A primer on corrections

[geonni banner]

Yup. Regional. The land of Yuppie in Northern California. Probably quite a few in Los Angeles too.

 

Bill Koehler taught obedience in Orange County in S. California. A woman once attended on of his classes with a lapdog that was ensconced in her lap. He invited her to bring her dog into the group. "Oh, no!" she said. "Litle ----'s feet never touch the ground. He'll learn by watching."

 

Welcome to the Twilight Zone...

[Root Beer]

Yup. Regional. The land of Yuppie in Northern California. Probably quite a few in Los Angeles too.

 

Bill Koehler taught obedience in Orange County in S. California. A woman once attended on of his classes with a lapdog that was ensconced in her lap. He invited her to bring her dog into the group. "Oh, no!" she said. "Litle ----'s feet never touch the ground. He'll learn by watching."

 

Welcome to the Twilight Zone...

 

Oh, I get a bit of Twilight Zone at times.

 

One time a couple came to observe my Rally class to decide if they wanted to come take it with their dog.

 

The class was super +R. My friend with the Beagle was in there, and she was playing Give Me a Break - quick releases, lots of treats. All of the students were using clickers and treats and the dogs were all nicely engaged and enjoying the heck out of the class.

 

The man shows up the next session with the dog on a choke chain. Ummmmmmm . . . OK . . .

 

I asked him to switch the dog onto his flat buckle collar while working on the course. He balked at first, claiming the dog wouldn't listen to him without the choke chain. But I convinced him by pointing out that you can't have a choke chain on a dog in the Rally ring and the dog would have to learn to work on a flat buckle.

 

Next, he didn't want to use food. He was quick to reprimand the dog, but flatly refused to acknowledge anything good that the dog did. He absolutely hated holding the leash loose, preferring, instead to use the leash to move the dog around, which - again, is against the rules in Rally.

 

I was left wondering . . . why on earth did he take the class? It was clear that he was dead set against reinforcing his dog.

 

The dog was a sweet bull terrier. On the rare occasions when he actually used reinforcement, the dog lit up and did a nice job. But 90% of the time, the dog plodded along, head down, reluctant to do much.

 

I was left wondering what he saw in the class that he observed that made him think, "yeah, that would be a great class for us!"

 

Twilight zone. Thankfully that is the most extreme case I have dealt with.

 

I had another student once who did everything I asked her to do when I was looking, but when my back was turned, she would rough her dog up (literally). But at least when I was watching, she tried to do what I asked.

 

This guy left me flat out wondering . . . whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?!!?

[geonni banner]

Dear Doggers,

 

I didn't say anything about training recalls.

 

Donald

Any pics from the Vashon Trial?

[rushdoggie]

The part I was actually taking issue with was the assertion that many [emphasis added] people who might want it now don't want to "take the time to build that rapport, that bond, that trust, that communication..

 

My original post said:

 

 

I also have found, that many (certainly not all) people who go the more forceful method (and no not every correction is forceful) do so because they want it NOW. They don't want to take the time to build that rapport, that bond, that trust, that communication that creates (as discussed in another thread) a mannerly dog.

 

You can get that with one perfectly well timed and appropriate correction for some things without fallout. You can't for others.

 

"It" would be "the whole picture of a well behaved dog" vs "a behavior I can fix quickly with minimal fallout and its best gotten NOW."

 

Also, I said "forceful" as opposed to a "correction."

 

Not really sure where I said that anyone who uses a correction doesn't want a relationship.

 

And I meant more pet people, not people here and not stockwork type training.

 

I mean the ones where you see their dogs actively avoiding them because they have idea what the human wants so they practice avoidance. I imagine you have seen dogs like this. The owners have not really trained much, they just yell or pop and wonder why the dogs don't understand English.

 

The "cookie pushers" who have confused dogs tend to have dogs who are mugging them and throwing behaviors, which is pretty annoying in its own right but its a different picture.

[juliepoudrier]

Rushdoggie,

I'm sorry if my apology wasn't enough for you. Clearly I have been wise to just stay away from this general forum. I will renew my efforts to do so, since clearly the pet perspective is the only one that's needed.

 

J.

