Tobey

[mbc1963]

Hmmm...

 

I said above that I would correct my dog (verbally) for growling at me or a visitor - but do agree that this is now, after I know my dog well. Thinking back to the early days with my dog, when he was both reactive and a stranger to me, that would have been a bad move. He needed lots of time and space to get to know me and the patterns of life here. The more I backed off and slowed down, the more progress he made. The more I moved forward quickly, the more steps backwards he took.

 

If I had known then what I know now, I would have moved much, much slower with Buddy than I did. I concur with Maralynn's post above: lots of space and quiet, and very slow introductions to the chaotic pieces of life. I took Buddy to my father's on the second day he was here, and my dog-loving father shoved his hand right in the dog's face. We're all lucky Buddy didn't bite. He loves my Dad now, but he needed way more space and time before he was ready for the chaos of Sunday dinner.

 

The longer Buddy lives with me, the more calm he is in new situations. Month by month, I can see the fear and reactivity receding to the back of his brain. (I don't expect it to ever fully disappear.) This isn't due so much to formal training at this point, as to my knowing the dog well and knowing what I need to do to make things work for him.

 

Mary

[kajarrel]

I'm on board 100% with Maralynn. Nice post.

 

Kim

[Izzysdad]

The idea about bringing him to where there are other dogs to start working on his barking issue. He doesn't bark in the house or when others come in the house, only when he sees other dogs/people he wants to play with. We were very far away and actually had some great success in getting him to focus on his and not bark. We were there for about 10 minutes and then we came home. It was a very postive thing.

[sweet_ceana]

I am just curious, maybe I am missing something, but who suggested that there should be absolutely no correction? I know I never said that. I just offered a description of where the behavior may have come from, and to reinforce that growling doesn't always mean you have an agressive dog. I have a fear aggressive dog, and you KNOW it when you have it. I think aggression is an extreme and infrequent mentality that gets thrown around a lot to describe miscommunication and frustration between dogs and owners.

 

I was not under the impression that NILIF was purely positive. Am I misunderstanding NILIF?

[MaryP]

I was not under the impression that NILIF was purely positive. Am I misunderstanding NILIF?

 

That all depends on what your definition of "positive" is.

[MaryP]

I think most dogs are given waaay too much freedom in the begining stages of life with a new family. Dogs need to know the rules before they can become family members. Most dogs would benefit by being crated for the most part for the first couple weeks and kept on a consistent scheldule with NILIF. It teached them the rules, boundries and routine that dogs, especially BCs crave. Instead people tend to welcome them with open arms and try to instanly integrate them into their life and the dog gets the run of the house without knowing the rules of the house. That puts alot of pressure on a dog still trying to figure his new life out.

 

I think that this is such an important but often not followed piece of advise for new pet owners. I always strongly encourage folks that adopt dogs from me to take this approach, but they almost never do. They are so excited about their new dog that they just want to give it everything and take it everywhere right away. It can cause some serious problems (and has).

 

This is the approach that I use with foster dogs and it works really well for getting them integrated into the house and the routine and easing their stress level. Some protest a bit at first, but in the end, I think it creates a better behaved dog a lot sooner.

[Izzysdad]

I think that this is such an important but often not followed piece of advise for new pet owners. I always strongly encourage folks that adopt dogs from me to take this approach, but they almost never do. They are so excited about their new dog that they just want to give it everything and take it everywhere right away. It can cause some serious problems (and has).

 

This is the approach that I use with foster dogs and it works really well for getting them integrated into the house and the routine and easing their stress level. Some protest a bit at first, but in the end, I think it creates a better behaved dog a lot sooner.

 

That is a good point to not take the dog everywhere at first, and I haven't. Tobey actually shows some anxiety riding in the car. My guess is that he has had very few in his life. We just did some work in the backyard and he did awesome. This boy is clay and can be molded into an awesome dog, and that's where we are headed....slowly.

