Second Guessing

[Heather Rae]

 

 

I taught her a game from the Control Unleashed program called "Give Me a Break" where permission to do what she wanted (sniff, lay on the ground and roll on her side, etc.), was put on cue. Then I used those things as a reward for her for focusing on the outdoor course and running with me, even just a tiny bit at first. Before long, I couldn't get her to sniff on course for love or money. She was no longer interested in rolling onto her side. I soon had a dog who was focused on me, wagging her tail, and eager to run.

 

 

Correct me if I'm getting the wrong picture, but I think I've done something similar. My father's Malamute had an atrocious pulling problem. He loves his way over all other things, I tried for several months the treat when your by my side method but it only got him briefly interested and did absolutely nothing when he saw a brush he wanted to smell. So instead I switched to allowing him to smell the bush his reward. When he pulled it was stop and come back to me and little by little (many-a-day of me looking foolish) he got the picture that walking by my side would allow him to get his way.

[Root Beer]

I guess I just like to figure out how to make what I want highly rewarding to the dog. And shape the dogs behavior that way. It's pretty straight forward to build drive for something.

 

I do, as well. Sometimes, though, I use what is naturally highly rewarding to the dog to create value in something else that I want to be highly rewarding. It gives me reinforcement options that go beyond food and toys, and sometimes it's nice to have that. It actually makes building drive for something even more straightforward at times.

 

Then why did you choose Border Collies over a more independent breed?

 

Because I love them. I think they are the best dogs in existence. I love the way they engage, they way that they relate, they way they think, they way they play. I even love their quirks. The more independent breeds bore me.

 

I think that actually was a big part of what I was saying about how I view things when a Border Collie is being "manipulative". I just don't consider it a "problem". I consider it something I can use to my advantage as a trainer. I would not want any other kind of dog. Bring on the Border Collie challenges!

 

I think comparing humans to dogs in this manner is like comparing apples to oranges. You are projecting your emotions on the matter to dogs.

 

I don't see it that way. A big part of why I enjoy sharing my life with dogs is because we connect on many levels, and emotion certainly has a part in that. Anyway, it's not projecting anything to recognize that I, as a human, share specific characteristics in common in common with my dogs, who are not human. No more than if I say that my dogs and I both enjoy eating chicken, so I can completely understand why the dog likes chicken. I am an independent person. Some dogs are also independent individuals. I can relate to that and I don't consider it to be a "problem" in a dog. It's not really a "comparison". It is simply a factor that shapes my personal point of view toward dogs that some would consider "manipulative" or "sulky".

[Root Beer]

Correct me if I'm getting the wrong picture, but I think I've done something similar. My father's Malamute had an atrocious pulling problem. He loves his way over all other things, I tried for several months the treat when your by my side method but it only got him briefly interested and did absolutely nothing when he saw a brush he wanted to smell. So instead I switched to allowing him to smell the bush his reward. When he pulled it was stop and come back to me and little by little (many-a-day of me looking foolish) he got the picture that walking by my side would allow him to get his way.

 

Same principle. So, to take it back to your earlier question, that's exactly how I choose to handle a "manipulative" dog. I take advantage of the dog's desire to get "his way" and use it to get what I'm training for.

[Heather Rae]

Same principle. So, to take it back to your earlier question, that's exactly how I choose to handle a "manipulative" dog. I take advantage of the dog's desire to get "his way" and use it to get what I'm training for.

 

There are something I can't allow period though, like being aggressive with the cats. He's extremely driven by the cats. As long as he doesn't paw them, nip them, or appear to be unduly rough with them I usually let him harass them... not much I can do when my kitten temps him into games of chase. I guess it's still not that different, he's allowed to play with the cats as long has he acts within a certain realm of behaviors. As soon as he doesn't he has to go to another room.

[Root Beer]

There are something I can't allow period though, like being aggressive with the cats. He's extremely driven by the cats. As long as he doesn't paw them, nip them, or appear to be unduly rough with them I usually let him harass them... not much I can do when my kitten temps him into games of chase. I guess it's still not that different, he's allowed to play with the cats as long has he acts within a certain realm of behaviors. As soon as he doesn't he has to go to another room.

 

That's not really something that I would see as "manipulative". He likes to play with the cats. He gets too rough sometimes. You make the limits within which he can play clear. As long as he stays within those limits, he can play.

 

The same idea does come into play in this instance - behaving appropriately with the cats (what you want) gives him access to the cats (what he wants). But I don't really see the dog in this instance as being particularly manipulative.

