, sound or scent of a snake.

I do socialise, my aim is just a neutral value of socialisation so it has been renamed neutralisation to avoid confusion with the generic plan.

[MonElite]

I'm glad you mentioned this MonElite. I'm often concerned that people hearing of (3rd hand, for example) or even reading of "neutralisation" but not fully understanding it, will take it to extremes. The other end of the pendulum swing, you might say.

Yes this is what I meant, the dog still needs to be socialised or more intorduced to certain things. Mine wasnt to what in my opinion was to late in the developement.

For the novice dog person, this is where I think it gets tricky for them.

Exactly, if I couldnt neutralise the dog properly I would preffer for it to have a positive value assigned to people, rather than negative.

Do you think though ME, that if you had had her earlier and had done that early exposure, as per the beginning of the thread that the outcome might have been different?

I belive it would have been as I would have taken the puppy places.

Alternativelly I should have gone out a bit more in the fear impact period to show her the world at least.

How much also would temperament play in this?

No doubt temperament plays a big role.

When I had seen her at the breeders place and was assesing her she was a happy open puppy, no differnent to her littermates. A friend of mine owns her litter brother and he is an open easy going dog, but he was also socialised earlier than my girl.

So to summarise - With the socialisation and the training (under a great helpfull trainer) I have done since my girl was about 10 months old till now I am happy with the way she turned out. There was a period of time where "everyone" was telling me to get rid of her and I was considering doing so. I am now glad I didnt. She is now titled, passed ET, has a pass in obedience (perfect scores for the Stand for Exam!!), we are training to do a BH, tracking and more obedience, and she is a lot of fun at home!

I will attempt to neutralise my next dog, learned a lot on my mistakes with both my dogs (one has gone one way the other the opposite) I think I can now come up with the happy medium.

Time will tell.

Edited November 6, 2008 by MonElite

[Monah]

E: I'm glad you mentioned this MonElite. I'm often concerned that people hearing of (3rd hand, for example) or even reading of "neutralisation" but not fully understanding it, will take it to extremes.

K9: This is true, it is one of the reasons that it can become difficult to offer any advice on any forum for fear of people getting it wrong.

There are many forums that as soon as a problem is presented, it is pasted as the standard answer "go see a behaviourist".

I am glad were not there yet.

K9 - my post was not intended as a criticism of the 'neutralisation' program and I hope you didn't take it that way. What prompted my post was a previous poster mentioning that she'd had dogs before in a country atmosphere with little socialisation and no problems, yet she's now socialised her current dog and has problems. I was concerned that her (and anyone reading) perception was now to not go out and socialise the dogs at all.

Whilst I agree that I have visited forums where "go see a behaviourist" is given more commonly than not, I put my hand up to say that I am not innocent of having done the same. And there are many occasions when "go see a behaviourist" IS the best advice that can be given over the net.

Ah Erny, sorry, that might have been my post. I may have worded it wrong. What I was trying to put across was that we didn't 'actively' socialise, we had businesses at home so people were around pretty often, we had cats, chooks, sheep too, a lot of machinery, our kids and other kids. The dogs were just 'there' , part of the furniture and generally didn't take much notice of others. However, we did not purposefully 'take the dogs out' to experience different things, people , other dogs running off lead etc. It just seems that now, there is a lot of stuff written about taking your dog out and 'socialising' and playing and meeting and greeting etc. I have a 'nervy' dog who was that way at 12 weeks when we got her, and was told by several training places etc. to 'take her out and more or less MAKE her get over it', inc. her being pushed onto agility equipment so I stopped going for a long time until I had her comfortable at home. I think all this made her worse not better.

In the past with our other dogs, ranging from wolfhounds to terriers and everything in between, they just got used to everything quietly without a fuss or excitement, in a 'home' environment. when we did go to the city,(often as we had a house and business there) they were not ever put out and just adapted from one thing to the next.

IMO sometimes socialisation is put up as a cure all and most of us are not aware of the dangers to the dog, then it is frustrating when the dog gets even more jittery instead of improving, and you don't know what to do next. I'm sure I could have managed my dogs nerves much better than I did, but am very inexperienced with this problem. she has come a very long way though as she couldn't even walk on lead if anything (inc cars) or anyone was behind us. But it has taken nearly 3 years of trying things to get to this stage.

BTW, she is very lovely I do feel guilty for pushing her through which was obviously her fear stage. Poor dog.