[Flamincomet]

I do not agree. As it was stated, you need to take swift action, as soon as possible. If the behavior escalates, then the correction needs to escalate. Someone needs to be in charge, and it does not need to be the dog. I can't think of what I would if one of my dogs were to growl at someone or bite me. Just remember, the growl is usually before the bite. "but I ended up being bit on the wrist after correcting him for growling at me in the manner that you described" So the dog won. What did you then do? Just wondering Ken

 

The problem with escalating the correction with reactive or fearful dogs, is that they will almost always continue to escalate as well, which leaves you trapped in a situation I personally would not want to be in. Dogs have teeth, people have soft skin, not something I'm wanting to put money on. Especially when there are many other non confrontational ways to deal with this.

 

What I don't understand, is why there needs to be a "winner?" In this particular situation I got bit and have permanent nerve damage, and the dog lost his home. To me everyone lost in that situation.

 

And no I don't think no action should be taken or the behavior ignored. I agree with most other posters that NILIF, or something similar is a great option.

 

Autumn

[Amelia]

Once he caught sight of the dogs he started with the barking and such I described in another thread. Katie took over and was getting him to focus on her and she was treat machine.

 

I only claim to be reasonably smart, but if I were a dog, I would learn from this experience that each time I became rash and disrespecful, I would be fed by my subordinate. I will never understand how feeding a dog teaches him to stop an action. You are not doing anything to create respect or make the dog understand that he's doing something wrong. If I got a cookie every time I kicked you, you'd have bruises.

 

Made him "believe" what? That when strange looking humans show up you go crazy , hold him down, scare the sh*t out of him, and then let what scares him touch him until he goes limp anyway?

 

I made him believe that when he is disrespectful there will be swift and immediate consequences, that aggression in any form will not be tolerated even a little bit, and that I make the rules so he doesn't have to. Going limp...hmmm, I would say that he became submissive (as opposed to aggressive) and began to enjoy the little girl's attention at which point I released the pressure completely and everybody had fun. I've said this many times, but dogs do not learn from pressure, they learn from the release of it. The quicker you release the pressure, the quicker the dog learns.

 

I daresay if you had a colt do this, you'd never hold it down and make it tolerate it. #1, most of us aren't strong enough, and I know I'd not want to scotch hobble a valuable colt and let him fight it out at the risk of injury to it or us. You'd probably take your time and let the colt get used to it. A little time, a little patience, and a good solid horse is made.

 

I have only raised a few colts from birth, and in fact did hold them down and sack them out almost as soon as they hit the ground. They struggled a little at first, but then went "limp" and took it like a massage, which is exactly what it is. I highly recommend it. It's called imprinting and I found it worked beautifully to help create horses that are a pleasure to be around. For the following 3 months they got daily lessons on the rules and manners, and then turned out with their mommas for 6 months to just be a horse. More commonly I have trained young horses that came to me with very bad manners and no respect. You're right, I could not overpower them, but I did outsmart them and it always started by making them tired.

 

In this particular situation I got bit and have permanent nerve damage, and the dog lost his home. To me everyone lost in that situation.

 

This is a perfect example of why you, as the handler must prevail. So nobody gets hurt and the dog doesn't lose.

 

 

I wish the very best for you and your dog, and again, I truly appreciate the fact that you rescued him. As I said, I'm a big, make that a huge fan of rescue. Cheers all,

[Flamincomet]

This is a perfect example of why you, as the handler must prevail. So nobody gets hurt and the dog doesn't lose.

 

I agree, but the way I went about doing it prevented me from prevailing and in fact set us up to lose.

 

Autumn

[Lenajo]

All I can say Amelia, is that some dog get better despite people, instead of because of them. 3 cheers to solid tempered dogs who make it through "training" as described.

 

A 3 band-aides to the pet people who try this at home. You'll need more if you aren't lucky.

 

The idea of pinning a pup for being scared is making me physically ill. As for horses - dear God - I'm so glad I had trainers with better attitudes towards their charges.

 

I am so outta here.

[nancy in AZ]

I only claim to be reasonably smart, but if I were a dog, I would learn from this experience that each time I became rash and disrespecftul, I would be fed by my subordinate. I will never understand how feeding a dog teaches him to stop an action. You are not doing anything to create respect or make the dog understand that he's doing something wrong. If I got a cookie every time I kicked you, you'd have bruises.

