Erny

LOL. Thanks Cosmolo.

Willow - thank you for responding and thank you for accepting my input for the conversation that it was intended as. We may not see eye to eye on the particular points we are each making, but I think much of you simply for your attitude. There are many who I think could do well to take a leaf out of your book .

Thank you Huski - that is what I am getting at. How can any of us say that one thing or another is never going to be "the best" for any dog in the world ever, when we don't know and will never know every dog/situation/person/circumstance (in combination) in the world?

I think you have expectations that are too high for your pup. Even a leaf falling from a tree is very entertaining for a very young pup (and is part of the beautiful innocence that I marvel and adore). There is no way she would be able to concentrate with all those things going on ..... at least not for more than a few seconds at a time. At home, nonchalantly walk around the back yard and reward her with a piece of special food treat every time she comes back to check in on you. When you go to the park, perhaps have her on a long line (NOT an extender line, please) so she has an opportunity to frolic. If she is a pup that likes to stay reasonably close to you (the aforementioned exercise helps with that) then you shouldn't have too much if any trouble with her wanting to exceed the length of the long line. Especially if you are playing with her within the perimeters of the distance the long line allows. When she's done with the frolicking, switch to your normal lead and do a very short session of LLW. Avoid too much 'forced' walking whilst she is so young and her bones are soft and growing. Also, the "park" you go to ..... if it is a dog park I hope your pup is fully vaccinated.

(My highlights) Not debating nor am I seeking to run you down - I say this up front in the hopes you don't take me the wrong way. I appreciate your candour, in fact . But I would like to make a point about what you've said above. IMO, if we're really being fair on the dog, we should be able to tuck away what "we" like/dislike and truly apply what does or would work best for the dog. Now this might be the head collar OR it might be the PPCollar OR it might be something else. And if the "best thing" for the dog was also something that the owner was able to well manage and achieve the best results with then to me going for something that might be second best isn't something I'd entertain just because "I" prefer the second best option. This is what puzzles me with organisations or trainers with methods that are not just preferred but where other methods/training tools are vetoed. I don't swear out any training tool because there is every likelihood that I will come across a dog whose temperament/disposition/situation/environment + owner ability/physical limitation will suit something that I might not ordinarily prefer. And that's already occurred more that once. What "I" prefer, to me doesn't come into it when all is said and done. That's why I make the effort to know as much about a good variety of training tools and gain experience in their use as I feasibly can. And if there is an organisation that seeks to control my very genuine feeling and aim for the welfare of any dog, by prohibiting my membership with it just because I advocate a tool that THEY don't condone, then that would have to be their choice in the matter. And that has already happened to me too. If there was an org that didn't like the head collar and as a result prohibited me from using it (as a trainer), that wouldn't stop me if I thought a head collar was the best tool for the job (and in my line or work, that has been the case from time to time). So I'm not using this as an argument for head collars -vs- PPCollars. It is what, in my heart of hearts, I think is best for the dog taking into account also its circumstances. And that would count no matter whom I am or was trained by or how. And if I am barred from any organisation as a result of my unbiased and open-minded attitude, then I shall not take that as a prosecution, or at least not one that I deserve. Oops ..... sorry - that turned out to sound like a speech. I guess in a way it is, although I didn't start out with that intent. ETA: Willow - Doesn't Delta's course cover the different head collar styles and suitability for certain dogs; the things to be aware of; etc. etc.?

I'd probably be inclined to contemplate training with the use of the PPCollar. I find it is easier and quicker to wean off from that to a different neck style collar than it is from a head collar to a neck collar. An excellent training tool and IMO less risk of accidental damage due to less leverage/stress/affect on the dog's skeleton, especially for a dog that is boundy boundy everywhere. Any training tool (head collar inclusive) IMO should be used initially under supervision to ensure the handler understands it and knows how to use it properly.

