Sunday marked the beginning of Bite Prevention Week. Since opening the store I've been bitten four times. Three of them were my fault and one of them was partially my fault (I turned my back on a dog I knew to be people aggressive and the owner lost their attention for a split second). Fortunately all of the bites were very inhibited and didn't even break the skin.
I only mention this to illustrate a point. I've studied dog behavior and communication. I've probably been around thousands of dogs. And still I've had occasion to be bitten. So how do you avoid being bitten?
1. If you are unfamiliar with the dog, ask before petting.
2. Do not approach a dog head on. Notice when dogs greet, they tend to approach each other at an angle. When I greet an unfamiliar dog who seems a bit uneasy, I kneel down and position myself sideways. I then extend my hand just far enough so he can approach me, but not so close that I invade his space.
3. Know the signs. Dogs communicate with body language. Most dogs who may bite are fear bitters, meaning they bite because they are scared and are trying to get the person to back away. But the bite is usually a last ditch effort.
Signs to look for can include lowered head and/or body, ears close to the head and back, tail down and between the legs, lip licking, yawning, looking away, piloerection (hair standing up), snarling, growling, etc. A side note: These behaviors should not be punished. This is how dogs communicate they are uncomfortable. Instead you should try to diffuse the situation and work on some desensitization, a blog for another time.
A final note, and then a few links to illustrations: It doesn't matter how "good" you are with animals, some dogs are not going to like you. You can be the kindest, most gentle person in the world, but you may have to same hair color as someone who startled the dog, for example. That's just the way it is. It does not mean you should put yourself in peril or overstress a dog to the point that he may bite.
Dr. Sophia Yin has a great PSA put together. It's a little over 30 seconds long, but you may want to pause it a few times to check all the information: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrQ1KO4j2bc
This is a poster, also from Dr. Yin, on the more common signals I mentioned above, free for download: http://info.drsophiayin.com/free-poster-on-body-language-in-dogs/
Monday, May 16, 2011
Sunday, May 8, 2011
Name Change
I was thinking about how I wanted to approach this and it reminded me that I haven't posted some information I intended to. So let me start by saying the Central Missouri Humane Society has been overwhelmed lately and is looking for foster homes. I'll have more information about that up shortly, but consider fostering if you have the space and desire to help out.
That being said, we're also seeing a lot of dogs coming in that have been recently adopted. (Reminder that dogs who have been adopted from a non-profit get a 50% discount on self-serve washes within the first 30 days of adoption.) Some of the dogs get a name change with their new life, so I wanted to give a few tips to make this go smoothly and quickly.
Remember that all good things should come from you. A dog will come to you more consistently if it is a good thing. For example, when you take your dog to the park, call him, praise him, and then let him go back to playing, sniffing, or whatever. About the fourth or fifth time you call him, he is much more likely to come so you can put the leash on him and go home. Hearing his name and coming to you is not always a bad thing. So his name becomes a good thing.
When you want to change a dogs name, there are two easy ways to do this. First is just simply using the name. Every time you interact with the dog, use his new name. Not sweety, or silly or good boy (unless that his name). Without getting into the science of this, he should quickly learn that this is his new name. This worked for both our dogs, Lambert and Cletus... I mean Puck and Duncan.
The second way you can do this is more of a classical training (or respondent conditioning) technique. Say the dog's new name. When he looks at you, give him a treat. Repeat this until he looks at you quickly and consistently. After he looks at you without hesitation about five times you can start to fade the treat. Give the treat every second or third time. eventually you can fade the treat completely. I would have every member in the family do this so the dog learns to respond to everyone.
If this goes slow at first, back up in the procedure a little. Say the dog's old name. As soon as he looks at you, say the new name. Repeat this a few times until he understands the new name means treat, then go to the steps in the previous paragraph.
Again, until he responds consistently to his new name, you want to avoid using "pet" names (pun intended) for him, just to avoid confusion.
That being said, we're also seeing a lot of dogs coming in that have been recently adopted. (Reminder that dogs who have been adopted from a non-profit get a 50% discount on self-serve washes within the first 30 days of adoption.) Some of the dogs get a name change with their new life, so I wanted to give a few tips to make this go smoothly and quickly.
Remember that all good things should come from you. A dog will come to you more consistently if it is a good thing. For example, when you take your dog to the park, call him, praise him, and then let him go back to playing, sniffing, or whatever. About the fourth or fifth time you call him, he is much more likely to come so you can put the leash on him and go home. Hearing his name and coming to you is not always a bad thing. So his name becomes a good thing.
