1 year old dog testing me!!

Alec Swan said:
There's a world of difference between "watching" and "doing". I've no wish to be unkind, but you may one day gain enough experience, to see the folly of your arguments. It's better to be quiet and be thought a fool, than to persevere, and prove the point, beyond doubt.

Alec.
Click to expand...

Oh and did I say I just watched, don't believe I did. 35 years of owning dogs, 10 years of working with problem dogs and throw in training my own and other dogs for TV and film work might mean I have a more than average understanding of dog training. 15 years ago I used to think Barbara Woodhouse was a good trainer and that to make a dog sit you needed to yank it on a choke chain until it did. But I chose to look into positive methods and learn about more about dog behaviour and I realised that there was a much better, humane way of dog training, which is just as effective, you should try it Alec
 
PucciNPoni said:
I don't particularly like heavy handed tactics, I do find that handing out treats inappropriately is almost worse because they can in fact be rewarding for the unwanted behaviour. I see it all the time - people using "bribes" and in fact the timing is so poor that dog thinks that the "bad thing" is actually the "good thing" and continues doing it...expecting and getting the reward.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. I feel certain that with dogs other than the painfully shy, an inappropriate harsh word is forgotten far sooner than the confusion of an ill-deserved reward, and the subsequent correction.

Someone previously suggested that there were systems which are in place which are Ancient and Modern. Actually, both systems are steeped in time and presumably there are those who find success with one, rather than the other. I for one, am convinced that food rewards are actually a retrograde step in that they encourage a dog to be selfish and think of itself, rather than working with its handler.

Alec.
 
gunnergundog said:
Unfortunately, there are many trainers/behaviourists who train for a living and who have NOT trained that many dogs that they have had to live with themselves for any sustained period of time; however they know a lot of theory and put letters after their name! :)
Click to expand...

This is very true ^^^^^ and by the time they have finished draining folk of money who are still left with an out of control dog and where given franky horrendous and useless advice the dog is then destined for rescue.
 
CaveCanem said:
If anyone is training me, I like to see how their own dogs behave.

I'd rather a trainer who trains to that individual dog's character, than the many, many trainers who pick and choose dogs to own or to work with that suit their individual training style, the ones who ask handlers with dogs that they can't fit into their training style to leave, the ones who say the owners aren't doing it right, the ones who keep the owners coming back with never any positive results because the training will never suit the dog. Those are the ones who are selling a lie.

A trainer who says no dog ever needs compulsion, or aversion, is also selling a lie IMO.
Click to expand...

And this^^^ I want to see the trainers dog/s behaving as I would eventually want mine too after working with said trainer (if handler/owner puts in the work), and this is why im proud to pluck any of my dogs from my pack and use them or all if need be and im happy to be complimented about their (behaviour):)
I even took a boarding dog tonight to work with a dog aggressive rottie (I never put her in harms way) she was just a (walk by stooge):p and we stooged my lurcher being off lead and approaching said rottie (to test a response to a dog wondering and approaching with no owner) "yes I cover stupid scenarios":o but hey, (they need to be covered) esp with this monsterous dog, as he was a giant of a rottie with a little owner:D.
And the (picking and choosing is frustrating) you either train all behaviourand deal with all breeds or state you are incapable and chose without ripping eye balls out and coming back for the sockets!! leaving the owner high and dry.
There are some fab trainers out there but there are also some bloody unscrupulous ones (I wont lie it does worry me)
 
Alec, it doesnt teach the dog how to be selfish. Clicker training (for example) is a fabulous communication tool, and the stuff you can teach you dog is endless! The problem starts when you RELY on food lure , and don't phase them out properly. Which is where many go wrong, and claim its all garbage!

It reinforces the dogs enjoyment of working with its handler, subsequently strengthening the bond, not removing it.

I think you should go on a little clicker course ;)
 
Smith123 said:
Thanks everyone, had another good day with the dog. He has been as good as gold (so far!) no snapping at all. Had one little moment when I wanted him to go out and he didn't want to, I called him he came into the room (a large room) but didn't want to go out as it was raining. He stood about 3 metres from me and would come to me. What should I do in the situation as the way my mum would get him is to treat him but I didn't want to do that as that is what he wanted!

This is what i did, it was probably wrong!!

I went to get him and he started running around the sofas(thinking it was fun) I called him agAin and he just looked at me as if to say what are you going to do now! I put the other dogs out and the just quietly followed him round the room, every time he stopped I pushed him on to gain control, I don't think he thought it was a game as he was not looking like he enjoyed it! After a while I stopped, he stopped and I made him sit, down, stay etc and he was very submissive(put his ead on the floor and just looked at me) he then went outside no problem when I told him. I didn't use any physical contact as he was quite jumpy and tail between legs wondering why I was making him go round and round the room!

