Willem

I find it hard to reward her after every turn as it happens really in seconds or even fractions of a second...so to make it a positive reinforcement and giving here a treat it would interrupt the whole sequence...hence I did it without giving her a reward, not sure whether giving a reward after finishing a sequence would make a big difference as the task is that the dog keeps the focus on you, starts anticipating your next step very quickly to avoid the tension in the leash, and does this multiple times in a sequence. Totally agree with 'no major force involved'...the trick is to change the direction really very often in a very short time. I contemplated a little bit more why crazy walking needs only little force if you get the timing right and it is actually pretty simple: if the dog is 1 m in front of you it can pull with all his power so just stopping the dog will require some strength. However, if you do the crazy walking the dog is / should be always at your side so you always have a much better leverage (similar like the leash attached to the front of a harness)...now you just have to make sure that the dog never gets in a positon (to far in front of you) that would compromise your leverage. Just before the dog gets into a better position for pulling you change direction again...and because the center of gravity is higher for bigger dogs the leverage works also here for you...

That's how I saw it used... safety is with the trainer, pressure (from the collar) is released when the dog comes to the trainer. So the dog starts to see the trainer as a safe place. Despite the trainer being the one that applied the pressure in the first place. One part I do like is if the dog does decide to have a go at another dog while under this system - the pressure / aversive is self inflicted. But they were under aversive from the sight of the other dog anyway. I'm having trouble imagining how the dog tells you where they want to go and when if they're under pressure and trying to "escape" to safety. It's not like my dog sitting at the back door and woofing to say wants out. I guess the part I don't like about is that is that the trainer applies discomfort, and the reward comes from the release of the discomfort. However - this is how a lot of herd (prey?) animals get trained. Eg horse - the rider puts pressure on, and the horse moves - so the pressure is eased. I guess the pressure can be pretty gentle and if a cue can be included, then no actual pressure need be applied but the animal will still anticipate it I guess. Like always being frightened until you get home to safety and can lock the doors. I think that would be a stressful way to live (or train). ...again, my laymen brain fails to see the difference to crazy walking: I apply pressure by putting tension on the leash / collar (discomfort), tension gets released when the dog is following me...?...

I noticed that in other countries you can buy Nexgard Spectra, which comprises besides Afoxolaner also Milbemycin Oxime. Milbemycin Oxime is the ingredient in Interceptor against heartworms. Any ideas why it is not sold in Australia? ETA:...both are owned by Novartis ...more $$ for having to buy both drugs to address heartworm and ticks?

I find it hard to reward her after every turn as it happens really in seconds or even fractions of a second...so to make it a positive reinforcement and giving here a treat it would interrupt the whole sequence...hence I did it without giving her a reward, not sure whether giving a reward after finishing a sequence would make a big difference as the task is that the dog keeps the focus on you, starts anticipating your next step very quickly to avoid the tension in the leash, and does this multiple times in a sequence. Totally agree with 'no major force involved'...the trick is to change the direction really very often in a very short time.

I think it's Constructional Aggression Treatment...

wrt crazy walking: I thought there is no reward for the dog involved at all - it is just less nuisance for the dog if she keeps the focus on where I want to go. If you can anticipate when the dog is losing the focus and wants to pull in her own direction it actually doesn't need much force - I'm pretty sure you can do it in most cases also with much stronger dogs without using a choke or prong collar. When I start a sequence of crazy walking it's changing direction every few seconds or even every second if required so the dog has no chance to orientate finding her own direction she wants to pull...a few changes and she is just busy trying to figure out where I want to go next....you have to be quick so...then we do some meters of normal walking and when I feel too much tension in the leash again I start the next sequence. Even my wife says it is now a pleasure to walk her - before she used always the harness with the leash attached at the front, now a normal collar does it for her too. ...following the right direction is the 'escape'...no rewards hence -R from me, but I'm not a behaviourist :D

