SkySoaringMagpie

Thanks Harminee. Run free Buzz, beautiful boy Goodbye Merlin, kick-arse kitteh

Sorry to hear you lost your Merlin - we lost our kitty Merlin today too so your farewell gave me a bit of a start. Your Merlin looked lovely, I hope you find comfort in your memories of him.

Hope my post into the "what's important" thread wasn't one of these. I'm not against easy, just lazy, where lazy is about half-arsing something at the dog's expense when you know how to do it better. I agree that it's not an aversive vs non-aversive discussion because I've heard "the easy way out" about check chains and food rewards too. Four observations: 1 - There are a lot of people out there who want a magic fix without putting any work in. I think trainers get jaded with this, and get cranky with people always looking for the easy way out where there is no easy way out. You know the ones who do the "that won't work" whine at everything you suggest purely because it sounds like they'll have to spend a bit of time with their dog. So perhaps it's the public's never ending search for the easy way out that has transferred a negative connotation onto training methods that appear easy (but usually aren't anyway, not for a novice - both food and check chains require good timing). 2 - Human hang-ups - whether about food, work and duty or self-esteem. People are crazy, and no amount of science will convince someone who is very emotionally attached to an idea about how their dog "should" be and what it "should do" just because they are carrying major personal baggage. Some of the stuff people do to their dogs is just Orwellian. If I had my way, I would fling some of these people into the sun. 3 - Some of us would prefer to take the long way around if, in our judgment, it reduces the risk of damaging our relationship with our dogs. JulesP's retrieve is a good example, unlike a recall, it's not essential to a dog's safety that it learn how to retrieve a dumbell so why not try an alternative that doesn't involve hurting your dog - even tho' it might take longer. Let's not debate this again, unlike #2, this is not a situation where people are being unrealistic about what dogs are capable of. 4 - Sometimes the "better" alternative depends what you are shooting for in the long run. If you just want a polite pet then lure away as long as you fade it later. If you want a dog with well developed shaping skills, and you have the patience and skill, it might be better to shape what you want. Horses for courses, and it depends a bit what engages the dog too.

Customs dogs (and I understand guide dogs too) are put into the private homes of "puppy walkers" up until about 12 months of age for environmental enrichment and socialisation. Info about their program is here: http://www.customs.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=5652 When I say "into the homes" Customs puppies are not allowed inside the house, but the principle of having them socialised to a range of situations and people early on is applied - the puppy walkers take them to schools, shopping centres etc etc.

Just to clarify, it is not the process of raising or lowering value of behaviour, rather raising or lowering value to an object, person or other animal. OK, help the numpty here. Isn't a high value for an object a predictor for behaviour which is why the process is undertaken? What's the difference?

I'm really appreciating all these thoughtful responses, thank-you! JulesP - I liked this a lot: I don't have borders so I can do dog sports, I do dog sports because borders are my choice of dog Willow wrote: My training philosophy is "do no harm". I won't use a method if I believe it has the potential to damage the relationship between dog & handler. This is important to me too. Not quite the same but related: A while back I read somewhere (can't recall where) that if you know a better way and you don't use it, you're putting the dog through unnecessary stress, confusion and/or aggravation. That really stuck with me, and ever since then I've tried not to be lazy about what I want from them (no yelling complete sentences at them from another room for example). Ultimately I want a good relationship with my dog, and I feel I have a responsibility as my dogs' caretaker to make decisions that prioritise their well-being. If that means that things like awards and titles take longer, or don't happen at all, that's what it means. I see that reflected in a lot of the responses here too, which is nice!

I have no issues with either raising the value of a wanted behaviour or with lowering the value of an unwanted behaviour. It is dog training after all. This part of the notestream kicked off because someone said that the ONLY thing a dog should value is the handler. That is where the comparison to Stockholm syndrome was made, unsurprisingly. I queried the dog only valuing the handler and gave an example of something drive-related that my dog values more than me. Instead of getting an answer, I was called ignorant and stupid by another poster. Perhaps you would care to answer the question Tony? Is neutralisation about neutralising everything but the handler, or is it only those things that the dog needs to avoid to work effectively? Or is it something else again?

Did anyone use the "c" word? Perhaps I missed it. Someone said they struggled to see how it could be humane. That's a statement about them, not about you. They don't need to say it, it is implied in both of bj2circeleb posts. Of course I don't expect you to agree that she is implying I am cruel, nor do I give a toss if you agree. Either you hate it, or you don't give a toss. Which is it? You push an aggressive "I am the logical informed person, you are ignorant!" line in your posts to people who don't agree with you. You rarely demonstrate any basis for your accusations and you impose on people's courtesy and good will so much that you compromise your message. Belittling someone by typing "fail" at them doesn't make what they say untrue, or make what you say true.

Did anyone use the "c" word? Perhaps I missed it. Someone said they struggled to see how it could be humane. That's a statement about them, not about you.