Was this completely the wrong thing to do?!
Click to expand...

Does he have an aversion to going out? was this to get him to go to the toilet and you ended up having to try and get hold of him to do so?
 
stargirl88 said:
Alec, it doesnt teach the dog how to be selfish. Clicker training (for example) is a fabulous communication tool, and the stuff you can teach you dog is endless! The problem starts when you RELY on food lure , and don't phase them out properly. Which is where many go wrong, and claim its all garbage!

It reinforces the dogs enjoyment of working with its handler, subsequently strengthening the bond, not removing it.

I think you should go on a little clicker course ;)
Click to expand...

Nice one Lol, I love the last bit:D (go on Alec) you will LURVE IT:p:D
 
CAYLA said:
Does he have an aversion to going out? was this to get him to go to the toilet and you ended up having to try and get hold of him to do so?
Click to expand...

He loves going out normally just didn't want to this time! Did I do completely the wrong thing?!
 
Smith123 said:
He loves going out normally just didn't want to this time! Did I do completely the wrong thing?!
Click to expand...

Well i personally would not go get him as I expect a dog to come when called, so maybe in these instances could you work on calling him and rewarding him, dont get me wrong the snacking would be met with firmness by me! but getting him to come to you may be best done with a positive (primula cheese at the ready) and a command, and eventually take the primula out and just use the command but (no chasing him) as it's his way of creating a game/attention and then leads to snapping and (getting his was) the treats I would only use short term and he should pick it up quick. So name "nice high picked tone" and when he comes suck of primula (then maybe go to the back door) and name/squirt (throw handful of tib bits out) and command "wee wee", so you can get him rushing for the door at toilet time instead of the commotion and rigmarole you are having to go through now.
 
Last edited:
stargirl88 said:
.......Clicker training (for example) is a fabulous communication tool, and the stuff you can teach you dog is endless! .......
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm sure that it is, and so's the human voice. ;)

I'm sure that clicker training will one day be used in every Nationals, regardless of the discipline! ;):D

I've a friend, of whom I'm very fond, she's an HHOer, and she has the most wonderful little terrier sort of thing. She has a little bag of treats and her clicker, and when she clicks, so short arse comes running for her treat. ;) The strange thing is that when I call her, she comes back back even faster, not because of any skill on my part, but simply because I like her, and she likes me.

I'll give your clicker course some thought! :p:D

Alec.
 
You dont have to use a clicker, you can use your voice, click with your tongue like a horse, or a very positive yes when the dog does what you want. The thing with a clicker is its always the same unlike the voice.

Ive used it for tricks mainly, when they are broken down into steps, the dog performs what you want, you then click and treat and then build it into what you want. You phase the treats out once the dog does what you want on command, it is not non stop treats because that is self defeating.

Ive used it on some dogs but not all, its horses for courses.
 
Interesting debate! OP I think most of what I'd suggest has been covered, but the only thing I would add is that discipline can come very effectively from walking. My big GSD was a nightmare as a young dog (not aggressive, but destructive). I got him a dog backpack and put weights in, and he walked in that, every day, an hour a day or more at the weekend. The difference after a couple of weeks was quite impressive. He loved to have a job, and to work for a reward. He carried his own water, treats and poo bags on long walks. People also reacted really nicely to him which was a big plus. And best of all, it wore him out! When we got home I'd do some training because he was in the right frame of mind for it. Then he'd pretty much sleep! Destruction stopped. My young GSD wears it now, he couldn't be prouder of himself while wearing it. EBay do cheap ones. Good luck with whichever method you go with!
 
As SadKen said, the paniers/backpacks are good for gettig that excess energy off, my pointer used to wear on and the pointer im now working with has one:D (sand is good to pack them with, you a get a good equal weight on each side and comfortable to carry to.

Also aswell as (off lead hooning) structured lead walks to teach good lead manners and teach not all walks mean hooning around.
 
Alec Swan said:
Para 1. Never ignore such behaviour. Your puppy is putting you in your place, and succeeding by the sound of it. Wallop the bloody thing, and mean it!

Para 2. Rewards? That young man is getting the better of you, and if you continue to bribe him, rather than insist upon compliance, you're going to end up with well entrenched and difficult to erase, problems.

Alec.
Click to expand...