[juliepoudrier]

It actually makes building drive for something even more straightforward at times.

 

I think this statement illustrates the difference in training goals I mentioned earlier, and why one person might find a sulky dog a challenge where another would find it a PIA.

 

From my POV as someone training a dog to work stock properly, I shouldn't have to *build* drive. Attemtpting to cajole a dog into working stock is how we end up with some of the cringeworthy videos that get posted here from time to time--videos of people with dogs unsuited to stock work who are trying to build some sort of drive--other than prey drive--in their dogs WRT livestock.

 

I think this is one big reason that the stockdog trainers and those who train for other things have such a big disconnect when they discuss training methods. On stock, I expect a well-bred stockdog to have some basic instinctual behaviors (for lack of a better term, and specifically related to livestock) that I can shape/direct and build on. I don't have to first create those behaviors in the dog and then shape them to a form I want--the behavior is innate. And before anyone pipes up and says that pet, etc., dog trainers are also building on behaviors the dog offers, I realize that. But the dog is offering behaviors to the human somewhat randomly at first (if that makes sense), whereas on livestock the dog is offering very specific behaviors at first.

 

I won't belabor the point. I just think it's important to put discussions like this in context, since obviously our personal experiences and feelings about types of dogs depends on our training goals. I probably wouldn't mind a sulky/manipulative dog so much if I were training for something else, say, flyball, and I imagine Kristine might find a sulky/manipulative dog not so much of a fun challenge if she were trying to train that dog for stock work.

 

J.

[Root Beer]

From my POV as someone training a dog to work stock properly, I shouldn't have to *build* drive. Attemtpting to cajole a dog into working stock is how we end up with some of the cringeworthy videos that get posted here from time to time--videos of people with dogs unsuited to stock work who are trying to build some sort of drive--other than prey drive--in their dogs WRT livestock.

 

Isn't it the case, though, that the dog you've got is the dog you've got? And that when challenges arise you have the opportunity to make of them what you will? (Of course some dogs are not (edited - should have said "not" originally) suited for stockwork, but that's not what I'm referring to). Yes, in a perfect world, we wouldn't want to have to build drive in a sport or pet dog, either, but often it's reality that it is simply necessary for an individual dog. Many people choose to become wrapped up in the "problems" and flat out fail to see vast depths of potential that are before their very eyes. I know I've done that and it has taken time for me to learn to see the potential and shift my thinking to learn to take advantage of the dog's assets as an individual when it comes to handling those things. But upon starting to learn to do that, many of the "problems" have become opportunities for deeper bonding and learning things that I would have cut myself off from had I chosen instead to treat the dog as a "manipulative and sulky" problem.

 

That's why I think in terms of independence, creativity, ingenuity, and willing to express frustration or stress, rather than "manipulative" or "sulky". I know - you're probably going to say it's "semantics", but to a vast degree, these kinds of things are what we make of them. Especially when it comes to pets. Just to be clear - I am talking about normal dog things here, not serious issues that warrant help from a vet behaviorist or medication or serious behavior modification.

 

Of course, my perspective may differ from those who do stockwork. Personally, I think it's good to consider different perspectives. The OP is at the point where she is considering getting a Border Collie. I think it is good for anyone who is in that position to know, not only that all dogs are not the same, but that there are different approaches to handling the "doggie" things that will come up along the way.

 

As you say, Julie, we could - and actually already have, many times - discuss the differences between what we want in a Border Collie who is to do stockwork and a Border Collie who will be a pet or sport partner, but I don't think that would really add to the topic at hand. Those difference certainly exist, though.

 

When it comes to teaching a dog to enjoy being in a crate, or to curtail his or her nipping, or to accept the leash (the kinds of things that the OP ran into with the puppy she dog sat, or would have if the puppy had been hers) I personally choose not to approach those things from the standpoint that the dog is "manipulative" or "sulky", but to consider the dog an individual and find ways to cultivate more of what I like in the dog by actually using the dog's natural drives and desires. I know that the "sulky" approach works for some, but there are other options, and I think it's good for the OP to know that.

[juliepoudrier]

As you say, Julie, we could - and actually already have, many times - discuss the differences between what we want in a Border Collie who is to do stockwork and a Border Collie who will be a pet or sport partner, but I don't think that would really add to the topic at hand. Those difference certainly exist, though.