The Gentle Leader is not recommended for dogs with 'square' muzzles. It puts too much pressure on too small an area (ie the two outside edges of the dog's muzzle). You need to watch this even for any other brand/style of head collar, although with conscious awareness and care head collars can be ok on such dogs, although I'd like to think it was for the short term rather than the long term use.

No - it doesn't taste awful. But it helps to prevent/ease secondary skin infection. Don't know if it will work for your dog because I don't really know what's going on (eg. skin allergy) but it won't do any harm. My boy suffers skin issues and this sometimes includes his paws. When he gets into licking them too much I apply the calendula and he stops. The 'tea' is drinkable, yet it doesn't seem to encourage them to lick more. ETA: A packet of the calendula will set you back about $8.

Try soaking her foot in Calendula Tea. You purchase the tea from a Health Food Store (it's only dried marigold flowers). Get a stocking and put about a teaspoon or two of the calendula in the toe part. Put it in a cup (like you would a tea bag and poor boiling water in. Leave it there until it becomes tepid or cool (definitely not hot). Dip her foot in it. You might like to gently/lightly dry the excess off so her foot is not dripping (also dab in between her toes and pads so they are not too wet) but otherwise leave it to dry. You might need to apply this a couple of times a day initially but if it is working you should notice results fairly quickly.

I think I've become paranoid about the drugs we keep putting on and (now?) feeding our dogs.

The only experience I have had was where my Dad's dog developed a haematoma and once it was lanced it was necessary for the pressure bandage to be stitched through the ear in places so that the skin would re-attach where it had been separated by the fluid. So I'm just curious as to how you apply a pressure dressing any other way that would be sufficient/efficient? Sorry, I can't help you with your query but I do hope that Boney is ok. Me? I don't think I could even bring myself to attempt any form of lancing (I failed miserably in biology when we had to do the dissection of dead rats - the initial skin cutting is the only part of medical shows I can't watch) and I'd be worried about doing the wrong thing and/or not doing enough - I'd have to take my dog to the Vet.

Thanks for the clarification RosieFT and apologies if I didn't read it correctly in the first place. Actually, I think it would be better to reduce the reward value. She's recognised the sequences of the exercise and the result (ie ball) and linked them together. {Chase birds + recall = ball}. So in effect, she's being rewarded with her 2nd highest reinforcer for not only the recall but also chasing birds. If you reduce the reinforcer to something she likes but not of as high value and then when she is sent back out again, do a recall that is in no way attached to the birds, and reward that with the ball.

Good question Aidan. I was assuming a ball was required for recall command compliance. If that's not the case, then putting her on an intermittent schedule of reinforcement might assist. I admit however that I like to reward recall the greater percentage of times. Perhaps you can look at reward variance.

Are you able to set up the situation so that you can you ignore her going after the birds and even 'disappear' on her when she does? This will help her understand that she doesn't own or control the game. If that's not possible and if it was continue to be a problem, I'd be inclined to teach her e-collar training (low stim/negative reinforcement). But then I already have the training equipment for this so for me that side of things wouldn't be a big issue. But the style of e-collar training that I do is complimentary to the dog's drive which means you would retain her enthusiasm for the ball and increase recall compliance without her 'working you'.

Ten dogs max (pups or adults). And if I can I have two instructors to the class but this isn't always necessary nor necessarily the case. For my "Puppy Social Group" habituation outings which I'm about to launch, I'm capping numbers to 6 pup/owner combo's to one instructor.

Yes. That's right. Sometimes you can know - especially from results. But yes .... because we aren't actually mind readers, it is about analysis of what we can see. The dog has to have prior learning and hence expectations of the reward. I don't know what you mean by this. Of course that would be the desire of 99.9% of the population I expect. And you may find that the behaviour very quickly returns due to spontaneous recovery. You also might find that P- isn't sufficient enough (even if you did apply it in your methodology). Much would depend on how much of an aversive the dog perceived your P- as a punishment.