[denice]

I find it interesting that many people are against correction. Actually the way things in society have gone they are against correction across the board. I am not convinced that is the best way to go with kids much less dogs. If you watch animals that live in a social group they get corrected by the other members of the group. That could be a herd of horses, pack of wolves, pride of lions, group of dogs, a bitch and her pups. Correction are as natural as it gets. Yes members are 'rewarded' for correct / appropriate behavior as well. Maybe that reward is as simple as you can lie here with me if you do not chew on me.

 

Dogs are masters of non verbal communication. They are just as expressive without words as children are with words. Add to that they Read intent, emotion well. We people ignore lots of non verbal communication but it is still there when we talk to others. It is there when we are with our dogs. Just because we say the say words even if we can say it in the same exact tone - which I doubt - dogs can pick up if we are a bit irritated, emotional, happy, upset, angry.... I consider saying things in a different tone, speech pattern ect being a form of praise/reward or correction. A correction to me is simply letting the dog know what I do not want.

 

If a pup is yapping in its crate I tell it hush/ quiet then maybe a good dog once it is quiet. I consider going and getting a pup once I call it and it does not come a correction. Whatever it is doing I take it from that showing it want I do not want and then what it is I do want. With more experience I can use tone and body position and words to convey my pleasure or displeasure. It is less about the exact words and more about tone and your body language. I can look directly at my dog stand up straight and walk toward it and it will know if I am pleased or not.

 

The more time you spend with dogs the quicker you pick up on little things. Watch two dogs together. They are always changing ears, tail height, stance... Build that relationship - You can begin to SEE them Thinking and interpret what they are thinking. Kinda like kids - you know when they are up to no good. Then I use voice and tone to reward the dog as it is thinking and trying Before it has even completed the Good thing or correct when it is thinking the 'Wrong' thing. ( good or wrong in my view alone)

 

Some people do not "Hear" themselves when talking to a dog. They do not pay attention to what they saying, how they are saying it, how they are standing, where they are looking ...ALL that matters to a dog. Yes more so to a sensitive dog but all dogs pick up on it. What you are asking needs to SOUND and FEEL like what you want. It will make a huge difference. I have actually video taped and recorded sound only for some people when working with their dog, it can be very eye opening. Honestly I pay close attention to things like that and at times know I do not control emotions as well as I should.

I do wonder those that say they are only positive trainers if the dogs see it that way. Are they really that able to mask emotion, frustration that they dogs take what is said and done always the same way. I doubt it. Dogs are to smart. I am all for positive training and rewarding behavior that you want to be encouraged. But how then do you deal with behavior you do not want? Even removing your attention is a correction. Not all unwanted behavior is going to disappear with a redirect. What happens if you are not there and have not taught your young dog to not chew on the couch or not to dig in the flowers. Granted crating the dog works to prevent some unwanted behavior but that is not the same as teaching him Not to do it. If a bitch corrects her pups it seems natural that we continue that once we are the social structure the dog is dealing with.

[ourwully]

Hi Root Beer

"Have you tried telling her to ignore you and then reinforcing her for choosing to offer voluntary attention?"

I tried this for a while with the Give Me A Break game but I always got side tracked and never gave it a fair chance. I do use Premack principles all the time, however, and they seem to work well. There is so much to remember for a beginner!

 

This ongoing discussion about corrections continues to be quite interesting. From reading the posts on this thread and others I would guess that the vast majority of people on this forum are extremely positive, with some being even more positive. If only the world in general was this positive!

[Root Beer]

I find it interesting that many people are against correction.

 

I think it is helpful to really take into clear consideration that different people approach things differently. And that what makes sense to you might not make sense to another person, and that what makes sense to another person might not make sense to you.

 

"Correction" makes no sense to me with dogs. It never has.

 

Believe it or not, my first training book was the original Monks of New Skete. I knew absolutely nothing about training at that point - zero! I took every suggestion they made in that book and flipped it around to be something good for the dog. "Alpha Rolls" turned into belly rubs. I simply ignored directives for any form of "correction" and used praise. In spite of my lack of training knowledge or experience, I managed to teach Sammie some really good things (back then we lived in a town, and he learned to sit by my side at street corners as we were waiting to cross, he learned to stay in the house when the door to the house opened) and I did so by "translating" a correction based approach (which Monks of New Skete - the original - really was) into a reinforcement based approach (even though I had no clue I was even doing that!)