 

Well you're not a dog, and it's clear that you don't have any basic understanding of the differences between or the effects of classical vs operant conditioning. For those of you who doubt the power of learning theory, it is a recognized SCIENCE--proven with scientific methodologies, not just a feel good way for people to interact and train their dogs. And another thing that is a pet peeve of mine, this reference to "all positive" trainers. While I'm sure some of these people do exist on the planet, they certainly are vastly in the minority. Just because someone doesn't use the "take him down and show him whose boss" method of punishment, does not automatically put them in the camp of "all positive" or "no pressure" trainers. Dogs don't think in terms of "winners" and "losers", this is a human construct and unfortunately it brings just the attitude that you express into a situation where it doesn't belong.

 

I watched a so-called professional trainer do just what you suggest, pushed a dog that had heretofore never initiated any more aggression than a fear-induced grumble while backing away. The guy was eventually bitten several times. It was really sad that he pushed this animal beyond the breaking point. It took a long time to bring him back.

 

I have only raised a few colts from birth, and in fact did hold them down and sack them out almost as soon as they hit the ground. They struggled a little at first, but then went "limp" and took it like a massage, which is exactly what it is. I highly recommend it. It's called imprinting

 

There is such thing as imprinting (not that I'm a big fan) but THAT is not imprinting. That is called creating learned helplessness. Sad, so sad.

 

ETA I have a question for those of you who espouse this "take down" method as a line of first defense. I concede that it may work in many cases, but if the same result can be achieved without resorting to violence and intimidation (and it's been shown they can), why would you WANT to use it? Seriously, this is not meant as a rhetorical question.

[Root Beer]

I only claim to be reasonably smart, but if I were a dog, I would learn from this experience that each time I became rash and disrespecful, I would be fed by my subordinate. I will never understand how feeding a dog teaches him to stop an action. You are not doing anything to create respect or make the dog understand that he's doing something wrong. If I got a cookie every time I kicked you, you'd have bruises.

 

You may not understand how it happens, but there are dogs who do, in fact, learn to stop actions through training that incorporates food rewards. I've seen it done, I've done it, and I've helped others learn how to make that very thing happen. We didn't all just get lucky, either. There are far too many of us who have had success changing behavior using reinforcemnt for that to be the case.

 

That's not to say that, as you stated above, the dog gets a treat every time they do what you don't want - in fact, that's not the case at all.

 

It's not everyone's choice, but there are many who do choose this type of approach and do so successfully.

 

As far as winning and losing and prevailing - honestly, if I had to think that way to raise a mannerly dog I personally would not choose to have a dog at all. I am deeply grateful that there are other ways to approach behavior modification that can be applied to the simplest manners training task, as well as much bigger behavior issues.

 

Finally, NILIF is not a food reward based training method, so there isn't even any particular use of treats associated with it, unless the handler makes a modification (which can be a good idea sometimes) to include the use of food.

 

Izzysdad, some form of NILIF might work well for you. There is a book called "Click to Calm" that you might want to get ahold of and read through. It gives a very simple foundation program, which includes a form of an NILIF approach, that you could work through with Tobey at home. In addition to providing a foundation with which you can work if it turns out that there is some anxiety causing this, it will give you a way to start to bond and get to know each other better. I just re-read "Click to Calm" to prepare for some work I'm going to be doing with a client with a dog who is resource guarding his crate and, based on what I re-read in the book and what you have posted, I think the book just might prove very helpful to you.

 

Whatever you choose to do, I wish you the best with Tobey.

 

Edited: I rearranged one sentence because I put it in the wrong place and it made no sense!!

 

Edited Again: I originally said that NILIF is not a reward based training method, but I mis-spoke. There is an element of reward in that the dog earns privileges such as freedom, access to furniture, etc. What I meant was that it is not a food-reward based training method. At least not per se. Granted, if you are using it to teach the dog to wait calmly for a bowl of food, the food will be the reward. But it's not "treat training", as some would say.