When you want to change a dogs name, there are two easy ways to do this. First is just simply using the name. Every time you interact with the dog, use his new name. Not sweety, or silly or good boy (unless that his name). Without getting into the science of this, he should quickly learn that this is his new name. This worked for both our dogs, Lambert and Cletus... I mean Puck and Duncan.
The second way you can do this is more of a classical training (or respondent conditioning) technique. Say the dog's new name. When he looks at you, give him a treat. Repeat this until he looks at you quickly and consistently. After he looks at you without hesitation about five times you can start to fade the treat. Give the treat every second or third time. eventually you can fade the treat completely. I would have every member in the family do this so the dog learns to respond to everyone.
If this goes slow at first, back up in the procedure a little. Say the dog's old name. As soon as he looks at you, say the new name. Repeat this a few times until he understands the new name means treat, then go to the steps in the previous paragraph.
Again, until he responds consistently to his new name, you want to avoid using "pet" names (pun intended) for him, just to avoid confusion.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
A little more about methods
When I talk to other trainers I tend to get specific and speak in scientific terms. Things like Differential Reinforcement, Discriminative Stimulus, the Four Quadrants, etc. When I speak to customers, students, or the public at large, I tend to speak in much broader, general terms. It's kind of like me not needing to know about programming when I get my computer worked on. I did want to get a little more specific though about something I mentioned in my last blog: clicker or marker training.
In my last blog, I grossly generalized clicker training. Now that we have the basics, I wanted to get a little more specific. Basically how it works is you use a unique stimulus to mark a behavior. This is a way to tell the dog he has done something correctly at the moment it occurs. Because the marker (click or a specific word) has been paired with a reinforcer (food, praise, etc.), it tells the dog that when he hears the marker a reinforcer is coming. It really isn't so much a training technique as it is a system of reinforcement.
I like to use a clicker because it is a unique sound that carries very well over most noise. In class we tend to use the word "yesssss," drawing out the "s" to make the sound unique so as not to be confused with just saying "yes" in regular conversation. This saves you from having to carry around something extra in your pocket. For the purposes of the rest of the blog I'll refer to "click" as whatever marker you like to use. I will also refer to any reinforcer you care to use as "treat" even though it can be praise, a favorite toy, or anything the dog enjoys.
First you have to start by "charging" the clicker. You simply have the dog close to you, click and treat. The treat should follow the click within about a second to be the most effective. The more the dog wants the treat, the faster this will work. It should only take very few repetitions before he starts to associate the sound with the reinforcer. Once this pairing has taken place you will be able to delay the delivery of the treat because the click will elicit the same emotional response as the treat. I was able to charge the clicker with my dogs in about 2 minutes, but would start any training for about 2 more weeks by charging, just to make sure it was stable.
Now, if I am working on a sit, I can ask Duncan to sit, and as soon as his bottom hits the floor, click and treat. If I'm working on target training, as soon as his nose hits the target, click and treat. Whatever the training, as soon as it happens, I can mark it and he knows a treat is coming.
The two most common questions I hear at this point are "How do you get the behavior for a longer period of time?" and "What if you don't have a clicker or treat handy?"
To get the behavior to last longer, we'll take the sit for an example. Have the dog sit, and as soon as he's sitting, click and treat. Once he's sitting without any prompting five to ten times in a row, you can delay the click and treat for about a second. Once he's doing that amount of time consistently, you can delay the click and treat for two seconds, then three, and so on.
Something to remember at this point is to keep the training sessions short at first. You may only want to do about five minutes at first, and in that time you may only get a three second sit inconsistently. In the next training session you'll want to back up one or two steps before you move forward. Once he gets used to the training routine you can go for about 15 minutes, but usually it's not recommended to go longer than that. You can do two or three training sessions a day, but be aware of your dog's boredom and/or stress levels.
The point of training a behavior is so the dog will respond in real-life situations. In real-life, you won't always have a clicker or treats on hand. If you don't have a treat, don't click. The click means a treat is coming and if you that pairing doesn't happen, it will begin to lose its affect.
When you ask for a behavior - we'll use the sit again - if the behavior has a history of being reinforced, he is more likely to offer the behavior even if it does not get the click and treat. You don't want to do this too often, but enough that you will get a response in those real-life instances. Think of a slot machine. A person may not be reinforced - hit a jackpot - every time they put a quarter in, but it happens often enough that some people will still offer the behavior - keep playing - for hours on end. As long as the behavior has a history of reinforcement, there's no reason you can't get the behavior at any time.