 

It amazes me when I think about it now. I wasn't operating from any particular point of view to "eliminate correction". My "translation" simply made more sense to me than what was being presented by the book.

 

It never even crossed my mind that I might be breaking some "taboo" by taking the material in that book and making it work for my own style with my dog. It made sense, so I did it.

 

I absolutely LOVED it when I took my first training class with Speedy and we were told, in no uncertain terms, that anyone who was harsh to their dog would be thrown out of class. I didn't want to have to be harsh with my dog to train - it still wasn't even on my radar that people actually did that. And, again, I still pretty much knew nothing about training, or different training philosophies, or anything.

 

I knew even then that I had to be true to myself when working with my dog. I wouldn't have articulated that back then, but looking back, I can see that I was operating off of that premise.

 

Here's the thing - my approach to training is not "against correction". It is for using a positive reinforcement based approach to train my dog.

 

It's my nature to do so, and I choose not to fight against myself on this.

 

If you watch animals that live in a social group they get corrected by the other members of the group. That could be a herd of horses, pack of wolves, pride of lions, group of dogs, a bitch and her pups. Correction are as natural as it gets. Yes members are 'rewarded' for correct / appropriate behavior as well. Maybe that reward is as simple as you can lie here with me if you do not chew on me.

 

Personally, I don't let what animals do as social groups limit what I am capable of as a human. (I am not saying that you are suggesting that). Dogs are limited to communication as a dog. If Dean doesn't like Bandit up in his face, he really has no other choice but to snark or snap at him to get the message across. But I am not a dog. I have options that Dean doesn't have. I can use positive reinforcement to train self control. I can teach "four on the floor" as a behavior through use of reinforcement. I can use food and toys and access to things that Bandit likes that Dean doesn't have the option of using to build self control and good manners.

 

So, I take advantage of the fact that I am human and I go beyond what a dog would be capable of.

 

 

But how then do you deal with behavior you do not want? Even removing your attention is a correction. Not all unwanted behavior is going to disappear with a redirect. What happens if you are not there and have not taught your young dog to not chew on the couch or not to dig in the flowers. Granted crating the dog works to prevent some unwanted behavior but that is not the same as teaching him Not to do it.

 

Redirects and management have their place, but you're right - those things don't generally teach what is desired (although sometimes redirects and management can provide information that leads to learning).

 

The way I deal with behavior I don't want is by training behavior that I do want. I don't teach my dogs "don't jump on the door". I teach "four on the floor" (I use reinforcement to train that concept). I don't teach my dogs "not to ignore me". I teach them to respond to a recall. I don't teach "don't bark in the crate". I teach "relax and remain quiet". I don't teach, "don't counter surf". I teach, "four on the floor in the kitchen". Etc. etc. etc. Every "don't want" has an opposite "what I want" (sometimes several). That is what I focus on training.

 

I realize that it is an approach that isn't going to make sense to everyone, but it makes sense to me (and to plenty of others), and it works. It goes way beyond redirecting and managing. It's training. The end result is that the dog knows what is expected and is able to behave accordingly.

 

I hope you find that helpful and maybe it provides a glimpse into the mind of someone who just sees this whole question very differently.

 

Realize that when I go to train a behavior or concept to my dog, I am not thinking, "oh drat - if I could only use a correction here, I could actually train the dog - well, I don't do that, so I'll just manage the situation instead of teaching the dog anything". I am thinking, "how can I convey this concept to the dog?" And then I formulate a proactive training plan using +R based techniques. There are so many +R options to choose from that I usually have several options in mind and can then base my choice on what seems to best fit the dog and the situation.

[Blackdawgs]

So much talk on corrections, but no one has offered a definition.

 

I'll start: Any action that changes or is intended to change the natural path or desire of an object or organism (dog).

 

Corrections don't have to be harsh. And in my world, redirections are corrections. Calling a dog off an obstacle in agility is a correction (as is turning the steering wheel of a car that is about the run off the road)

 

Next?

[GentleLake]

Here's the thing - my approach to training is not "against correction". It is for using a positive reinforcement based approach to train my dog.

 

This is very nicely put.

 

I wish I were as good at it as you are. I've had some dogs I've rarely, if ever, corrected -- never had to -- beyond a gently "no" or "ah ah."