...'What has caused this decline?' ...you can't communicate with dogs (and cats) via smart phones and Fakebook, that's the reason :laugh:

people sometimes forget that barking is a valuable trait that distinguishes a dog from a wolf, dogs were bred to bark! ...obsessive barking is a total different story and a problematic behaviour, and if a dog becomes an obsessive barker there is always a reason for this.

would be 'crazy walking' a good example for -R?...she was a hefty puller till I started this 'crazy walking' changing the direction when ever she was putting tension on the leash

while she still gets overexcited (much..muuuch better so) when she gets to close to other dogs, I noticed something interesting: there are a few dogs on properties in the neighbourhood and when we walk along their fences the distance to the fence is sometimes only 1-2 meters. Now, if it is a colourbond fence, or a fence with only little gaps, she shows nearly no interest in the dog on the other side of the fence, even if the other one is running up and down and barks at her. She notices the other dog, sees glimpse of the dog through the gaps, smells and hear it, but she doesn't get excited at all. I guess a good example of classical conditioning, she learned that there is no chance to play with the other dog if a solid fence separates them. I didn't had to train this with her, or at least I'm not aware of it. Overexcitment was also never a problem with the neighbours' dogs when she is outside in the backyard. She might rush sometimes to the fence (colourbond and timber) and there is a short barking when she and the neighbours dogs are outside at the same time, but it takes really only seconds and then everyone does its own business. So, if I would have listened to the suggestions at the beginning of this thread and wouldn't have let her play with other dogs at all, I guess at this stage she also wouldn't be overexited anymore when she sees another dog outside the backyard. On the other hand, this overexcitment last now a few seconds if we bump into another dog, if I allow it respectively let them met its a sniff, some attmpts to get playtime but a 'Let's Go' is in most cases enough to make her continue walking (without pulling the leash!). So I guess knowing that she really plays nicely with other dogs and that she doesn't show any aggression at all plus the huge improvement over the last months is a good outcome too.

ha, ha...I noticed that...but there are also others that call 'refusing a reward' (or 'moving treat away from dog') a punishment: http://www.dogstardaily.com/blogs/isnt-painre-defining-punishment...I guess she is not a real behaviourist :D ...on the other side: it reduces unwanted behaviour so ...anyway, our dog doesn't give a damn how it's called - but I'm pretty sure she prefers positive reinforcements, her treats, pats and workouts to less enjoyable trainings methods :D .

thanks for correcting my layman wording, but isn't operant conditioning we talking here?

I think what willem is trying to say is that he doesn't distinguish or recognize positive or negative punishment as separate entities because both result in a negative consequence (and hopefully subsequent extinction of behaviour) thanks for giving my layman thoughts some credit :D ...however it is more that I differ between the phase when you start positive reinforcement training rewarding your dog and the later phase when he is used (conditioned) to it. It is the later phase, where he is used to this kind of training and expects earning the reward that I believe the current terms are limited, actually the subject matter experts seem to ignore the difference. Refusing the treat / reward at the start: I wouldn't call it punishment at all as I believe that it doesn't have a big impact on the dog's behaviour (also a lot of experts would call it a form of negative punishment)...it is just the reward that affects the behaviour (IMO). The later stage is totally different - the dog is now used or even addicted to the reward and refusing the treat becomes a very powerful form of punishment; holding the reward back will trigger now negative feelings / perhaps frustration ...and I'm the one who triggers it, I'm the one who gives / adds frustration to the dog...so yes, IMO punishment, but it doesn't fit smoothly in the existing quadrants.

that just shows how limited those diagrams are ...looks like it needs another quadrant as 'negative' also doesn't cover it (I don't 'take' the treat away, I refuse it and this triggers frustration)...how about indirect positive punishment :laugh: ... it seems that some people have just issues with accepting that 'not giving something that is wanted or needed' is a very powerful form of punishment and widely used in all realms even for torture.

...that's why it is called 'opinion'...and everyone is entitled to his/her own :) An opinion can be wrong. Of course, you're still entitled to believe the wrong thing if you choose. Others in this thread have quite clearly explained how withholding or refusing to give a treat is NOT a form of positive punishment. whatever you want to call it: it is the consequence resulting from the dogs choice and as it is not the consequence the dog prefers I call it punishment...you can debate whether it is positive or negative, due to the 'brain wash' effect (addiction) that develops in the dog's brain after a while I would call it a positive punishment (yes, the 'noxious' stimuli is added by the dog's brain and not by me, but I trigger it by refusing the treat).