[Erny]

Ah Erny, sorry, that might have been my post. I may have worded it wrong. What I was trying to put across was that we didn't 'actively' socialise, we had businesses at home so people were around pretty often, we had cats, chooks, sheep too, a lot of machinery, our kids and other kids. The dogs were just 'there' , part of the furniture and generally didn't take much notice of others. However, we did not purposefully 'take the dogs out' to experience different things, people , other dogs running off lead etc.

That's ok Monah - and without looking back I'm not sure who was the poster but assuming it was you, I'm glad that you've not taken the wrong end of the stick as I was concerned that you had . In your case it sounds as though much of the introduction to new/novel things was at your door step and although I think it is a good thing to have dogs experience these things in unfamiliar environments as well, I imagine it stood your dogs in good stead.

Many people don't have that constant/frequent 'traffic' at their own homes and given that it is unlike the 'olden days' when it was more acceptable for dogs to roam and self-socialise, it is important that people make the effort to take them out to it. That's why (IMO) there IS so much of the emphasis on socialisation. When the laws came in that said people had to lock their dogs up in the yard (and I agree, there is good reason for that), they kind of forgot they'd need to change what they do to make up for the lack of opportunity their previous dogs used to have.

I agree thought that when we do take them out, we (general populous) tend to make far too bigger deal about our pups and dogs engaging in play time with others. Back in my day ( .... god, sometimes I sound so ancient ..... I'm not though, really . Not IMO anyway .) dogs self-socialised with everything, including all the dogs in the neighbourhood. We were at school so the dogs were left to their own devices. I tended to find those dogs didn't go 'spare' at the sight of another dog. They'd do the meet and greet thing, but it was otherwise pretty much a "shrug shoulders, big deal" attitude. I see a lot of people with their pups/dogs trying to force and overly encourage them to interact. Provided my dog's not acting from fear, I'm quite happy if he isn't particularly interested. Not to suggest that he isn't :coffee:.

It just seems that now, there is a lot of stuff written about taking your dog out and 'socialising' and playing and meeting and greeting etc.

For the reason/s, I think, that I've mentioned above. And also because there are so many dogs who were NOT socialised and therefore were very inappropriate in their "meeting and greeting", the emphasis was placed to err on the side of what they perceive as "positive" rather than "negative". Unfortunately, what is written cannot be written to account for every single person's life-style and circumstance.

I have a 'nervy' dog who was that way at 12 weeks when we got her, and was told by several training places etc. to 'take her out and more or less MAKE her get over it', inc. her being pushed onto agility equipment so I stopped going for a long time until I had her comfortable at home. I think all this made her worse not better.

I'm inclined to think I would have had her out and about but in very 'gentle' ways .... ie low intensity. But I agree that there needs to be that element of 'trust' from the dog first so that it can at least feel protected by you.

IMO sometimes socialisation is put up as a cure all ....

I don't perceive it as having been put across that way but I guess it is possible that it could be. I agree that many people don't understand HOW to APPROPRIATELY socialise their dogs to new and novel things/dogs/people and that the mistakes they make can have a negative affect as well.

... and most of us are not aware of the dangers to the dog ...

I agree.

... then it is frustrating when the dog gets even more jittery instead of improving, and you don't know what to do next. I'm sure I could have managed my dogs nerves much better than I did, but am very inexperienced with this problem. she has come a very long way though as she couldn't even walk on lead if anything (inc cars) or anyone was behind us. But it has taken nearly 3 years of trying things to get to this stage.

Sounds to me you've worked very hard on the issue and come far. Well done . Please don't blame everything on "socialisation" though. It sounds to me as though this dog had the issue before she even came to you, an element of which could even have been genetic.

[Di*]

After having walked the dogs yesterday for the first time since I got back, and having had some sleep, I had a think about this.

I can see how neutralisation would make training easier as there are less temptations/distractions.

But I have to put my hand up as being one of those people who really enjoys it and gets a lot of pleasure out of being social with my dog. I really enjoy meeting people and dogs (not dogs with Zoe though!) on walks, people enjoy meeting and patting the dogs, and we talk. And with Diesel the dogs get to sniff and say hi. I find this one of my favourite parts of owning a dog.

Zoe is more attached to me than Diesel is - will ignore people and distractions and focus on me more and will not work for other peoplw well if prevented by a lead to get to me. That I think is more individual personality plus she is older and I have worked with her more.

And with Purple Julie, unless you strictly control the people your dog interacts with, I think it would be very difficult to neutralise your pup to people, as most people want to say hi and visit puppies even if they don't with adult dogs. And it is hard enough to find dogs that can give your pup a positive experience, it would be very difficult to find one that would help your pup to see dogs as neutral.