 

Tansy tries my patience, though, and more than any dog I've ever trained before seems at times to be willfully disobedient. What I actually think it is is lack of impulse control that I haven't quite mastered how to deal with, so I find myself giving sterner verbal corrections because they seem to get through to her when she's so distracted that she doesn't seem to be able to focus.

[rushdoggie]

Rushdoggie,

I'm sorry if my apology wasn't enough for you. Clearly I have been wise to just stay away from this general forum. I will renew my efforts to do so, since clearly the pet perspective is the only one that's needed.

 

J.

 

*headdesk*

 

I'm sorry my attempt to show you an apology wasn't needed because I didn't say what you thought I said.

 

This is a terrible medium for communicating differing thoughts ideas because someone is likely to get a completely different meaning from the same words and be offended. Then when I attempt to explain I had a different perspective I get the snarky line above.

 

Julie. of course your perspective is valid, it just didn't apply to that particular comment. You did not need to apologize, I'm not sure why you took issue with my original comment, its all good its just the internet for heaven's sake.

[Smalahundur]

I have a morbid fascination with these kind of discussions. It almost seems as if the participants of both camps do their utmost best to misinterpret the statements of one another. It also seems that the same persons are going through the same loops over and over again.

 

Fine primer on corrections btw.

 

Happy to live in a place this so called controversy does not exist; nobody bats an eye if you correct your dog, on the contrary, it is appreciated.

[geonni banner]

Tansy tries my patience, though, and more than any dog I've ever trained before seems at times to be willfully disobedient. What I actually think it is is lack of impulse control that I haven't quite mastered how to deal with, so I find myself giving sterner verbal corrections because they seem to get through to her when she's so distracted that she doesn't seem to be able to focus.

From my point of view, that's an "if it works, don't fix it" sort of thing.

 

With all due respect to +R trainers, I don't often run into traditional trainers who seem to be bent on converting +R trainers to a choke-chain, or citing volumes of books, websites and personal experience to prove that what they are doing is better, more sensible, humane, effective, etc. The opposite is unfortunately not true.

 

I tend to think of the way I do things as the best way. For me. If I didn't, I would choose a different way. For some reason I can't shake the notion that others should be able to do the same and be satisfied with that.

 

Like Julie, I see this type of discussion too often as a semantic quagmire wherein few are influenced, but many are perturbed. I like to hear the sound of my own text as much as the next person, but this sort of thing often devolves into pointless, continuing lobbying, and not infrequently seems more than a little passive-aggressive. As in, "OK, I'm fine with you doing X,Y, or Z that way! But you know... I don't need to do that, and I get great results. You might want to consider..."

 

OK. I'm done. Kudos to everyone with happy, useful & well-behaved dogs!

[Root Beer]

From my point of view, that's an "if it works, don't fix it" sort of thing.

 

With all due respect to +R trainers, I don't often run into traditional trainers who seem to be bent on converting +R trainers to a choke-chain, or citing volumes of books, websites and personal experience to prove that what they are doing is better, more sensible, humane, effective, etc. The opposite is unfortunately not true.

 

Actually, I don't see anyone in this thread who is trying to "convert" anyone here. Ourwully did ask for suggestions from the +R side, and I am happy to offer those for his consideration. I appreciate his openness to learn, regardless of what he ultimately decides.

 

But I really hate misconceptions. (Such as "corrections are necessary" to have a dog who is safe off leash in the world).

 

Choose not to train as I have chosen . . . that's your choice.

 

But I do ask that those who are going to make claims about the effectiveness of +R based training represent the facts, not the misconceptions, and recognize that there are people out there training successfully this way.

 

Now, if you don't run into traditional trainers who are trying to "convert" people, you just haven't run into that crowd. They exist. I have entered into dialogue with them. It is incredibly interesting. They are every bit as passionate as we +R trainers about their training choices, and there are plenty of them out there working to "convert" people.

 

I could PM you some Facebook groups if you want to find some of them.

[denice]

Root Bear Can you walk me through a couple examples. Say a dog barking that you want to stop barking what do you do? I understand the need to train a quiet command but how do you ask the dog to stop with a positive action other than redirecting. I feel redirecting would indeed get him to stop maybe momentarily but I dont see how it teaches him not to do it.