...that's why it is called 'opinion'...and everyone is entitled to his/her own :) You are indeed. Those who understand the science have taken considerable time and effort trying to explain learning theory. My opinion is that you are not interested in gaining any further knowledge - look up confirmation bias in Wiki. ...I admit, I don't understand the fuss about classical vs. operant conditioning as, yes IMO, in practical (dog) training it is a mix of both anyway. If a behaviour becomes an unwanted behaviour, yes, then it might be required to analyse the problem deeper to make sure that they don't work against each other as this is often the cause for the unwanted behaviour.

...that's why it is called 'opinion'...and everyone is entitled to his/her own :)

Um . . . . that is certainly NOT how I view it! That seems a very warped and pessimistic view of using rewards in training Agree. And it shows very little knowledge of dog behaviour and psychology. Wtf. ha, ha, ...doesn't sound so romantic, doesn't it?...I have more bad new for you: this conditioning works for us humans too, and the advertising industry is happily spending big $$$ manipulating us so we hunting for their treats and showing the 'right behaviour' by buying all the stuff we don't need. wrt dog training: why it is a pessimistic view?...I like this form of training because I can see that it works and that there is no need to go aggro when training the dog so I think I'm pretty optimistic actually :D ....and it is even fun...

...yes, but the driver behind banning those breeds listed above in Germany was also to 'disarm' the gangs. I guess the police believed that once it is was illegal to own such a breed they (the police) would get more leverage to fight those gangs. To my knowledge you still can own e.g. pitbulls etc. in Germany (wrt breeding I'm not so sure), but it is linked to very strict requirements (age, certificate of good conduct, no police records etc.) and might involve special fees.