Really? I have a bitch for whom the best thing in the world EVER is lure coursing. It holds a massive positive value for her far exceeding anything else, including me. The minute she realises she is at the field and the machine is there she becomes incredibly alert and happy and is just itching to get out there. I am not as exciting to her in that moment as a plastic bag on a string, but I still manage to get her back at the end of the run. Given that, why would I want to make her experience of lure coursing neutral? Seems to me that would be shutting down her drive to do what she was bred to do? It pleases me to see her so happy, and I have no issue at all with the fact that in that time and moment, the thrill of the chase is more important. How could dogs work effectively at things like coursing and earth-dogging if the owner was the only thing with positive value?

Some of the threads in General have prompted some questions in my mind - particularly the thread on destructive puppies - but I thought the questions might be better posed here. What's important to you when you go to train a dog? I'm not talking about titles, but about what you want to achieve in the broadest behavioural sense when you start out with a new dog. And how you want to achieve it. I know it's a big question. I guess I'm asking "what is your training philosophy?" When you give advice, how do you factor in what might be important to the person asking for advice if it differs from what would be important to you?

Great idea, thanks for the reminder. Picked up a few at lunchtime, need to buy ourselves a freezer! He had heaps there.

Yeah, that's why I wrote "something to explore/play with" rather than "the answer to your prayers!". Unsupervised unwanted barking can hard to fix even with special collars. Apparently there are remote mark and treat devices too, but I've never used one and couldn't comment on them. I think you've worked it out yourself anyway. I know one of our puppies plays beautifully when coming from a calm start, but is a pain in the neck when she is greeting the other dogs after a day in the kennels because she's so excited she doesn't think straight. So I don't let her interact with the others until she calms down. Can't recall who it was who taught me to assess arousal and stimulation levels when trouble shooting but it's been a useful insight for me.

Is this the same seminar? http://www.petsinthemaking.com/documents/dunbar.pdf That's the one.

30 Jan - 1 Feb. Also seminars in Perth the previous weekend. If you PM me an email address I can forward you the brochure I got. No webpage for it unfortunately.

OK, OH drew the short straw and has to stay home with the dogs. I just sent off my rego and payment for all three days. Really looking forward to it. Who else is going? Am I going to be a no mates nigel?! Shall we try for a DOL dinner on the Saturday night?

RIP Lucy, she sounds like she was a real sweetheart. :D

No. As Nekhbet says, the owner has to do the work for the problem to be solved. Last time I paid someone (to help me with a couple of problems I had in the show ring) I was looking for the benefit of someone else's experience. I knew I had to do the work once she gave me some guidance about how to approach the things I was trying to solve.

I thinks its going to become a degree soon ... with all the 'terms', theories and such you'll spend more time with your nose buried in a book then training dogs. It can never replace personal, good old hands on experience though frankly I know what counts for more. The difficulty is that at the moment a lot of what is out there on pack behaviour is sheer pop psychology and it's eaten up because humans love, love, love hierarchy (particularly where they are at the top). Sure, ultimately you have to deal with the dog in front of you, but it helps if your brain is not full of either Ye Olde Crappe or Shiny New Crap 2.0. Good critical thinking and research skills shouldn't be underestimated or devalued, but as you say, you need hands on experience as well.

Tris I saw this link about training paired cues posted in another training board I'm on and thought it might be something to explore/play with: http://www.clickertraining.com/node/185

How do you know if your dog respects you as a leader? The dog looks to me in uncertain situations for guidance on how to proceed. The dog respects the boundaries I have set out. If the dog tests me, the dog backs down when I hold my ground. How do you earn your dogs respect as a leader? Being calm, consistent and having demonstrable self control in high stress situations. Not allowing yourself to fall apart, lose your shit or otherwise drop your bundle in front of the dogs. Understanding that you are a monkey and your dog is a canine, and having respect for both positions. It was also said that the only dangerous dog is the one that makes up its own mind- How do you stop a dog from making up its own mind? I'm sorry, but that is complete bollocks. My dogs can choose anywhere in the yard to eliminate. My dogs can choose what of the toys I leave out they might like to play with. My dogs choose where on the floor they want to flop out and sleep. I only fail as a leader if my dogs are making decisions about things that I should be making decisions about. A leader controls the things they care to control, they do not try to control everything if they are smart. A leader who tries to control everything will become a slave to their ego. ETA: My dogs know far better than I do how to chase a rabbit over uneven ground and they do a much better job of it than I would. Many breeds are bred to think and act independently in order to serve the needs of their humans.

Two different "theys". The import restriction is a Commonwealth law, the use laws are state and territory laws.

I am surprised this news hasn't filtered down to DOL: http://www.customs.gov.au/webdata/resource...ces/ACN0855.pdf

The difficulty is that if you are next door to a junkie with anger issues, no reasonable action you take will protect your dog. You run the risk of making your dog's life smaller and smaller to appease someone who is going to be unreasonable anyway. You've already noted that his assessment of the barking is unreasonable. I don't know how your yard is set up, but is it possible to put Grover in a secure run in an area where there is no line of sight or access from the road or the guy's house, and shadecloth it so he can't be seen and no-one can throw any bait in? If the guy has decided he doesn't like the dog, he will bait or abuse it whether or not it barks. Or try and sell it to one of his pigging mates to fund his next fix. I'm sorry, I wish I could be more positive, but if this was me, my dog would be inside or in a locked run. And I'd be reviewing all my other home security arrangements too.