I am not trying to change anyone just trying to understand and makes sense to me. I mentioned corrections are a natural part of animals social structure to point out that they know what a correction is, they know what it means to have someone else in charge or they know what is to be the one in charge. They understand a hierarchy so why not use those things that they come to you understanding?

 

To me the purpose of a correction is getting the dog to think. It may also get a dog to stop doing what it is doing and think. The message I want the dog to get is - I need you think and figure this out. I do not necessarily follow a correction with a command. Hey stop doing that and do this. If the dog is thinking and he figures out the situation Then he has learned something and is just not doing what I ask. That to me is KEY in our relationship. I do not want to have to monitor and situations I want to trust he will make the correct choice. I want to give him the opportunity to make a choice then we will go from there. If he needs to rethink his choice then I will ask him to do that. Again I think if you are clear and consistent and have that good relationship with your dog then the need for corrections greatly diminishes. Most of the time the people that I see correcting over and over are not consistent in letting the dog know what they want from them. You need an end plan to work toward. One definition for each command and follow through if the dog does not do it right. This lets the dogs know for Certain what the command means and that he has to comply.

[Root Beer]

Root Bear Can you walk me through a couple examples. Say a dog barking that you want to stop barking what do you do? I understand the need to train a quiet command but how do you ask the dog to stop with a positive action other than redirecting. I feel redirecting would indeed get him to stop maybe momentarily but I dont see how it teaches him not to do it.

 

It would depend a lot on the situation, as different barks get a different response from me.

 

I never discourage alert barking. I want that. They learn on their own that once I've checked out the situation (looked out the window or door or whatever) that their alert was understood and the barking stops once the need is gone. One time I ignored my dog's barking and there was someone trespassing on my property. I have taken alert barks seriously since then, even when it turns out to have been someone pulling into the neighbor's driveway or one of his barn cats in our yard.

 

One area where we definitely agree - dogs read intention. They know when I have heeded what they are trying to let me know, and I have never had a problem with dogs continuing to bark after I have checked out the alert.

 

I have dealt with inappropriate barking in non-alert situations by teaching my dogs to take a breath, which involves closing their mouths. They learn this as part of their regular basic training, and I use treats and a clicker to teach it. I can put a cue to that and I can build and reinforce duration.

 

For building quiet in a crate, I use Kongs. I did this when I had two of my dogs in the same class, and they were very jealous of each other - the one who was not working on the floor would bark and carry on. I simply gave the dog in the crate a Kong (stuffed with frozen good stuff) as I took the other dog out on the floor. After doing that habitually, they would both remain quiet while the other was working, even without the Kong.

 

Other tools I have used to build duration of quiet - the Look at That Game from Control Unleashed and Mat Work from Control Unleashed. If you aren't familiar with that book, you might want to check it out.

 

It's not that these things teach the dog "not to bark", they teach the dog to remain calm and quiet. Calm and quiet is not the absence of barking - but a calm quiet dog will not be barking, unless this is a legitimate reason to be doing so.

 

They understand a hierarchy so why not use those things that they come to you understanding?

 

Because that's not how I want to live with my animals. I mean - there is a hierarchy just by nature. I am the one who can come and go freely. I am the one who decides when mealtimes are going to be and what is served. I decide when the door gets opened. They know I am in charge because I am the one who controls most of the resources (although I have a very relaxed style when it comes to that - I'm not a NILIF-er).

 

But I don't use a hierarchy in the sense of using corrections. I would find that highly stressful, actually. I simply can't focus on what's "wrong" without going to a lot of effort. So I don't - I focus on building what I want them to learn.

 

To me the purpose of a correction is getting the dog to think. It may also get a dog to stop doing what it is doing and think. The message I want the dog to get is - I need you think and figure this out. I do not necessarily follow a correction with a command. Hey stop doing that and do this. If the dog is thinking and he figures out the situation Then he has learned something and is just not doing what I ask.

 

I do the same thing, but in a different way. Instead of using a correction to get the dog to stop, I allow the dog the opportunity to figure out what is desired.

 

So, when Bandit was learning to put four paws up on a platform, I didn't correct him when he had three paws on - I gave him verbal praise for his effort - let him know he was on the right track, and allowed him to figure out how to score the jackpot. "Incorrect" guesses were nothing but good tries.

 

A thinking dog is definitely important to me. And good +R training can definitely foster a thinking dog.