And I think it *does* add to the topic at hand, because it places the comments of individual posters in context. If I say a sulky dog is a PIA and you say a sulky dog is an extra special challenge that you personally love and can learn tons from and in fact you have had tons of success training such dogs, then either one of us sucks as a trainer or context is important. I happen to think it's the latter, though no doubt you might think it's the former.

 

In so many of these discussions, if a stockdog trainer says X, someone who doesn't train dogs on stock will come along and say,"Oh no, X is actually just another challenge that requires a special depth of perception to get the most out of the dog in question, and if you'd just listen and learn from the dog you could get the result you wanted and deepen your bond with your dog."

 

So, like tilting at windmills or uselessly banging my head against a brick wall, I sometimes feel compelled to point out that one trainer's paradigm doesn't have to be (nor sometimes can it be) another's.

 

Doing so paints a more complete picture for folks reading the posts.

 

As for the comment about working with what you've got, well, sure, within reason. If I've got a dog that wants nothing more than to take down stock and rip their throats out, that may be the dog I have, but it would certainly be fairer to the dog and to the stock if I choose a different activity to train the dog in. I don't pass dogs on, so by default I work with what I've got, but by the same token, if I what I've got simply isn't working out on stock, I will find a different activity. Again, different paradigms, because in my situation not working out involves another species who pays the price of the not working out.

 

And that presents another point. I do offer lessons for stock work. To me, as much as I might need the income, I can't justify telling someone to keep working with what they've got if what they've got is causing stress to the stock or clearly shows little talent for work. It's different than training manners or sports or similar, where a trainer can generally shape behaviors in the dog over time that will enable the dog/owner to do the activity they wanted to do. But while you're (the general you) training the dog for those desired behaviors, you are not potentially damaging another living being. So ... different paradigms, different goals.

 

And I've certainly said enough on this subject. I just want readers to understand that while some would say that all things are possible with pretty much any dog, that's not always the case. And although the exceptions may exist for only a very small slice of the activities one might choose to do with a dog, they DO exist.

 

And now this thread can go back to explaining how to train a sulky/manipulative dog.

 

J.

[Root Beer]

And I think it *does* add to the topic at hand, because it places the comments of individual posters in context. If I say a sulky dog is a PIA and you say a sulky dog is an extra special challenge that you personally love and can learn tons from and in fact you have had tons of success training such dogs, then either one of us sucks as a trainer or context is important. I happen to think it's the latter, though no doubt you might think it's the former.

 

Nice assumption.

 

Context is important, although I wouldn't say it's the only factor in play. As far as the skill of the trainer, I hold that we all have assets and skills and we all have areas where we need to improve. Call that what you will. I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt until I know otherwise firsthand.

 

In so many of these discussions, if a stockdog trainer says X, someone who doesn't train dogs on stock will come along and say,"Oh no, X is actually just another challenge that requires a special depth of perception to get the most out of the dog in question, and if you'd just listen and learn from the dog you could get the result you wanted and deepen your bond with your dog.

 

So, like tilting at windmills or uselessly banging my head against a brick wall, I sometimes feel compelled to point out that one trainer's paradigm doesn't have to be (nor sometimes can it be) another's.

 

And that pretty much leads me to point out that I feel it is good for potential Border Collie owners to learn as much as thy can about their options, and put as much thought and consideration into choosing their approach as possible.

 

I don't see that as a bad thing.

 

Doing so paints a more complete picture for folks reading the posts.

 

As does, I believe, presenting options.

 

As for the comment about working with what you've got, well, sure, within reason. If I've got a dog that wants nothing more than to take down stock and rip their throats out, that may be the dog I have, but it would certainly be fairer to the dog and to the stock if I choose a different activity to train the dog in. I don't pass dogs on, so by default I work with what I've got, but by the same token, if I what I've got simply isn't working out on stock, I will find a different activity. Again, different paradigms, because in my situation not working out involves another species who pays the price of the not working out.

 

In sports, too, there are certainly times when the right choice is to stop an activity that the dog is not suited for, or flat out dislikes. There are times when it's worth working through things and times when it's worth doing something else with an individual dog.

 

When it comes to basic manners, though, the context is somewhat different because it wouldn't really be fitting, in most cases, to decide that the dog simply isn't suited to learn to curtail nipping, stay quiet when contained, etc.

[Maralynn]

I'm guessing that you and I choose dogs for different reasons, Kristine. I want a dog that can work, you choose dogs you can train. So our criteria in what we use to select a dog are probably a bit different.