Something to keep in mind with clicker training: it was popularized with training sea mammals. This is how killer whales and dolphins are trainer. It has also been shown to work by coaches training athletes such as swimmers and gymnasts. It can work on any vertebrate from fish to lizards to dogs.
Maybe later I'll do an entry about why clicker training works so well, but this is more about method, so I'll stop there for now.
In my last blog, I grossly generalized clicker training. Now that we have the basics, I wanted to get a little more specific. Basically how it works is you use a unique stimulus to mark a behavior. This is a way to tell the dog he has done something correctly at the moment it occurs. Because the marker (click or a specific word) has been paired with a reinforcer (food, praise, etc.), it tells the dog that when he hears the marker a reinforcer is coming. It really isn't so much a training technique as it is a system of reinforcement.
I like to use a clicker because it is a unique sound that carries very well over most noise. In class we tend to use the word "yesssss," drawing out the "s" to make the sound unique so as not to be confused with just saying "yes" in regular conversation. This saves you from having to carry around something extra in your pocket. For the purposes of the rest of the blog I'll refer to "click" as whatever marker you like to use. I will also refer to any reinforcer you care to use as "treat" even though it can be praise, a favorite toy, or anything the dog enjoys.
First you have to start by "charging" the clicker. You simply have the dog close to you, click and treat. The treat should follow the click within about a second to be the most effective. The more the dog wants the treat, the faster this will work. It should only take very few repetitions before he starts to associate the sound with the reinforcer. Once this pairing has taken place you will be able to delay the delivery of the treat because the click will elicit the same emotional response as the treat. I was able to charge the clicker with my dogs in about 2 minutes, but would start any training for about 2 more weeks by charging, just to make sure it was stable.
Now, if I am working on a sit, I can ask Duncan to sit, and as soon as his bottom hits the floor, click and treat. If I'm working on target training, as soon as his nose hits the target, click and treat. Whatever the training, as soon as it happens, I can mark it and he knows a treat is coming.
The two most common questions I hear at this point are "How do you get the behavior for a longer period of time?" and "What if you don't have a clicker or treat handy?"
To get the behavior to last longer, we'll take the sit for an example. Have the dog sit, and as soon as he's sitting, click and treat. Once he's sitting without any prompting five to ten times in a row, you can delay the click and treat for about a second. Once he's doing that amount of time consistently, you can delay the click and treat for two seconds, then three, and so on.
Something to remember at this point is to keep the training sessions short at first. You may only want to do about five minutes at first, and in that time you may only get a three second sit inconsistently. In the next training session you'll want to back up one or two steps before you move forward. Once he gets used to the training routine you can go for about 15 minutes, but usually it's not recommended to go longer than that. You can do two or three training sessions a day, but be aware of your dog's boredom and/or stress levels.
The point of training a behavior is so the dog will respond in real-life situations. In real-life, you won't always have a clicker or treats on hand. If you don't have a treat, don't click. The click means a treat is coming and if you that pairing doesn't happen, it will begin to lose its affect.
When you ask for a behavior - we'll use the sit again - if the behavior has a history of being reinforced, he is more likely to offer the behavior even if it does not get the click and treat. You don't want to do this too often, but enough that you will get a response in those real-life instances. Think of a slot machine. A person may not be reinforced - hit a jackpot - every time they put a quarter in, but it happens often enough that some people will still offer the behavior - keep playing - for hours on end. As long as the behavior has a history of reinforcement, there's no reason you can't get the behavior at any time.
Something to keep in mind with clicker training: it was popularized with training sea mammals. This is how killer whales and dolphins are trainer. It has also been shown to work by coaches training athletes such as swimmers and gymnasts. It can work on any vertebrate from fish to lizards to dogs.
Maybe later I'll do an entry about why clicker training works so well, but this is more about method, so I'll stop there for now.
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Choosing a Trainer and Method
Many of you know I've been sick for a while. Unfortunately, the medicine I was on was an antidepressant that had the side effect of helping my ailment. Good for my headaches, but it made me very unmotivated. So one of the things to suffer was the Mudd Puppies Blog. I'm off the meds and trying to play catch up now. Hopefully I can get back to my schedule of every two weeks to a month. But, enough about that.