 

Then he has learned something and is just not doing what I ask. That to me is KEY in our relationship. I do not want to have to monitor and situations I want to trust he will make the correct choice. I want to give him the opportunity to make a choice then we will go from there.

 

Yes, I definitely want that, too.

 

For instance, there is a hole in our fence right now. I am going to patch it one of these days, but in the meantime, I am confident that my dogs won't go through it - even though they are very well aware that it is there. I have seen all three of them carefully checking it out.

 

I don't leave them out in the yard unsupervised for extended periods of time, but they are sometimes out there alone for 5 minutes or so. How do they know they are supposed to stay in the yard? I have told them, "stay in the yard". They understand. And yet, not one of them has ever been corrected for leaving the yard, nor did I discourage them from checking out that hole. It's a fact of life, and they do understand to stay on our side of it.

 

I can trust them to make the right choice - I don't have to be out there to micromanage them.

 

So, how do we get there? The normal give and take of life. Training together - sometimes working pieces of sport behavior and sometimes working on manners type stuff. They make choices and are reinforced for making right choices. I am clear in my expectations, as well - unless we are playing some kind of game where I am deliberately not being clear.

 

I hope that clarifies some things for you.

[ourwully]

Hi Root Beer

I know the explanation was not meant for me but I enjoyed it just the same. It was very clear and actually made me reflect on some of the things I am doing and why I am doing them. Sometimes a lot of examples are needed to get the point across, even when you are preaching to the converted. From what I see you have to work from a set of principles and then stick to them through the various scenarios. When I look at my training with Juno, overall I am pretty happy with it, even though I've had some bumps in the road. Saying all this I still think that you have to be an exceptional trainer to stay true to these principles. Anyway, thank you very much for your time and effort throughout this discussion!! I really appreciate it.

Bill

[Root Beer]

Thanks, ourwully!! I'm glad you found it helpful.

 

I've had my bumps in the road, too. I've been at this since 2002 and my dogs have presented some unique challenges that have required a lot of outside-the-box-thinking - and they have all be awesome teachers! I've made my share of mistakes, and ended up having many, many learning experiences!

 

It's funny, though - it is Bandit - the first really normal dog I've ever trained - who has reminded me most vehemently that I must stay true to myself as a trainer.

 

Have patience with yourself and keep on learning. I know it might seem like at 2 years old, Juno should have some things mastered, but in a few years you are likely going to be amazed at how much you've accomplished!

[stockdogranch]

I know we've been down this same road many, many times over the years, and so, I had not planned on entering into the discussion yet again. However, when I read the statement that "Corrections make no sense to me with dogs," what immediately came to mind is a young dog that I have been struggling with (stock training, of course). But she is a dog, and I cannot imagine dealing with her with no "corrections" (however you want to define them). I will add that she is fine off of stock, as far as general behavior and manners and all; it is only on stock that the issues appear. She had some injuries (from being too rash on cattle) when she was younger, so she is a bit behind age-wise in her training. She got bigger and faster than I was apparently able to deal with. What she was doing was this: she would be working along (with me still at a close distance to her because she does not know much, and also because she cannot handle herself) ok, then suddenly (I'm sure in her mind the sheep did something to make her think they were going to get away) she would dash around to the head, single one off, grab it by the throat, and hang on while trying to take it to the ground. Sometimes she succeeded. So, I am really curious: how on earth do you suggest I deal with that with no corrections? Let her kill sheep while waiting for her to "figure out what is desired"? Honestly, I know (until quite recently) she did not give a rat's ass as to "what is desired."

A

[Tea]

Denice- Amen.

[Root Beer]

What she was doing was this: she would be working along (with me still at a close distance to her because she does not know much, and also because she cannot handle herself) ok, then suddenly (I'm sure in her mind the sheep did something to make her think they were going to get away) she would dash around to the head, single one off, grab it by the throat, and hang on while trying to take it to the ground. Sometimes she succeeded. So, I am really curious: how on earth do you suggest I deal with that with no corrections? Let her kill sheep while waiting for her to "figure out what is desired"? Honestly, I know (until quite recently) she did not give a rat's ass as to "what is desired."

A

 

I'm glad you asked this because it is a great example of an aspect of +R based training that isn't readily obvious to a lot of people.