Isn't it the case, though, that the dog you've got is the dog you've got? And that when challenges arise you have the opportunity to make of them what you will?

 

Yes and no. If the dog really doesn't seem suited, then I'd cut my losses and the dog would become a pet. There are many dogs highly suited for the job, so why spend the time training a dog that isn't really suited? In the case of stock work, it really isn't fair to the stock to continue to work with a dog that just doesn't have all the pieces needed to do the work. In the case of SAR work, unless my dog is making progress and enjoying the training, then I'm not going to keep it up. There is no sense spending my time and others with a dog that just isn't suited. Now, training issues do arise and I'll tailor training accordingly, but I do need the right pieces to work with.

 

Don't get me wrong on all this, I love the training process, the differences in dogs and finding what works for each dog. I also love training random things just for kicks. I find it fun and challenging. But there are different criteria in training for work and training for fun.

[Diana A]

I really like this^^ a "harder" temperament doesn't really mean a harder dog to work with - BCs have been bred to work with and please you. They're just going to keep you on your toes a little more and most likely be a much more versatile dog as they mature.

 

That is very true - it's more than a matter of hard vs soft. I try to look for biddability in the parents when I look at choosing a breeding to get a puppy from. I've learend that matters a lot more than hard vs soft temperament.

 

My OTCH dog, Simon, was hard as nails. I swear sometimes that dog had no pain nerves whatsoever and no emotional sensitivity at all. He used to slide into the wall picking up his dumbbell and that never stopped him from just doing it again the next time and he had very little regard for his body. I never could get him to do something or not do something by way of him wanting to avoid a physical correction. But if I showed him what I wanted, he'd turn himself inside out to do it for me. If he hadn't been so biddable he would have been impossible to work with because he pretty much did what he wanted and don't anyone get in his way! Lucky for me the thing he wanted most in life was to do what I wanted. He was an awesome dog and placed at several obedience tournaments and earned his OTCH in a highly competetive part of the country against some top dogs. And he was absolutely the easiest puppy I've ever raised - I honestly can't remember him ever doing anything wrong.

 

Now another dog I had was much more independent minded and extremely soft - opposite of Simon. I found that much harder to work with because she wanted to do her own thing a lot of the time, but if I pressured her too much to do what I wanted, she'd quit, or sulk, or get freaked out and run and hide (and I'm talking about something like a stern 'no' with a meaningful look in the eye - not even anything physical). She was an awesome agility dog because she really wanted to do it (had a lot of natural talent too) so I could control things by just not letting her play the game until she did what I wanted, but she wasn't as good of an obedience dog because she mainly wanted to do things for herself, not for me. The softness just got in the way of me being able to train effectively. I worked her on sheep as well and finally gave it up - she did okay just doing stuff she liked, like fetching sheep, but the second you started pushing her outside her comfort zone, forget it, she'd get all worried and not even try.

 

My ideal dog, given a choice, would be medium to hard temperament, but extremely biddable.

 

This puppy sounds like a really tough one to me. I have had many that were much easier than what you're describing. I wouldn't give up on getting a puppy, just ask a lot of questions about what the parents are like, and older siblings or half-siblings, so you get an idea of what you're in for.

[juliepoudrier]

And that pretty much leads me to point out that I feel it is good for potential Border Collie owners to learn as much as thy can about their options, and put as much thought and consideration into choosing their approach as possible.

You know, I don't know why I ever bother anymore, except that as Kristine points out, people should understand their options, and if I didn't speak out, then everyone reading these boards would think that training methods, paradigms, philosophies all must mesh with Kristine's world view of training dogs.

 

Options. Right. That's why I took exception to your comments that sulky dogs are simply a different training challenge and can actually make you a better trainer. etc. That's true for YOU, in your context of pet dog training and freestyle and agility. (Of course, really all I said was sulky dogs are the type of dog I least like working with; I should have known that the obligatory response would have come along that sulky dogs are just special training challenges and actually the best dogs to train--it's the same old same old around here.)

 

I have pointed out that sulky dogs are not necessarily suitable for training on stock, and Maralynn has said something similar about SAR work. Ergo, someone who might be interested in stockwork or SAR might want to consider the effect of having a sulky dog, and perhaps just in the context of puppy raising so that they don't exacerbate any tendencies toward sulkiness with their puppy raising and training.