Very well said
 
PucciNPoni said:
I don't particularly like heavy handed tactics, I do find that handing out treats inappropriately is almost worse because they can in fact be rewarding for the unwanted behaviour. I see it all the time - people using "bribes" and in fact the timing is so poor that dog thinks that the "bad thing" is actually the "good thing" and continues doing it...expecting and getting the reward.
Click to expand...

I don't see how rewarding the wrong behaviour is worse than punishing the wrong behaviour to be honest. Getting it wrong is always a problem, but if we accept that people will get it wrong (because we are fallible) I'd rather give a treat for the wrong thing than give a slap (or electric collar zap, or choke chain tug) for the wrong thing.

Alec: your recommendation was not for a harsh word, it was for a wallop (and mean it). Associations, regardless of whether they are positive or negative, can be made really quickly (sometimes as quickly as 2 or 3 repetitions) - all trainers rely on that.

Regarding communicating with the human voice you can certainly do that. There is nothing magical about the click, you can use any noise or word to mark the behaviour. Similarly with rewards, the terrier that likes you, comes to you for a smile, or a pat; food is not the only reward, it's just a really high value reward which makes it very useful for most dogs.

Regarding the bribery issue, you cannot bribe someone who has already done the behaviour. A 'lure and reward' training technique is conceivably a bribe based system as you present the reward and use it to elicit the behaviour. In clicker you do not elicit the behaviour with the food, you re-inforce it.

So bribe goes: food, behaviour, reward
Positive reinforcement: behaviour, marker, reward
 
Booboos said:
I don't see how rewarding the wrong behaviour is worse than punishing the wrong behaviour to be honest. Getting it wrong is always a problem, but if we accept that people will get it wrong (because we are fallible) I'd rather give a treat for the wrong thing than give a slap (or electric collar zap, or choke chain tug) for the wrong thing.

.......
Click to expand...

Considering your opening sentence, was that a typing error? If you're serious and you're happy to reward the "Wrong behaviour" (though I'm not too sure what you mean by that), at what point and how, do you correct the errors?

This is the last time that I'm going to bother to explain about chastising a dog. Here we go;

If a dog doesn't understand a command, or is confused, or fearful or for what ever reason, it's trying to comply with the handlers wishes, but the penny hasn't dropped, then the handler who raises his voice, or worse, wallops a dog, is a fool.

If a dog doesn't understand what's required of it, then the handler has either taken short cuts, or progressed faster than the dog can cope with. Dogs learn by an association with action and reaction, and except in the rarest of animals, they learn by repetition. Dogs, "generally", do not have the quality of Intelligence, they don't "generally" have the power of reason and so they learn in very basic and bite sized lessons, again by the thought process of cause and effect.

Not always, but often, when we rear a puppy, then for the first few months, life's a game for them. Discipline is kept to a minimum. Over disciplined puppies, like children, will get to the stage of being teenagers, and they will rebel. It's better to allow them liberties as puppies, so that when we start to ask for, and then insist upon compliance, they have the option to listen, or to ignore us. Generally they will ignore us, and as we apply more pressure, "Sit and Stay" for instance, so the more determined and often from a work viewpoint, the better dogs, will kick over the traces, and put up resistance.

We've now reached the stage where we (the trainers), need to assert our authority. When the puppy has been replaced in the sitting position, two or three times, and when it understands what we want, but chooses to ignore us, THEN, we are in a position where a scruffing and a grumble will, if the puppy still chooses not to listen, be followed by a good wallop. Generally the scruffing is enough, but with the more determined, Round 2 comes in to play, and bare in mind that they've never had a hand raised to them, it's generally a serious awakening. For the next couple of months, and on occasion, the puppy may decide that once again, it knows best, and once again, it learns the facts of life.

I've had many, many puppies who I've never raised a hand to, but strangely, the most useful dogs have always been those who were the most wilful as puppies.

Then we have another type of dog. We have the OP's bloody Damnation! He's a young dog, and he fancies himself. The OP has neatly found a way around it, it seems, but a youngster that snaps at me, and means it, even for fear, will be treated as an adult dog will treat it. When I say "Mean it", I mean just that. A wallop has to convey displeasure, and a refusal to tolerate the dogs behaviour. No young dog will learn what's wanted, unless we are clear and unequivical in our deliverance, so how you can explain the sense of rewarding unwanted behaviour, is beyond me, as all that you achieve is that you install confusion, which because of mixed messages, is how the OP's dog ended up, as he was.

Right that's it. That's the thinking behind my modest achievements, I'm sure that you wont agree, but as I'm off to the pub, it wont really matter!! ;)

Alec.
 
