sidoney

Now why did I not realise that? We're gonna have a great time ... tiring, but excellent. BTW my dogs are in for a shock ... they thought a 3 day seminar was hard work, last year. 5 days is going to be interesting.

Sooo sorry for you. It rips your heart out.

Woot! Rose was gonna come - she's auditing coz she was expecting Misty to be in whelp - well the little rotter came into season this morning. Hopefully she'll still come, but we won't see Misty either way. Oh yeah and I saw Ruth on the list of attenders too.

Go the Vizslas!! (We'll be there too - Garrett/Derrett.) I just made up about 3-4kg of the liver treat recipe that henrynchlo gave me, in preparation.

I have got Phenergan over the counter. Sometimes a hives reaction can continue and go up and down for a while after the original reaction, without being exposed to a trigger again. I've had the odd case with my Vizslas.

If the dog has learned that "food in sight/smell" means possiblity of reward, and none means no possibility, then it won't do anything if it knows there is no reward. Probably the easiest answer is to get the rewards off your person - stash them around your training environment. Then use some kind of bridge and go to the reward. Make rewarding unpredictable. When the behaviour is learned, about 1 in 7 ratio gives high effort. Also vary rewards - not just one type of thing. You have already mentioned food. Praise and petting can also be rewarding to the dog. Getting in the car, going through the door, sniffing interesting smells - all can be controlled and used by you to reward the dog. Eg. training my puppy in the park. Comes to me when called - food reward (fast, easy, high value). Cued to sit and give eye contact - the reward is the release to go run around again. I am controlling her access to the things she wants to do. She is responding to my cue in order to get what she wants.

I agree with poodlefan about distractions. From on his own to in front of a class is a big jump. I'd be "taking the show on the road" - practicing the recall in different environments and increasing levels of distraction. You can also set up distractions at home, eg. recall past a food bowl (start with it far away or covered or something - I have used a container with holes in the top so the smell is there but food can't be eaten), recall while you or someone else is throwing a ball, or whatever will distract the dog. Start low distraction and build it up. Self control, yes, but by teaching it to keep its mind on what you have asked for it, that coming is more fun than doing something else. When you have a dog that will perform despite distractions, then you have a more reliable behaviour. BTW I am training my Kelpie pup to wait until a verbal release, and give me eye contact before being released. Very important for lead outs in agility and high drive dogs can find it difficult. This requires self control. We started it at home and have taken it on the road, and increased distraction level. We have been practicing it in the park on the other side of a fence where two cattle dogs threaten to murder us - started further away and got closer. She can also wait while I scatter a heap of cut up yummy treats in front of her, then walk away a bit, then release her to eat them. I started this by having one treat in my hand, then on the ground, then a few, then throwing them - you get the idea. This puppy is under 5 months old. Gradually built up the distractions. I have corrected her - it consisted of, she got up as I scattered food, I put my leg in between her and the food, asked her to sit, rewarded the sit, had eye contact, gave verbal release to get the food. She'll do it for toys as well. We are building up duration of eye contact. Recall - also building that up over distance and distractions, each factor separately.

It's a philosophical divide. One that may have no definitive proof either way. As I have maintained earlier, to see the dog as needing clarification and further training is potentially less dangerous and less punitive than to see the dog as deliberately misbehaving.

The point I was making there was that if one uses OC terminology, a punisher is a punisher whether one is emotional about it or not. Or whether it's painful or not. And I think that there have been some uses of the same word but different definitions that has been a bit confusing. Ah, and also a punisher is one that does indeed stop or reduce the behaviour - which nagging "corrections" that have no effect don't do, so they aren't punishers at all. Even if they are painful. And again, we see the problems with imprecise terminology. I think the term "corrections" is one that people feel better about using than "punishment". Oh yes and also if someone comes home and kicks a dog for spreading rubbish around, they may feel like they are punishing the dog, but all they are doing is abusing it.

I read the (chapter?) and I think she was writing about something quite different to training dogs, but using training that dog to illustrate what she was saying. As I don't have pgm's theoretical background in philosophy I don't totally understand the antecedents. That said, it appears to come from a very different viewpoint about what dogs are and what our relationships with them are or should be to the one that I have. Perhaps each of us were predisposed to take such apparently different viewpoints by our previous knowledge and experience. However, from my viewpoint, the one espoused in the excerpt I read has some dangerous implications, eg. a belief in a dog's morality, that I referred to earlier on. She also makes a number of attributions about dog behaviour that are not uncommon, but which I would question, particularly to the extent that she is making them. Again, that is no doubt influenced by differing viewpoints - however for me the most telling difference is the implications that it could have for dogs themselves. It also has a different definition of "punishment" to the one used in an OC sense, and this could be leading to some confusion in this discussion (apart from having other implications). Always difficult to take something out of context but: Something I didn't find out from what I read was what pgm meant when s/he said Does that statement tie in with the excerpt above?