 

I can only hope that folks reading this forum do indeed recognize that one person's opinions/experiences do not a fact of training make. Note that I said *I* do not like sulky dogs for my purposes. I didn't say everyone should ditch sulky dogs.

 

Yes, folks there are options, and just because Trainer A says you should consider a sulky dog to be a special challenge that certainly can and should be overcome, and with outstanding results, just realize that there's a particular context in which those comments are being made.

 

So this will be my last post on this subject here. It's just turned into yet another of those circular discussions that goes nowhere. I don't have to have the last word. I've made my point.

 

J.

[jdarling]

Nice job, Julie. I think there are quite a few of us that agree with you, but I think most people don't have the interest or energy to step on this merry-go-round. It only goes one direction ... does a lot of up and down ... but it doesn't stop, and your only option is to get off when you get dizzy.

 

I, personally, do not like working with sulky dogs on or off stock. The only challenge they pose for me is finding them a new home. In fact, I think in some cases, the owner/trainer can easily exascerbate a dog's tendency to be sulky by rewarding the behavior.

 

 

 

 

[shysheperdess]

My first dog was a rescue and my first dog I trained for competition, we were also hugely successful earming our eventual OTCH and ranking #1 in her breed nationaly for Novice and Open titles. But I made some huge mistakes early on which I think "encourages" her to be manipulative and loose confidence. I used TO MANY treats and positive motivators for her...I would reward her constantly for doing the right thing even if she would have done it for no reward. I was just so happy for her to be doing it so beautifly I rewarded in excess. I never made her responsible for her part early on. I coddled her...when she would get nervous at shows I would comfort her. I would bribe the heck out of her even though she well knew the exercises. I would go to shows early on with extra yummy treats, pretended like I had some in my pocket in hopes she would do well......I didn't want her to be uncomfortable or put to much pressure on her. In many ways she became "soft" and manipulative over time...to the point where unless she knew I had food or a toy...she wouldn't work as well..."what's in it for me"??

 

We managed to actually have a great deal of success up until training for Utility and our OTCH using my methods already...then hit a brick wall...she couldn't handle the pressure of training for such an advanced level and she started sulking in the ring, etc.

 

 

I had to re-train everything....make her responsible for her part, teach her how to handle pressure and accept a correction and what it meant...we worked through it...took about a year and a half....OH did we have loads of colorful temper tantrums during this time....refusing to work at all, actually trying to bite me, growl at me....but we worked through it. I tried not to emotionaly feed into it and I conintued to make her accountable, set standards for her and have her meet them. We went on to achieve our OTCH, many HIT's along the way and a beautiful partnership.

 

She could have easily been labeled a "soft" dog with the behaviors she exibited during her "rehabilitation".....I am sure pet people would have been horrified. The clicker trainer over at PetCo would have fainted....but it ended up being the best thing for her. She wasn't a "soft" dog....she was just spoiled, smart and didn't mind capitalizing on what I was offering her...all my fault of course...but still.

 

I can tell you with %100 certainty with this dog that if I would have done what RB sudjested with CU program she never would have gotten past a CD...maybe if that..Nor would I apply the CU concpets she's describing to a situation in where a dog is chasing cats, or nipping...

 

People give advice within there own realm of experience no matter how little they have, there are MORE than there share of "know it alls" in dog training so people reading these boards for advice should be careful who they take it from. I wouldn't recomend a newbie going to look for answers from a petco down the street who graduated from a 2 week pet dog training course and I certainly wouldn't take advice on advanced training concepts or concepts from a "sport" perspective from someone who hasn't achieved a high level of success in the areas they choose to compete...

[Heather Rae]

Personally I have no idea if I would like working with a sulky dog, I suppose I would prefer an un-sulky dog who's overjoyed to work with me; however, if I ever end up with or run into a sulky dog I would like to have options on how to deal with it.

[shysheperdess]

My point Heather, is that most dogs who are sulky are made that way.....

 

Here is an example I see all to often

 

 

"pet people get a puppy, puppy get stepped on and squeels....owners lavish attention on the puppy and fuss over it treating it like a baby and making a big ol fuss...or puppy gets in a situation where they are intimidated and the owners pet it and coddle it, rewarding the puppy for being afraid and sending a mesage to the pup that whenever something uncomfortable happens...it's ok to just cower or sulk or come to the owner and they will be protected. Puppy come to class later on for the first time, and need to learn that biting is not an option. Some pressure or a mild correction is put on the puppy that they find uncomfortable to stop the behavior...puppy cowers and wanted to snuggle up to there owner....emotional part of the owner feels sorry for puppy and encourages the sulky behavior, thinks my puppy is being hurt and doesn't like that....we're not going to do it....puppy gets to keep doing whatever..."