One of my dogs is a pet therapy dog and her role is to interact with people. Total focus on me would defeat the purpose. My other two are totally unsuited to this role precisely because of their level of focus on me. Therefore, doesn't this return to point made in an earlier post about the different aims/goals of ownership and training? I can't imagine how having my dog neutralised to all other people would in any way enhance my pet therapy dog's training.

Di

[Just Midol]

You can neutralise a dog and still have its focus remain off you.

My pup has been neutralised and he won't be focusing on me when heeling or walking.

And neutralising to people is easy imo.

[Monah]

Erny, thanks for a very helpful post. I should mention, I was also very lucky with Monah that I found a wonderful behaviourist when she was about 18 months old who gave me a great program, the difference was that she said to try one child at a time to help Monah with her kid phobia, and previously I had been told to take her to soccer games etc. with loads of kids around, she FREAKED, so i made it worse. If only I had met the behaviourist at 12 weeks! But, Like I said, she is a lovely dog and we adore her, and we can do anything with her at all.

[Steve K9Pro]

D: One of my dogs is a pet therapy dog and her role is to interact with people. Total focus on me would defeat the purpose. My other two are totally unsuited to this role precisely because of their level of focus on me. Therefore, doesn't this return to point made in an earlier post about the different aims/goals of ownership and training? I can't imagine how having my dog neutralised to all other people would in any way enhance my pet therapy dog's training.

K9: Imagine creating a high positive value for people with your dog & turning up to see an elderly person in bed, & your dog jumps all over them?

To a degree you may be trying to create a calmer dog around people than some others may be looking for, so this would be your version of neutralisation.

[Di*]

K9: Imagine creating a high positive value for people with your dog & turning up to see an elderly person in bed, & your dog jumps all over them?

To a degree you may be trying to create a calmer dog around people than some others may be looking for, so this would be your version of neutralisation.

Thank you for your response.

Sorry, I need more explanation. Do you agree that total focus on me is not desirable in this case?

Re neutralisation--rather than jumping all over people, it is more the case that response to a whole range of environmental stimuli is what needs to be neutralised--sudden bangs, wheel chairs, walking frames, metal banging on metal, sudden screams etc. The dog's interaction with people is much more complex than just being calm, though calmness in certain contexts is important. For example, my dog visits a psychiatric ward where many of the patients have few interactions with the world--my dog's responsiveness in her interactions is highly valued in these cases and her pleasure in her interactions--that she is excited to see them is important. That she is able to shift her focus from me and make someone else feel that they are the most important thing in her world is her greatest asset. I have no idea how you would train a dog to do this. As I said neither of my other two have this quality and I don't feel I can take the credit for my dog being like this. Certainly, I can't imagine a training regime such as the one you have described that you have put in place for your dogs would have enhanced this capacity in my dog. This is not a criticism at all of your training--I have attended one of your weekend sessions and it was excellent. My point, I suppose is that the dog that is totally focused on its handler is not necessarily desirable in all circumstances.

di

[corvus]

I think some people are control freaks.

I don't know if this is just me, but frankly, the main reason I have animals is because they are in a sense uncontrollable. I love that an animal is its own creature with an agenda and likes and dislikes, and I love feeding its likes and seeing it happy. I'm a bit simple that way. When I work out what they like, I give it to them if I can. Provided it's harmless. I love that when they interact with me it's purely because they want to. I am happy to tamper with that if it seems necessary for their safety, or if it's necessary to open them to new things for them to enjoy, but ultimately, I don't want to mess with it just to make training easier. That's cheating, which is fine if that's all you want from your animals. I just like the added depth I get from working around an animal's natural tendencies rather than just controlling them. I couldn't have been prouder when I taught my hare a meaningless trick just because it took me a long time and a lot of thinking to find a way to convince him to do it. It was so much more rewarding than teaching Kivi to down on signal.

Anyway, there are always risks, but I think you can train a perfect recall without neutralisation, and I'd rather try that way first because of the way I enjoy my animals. I did end up having to withold treats from my hare to get him to co operate, but he only missed out for a few nights before he figured out what the game was and then he was coming out and talking to me and getting his head scratches and remembering how much he likes those. I wouldn't have persisted for much longer if he hadn't caught on. I always say just because you can train it doesn't mean you should. We spend so much of our time dominating our animals when all we need to do is learn to work with them and enjoy them for who they are and what they are.

[Erny]

Whoa Corvus ...... "control freaks" ???? Noice. (Not.)

it's a training forum. The thread is about training. So we talk about training. Derr.