Well, a couple of things have gotten me thinking. If you read this blog regularly, you know last October I received my Dog Training Certificate from Companion Animals Sciences Institute (CASI). Since then I have been assisting at the Columbia Canine Sports Center (CCSC). I have the book learnin', now it's time to get the hands on experience.
Last week I sat through the orientation for students as a refresher and to get my next "assignment" for the next session with CCSC. I spoke with Kathy and Ginger after orientation and was surprised when they asked if I wanted to teach a class. After I was able to collect myself I told them I just needed a little time to get a lesson plan together but I'd be willing to give it a try. Truth be told, I'm very excited and very nervous about this, but I've started working on a lesson plan for a puppy class and basic obedience class and believe I'll be teaching next session.
What will be taught is the easy part. What I'm struggling with is the class discussions. I have so much information running around in my head from what I learned with CASI, blogs I read, videos I watch, journals I read, and other trainers I talk to. Not only am I trying to decide what to include, but how to keep it short, concise, and in a way that the students will retain the information.
The thing I've been thinking about the most is training methods. Not what method/s I intend to teach, but how I'll answer if someone asks when they should alpha roll their dog or what to do when their dog tries to dominate them. I saw a video the other day of a trainer touting the virtues of shock collars. These have many different names, but let's call them what they are. I was appalled that this trainer's (I wish I could remember his name, but I tried to erase it from my memory) technique was to slap a shock collar on a dog and call it training. The dogs are trained. A behavior is evoked in the presence of a stimuli, but where's the fun in that for anyone?
I have to wonder why some people get dogs. What's the point if the relationship is a constant struggle. I don't want to spend my time disciplining my dogs. I'd rather have a relationship with a dog who can think for himself and has learned how to make the right decision. I'd rather have a dog that looks to me for the right thing to do, not a dog that cowers because they aren't sure what to do.
I read and hear a lot of people say that dominance is the only thing that works on "red zone cases," but this is absolutely not the case. Most of the cases behaviorists see are aggression cases. The behaviorists I follow have been dealing with "red zone" cases longer than some tv personalities have been alive with as good or better rate of success. Most aggression in dogs stems from fear or insecurity. So first of all, what good is going to come from making a fear aggressive dog fear you? Second, if a fear aggressive dog is fearful, what is the natural response going to be except to protect himself. And third, if you use aversives to train a dog, if he doesn't totally shut down, or even if he does, there is the risk that eventually he will try to protect himself by aggressing. Why risk it when other, less aversive techniques are proven to work?
I personally don't believe you can be an all positive reinforcement trainer. It says to me that a dog can do no wrong or you totally ignore any inappropriate behavior. I would certainly not just sit and watch if one of my dogs raised his leg on the coffee table, for example. I also accept the fact that I use positive punishment - introducing a stimuli to lessen the frequency of a behavior. When I say "no" I've added a stimuli - the word - to lessen the frequency of a behavior - peeing on the coffee table. The most important thing is to use the "least intrusive effective behavior intervention" as James O'Heare calls it.
Why alpha roll your dog if he nips you when a sharp, quick cry of mock pain can teach him bite inhibition? Why use a shock collar to train your dog to sit when using a treat that can be faded can be used to lure him into position and he will learn to enjoy it? Why use aversives to teach an aggressive dog not to be aggressive when you can change the behavior instead of suppressing it by desensitizing him?
One of the things to look for in a trainer is their technique. I see a lot of trainers say positive reinforcement doesn't work, but shock collars do, choke chains do, or whatever method. Any training technique can work as defined above. The thing to remember is it's not an either/or decision.
Positive reinforcement can be clicker training, or target training for example. But you may also incorporate negative punishment - removing a stimuli to decrease the frequency of a behavior. An example of this might be turning your back to a dog - removing your attention - and crossing your arms when a dog jumps up on you. When searching for a trainer, remember that positive reinforcement is not a training method, it defines the method. Likewise, a clicker trainer, although this is my preferred method, may narrow their technique to the point of excluding any other possibilities. A trainer needs to be open to any technique that can work best for each individual dog while remembering to use the least intrusive effective behavior intervention possible.
Before choosing a trainer, find out what they mean by "all positive trainer" or "balanced trainer" or even "clicker trainer." The answer should be that your dog is going to enjoy the training as much as you do.
I want to leave you with two links.