 

This would never be a situation that a +R trainer would put a dog into with the intent of letting the dog figure out what is desired. Another good example that I have direct experience with is working with dogs who are car chasers. (I know - you didn't say anything about chasing cars. I have chosen to highlight a different example that I have successful personal experience with. I am very much aware that you didn't say it). A +R trainer would not turn a dog loose by a street and leave the dog to figure out that he or she is to remain calm and either watch the car go by, or ignore it altogether. (Some people think we actually advocate doing this and nothing could be further from the truth).

 

But - at the other extreme, neither does a +R trainer simply put the dog on a leash forever and not work with the dog so he or she can be trustworthy around moving cars.

 

The answer is that impulse control work would be done away from the situation that would prepare the dog to have the self control needed in the situation.. Personally, I would employ a lot of CU games, but there are certainly other +R based impulse control techniques to choose from.

 

Giving the dog opportunities to learn by figuring out what is desired is just one piece of a solid +R training approach. I absolutely would do a lot of that with a dog who needed any kind of impulse control work, but never, ever, ever in situations where the dog - or any other living being - is going to be any kind of danger. So for things like car chasing, reactivity to other dogs or people, hiking off leash in the woods, etc. the dog is not going to be put in those kinds of situations for shaping sessions. The dog is going to have solid foundation work before he or she is going to be expected to take on responsibility in those kinds of situations.

 

As far as the exact specifics of what I would do to train - that goes beyond the scope of what I share online. But I would be happy to direct anyone who is interested to good resources where you could explore that information.

[denice]

I think every ones journey in life varies quite a bit and makes them who they are. It is not any different if we discuss our lives with our dogs. People come from different places with different experiences and talents and our dogs are all unique even if we limit the discussion to one breed. Thankfully I have learned from the past and do things differently now than I did even last year. My life seem connected to dog in about every aspect. Everything from fostering guide dog pups to just having a pet to working as a vet tech to grooming to working dogs on stock. At the vet clinic and grooming there is a time limit to get what I need to do done. Over years I can and have built up a relationship with many dogs but that is not always possible. I have learned that if you approach a dog from a place of calm controlled authority it responds - generally positively - goes with the flow without fear or concern. If you are worried the dog is instantly concerned, if you are upset even if it has nothing to do with them same thing, even if you are in a hurry they will be different. I need the dogs to do things because I say to do them. It is AMAZING how many owners can not walk their dogs well on leads or trim their own dogs nails or brush them. For the most part I can do it alone once the dog has come to the conclusion that his usual antics dont fly. They get a verbal correction when they are misbehaving and most quickly come to the conclusion that it is not really a big deal, they are not going to get out of it so might as well suck it up. They know as soon as someone walks into a room or takes the leash if they will try something that has worked in the past or not. Because of the time limit and working with every breed and situation under the sun the obedience approach works the best for me. Do it cause I say to do and I am the one in charge.

Very rare to need that approach with dogs where a relationship with trust and time has developed. It is just part of who we are when we are together. But there are times when they need to do it or not do something because I say. I have a dog that simply does not like a crate. He was 8 mo old when I got him, he is now 4. I can count on him letting me know he doesn't want to go. Fine I get it - you dont like it- but go in when I say anyway. Sometimes that involves picking up his rear end a bit and making him go in. He has gotten better and he goes in well if he has worked and is tired. I love him, Great sheepdog, I figure if this is his only behavior that is frustrating I can live with it but that doesn't mean once I ask him to go in he has a choice.

Since I came into stock work from the veterinary world first and them from the sheep side of things I was very do it cause I say. Now working sheep for 20+ years and stockdogs for nearly 16 I have a different outlook. I think when working stock with dogs bred to the work it shows you just how smart they are and how much your relationship with them matters. I tend to look at problems first What did I do to cause that? Then Why did the dog do that? Try to see from his perspective and break things done in the are he is have a problem. Go back and do small things to make the big picture better. It is often the dog is uncomfortable with something so I go back to Helping him then put it all back together again. Training for me on stock is more about Helping them if uncomfortable or dont understand

 

Because it is just not my dogs I work on stock or work with at the vet office or grooming I need to find the approach that works everywhere. I suppose I have learned to combine things. In all places with all dogs they read you and body language and your emotions and confidence. If approached correctly it goes a long way with them. Reading their body language goes a long way.