Where the heck you got some idea that we don't have fun with our dogs and they with us is beyond me. In fact, if you read the thread properly, you'll see it is exactly about that. I can tell by a few other things that you've said in your post that you really have got hold of the wrong end of the stick on this but I see you're on the subject of training your hare again so I won't worry about going into those.

Edited November 8, 2008 by Erny

[spanky]

I think some people are control freaks.

I don't know if this is just me, but frankly, the main reason I have animals is because they are in a sense uncontrollable. I love that an animal is its own creature with an agenda and likes and dislikes, and I love feeding its likes and seeing it happy. I'm a bit simple that way. When I work out what they like, I give it to them if I can. Provided it's harmless. I love that when they interact with me it's purely because they want to. I am happy to tamper with that if it seems necessary for their safety, or if it's necessary to open them to new things for them to enjoy, but ultimately, I don't want to mess with it just to make training easier. That's cheating, which is fine if that's all you want from your animals. I just like the added depth I get from working around an animal's natural tendencies rather than just controlling them. I couldn't have been prouder when I taught my hare a meaningless trick just because it took me a long time and a lot of thinking to find a way to convince him to do it. It was so much more rewarding than teaching Kivi to down on signal.

Anyway, there are always risks, but I think you can train a perfect recall without neutralisation, and I'd rather try that way first because of the way I enjoy my animals. I did end up having to withold treats from my hare to get him to co operate, but he only missed out for a few nights before he figured out what the game was and then he was coming out and talking to me and getting his head scratches and remembering how much he likes those. I wouldn't have persisted for much longer if he hadn't caught on. I always say just because you can train it doesn't mean you should. We spend so much of our time dominating our animals when all we need to do is learn to work with them and enjoy them for who they are and what they are.

After spending a weekend with K9 Force listening to him impart his knowledge and experiences, I can tell you that you are so wide of the mark suggesting he doesn't enjoy his dogs. So wide of the mark.

Each person has the right to train their dogs the way they choose. K9 Force explained to us on the weekend that not everyone will want to train to the degree he does and that the boundaries he sets can be broken for pet animals... it all depends on the owner.

Honestly, if you don't wish to discuss this topic in an effort to learn more about it, if your only reason for posting is to offend us control freaks, then I'd appreciate if you'd butt out of the thread. K9 Force and Erny and others have heaps of experience and guidence they can provide to those of us willing to learn, so please don't spoil that for us by coming in here and offering nothing constructive... apart from the potential to make people like K9 Force stop posting due to it becoming a waste of his time.

[spanky]

On a happy note... I'm slowly getting thru this thread and while it's probably way to late to even attempt neutralising either of my dogs (7 and 1.5) I find the topic very interesting. I'm hoping I can still get some of the focus out of the dogs to look to me (and hopefully the OH) as the pack leaders and to have a bigger trust in them when we start taking them camping with us.

I start drive training with my girl in a week or so.... how's that program going K9 Force .... and I'm pretty lucky with her that she's come pre-programmed not to be overly interested in dogs or people. Strange dogs probably rate about -3 to -4 for her, but she doesn't notice them once I have a toy in my hand.

My first question is around the seperation... I completely understand why K9 Force keeps his new puppies away from the other dogs... but for those of us that aren't willing or able to do this, does it impact too much... especially if you only have 1 or 2 other dogs?

Our aim is to purchase a farm within the next 5yrs and we'd like to run cattle, which in turn means we want a working dog, so I'm interested in understanding the level of neutralisation that would be recommended in this situation... as I've never owned a working breed before... let alone one that actually works.

[Flaves]

How do you neutralise older dogs? To people and to other dogs?

[corvus]

Sorry, maybe control freaks is a bit of a strong term. I did read a lot of the thread (not all), and I do think some people are control freaks about animals. I never said that was a bad thing! And I don't think control freaks have no fun with their dogs. I think maybe I even get the benefits of being a control freak. It's just a matter of the type of fun you have and what floats your boat. Working around things floats my boat. Leaving things as they are unless there's a really good reason to change it is the way I have fun. I didn't mean to imply that you all have robots or something. I'm a control freak about some things and proud of it. Just not doggy things, it seems. Anyway, I'll shutup. Honestly didn't mean to offend.

[Kavik]

Different people have different goals and expectations from their dogs. I would like to compete with mine, so have different expectations than someone who does not wish to compete. Does this make me a control freak? Maybe to some people it would seem that way, when they see me practicing straight fronts, and other fiddly obedience steps. But the dogs really enjoy it, it is how we have fun together, and Kaos really needs to have something to do. I should really be more of a control freak with him than I am, considering how he brushed me off at our last trial