This is another take on choosing a trainer:
http://www.dogstardaily.com/blogs/when-choosing-dog-trainer-buyer-beware
This is a great example on how to train a dog with an aggression problem:
http://drsophiayin.com/resources/video_full/counter-conditioning_a_dog_to_blowing_in_face
Well, a couple of things have gotten me thinking. If you read this blog regularly, you know last October I received my Dog Training Certificate from Companion Animals Sciences Institute (CASI). Since then I have been assisting at the Columbia Canine Sports Center (CCSC). I have the book learnin', now it's time to get the hands on experience.
Last week I sat through the orientation for students as a refresher and to get my next "assignment" for the next session with CCSC. I spoke with Kathy and Ginger after orientation and was surprised when they asked if I wanted to teach a class. After I was able to collect myself I told them I just needed a little time to get a lesson plan together but I'd be willing to give it a try. Truth be told, I'm very excited and very nervous about this, but I've started working on a lesson plan for a puppy class and basic obedience class and believe I'll be teaching next session.
What will be taught is the easy part. What I'm struggling with is the class discussions. I have so much information running around in my head from what I learned with CASI, blogs I read, videos I watch, journals I read, and other trainers I talk to. Not only am I trying to decide what to include, but how to keep it short, concise, and in a way that the students will retain the information.
The thing I've been thinking about the most is training methods. Not what method/s I intend to teach, but how I'll answer if someone asks when they should alpha roll their dog or what to do when their dog tries to dominate them. I saw a video the other day of a trainer touting the virtues of shock collars. These have many different names, but let's call them what they are. I was appalled that this trainer's (I wish I could remember his name, but I tried to erase it from my memory) technique was to slap a shock collar on a dog and call it training. The dogs are trained. A behavior is evoked in the presence of a stimuli, but where's the fun in that for anyone?
I have to wonder why some people get dogs. What's the point if the relationship is a constant struggle. I don't want to spend my time disciplining my dogs. I'd rather have a relationship with a dog who can think for himself and has learned how to make the right decision. I'd rather have a dog that looks to me for the right thing to do, not a dog that cowers because they aren't sure what to do.
I read and hear a lot of people say that dominance is the only thing that works on "red zone cases," but this is absolutely not the case. Most of the cases behaviorists see are aggression cases. The behaviorists I follow have been dealing with "red zone" cases longer than some tv personalities have been alive with as good or better rate of success. Most aggression in dogs stems from fear or insecurity. So first of all, what good is going to come from making a fear aggressive dog fear you? Second, if a fear aggressive dog is fearful, what is the natural response going to be except to protect himself. And third, if you use aversives to train a dog, if he doesn't totally shut down, or even if he does, there is the risk that eventually he will try to protect himself by aggressing. Why risk it when other, less aversive techniques are proven to work?
I personally don't believe you can be an all positive reinforcement trainer. It says to me that a dog can do no wrong or you totally ignore any inappropriate behavior. I would certainly not just sit and watch if one of my dogs raised his leg on the coffee table, for example. I also accept the fact that I use positive punishment - introducing a stimuli to lessen the frequency of a behavior. When I say "no" I've added a stimuli - the word - to lessen the frequency of a behavior - peeing on the coffee table. The most important thing is to use the "least intrusive effective behavior intervention" as James O'Heare calls it.
Why alpha roll your dog if he nips you when a sharp, quick cry of mock pain can teach him bite inhibition? Why use a shock collar to train your dog to sit when using a treat that can be faded can be used to lure him into position and he will learn to enjoy it? Why use aversives to teach an aggressive dog not to be aggressive when you can change the behavior instead of suppressing it by desensitizing him?
One of the things to look for in a trainer is their technique. I see a lot of trainers say positive reinforcement doesn't work, but shock collars do, choke chains do, or whatever method. Any training technique can work as defined above. The thing to remember is it's not an either/or decision.
Positive reinforcement can be clicker training, or target training for example. But you may also incorporate negative punishment - removing a stimuli to decrease the frequency of a behavior. An example of this might be turning your back to a dog - removing your attention - and crossing your arms when a dog jumps up on you. When searching for a trainer, remember that positive reinforcement is not a training method, it defines the method. Likewise, a clicker trainer, although this is my preferred method, may narrow their technique to the point of excluding any other possibilities. A trainer needs to be open to any technique that can work best for each individual dog while remembering to use the least intrusive effective behavior intervention possible.
Before choosing a trainer, find out what they mean by "all positive trainer" or "balanced trainer" or even "clicker trainer." The answer should be that your dog is going to enjoy the training as much as you do.
I want to leave you with two links.