[eclare]

I'm the farthest thing from a training expert, but one point in this debate that I have not seen mentioned is that the mindset of a fear-aggressive dog is not conducive to reasoned learning. By that I mean, if you try to "teach a lesson" to a dog that is scared to the point of aggression, it's probably not going to learn the lesson that you intend because it is focused entirely on its fear. If a dog is afraid of something and is "corrected" for reacting to it, it seems to me that it will continue to associate whatever caused the fear in the first place with a negative consequence. My question for those who use corrective training techniques is how do you distinguish between the dog's reaction and the stimulus that caused it.

 

For example, dog sees "grizzly bear", freaks out, and growls. Dog gets corrected. Won't dog now associate "grizzly bear" with correction and become even more afraid every time it sees a new "grizzly bear." How do you get the dog to understand that it's his growling that caused the correction?

[Kenbo]

I'm the farthest thing from a training expert, but one point in this debate that I have not seen mentioned is that the mindset of a fear-aggressive dog is not conducive to reasoned learning. By that I mean, if you try to "teach a lesson" to a dog that is scared to the point of aggression, it's probably not going to learn the lesson that you intend because it is focused entirely on its fear. If a dog is afraid of something and is "corrected" for reacting to it, it seems to me that it will continue to associate whatever caused the fear in the first place with a negative consequence. My question for those who use corrective training techniques is how do you distinguish between the dog's reaction and the stimulus that caused it.

 

For example, dog sees "grizzly bear", freaks out, and growls. Dog gets corrected. Won't dog now associate "grizzly bear" with correction and become even more afraid every time it sees a new "grizzly bear." How do you get the dog to understand that it's his growling that caused the correction?

 

 

Lot of good points made here and each person has to be there to judge each, but

 

For example, dog sees "child", freaks out, and growls. Dog gets corrected. Won't dog now associate "child" with correction and become even more afraid every time it sees a new "child." How do you get the dog to understand that it's his growling that caused the correction?

 

Hopefully the dog won't growl at the child or at least know that it will be corrected if it does, some things are a given, some are not. Ken

[Ninso]

I only claim to be reasonably smart, but if I were a dog, I would learn from this experience that each time I became rash and disrespecful, I would be fed by my subordinate. I will never understand how feeding a dog teaches him to stop an action. You are not doing anything to create respect or make the dog understand that he's doing something wrong. If I got a cookie every time I kicked you, you'd have bruises.

 

Well of course it doesn't make sense when you say it that way! But that's not at all how it actually works in the hands of a person who is skilled at training through positive reinforcement. In the example of a dog who is barking at other dogs, the dog is not fed for barking, he is fed for the absence of barking. Thus, as long as the reward is more reinforcing than the barking, the dog will soon learn that barking gets him nothing and silence gets him a chance to earn a reward. If this method did not work, then millions of positive reinforcement trainers world-wide would not use it.

 

Have you ever tried positive reinforcement training? Have you ever done any research on it? Based on your above-quoted comment, your dislike for it seems to be fueled by a complete lack of understanding as to how it works. Why not educate yourself on a topic before making claims about it? Of course positive reinforcement training is not going to be the answer for every dog or every behavior (I have a dog whose highly self-reinforcing barking I've only been able to cure through correction, specifically, a bark collar) but neither is the solution you have proposed, even if it has always worked for you.

 

As for correcting aggression, my dog Jun is fear-aggressive towards children. She is a rescue that came to me at 8 months old and I can only assume she was never properly socialized with children. I am certain that I made her fear worse by correcting her the first few times she displayed the behavior (on the advice of a person who, like you, "does not tolerate" any aggression and responds only by correction). I am certain that if I corrected her as harshly as you corrected your pup, not only would her fear of children not be cured, but she would most likely develop a new fear of me as well. On the other hand, on the occasions I've had her around children it only takes a little time before she begins to realize on her own that they aren't going to hurt her and stops growling at them, as long as they stay a little distance away. If I had access to children to expose her to on a regular basis, I bet it wouldn't take long before she would overcome her fear on her own.

[eclare]

Kenbo,

Well, my point is that if the dog sees the child as something to be afraid of (ie, a "grizzly bear") he will continue to be afraid of the child after correction. I guess what I don't understand is how you can change the behavior without changing the underlying cause of the behavior, which is the fear. It seems to me that the correction might suppress the physical reaction in the short term, but a fearful dog can be like a ticking time bomb.