 

 

Puppy end up in my training facility at 15 months old, yanking it's owners are out, biting, barking or whatever...or for people who want to compete, they can't advance because the dog can't handle the pressure...

[MrSnappy]

I sometimes think "sulky" and "soft" are just a matter of perspective - I don't even mean whether one should like working with them or not, I just mean how the handler chooses to perceive the dog's behaviour based on their own criteria and/or bias.

 

My stockdog trainers called Piper "sulky" - when she got upset she quit and this was perceived as her willfully not doing what they wanted because it wasn't what she wanted to do. My agility trainer calls her "soft" and insists that when she doesn't understand what I want she doesn't know what to do so she just quits. It was confusing for me to understand which category my dog fell into. Over time, I think I lean a lot more toward my agility trainer's perspective. Piper shuts down when confused because she doesn't want to do the wrong thing so she does NO thing instead, rather than risk being wrong. I don't think she's trying to manipulate me at all - she's trying to 'save' herself. She was never a particularly talented stockdog and it's not because she was being sulky, it was because she didn't know what to do and didn't want to try doing the wrong thing in case someone got angry at her for it. It's actually kind of sad because while she wants to work stock, she doesn't have the capacity to learn more advanced behaviours while doing it ... she only knows how to head and I think she is probably a perfect example of not breeding for working ability - she has some instinct, but not enough.

 

In agility, she's not the best agility dog - she is fast, and she is driven and she really enjoys it, but if we don't keep it 100% positive all the time, she can't enjoy it and will stop trying to understand what is expected of her. She can't really think for herself out there, can't read a line of travel (unlike Tweed, who I am pretty sure scans the course map before we go out there) and you have to be on top of her and constantly directing her the whole time.

 

And that's okay - she is who she is, though it's a constant challenge for me to not get irritated when we are trying the same sequence 5 times and she's still not getting it because a part of me still thinks she's just being obstinate. But in reality, she's just worried. If I don't get frustrated, she eventually gets it and then she learns it for good.

 

She is the polar opposite of Dexter, who will try EVERYTHING, sometimes more than once, even if I'm irritated. Part of that may just be his personality, but it could also be that from a puppy, I made a point of rewarding (with attention, or food, or a toy, or just praise) the behaviours I saw and liked, and really encouraged him in this way to try different things. It's a shift in *my* training philosophy, because when Piper was a puppy I _made_ her do what I wanted and was much more rigid about how I handled my dogs in general. So I don't know if I created the dogs they are now, or if Piper would always be soft and Dexter would always be tough as nails, no matter what I did. I lean more toward thinking that Piper would have more self confidence if I had encouraged self confidence when she was a puppy ... but I also think I could beat Dexter with a 2X4 and he would still be inclined to get up, shake off the concussion, and try it again. Nature and nurture both, I suppose.

 

The WooTWoo have always been my biggest challenge because no matter what I want them to do and no matter what I do to try and elicit that behaviour, they (it?) first and foremost wish to please themselves. And that's not because they are "hard" or "manipulative" dogs either (TWooie, in particular, greatly fears punishment of any kind) - they just lack that particular border collie sensibility of "please, let me please you" and it was kind of like a glass of cold water in my face to have a dog(s) without that particular facet of personality I had come to expect from dogs, since I work always with border collies. With those two, if there is something I want, I have to pay them for it, and pay them well. I no longer consider it frustrating, I just accept it as a way of life with the WooTWoo. But I have to say that if that's the kind of dog you get when you cross a sheltie with an Aussie, I'm not sure anybody should cross those two breeds ever again! ;-)

 

Sorry, I meandered.

 

RDM

[Root Beer]

You know, I don't know why I ever bother anymore, except that as Kristine points out, people should understand their options, and if I didn't speak out, then everyone reading these boards would think that training methods, paradigms, philosophies all must mesh with Kristine's world view of training dogs.

 

Right. Everyone thinks exactly like I do. That's why these topics turn into ongoing discussions where different points of view are expressed and points are debated and discussed.

 

I seriously doubt anyone is getting that impression. I frankly wonder why you would even think that anyone would.

 

Options. Right. That's why I took exception to your comments that sulky dogs are simply a different training challenge and can actually make you a better trainer. etc. That's true for YOU, in your context of pet dog training and freestyle and agility.