Booboos said:
I don't see how rewarding the wrong behaviour is worse than punishing the wrong behaviour to be honest. Getting it wrong is always a problem, but if we accept that people will get it wrong (because we are fallible) I'd rather give a treat for the wrong thing than give a slap (or electric collar zap, or choke chain tug) for the wrong thing.

Alec: your recommendation was not for a harsh word, it was for a wallop (and mean it). Associations, regardless of whether they are positive or negative, can be made really quickly (sometimes as quickly as 2 or 3 repetitions) - all trainers rely on that.

Regarding communicating with the human voice you can certainly do that. There is nothing magical about the click, you can use any noise or word to mark the behaviour. Similarly with rewards, the terrier that likes you, comes to you for a smile, or a pat; food is not the only reward, it's just a really high value reward which makes it very useful for most dogs.

Regarding the bribery issue, you cannot bribe someone who has already done the behaviour. A 'lure and reward' training technique is conceivably a bribe based system as you present the reward and use it to elicit the behaviour. In clicker you do not elicit the behaviour with the food, you re-inforce it.

So bribe goes: food, behaviour, reward
Positive reinforcement: behaviour, marker, reward
Click to expand...

I didn't say it definitely was worse, I said it was almost worse. Okay, semantics. I did make it clear that I don't necessarily like / approve of heavy handed tactics - certainly not for all occasions.

However, I do find that dogs who are rewarded for the wrong behaviours are pretty confused when you then correct them for doing what they were always rewarded for! My own version of correction tends to be a voice - a firm NO and grabbing the collar if necessary to reinforce their attention on me. This does not mean I go yanking and dragging dogs around by their collars. But if a dog is dragging ME around, I do pull back and keep putting the dog in to sit position . It's not allowed to move until I've said it could, and then it has to stay next to me, not in front of me. Sometimes this ends up being a longish session because the dog has had it so reinforced that dragging folk round is acceptable.

I recently watched someone with a large dog in an attempt to get the dog to sit still for a moment feed the dog treats. But the dog was clamboring all over her trying to get the treats, which she was still feeding - not waiting for the dog to sit quietly and THEN say "Good dog" followed up by a treat. It was demanding the treat rather rudely and she was giving the dog the reward for it!

I couldn't have cared less whether she used a clicker or her voice, so long as the timing was correct and not just willy nilly rewarding the dog for it's jumping all over her (and me, I might add - I was being mugged and even while I was ignoring the dog she was still feeding the treats!) So in this case, the dog was very much getting the food before the behaviour because it hadn't actually done the correct thing!
 
Alec Swan said:
Considering your opening sentence, was that a typing error? If you're serious and you're happy to reward the "Wrong behaviour" (though I'm not too sure what you mean by that), at what point and how, do you correct the errors?

.
Click to expand...

No it was not a typo but you miss the point. The point was that any training technique will be misapplied by some people (this is true of any technique in any field because people are falible).

When positive reinforcement is misapplied the dog is rewarded for the wrong behaviour - this is bad.

When positive punishment is misapplied the dog is punished for the wrong behaviour - this is worse.

I correct errors by negative punishment (i.e. withdrawal or omission of reward).

I am in complete agreement with you that dogs need to understand what we are asking for, and also that the best way to do that is for behaviours to have consistent consequences, but we disagree over which consequences are more efficacious. For me (and the overwhelming amount of experimental studies in the topic) positive reinforcement is the fastest way of strengthening behaviour.
 
PucciNPoni said:
I didn't say it definitely was worse, I said it was almost worse. Okay, semantics. I did make it clear that I don't necessarily like / approve of heavy handed tactics - certainly not for all occasions.

However, I do find that dogs who are rewarded for the wrong behaviours are pretty confused when you then correct them for doing what they were always rewarded for! My own version of correction tends to be a voice - a firm NO and grabbing the collar if necessary to reinforce their attention on me. This does not mean I go yanking and dragging dogs around by their collars. But if a dog is dragging ME around, I do pull back and keep putting the dog in to sit position . It's not allowed to move until I've said it could, and then it has to stay next to me, not in front of me. Sometimes this ends up being a longish session because the dog has had it so reinforced that dragging folk round is acceptable.

I recently watched someone with a large dog in an attempt to get the dog to sit still for a moment feed the dog treats. But the dog was clamboring all over her trying to get the treats, which she was still feeding - not waiting for the dog to sit quietly and THEN say "Good dog" followed up by a treat. It was demanding the treat rather rudely and she was giving the dog the reward for it!