[Izzysdad]

Wow, this thread certainly has taken off! There are so many different ways to train a dog, and everyone finds an approach that works for them. We've thought about clicker training and may consider it. Since our little incident Sat. night there hasn't been a peep out of him growl-wise. He did have a vet appt. today and he of course did bark when he couldn't go greet the vet right away on his terms, but once I got him calmed down and on the table he of course was a big loveable fur ball and didn't make a peep the rest of the time.

[Kenbo]

an only assume she was never properly socialized with children. I am certain that I made her fear worse by correcting her the first few times she displayed the behavior (on the advice of a person who, like you, "does not tolerate" any aggression and responds only by correction). I am certain that if I corrected her as harshly as you corrected your pup, not only would her fear of children not be cured, but she would most likely develop a new fear of me as well. On the other hand, on the occasions I've had her around children it only takes a little time before she begins to realize on her own that they aren't going to hurt her and stops growling at them, as long as they stay a little distance away. If I had access to children to expose her to on a regular basis, I bet it wouldn't take long before she would overcome her fear on her own.

 

Respect can and will come from fear. All of my dogs will always come to me first to be loved, and I am the one who will hands out the corrections. My wife will attempt to make them do something and they will just look at her. She was never the enforcer. I will say one word and they jump to it either out of fear or love. Either way, I don't care, but they will do it. Ken

[MaryP]

I guess what I don't understand is how you can change the behavior without changing the underlying cause of the behavior, which is the fear.

 

I don't believe you can and anyone who thinks that you can use "the fear of God" approach to curing a dog of a fear (which presents as growling at the thing that is feared) is fooling themselves and anyone else they advise to use this approach.

[Kenbo]

Kenbo,

Well, my point is that if the dog sees the child as something to be afraid of (ie, a "grizzly bear") he will continue to be afraid of the child after correction. I guess what I don't understand is how you can change the behavior without changing the underlying cause of the behavior, which is the fear. It seems to me that the correction might suppress the physical reaction in the short term, but a fearful dog can be like a ticking time bomb.

 

It's not always the "child" it might be that they "can" and if they know that is unacceptiable actions, and they will be corrected if they do it, they might just think about it if they know they will be in trouble. but I do see your point

[Amelia]

The following is reprinted from Dr. Miller's website:

 

Dr. Miller is one of the leading advocates and educators on the concept of imprint training of foals.

An overview of this technique is provided below.

 

Imprint Training - An Overview

 

Imprint training offers a singular opportunity to permanently mould a horse's personality. For a short time, the new born foal is programmed to imprint stimuli. The right procedures at the right time yield dramatic results. There is no time a horse will learn faster.

 

Advantages

 

Imprint training can help ease handling, enhance later training efforts and reduce injuries. It shapes behavior in the following ways:

 

1) Bonding with the imprint trainer. Immediately postpartum, the foal bonds simultaneously with its dam and with one or more persons handling it. Such foals see humans, not as predators, but as fellow horses.

 

2) Submission, but not fear. During imprint training, the foal cannot escape (its natural method of survival) exposure to frightening stimuli. As a result, it becomes dependent and submissive in its attitude. The foal sees the trainer as a dominant horse or herd leader. Psychologically, this is the ideal relationship between horse and human. We must have submissiveness in a horse if he is to work for us. But, the submissiveness should be created not by fear (a predatory role) but by dependence (a dominant leader role).

 

3) Desensitization to most sensory stimuli (visual, auditory, tactile, and olfactory). Most parts of the body, including all body openings, are desensitized. Rapid, repetitious stimuli (flooding) are used until the foal is habituated, i.e. permanently non responsive to those stimuli. Loud noises, fluttering objects or being touched anywhere on the body will thereafter be calmly tolerated.

 

4) Sensitizing to performance related stimuli. Specifically, the foal can be taught to respond (rather than habituated) to head and flank pressure. The responsiveness allows control over the fore and hind quarters. The foal will lead where directed, and will move its hind end laterally in response to the touch of a finger in the flank region. This is best taught on the day after birth, after the foal is on its feet.