 

Actually, Julie, quite a few people who come onto the boards looking for information on raising and training dogs are pet people. Their Border Collies are companions, house pets, and perhaps do some basic training. I am not the only person on the board - posting and/or lurking - who is working with Border Collies in these contexts. And yes, those people have options - quite a lot of them.

 

I'm sorry that you find the concept that people in that position can actually use what you consider "sulkiness" to their advantage in helping their dogs become more well behaved pets. That they can use a dog's desire to do his or her "own thing" to cultivate a dog who is more willing and cooperative. I think it's a good thing for people to know, but you are certainly free to disagree.

[Maralynn]

Personally I have no idea if I would like working with a sulky dog, I suppose I would prefer an un-sulky dog who's overjoyed to work with me; however, if I ever end up with or run into a sulky dog I would like to have options on how to deal with it.

 

I'd show it what was acceptable and what was not. In order to get what they wanted, they'd have to work through me. If they wanted to 'sulk" they'd get crated and I'd come back later. I also wouldn't give them opportunity to self satisfy.

 

ie, teach them my rules to live by and be fair and consistent with those rules. Make the world very black and white for them. Dogs are smart - they pick up on this quickly and adapt.

[Root Beer]

Personally I have no idea if I would like working with a sulky dog, I suppose I would prefer an un-sulky dog who's overjoyed to work with me; however, if I ever end up with or run into a sulky dog I would like to have options on how to deal with it.

 

You know, this isn't something that I've actually run into a lot with my Border Collies. They generally are very eager to work with me. And when I have found any reluctance, I have been able to pinpoint, every time, what was causing the avoidance response, and then I've been able to handle the situation accordingly. Often what is considered "sulkiness" can often be traced to stress, or to the dog not fully understanding what is being expected, or simple lack of motivation. Again, I am speaking in a pet/sport context here.

 

I've found that once the stress has been alleviated, the criteria has been made clear, or ample motivation his been provided, I find myself with a dog who is willing, eager, driven, and incredibly fun to work with. That is, after all, one of the things I love best about living and training with Border Collies.

[juliepoudrier]

Right. Everyone thinks exactly like I do. That's why these topics turn into ongoing discussions where different points of view are expressed and points are debated and discussed.

 

But they aren't ongoing discussions with a bunch of folks chiming in to offer their viewpoints and actually discussing the pros and cons of those various viewpoints (which would actually be nice)--these discussions end up pretty much being you hammering away at someone else, just like now. I tried to bow out of this discussion and yet you persist in posting directly to me. Your habit of taking what someone says in one context and twisting it around to mean something else in YOUR context so that you can then disagree with the other person's comments serves only to end discussion, since most folks have neither the time nor the desire to get into a debate on semantics (that is, your interpretation of what I'm saying in my own context). The end result is that folks with differing or opposing viewpoints give up, like I'm doing now. So your viewpoint does often end up being the dominant viewpoint presented in every discussion in which training of any sort is mentioned. The only place this doesn't happen is in the training section specifically devoted to stockdogs.

 

Actually, Julie, quite a few people who come onto the boards looking for information on raising and training dogs are pet people.

 

Does being patronizing help make your point? Do you think it gains you credibility with all the pet people who are seeking advice?

 

Their Border Collies are companions, house pets, and perhaps do some basic training. I am not the only person on the board - posting and/or lurking - who is working with Border Collies in these contexts. And yes, those people have options - quite a lot of them.

 

Thanks for repeating that exceedingly important point. Has anyone said people don't have options? Was that ever the actual crux of the discussion? If I say I don't like working sulky dogs in the context of stockwork and you come along and say sulky dogs are fun and challenging and will make you a better trainer in the context of pet work, what exactly are you trying to prove? That folks shouldn't give up on their sulky dogs? But of course, I never said they should, so you're creating a dichotomy where one didn't exist in the first place solely to promote your own agenda.

 

I'm sorry that you find the concept that people in that position can actually use what you consider "sulkiness" to their advantage in helping their dogs become more well behaved pets. That they can use a dog's desire to do his or her "own thing" to cultivate a dog who is more willing and cooperative. I think it's a good thing for people to know, but you are certainly free to disagree.

But you see Kristine, as usual, you are putting words and motives into my mouth (typing fingers) that I neither implied nor outright stated. AS you well know, I never said people couldn't turn sulkiness to their advantage (or not)--that's all you. You are placing these assumptions on me so that you can continue to advocate to your own agenda. That's not a discussion--that's you manipulating a "conversation" so you can pursue your own agenda.