I grew up with dogs from a baby but have ridden since say 8 years old and had my own horse/s since I was 13. Although I don't get to ride much these days - I have been doing much over the last several years to put me in the position of buying property and getting off a suburban block, so that I can go back to having them outside my back door. So to speak. All my family has horses. Some of the horses are quite well known within their own circles. I have the fewest horses - I have 4. I did used to work with horses in various fields for some years. Probably the most expertise I have is in taking young unhandled horses and making good equine citizens of them, suitable to go on with.

Sorry pgm, that story is too allegorical for me to understand what you are saying. Are you saying, training a dog to "look over a rainbow" in a metaphysical sense?

Yes, that is kind of what I meant - most specifically, I refer to her description of what dogs are, and the nature of the relationship between dogs and humans. The way she trains dogs seems to be an expression of those beliefs. I've read a little Wittgenstein and less of the others - that is not my field, although I have been touching on it more lately. I have noticed that the writings of someone like, say, Wittgenstein, are constructed/understood/used in a number of not necessarily aligned ways. Although as I say, I have touched on it only lightly.

It's difficult to do anything challenging in an unchangingly calm way - and destructive when you don't. Training animals has taught me to be much more patient and calm. I was horrible as a teenager. Nowadays I find that the total focus when teaching something difficult and observing the animal minutely is calming in itself. Training unhandled horses is probably the most effective at producing that focus and calm for me. Because if you don't have total focus, and make some blunder, there is a real chance of getting clobbered in some way!

Thanks to Tabata for posting the link. I'd not read any of this before but have now read all that was available on that link (about 13,500 words more or less). pgm, you would replace the head in the hole of water with an ecollar - to what extent does your belief system align with what else is written there, and in what places would you differ?

Thank you for the reference. Always interesting to expand one's field of view.

Bonniescot, try here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BalancedTrainers/

I would need for this to be clarified in order to be able to understand it.

Thanks for that info vpzn(&t), I'd be interested in learning more about that and would be interested in the link too.

Herding is what sheepdogs were bred to do. Likewise, I don't need to reward my dogs for hunting and pointing game - that's what they want to do. Sam, the instincts in these dogs has been modified over centuries of breeding. I'd be interested in hearing pgm's reply to poodlefan's question.

I will add that back when I was clicker training Shaula for obedience, they were exciting and challenging times to be clicker training. There were not many people doing it and traditional trainers looked VERY askance at it. Our knowledge was gained via the 'Net through a wide-spread network of other clicker trainers. What we were doing, at least in terms of general dog training, was new and we often had to work from first principles and make up the method as we went along, or adapt and apply from other related situations. I was lucky in that I had a friend (who had Shaula's sister Adele) who didn't live too far away, and we used to clicker train our dogs together.

Here's a piccy of my 8 year old girl doing agility. Gotta love that cheesy Vizsla grin! This girl, Shaula, was one of the first fully clicker trained obedience titled dogs in Australia. She gained her CD title at, hm, about 14 months, with her first trials at about 12 1/2 months. She trialed in Novice 4 times, for 4 passes, 3 of which were wins. Her mother Amy gained CDX with several wins and places but that was before I knew about clicker training. Shaula has several progeny competing in the obedience rings, from 2 repeat matings with Huxley (obedience champion) - one of these puppies I have kept, that's Cedar. Cedar and her siblings have no less than 4 obedience champions in their pedigree. Anyway, after gaining Shaula's CD title, we didn't do any doggy competition for some years, until we came back but this time doing Agility, and again, she is doing well (despite limited competitions) - as is Cedar. Oh BTW, photo credit pinnicle photography, www.pinnicle.com.au

I find that the most misunderstood part of dog training is the TIMING of the various reinforcers, punishers, etc. I find that people normally know at least a few things that their dogs like and don't like (although not the full range, and also some don't seem to realise how environment/distraction influences this, eg. bring kibble to their first night training), but again and again, I see little understanding of how and WHEN to use this knowledge to influence behaviour. For example, and clicker teachers will know this one, soooo many times people will click just AFTER a behaviour. It takes awareness and practice to get the timing right. They also often don't think about how what they are doing is reinforcing/punishing behaviour. Eg. make a mistake in a course, handler slumps - this punishes the dog for trying (as vpzn(&t) has mentioned). Or, very common, dog whines or barks, handler pats it to get it to be quiet - they have just rewarded whining. When people realise that more than food can reinforce, and more than a kick can punish, then they tend to become more aware of how their actions influence behaviour. (BTW pgm, how's about a piccy of your boy? I'm always in for a Vizsla ogle! )

so sorry for you - frizzles are lovely - I know what it's like to lose a beloved chook.

I think Nat has hit upon something important - we who are having this discussion here do have some understanding of and experience in dog training. I completely agree with her when she suggests that a better understanding of reinforcement and punishment would help the average dog trainer (edit, ahem "owner"). It's not a great deal to remember, just a few simple guidelines to follow. I would argue that this understanding would also help in raising children - particularly young children. (oh, btw, re use of language - the thread title - "positive re-enforcement" - has a strange sort of dichotomy, eh?)