 

Some believe that early bonding between the foal and humans will produce a "pet" foal. They believe that early foal-human bonding will produce a spoiled horse, indifferent to stimuli, which will lack the flightiness "necessary" to race or perform well. This is nonsense. Imprint training, properly performed, will enhance a horse's relationship with humans. It will teach it "good manners" and increase its responsiveness to stimuli that will later improve its performance.

 

The only "disadvantage" of imprint training is that, since it is best started immediately post-partum, the mare must be brought in for foaling. This is actually desirable, because it allows rapid identification of any obstetrical problems. It also requires that the Broodmare be gentle and well mannered. If she is not, it is better to correct before the mare foals, or, better, before she is bred. One should not expect to turn out docile, well mannered foals if one doesn't have a well mannered mare. Yet, some people seem to take pride in owning untrained, ill mannered broodmares. To me, poor manners indicate ownership by an inept horseman.

 

An enhanced relationship

 

I first became aware that neonatal foals can be trained and their behavior indelibly shaped, about 30 years ago. Subsequently, a behavior shaping routine evolved which I call "imprint training". I have no illusions that the training of new born foals is a new idea. In fact, there is no doubt that human beings have done this for thousands of years. All I have done is ritualized the procedure, given it a name, attempted to scientifically explain why it is so effective, and publicly promoted and encouraged its use because it enhances the relationship between horse and human, and, from a veterinarian standpoint, greatly facilitates the practitioner's job.

 

Ill mannered horses are the bane of the horse industry. If you can imprint train your foals, this problem will be minimized.

Imprint training is now commonly used all over the world. Since imprint trained horses are more manageable, far fewer injuries occur to horses and people. It has made life easier for both horse and horse handler.

 

 

I don't know about you guys, but after a lifetime of training horses, I thought this approach sounded pretty good. I tried it, it worked beautifully and, like I said, I highly recommend it.

Dr. Miller retired from veterinary medicine after 30 years and is considered an expert in animal behavior.

 

They struggled a little at first, but then went "limp"

Edited to read: The colt went to sleep.

 

Cheers all

[dracina]

Wow, this thread certainly has taken off! There are so many different ways to train a dog, and everyone finds an approach that works for them. We've thought about clicker training and may consider it. Since our little incident Sat. night there hasn't been a peep out of him growl-wise. He did have a vet appt. today and he of course did bark when he couldn't go greet the vet right away on his terms, but once I got him calmed down and on the table he of course was a big loveable fur ball and didn't make a peep the rest of the time.

 

Izzysdad:

 

Good luck to you and Tobey. You seem to be a very good owner, and I am sure that you will find a successful solution. You are smart to ask for advice, because it sounds as though the situation is a bit iffy, and the last thing you want is it to become unsafe for human or dog.

 

There are many different ways to train a dog, and the one that works for you and your dogs is the best one.

 

Karrin

[eclare]

It's not always the "child" it might be that they "can" and if they know that is unacceptiable actions, and they will be corrected if they do it, they might just think about it if they know they will be in trouble. but I do see your point

 

It also seems to me that if your dogs behavior is based entirely on his fear and respect of you, then it's pretty much game on when you're not around. Kenbo, I'm sure that you would never leave a child unattended with your dogs, but if someone else had trained a dog not to growl at a child by physically correcting the growl, the dog may just learn to growl (or worse) only when its owner isn't around.

[Kenbo]

I don't believe you can and anyone who thinks that you can use "the fear of God" approach to curing a dog of a fear (which presents as growling at the thing that is feared) is fooling themselves and anyone else they advise to use this approach.

 

I agree and maybe we're seeing the same thing but calling it a different name. A fear is a fear, but bad behavior is not the same, it's the bad action that I want corrected not the fear which is much harder. Biting in most cases and growling is a bad action. Maybe they don't want anyone in their space, which we all like at times, but the dog should not make this decision. As I have said many times, either you control the dog or the dog will control you. It's that simple. Fear biting is a whole new topic and it should be handled a little different, but not much. Got to go home from work. Ken