Podengo - really good article - that says what Huski said pretty much - it's more about how good your training is. From the article Willem - I think you're still a bit confused about the what the quadrants mean - it's easy to do which is why I avoid using the the terminology. The people who claim to be "positive only" are also confused. Hitting a dog - is the adding (+) of an aversive (something the dog doesn't like) in the hope of reducing/stopping an undesirable behaviour. Apply this to a human example - pinched from Susan Garrett... You're driving to dog training class... you might have been speeding. The police officer pulls you over and instead of giving you a fine - the police officer shoots your dog. Do you think you'd risk driving again? With your new dog? What about a child or friend? Is the behaviour the police officer was trying to reduce or stop - what you change? Shooting your dog is only +P if it successfully changes your behaviour. Actually shooting the dog might be -P - taking something away to reduce a behaviour or it could be +P - adding a bullet or an aversive - dead dog. I do really hate the jargon. Now imagine the police officer who hands out rewards big enough that you're happy to be stopped - maybe $10,000 cash? if he catches you driving nicely in way that helps the traffic flow? This is +R - if you drive nicely more often. R stands for "re-inforcement". Would you be happy to see the next police car or would you still have a little startle in your seat? So Re-inforcement is about anything that encourages more of a (desirable) behaviour. Eg pulling on lead and the dog getting closer to where it wants to go (reward) - results in more pulling on lead - self re-inforcing. Hence people with a pulling dog - really need to stop the reward of the dog getting to go where it wants when it's pulling. Three pops on the chain but the dog is still getting where it wants to go when pulling - isn't going to work. I agree with Simply Grand? who said that Cesar has been changing his methods. And with TSD about the body language of dogs in photos with Cesar. I watched one early episode where he "trained" a boxer to be "calm submissive" loose lead walking and the dog at the end looked frightened and stressed. Not relaxed and comfortable. I haven't seen many of the more recent episodes. I hope he's been keeping up with the newer techniques. Tho they are not all that new. The scariest thing about reward based training is it can be a form of "brain washing". The advertising industry use the techniques a lot and successfully. They're all about changing human behaviour and rewarding their product purchases with "feel good". Never mind if the purchases are at all beneficial to the buyer in the long term. The techniques work quite well on humans but does require a lot of creativity. Like how do you get an old school trainer to try something new? To even want to try something new. Some of them don't even want to own a computer or a smart phone. Telling them they're doing it all wrong and this way is better - doesn't work. I learn that the hard way. At the moment at our clubs - a lot of the top competitors who are regularly winning (at agility and obedience) are using the reward based training (reward / no reward and prevent/stop undesirable behaviour), but they're not instructing. The old school instructors won't let them. At the beach this morning - I saw a lot of dogs pulling on lead. My dog did too occasionally - when we were too close to someone handing out treats for nothing - ok treats for barking and jumping. But most of the time she was good loose lead walking. Sometimes the pulling dog people ask how I got that. Most of them think it's something to do with my dog, not training and that their dog will "grow out of it" even if it's 6 yo already or then it's a breed thing. I've even heard labs are impossible to train. WTF? And others just pull on by as if it is hopeless. But I can't tell them different unless they want to hear it. How do you get someone to open their mind to something different? thanks for the head-ups :D ...$10,000 for good driving behaviour would be nice... :laugh: wrt 'brain washing': I think the 'reward' used for training is only a real reward at the start of the training and we use it (take the following with a pinch of salt...) to get some leverage for a sneaky punishment by refusing the reward if the behaviour is not in our favour. E.g. the clicker training: once the synapsis for the dog's response are developed in the dog's brain he has to shift the focus to the originator of the sound...it becomes a reflex. It's not that the dog wants to look at you...it becomes a programmed response. Once the dog is 'addicted' to the whole rewarding game, and the pattern of 'right choice = reward' is established as a reflex the reward is - IMO - not a real reward anymore, but refusing the reward becomes a - IMO - positive punishment. A little bit like someone getting addicted to alcohol (or other drugs): first he / she enjoyed it...then it becomes an addiction and not having the drug is torture. If you would change your trainings approach by refusing any reward (no patting, no treats etc.) I bet the dog would still do the tasks as he is programmed to do so, but after a while he would start to behave like a junkie on coldturkey.

in summer interceptor for worms and heartworms, Advantix for paralytic ticks (and fleas). Advantix works also as a mosquito (carrier for heartworm larve) repellent which gives some advantage over Nextgard and Bravecto, downside is that it is very dangerous for cats so if there are also cats in the household Nextgard or Bravecto might be the better choice. Nextgard and Bravecto is also much easier to administer as it is a chew - Advantix has to be applied topical and works only reliable against paralytic ticks if applied every 2 weeks while Nextgard last a month and Bravecto even 3 month. The development of heartworm requires a longer period of temperature above 14 deg C - 1 night where the temp. drops below the 14 deg C interrupts the cycle, hence in winter I don't administer interceptor and use Canex as a dewormer. I buy online - some research before you buy can save quite some $$$ as the prices always change.

one reason for banning was that before 2000 these breeds were very popular among criminals (rocker gangs, pimps, drug dealers) and were misused as weapons. Consequently the numbers of dog attacks by these breeds were sky rocketing and there was a significant public pressure to address the issues. A pity for the real dog lovers, but the criminals gave these breeds really a bad reputation. wrt the cruelties mentioned in the article: while the article doesn't mentioned it, it is very likely that those barbaric acts were committed by gangs fighting each other.

New????...the article is 16 years old...

Not really. For that to be the case, you would see a reduction across the board of that behaviour that failed to be rewarded. This usually results in general behavioural suppression, which is a pain in the arse for training. Rather, the behaviours that are not rewarded are abandoned through extinction. ...I made a second attempt to digest this, but na, I don't get it...???...

at the end the money (my reward for work) I won't have for me due to the fee is what hurts me...sometimes more than 50% of my dog's food ration are treats as reward for good behaviour, so giving her a 'ticket' for bad behaviour means less treats (no, I don't let her starve if she doesn't earn enough treats :D )...hence IMO a positive punishment...