 

I am sure this got off topic and rambled. The point is we and our dogs are different. I have no problem with different ways of training. I do not agree with some but I do not have to. If it is negatively affecting the dog I may say something, if it really not teaching the dog what it needs I may make a suggestion but it is your choice. Whatever your approach I think you need to consider that you are not the only one that is coming in contact with your dog. If you training methods help make the dog easy for the other people to work with him that's great. If they do not might want to rethink them.

 

I do believe we owe it to the dogs we come in contact with to be as positive, clear, consistent as we can possibly be in what we expect of them. If we approach things that way and take in consideration what the dogs are thinking then while our methods may vary the dogs and people they come into contact with will benefit.

[Tea]

well said, thanks

[Root Beer]

Denice, I really appreciate the respectful way that you have approached this discussion. It is a pleasure discussing training with you.

 

In some things we are not as different as it may seem. Just because I train +R doesn't mean there aren't times when my dogs just have to do things because I say so. There is absolutely nothing that contradicts with a +R approach and the fact that sometimes life necessitates that things just be done. There are probably a lot of times we would train things very differently, but the end result would look very much the same. The biggest difference is going to be in the approach that I took to actually training the concepts and behaviors. When Dean sits and stays while I put Bandit's bowl in the dining room - it's still a +R trained behavior regardless of whether he wants to sit and stay at that moment (he doesn't!). It's a +R trained behavior because I taught him how to sit and stay using treats, toys, and environmental reinforcers. Probably where we would differ most would be in the fluency building stage where I would not have chosen to enforce it using a correction, but I wouldn't have done nothing either! That is the stage where reinforcement is used to build further understanding, to strengthen the behavior, and to build it to the point where the dog can do it whether he wants to or not.

 

I actually find that I hold my +R trained dogs to a higher standard when out and about at training classes and such because I don't want people blaming my training choices for lapses in behavior. Of course they happen - they are dogs! But I work to build very good manners. That has been a challenge with puppy-boy, but we're getting there.

[denice]

Unfortunately the written word only goes so far to give an accurate description. I do try to choose my words carefully because of that. I too appreciate a good friendly discussion. We all can learn something and look at things from a different perspective. I find those that get offended when asked a question more often than not have not thought things through enough to explain their approach or reasoning to others and sometimes it reveals their reasoning is flawed and they are afraid to say maybe they need to think about more closely. Many people are uncomfortable trying to see things from a different point of view. That is sad to me because you can learn so much.

 

I was a stock dog clinic once and asked the clinician to explain his approach to getting the dog to give a bit of ground and not push on the sheep as it was circling the group. I explained how I saw it and how I interpreted his method. I was cautious in asking and wording my question since I did not want to appear disrespectful in any way. To say he was not happy is understatement, he could not give me a reason why he approached things as he did and turned the discussion to his children. I didn't mind hearing about his kids but would have liked an answer.

 

We are creatures of habit much more so than we would like to admit. We do things without thinking and are not present in the moment much of time. In todays world I think that is even more a concern. Sometimes I have to stop and think - now did I really do that or not, I meant to... For me stock dog work/training is one of those you have to be Present For. It takes All you mind and concentration to really See what is going on. Seeing things from the sheeps perspective and the dogs will only help. Heck I am fully aware the dogs are born with amazing ability and who am I to imply I know better than they do. To see a young pup work sheep with just the knowledge that he was born with is humbling and nothing short of amazing. To spend the time and see the areas where the dog is uncomfortable and help him work through that and see those AH HA moments, that is very rewarding. I have been the cause of many wrecks by not seeing what my dog needed was a different approach and a bit of help in certain circumstances. It is giving them that help, understanding their concerns slowing things down with the right sheep and right place and attitude to help them that makes such a difference to them. It builds trust like nothing else.

 

Not all dogs learn the same just like people. You need to have enough tools in your tool box to explain things differently to them and the patience to do so. You need the courage to First ask yourself what you are doing or not doing to cause the behavior or problem. Doesn't matter if it is the dog not coming when called once or the dog not going over a jump or the dog pushing on sheep as it flanks. I think 9 times out of 10 it is what we have or have not done that is the problem.

 

Root Bear if you ever want to come West and try Bandit on sheep just let me know

 

Thanks Tea - been thinking about you folks out west. Hope things continue to improve.