This is another take on choosing a trainer:
http://www.dogstardaily.com/blogs/when-choosing-dog-trainer-buyer-beware
This is a great example on how to train a dog with an aggression problem:
http://drsophiayin.com/resources/video_full/counter-conditioning_a_dog_to_blowing_in_face
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Dogs walking ahead
This goes back to one of my favorite topics: dominance. Specifically, dogs walking ahead.
So, here's the scenario: I had stepped out of our walk-out basement the other day with Duncan, my Brittany. When we came in, Duncan went in the door first and went up the stairs ahead of me. How many indications of dominance do you see in this scenario?
Okay, I held a few things back, just to get to my point. First, consider locomotion, or the way we move. Bipedal locomotion is very impractical when compared to the alternative. Sure it has its advantages. Some scientist believe standing upright is a major contributing factor to our high intelligence as a species. But think about the species that can choose between walking on two legs or four. The first that come to my mind are bears and gorillas. When they want to move quickly or more efficiently they move on all fours.
Dogs are designed to move on all fours. They simply move faster than we do. How often have you seen someone chasing after a dog who is quickly outdistancing them? Consider that the second fastest land animal, after the Cheetah, is the dog - specifically the Greyhound.
So back to the previous scenario. When I was ready to go back inside, I called Duncan. He ran up to the door and I told him "back" so I could get the door open. I then told him "inside" because I didn't want to trip over him and the way the door is positioned it's awkward to hold it open while I wait for him to come in. He waited for me in the basement while I locked the door and when he saw me coming he started up the stairs. I'd rather have him go first than try to pass me because I'm slower than he is. He would walk up three or four steps, stop and look at me to check if I was still coming, up three or four more and check, all the way up. Even with his stopping and going, he still made it up the stairs much quicker than me.
All of this taken together does not at any time show a dominate dog. It shows my consideration for both of our safety and my understanding that this is a dog who can move more efficiently than I can. It does not show a dog who is trying to dominate me, but a dog who listens and constantly checks with me because he wants to be with me.
So, here's the scenario: I had stepped out of our walk-out basement the other day with Duncan, my Brittany. When we came in, Duncan went in the door first and went up the stairs ahead of me. How many indications of dominance do you see in this scenario?
Okay, I held a few things back, just to get to my point. First, consider locomotion, or the way we move. Bipedal locomotion is very impractical when compared to the alternative. Sure it has its advantages. Some scientist believe standing upright is a major contributing factor to our high intelligence as a species. But think about the species that can choose between walking on two legs or four. The first that come to my mind are bears and gorillas. When they want to move quickly or more efficiently they move on all fours.
Dogs are designed to move on all fours. They simply move faster than we do. How often have you seen someone chasing after a dog who is quickly outdistancing them? Consider that the second fastest land animal, after the Cheetah, is the dog - specifically the Greyhound.
So back to the previous scenario. When I was ready to go back inside, I called Duncan. He ran up to the door and I told him "back" so I could get the door open. I then told him "inside" because I didn't want to trip over him and the way the door is positioned it's awkward to hold it open while I wait for him to come in. He waited for me in the basement while I locked the door and when he saw me coming he started up the stairs. I'd rather have him go first than try to pass me because I'm slower than he is. He would walk up three or four steps, stop and look at me to check if I was still coming, up three or four more and check, all the way up. Even with his stopping and going, he still made it up the stairs much quicker than me.
All of this taken together does not at any time show a dominate dog. It shows my consideration for both of our safety and my understanding that this is a dog who can move more efficiently than I can. It does not show a dog who is trying to dominate me, but a dog who listens and constantly checks with me because he wants to be with me.
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Challenge
I've been at a loss for topics lately. That, coupled with my evenings getting a bit busier has made me neglectful of this blog. Part of my schedule has been taken up by my helping at the Columbia Canine Sports Center. As followers of this blog know, I received my Dog Training Certificate from Companion Animal Sciences Institute last October. Now, thanks to CCSC, I'm taking that classroom knowledge and applying it to real life situations.
I'm currently assisting in my third class with as many instructors. Each one has something unique to offer and has me constantly thinking about what pieces I want to implement when I start leading my own classes, and what parts can I leave behind. I should preface this by saying I haven't disagreed with any of the techniques, it's just a matter of preferences.
I also spend my time reading blogs, journals, newsletters, articles, research papers, and just about anything else I can get my hands on. Of course I give preference to those people who seem to fall in line with my way of thinking, but I try to read those which I don't agree with when I have time. It helps keep me abreast of the discussions in the field and what the stance is of both sides of any argument. I hope I am open minded enough, that if a viable argument was presented I would incorporate the new found knowledge into my own philosophies and techniques.