I couldn't have cared less whether she used a clicker or her voice, so long as the timing was correct and not just willy nilly rewarding the dog for it's jumping all over her (and me, I might add - I was being mugged and even while I was ignoring the dog she was still feeding the treats!) So in this case, the dog was very much getting the food before the behaviour because it hadn't actually done the correct thing!
Click to expand...

I completely agree with you that dogs can become easily and greatly confused by owners who misapply cues, markers and rewards. I have seen people who week after week were unable to apply the "behaviour - click - treat" sequence. The task wasn't so much to train the dog, but to train the owner and some people failed miserably.

The lady you describe sounds like a case in point. Any decent class that uses food starts with a 'leave it' command and keeps strengthening it until it is very well established. The dogs get it really quickly - I had a border collie get it on the second repetition. Any further inappropriate behaviour, like jumping up for food, should be discouraged by withdrawing the reward.

I can't really defend a theory on behalf of people who cannot apply it though! ;)
 
Booboos said:
.......

For me (and the overwhelming amount of experimental studies in the topic) positive reinforcement is the fastest way of strengthening behaviour.
Click to expand...

I'm not in any way trying to belittle what's experimental, but though they may exist, I don't know of one Professional, in any discipline, who would agree with you. I'm not going to offer my own experience as a yard stick, but I know of many Internationally competing dog handlers, and not one who I know of uses the methods which you ascribe to. Not one.

Perhaps they're wrong, and you're right. I'm not being sarcastic, but perhaps you could consider that you're contradicting those who earn a living doing, what you do, for a hobby. ;)

Alec.
 
I know a lot of gundogs - mainly labs - and most are very well trained, good natured dogs. They work as well, but they are 'good' dogs anyway. I also know 2 labs, both pets, who have been trained using treats and both are really awful dogs, absolutely no respect for the owners at all and will only do what they are told for a biscuit, never because they want to work with you. To me that is the result of treat based training but I acknowledge it is a very narrow view.
 
Alec Swan said:
I'm not in any way trying to belittle what's experimental, but though they may exist, I don't know of one Professional, in any discipline, who would agree with you. I'm not going to offer my own experience as a yard stick, but I know of many Internationally competing dog handlers, and not one who I know of uses the methods which you ascribe to. Not one.

Perhaps they're wrong, and you're right. I'm not being sarcastic, but perhaps you could consider that you're contradicting those who earn a living doing, what you do, for a hobby. ;)

Alec.
Click to expand...

Which discipline?

The whole of sea mammals training field is exclusively positive reinforcement, indeed I think we'd struggle to find one example of a trainer who faced with a disobedient whale, wades into the pool, wallops her one, scruffs her and drags her back through the hoop to teach her respect.

Dog obedience: I don't know these people personally but by their own accounts and books they use positive reinforcement and win titles at the highest levels of obedience: Morgan Spector, Esther Zimmerman, Deborah Jones, Cecilie Koste, Susan Garrett, etc. If you become a member of this group you can see the list of obedience achievements by its clicker using members
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/clickcompobed/

Canine musical freestyle: is overwhelmingly dominated (see what I did there!) by clicker trainers, as are more amateur oriented events like Clicker Challenge.

OK you might say, let's get serious here, what about Schutzhund clicker champions? Jessy Gabriel (represented the US in World Schutzhund Championships), Rob Dunn (ditto), Doug Calhoon (Schutzhund competitor and judge, also trained 14 police dogs)

I have to take MiniBoo to nursery now but I could go on!
 
Certainly the agility world is positively trained... In fact it is in the rules that the sort of handling that involves walloping, scruffing or pinning your dog to the floor would end up with you being disciplined.
 
In Schutzhund (No such thing anymore by the way - it's IPO!!) you cannot touch the dog during any of the exercises. It can lead to instant disqualification.

You will get marks if they dog looks 'happy in it's work' and have points deducted if it looks under pressure.

Not all use clicker training (it is very useful for foundation work) but all use vocal markers. And very few use no compulsion at all. It's not a good idea to allow a dog which has the balls required to take on an adversary, to make all it's own choices in life, IMO.
 
Im quite old school with my dog training and resisted clicker training thinking it was only useful for Dolphins etc and was practised by fluffy bunnies.

When I had Darcy who was fear aggressive with dogs I went to a clicker trainer and got results.

I now use a combination of training with my dogs and they are happy well rounded dogs so I am happy.

I try to keep an open mind and will give most things in life a try but I also live by the maxim there is no point getting older if you dont get wiser.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top