 

My apologies to anyone else reading this. I said I was done. Now if Kristine would do me the favor of not trying to drag this part of this thread on (and on), I really will be done.

 

Kristine, if you'd like to continue this "discussion" in private, that's fine. I just don't think we're doing pet people, sports people, stock people, or purple people any favors with this disagreement, which I think goes way deeper than training philosophies.

 

J.

[Root Beer]

But they aren't ongoing discussions with a bunch of folks chiming in to offer their viewpoints and actually discussing the pros and cons of those various viewpoints (which would actually be nice)--these discussions end up pretty much being you hammering away at someone else, just like now.

 

Throughout this discussion, Julie, I have responded to people who have directly quoted me. We have discussed this before, and I know that you don't like it when I do that. But, that is not really hammering away at anyone. It is simply discussion.

 

I tried to bow out of this discussion and yet you persist in posting directly to me.

 

Only in response to your posting directly to me. If you don't want me to reply directly to you, don't address me directly in a discussion. It's pretty simple. If someone addresses me directly, I am going to respond. It is my understanding that this is permitted on this forum.

 

I am going to request at this time that if you wish to continue to discuss my personal discussion style, that we take it off the board. It has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Moreover, this is something that you insist on doing over and over in successive discussions. You quote me directly, and then turn around and get upset because I reply directly back to you, and then proceed to tell me not to do that.

 

I honestly don't know why you think you have the right to tell me what I should or should not say on this forum or when I may or may not reply to someone who has quoted me directly. I am well aware that we do not agree on everything, but why you feel the need to make an issue of it so often is beyond me. I have never once told you what you should or should not say. I don't know why you try to tell me what I should or should not say. Maybe that is something you really don't need to be concerned about.

 

You see me as dominating the discussion, where, in fact, you have just now taken over the conversation and made it about how I choose to respond in discussions in which I am involved. I was discussing dogs with Heather Rae and Marilynn in the context of the topic. You have made it about my personal involvement in the discussion. I would really rather stick to the topic of dogs.

 

Let's take this off the board, please.

[Heather Rae]

I'd show it what was acceptable and what was not. In order to get what they wanted, they'd have to work through me. If they wanted to 'sulk" they'd get crated and I'd come back later. I also wouldn't give them opportunity to self satisfy.

 

ie, teach them my rules to live by and be fair and consistent with those rules. Make the world very black and white for them. Dogs are smart - they pick up on this quickly and adapt.

 

I get this huge complex when it comes to this stuff. I mean what if I try crating a dog who sulks, do I now have to worry that they're going to hate their crate or am I going to have to worry that if they love their crates that putting them in the crate will cause them to continue the unwanted behavior. I know training dogs isn't... rocket science. It seems more artistic, unfortunately I'm not terribly artistic and wish there was like a formula to follow which would always equate to the perfect dog.

 

I need some confidence building training.

[Root Beer]

I think, Heather Rae, that the best confidence building training for you will be to give it a try. You will make mistakes, but you will have the chance to learn from them. Your first Border Collie probably won't be perfect, and that's OK. You will also do things right.

 

Starting out with an older Border Collie might really be the way for you to go, since you would have the chance to get a grip on some of the stuff that you are concerned about without having the responsibility for raising a baby puppy who needs to learn pretty much everything. You might be able to find an older Border Collie who is already crate trained, or at least has been started on crate training by a rescue or foster home.

[shysheperdess]

Heather, training dogs is really not as complicated as it seems. You need to set expectations you want for your pup/dog and then follow through and make sure they are met. The nice thing about getting a pup with a personality that suits you...and for a pet owner, a softer more biddable sweet pup would be the best fit...you mold and shape that little guy into the kind of companion that will fit you...

 

I wouldn't be to concerned about getting a pup with a personality that might pre-dispose it to being more sulky...that really is mainly concerning to those of us who do compete in a sport or sheepdog trials and the dog needs to be able to handle some pressure, etc. For a pet pup is really shouldn't be to much of a problem unless you have to deal with behavior concerns somewhere down the line...

 

find a pup from a good breeder, pick a social laid back little guy and sign up for puppy classes from a reputable training facility. Then continue with classes. Having a knowledgable trainer or resource throughout your life and journer with your pet is probably the best advice I could give you....