So, what this is all leading to: It really irks me when some of these people turn to name calling and trash talk when they disagree with someone. Maybe it's just the sites I frequent, but it's not surprising to me that usually the ones who start casting aspersions are the people who subscribe to force training and dominance theory. Even in the face of hard scientific evidence they refuse to deviate from their beliefs.
Something to consider is the definition of training. In simplest, scientific terms, training is the change of behavior in the presence of a stimulus. So is force training or dominance actually training? By definition, it is. But it is at the risk of flooding or learned helplessness. Not only do these techniques risk damaging the relationship, but the trainee will usually only perform the behavior to the point of avoiding the aversive.
With these techniques, the trainer is not teaching what is expected, but rather what behavior is unwanted. For instance, asking a dog to sit but he stands. A leash jerk is applied, and the dog doesn't learn to sit, but learns NOT to stand.
With a reinforcement training, the desired behavior is reinforced. The trainee is learning what IS expected. Not only will you get the desired behavior, but in the long run the trainee will not only present the desired behavior, but will offer it in better qualities and quantities.
Another argument along the same vein is that there is not just one way to train or teach. I agree completely. I've worked with and trained using target training, marker training, and, I'm loathe to say, dominance training, just to name a few. But at the end of the day I want a dog that is going to do what I ask because he WANTS to, not because he feels he HAS to.
Truth be told, I've gotten into discussions with other reinforcement trainers with whom I disagreed. But I've learned so much from them, even if it was just finding the evidence to backup and reinforce my position. And these people, I've always had very frank, open discussion that did not deteriorate to name calling.
In my blogs, I try to present an overview of the information, then give a list of resources so you can read it for yourself and draw your own conclusions. The information is out there. I challenge everyone to read it and draw your own conclusion, and not just get your information from sensationalized television shows.
I'm currently assisting in my third class with as many instructors. Each one has something unique to offer and has me constantly thinking about what pieces I want to implement when I start leading my own classes, and what parts can I leave behind. I should preface this by saying I haven't disagreed with any of the techniques, it's just a matter of preferences.
I also spend my time reading blogs, journals, newsletters, articles, research papers, and just about anything else I can get my hands on. Of course I give preference to those people who seem to fall in line with my way of thinking, but I try to read those which I don't agree with when I have time. It helps keep me abreast of the discussions in the field and what the stance is of both sides of any argument. I hope I am open minded enough, that if a viable argument was presented I would incorporate the new found knowledge into my own philosophies and techniques.
So, what this is all leading to: It really irks me when some of these people turn to name calling and trash talk when they disagree with someone. Maybe it's just the sites I frequent, but it's not surprising to me that usually the ones who start casting aspersions are the people who subscribe to force training and dominance theory. Even in the face of hard scientific evidence they refuse to deviate from their beliefs.
Something to consider is the definition of training. In simplest, scientific terms, training is the change of behavior in the presence of a stimulus. So is force training or dominance actually training? By definition, it is. But it is at the risk of flooding or learned helplessness. Not only do these techniques risk damaging the relationship, but the trainee will usually only perform the behavior to the point of avoiding the aversive.
With these techniques, the trainer is not teaching what is expected, but rather what behavior is unwanted. For instance, asking a dog to sit but he stands. A leash jerk is applied, and the dog doesn't learn to sit, but learns NOT to stand.
With a reinforcement training, the desired behavior is reinforced. The trainee is learning what IS expected. Not only will you get the desired behavior, but in the long run the trainee will not only present the desired behavior, but will offer it in better qualities and quantities.
Another argument along the same vein is that there is not just one way to train or teach. I agree completely. I've worked with and trained using target training, marker training, and, I'm loathe to say, dominance training, just to name a few. But at the end of the day I want a dog that is going to do what I ask because he WANTS to, not because he feels he HAS to.
Truth be told, I've gotten into discussions with other reinforcement trainers with whom I disagreed. But I've learned so much from them, even if it was just finding the evidence to backup and reinforce my position. And these people, I've always had very frank, open discussion that did not deteriorate to name calling.
In my blogs, I try to present an overview of the information, then give a list of resources so you can read it for yourself and draw your own conclusions. The information is out there. I challenge everyone to read it and draw your own conclusion, and not just get your information from sensationalized television shows.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
One "Jerk"
Mudd Puppies Self Serve Dog Wash, LLC
I know I've talked about this before, but it always bares repeating. A friend just shared an excellent article/blog with me about the dangers of choke collars. Here are a few things to help keep this in perspective.
It's been determined that dogs feel pain about the same way people do. The difference is dogs are still predatory enough that it is preferable to mask or hide pain. If a predator shows pain or weakness they then become prey, so it is better to hide that pain from potential predators. Stories are often told about dogs who have some trauma and the people didn't know about it until it had escalated to a serious problem. This is why.
With that in mind, I've seen a lot of trainers and sales people downplay the harm choke chains and prong collars can do by telling people to put it on their arm. The human arm has a lot of muscle and fat, so it is not a true representation. Feel your dog's neck. Just like yours, you can feel the vertebrae, tendons, arteries, and esophagus just like your own neck. There is not a lot of muscle or fat to protect these things like in your arm. If you want a true representation of what these collars feel like to your dog, put it on your own neck.
The other thing to remember is every collar used with domestic animal are full pulling... except dogs. I saw it put this way once: If I push on you, your natural instinct is to push back so I don't knock you over.
My personal belief is collars should only be used as a place to hang tags. If you have a problem puller I recommend two things. First is a head halter. These work like the bridle of horse. Dogs don't have a lot of lateral strength (side to side) so when they start to move ahead they are turned away from where they want to go. These are a great temporary tool for teaching loose leash walking. With these halters, you should never jerk the leash and I recommend fading them as quickly as possible. The down side is some dogs find them uncomfortable. Also, if they are jerked (whether by the fault of the dog or the person) it can cause some damage, so care does need to be taken.
The other option is a body harness. There are several different designs and you just have to find one that works for you. Some connect on the front and use the physics of that lateral strength to keep the dog from pulling. Others connect to the back and "lift" the dog when he starts to pull. The disadvantage front connecting harness is the dogs can get a bit tangled in the leash. With the back connecting harness, the dogs can get a little force against them, more than the halter or front connecting harness, but less than a collar.
With all the pluses and minuses of these options, I think they still far outweigh the damage that can be done with a prong collar, choke collar, or even a regular collar.
http://www.peterdobias.com/community/2009/05/one-jerk-can-cause-a-lot-of-damage/
I know I've talked about this before, but it always bares repeating. A friend just shared an excellent article/blog with me about the dangers of choke collars. Here are a few things to help keep this in perspective.
It's been determined that dogs feel pain about the same way people do. The difference is dogs are still predatory enough that it is preferable to mask or hide pain. If a predator shows pain or weakness they then become prey, so it is better to hide that pain from potential predators. Stories are often told about dogs who have some trauma and the people didn't know about it until it had escalated to a serious problem. This is why.
With that in mind, I've seen a lot of trainers and sales people downplay the harm choke chains and prong collars can do by telling people to put it on their arm. The human arm has a lot of muscle and fat, so it is not a true representation. Feel your dog's neck. Just like yours, you can feel the vertebrae, tendons, arteries, and esophagus just like your own neck. There is not a lot of muscle or fat to protect these things like in your arm. If you want a true representation of what these collars feel like to your dog, put it on your own neck.
The other thing to remember is every collar used with domestic animal are full pulling... except dogs. I saw it put this way once: If I push on you, your natural instinct is to push back so I don't knock you over.
My personal belief is collars should only be used as a place to hang tags. If you have a problem puller I recommend two things. First is a head halter. These work like the bridle of horse. Dogs don't have a lot of lateral strength (side to side) so when they start to move ahead they are turned away from where they want to go. These are a great temporary tool for teaching loose leash walking. With these halters, you should never jerk the leash and I recommend fading them as quickly as possible. The down side is some dogs find them uncomfortable. Also, if they are jerked (whether by the fault of the dog or the person) it can cause some damage, so care does need to be taken.
The other option is a body harness. There are several different designs and you just have to find one that works for you. Some connect on the front and use the physics of that lateral strength to keep the dog from pulling. Others connect to the back and "lift" the dog when he starts to pull. The disadvantage front connecting harness is the dogs can get a bit tangled in the leash. With the back connecting harness, the dogs can get a little force against them, more than the halter or front connecting harness, but less than a collar.
With all the pluses and minuses of these options, I think they still far outweigh the damage that can be done with a prong collar, choke collar, or even a regular collar.
http://www.peterdobias.com/community/2009/05/one-jerk-can-cause-a-lot-of-damage/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)