Agree, Kelpie-i. Perhaps I'm missing something, but the way I figure it is simple enough. When I read Aidan's post/s (which are very well and thoughtfully articulated, I might add) I got the impression that he was suggesting that "extinction" was some other 'learning principal' that perhaps somehow should have been included in the four quadrant matrix. I don't know if that's what you meant, Aidan, and somehow I don't think you do, but I certainly don't. (ETA : Re-reading earlier posts in this thread .... perhaps I got that impression from posts in the other thread where it all began ???) The human 'trains for' extinction. For the dog, extinction 'occurs'. So extinction is a 'process' (I think Aidan might have said that). For extinction to occur, the dog must not be able to reach its goal (which is of course the reinforcer), whatever that goal might be. Of course the trick is to know what the goal is and to ensure that it cannot be reached. As for the P- -vs- extinction discussion ..... Aiden, I really think that's something that unless you can literally be inside the dog's head and know precisely its thoughts from one moment to the next (wouldn't that be lovely ..... our jobs would be soooooo easy ), you could debate until the cows come home. Given I don't have any cows, that presents to me as being a long, long time . I think whether the behaviour is extinguished through punishment (P+ or P-) depends much on whether it outweighs the reinforcer or not. So, in some cases the punishment (P+ or P-) might not remove the original reinforcer, but it might be perceived as sufficient enough to weaken the unwanted behaviour. I don't believe that in the technical sense (the way I've been taught it, anyway) that this is "extinction training". Punishment (+ or -)of course refers to consequences that make the behaviour less likely to occur again. Extinction training on its own doesn't make behaviour less likely to occur again as we know that "extinction" is prone to spontaneous recovery in the presence of the conditioned or unconditioned reinforcer. The above is often why extinction training is required to be paired with punishment (+ or -). We also know that "extinction training" is prone to 'extinction bursts'. So - using the example that was given in a previous post (Aidan or Kelpie-i) of a dog who has taken to rolling over when commanded to drop : If the treat is withheld (P-) and the dog therefore stops rolling out of the drop then I can't help but assume that the dog's goal/reinforcer is the food treat. But I'm also inclined to assume that it is not so much that extinction has occurred either ... there's been no extinction burst. But further thought/investigation as to whether "extinction" had actually occurred in this situation would be required (if you really wanted to know). For example, you'd need to contemplate/know what the reinforcer was for the dog to roll over and out of the drop was in the first place and whether the dog's goal for that reinforcer was ever met. (Are any of those cows coming home yet .... ?) As the subject title is "Extinction -vs- Negative Punishment" .... I confess to not being completely sure what discussion you're really aiming for (my apologies). Are you saying is one better than the other or equally the same? My answer to that would be "that depends on the dog, its goal/s, what the reinforcer is and whether the punishment outweighs the reinforcement.". Or are you suggesting that extinction (training) is the same thing as negative punishment? My answer to that is again "that depends on the dog, its goal/s, what the reinforcer is and whether the punishment outweighs the reinforcement." To me in theory they are different, but to the dog in practicality? That's where I guess I would need to be able to be in his head ...... Pardon me if I have completely missed the direction of your thread Aidan and whilst your posts are extremely well written and thought provoking, I think this has been complicated somewhat beyond what it really needs to be. Just my 2c worth and hope I have managed to make sense. I can see where we could each spend many hours splitting hairs over it all and whilst this would make for interesting round table discussion (provided we had a few bottles or ten of wine to absorb while we were at it) I think perhaps we are making it more complicated than necessary. In fact, when I have thought about it, it has reminded me of the mirror trick - the one where one mirror shows an image that turns out only to be an image that is in another mirror which is showing an image from another mirror and so on . ETA: I hope you have read my post more than once, because I've edited, re-edited and re-edited in an attempt to tidy it up and make the words flow in such a way as to having any chance of being understood.

It's not necessarily Separation Anxiety (an over diagnosed condition in too many cases). What's your dog do when you are away/at work? Check your leadership status - think of what that status is from your dog's pov not so much yours. Could be something environmentally related that is causing the anxiety/behaviour. IE The car and being left in it (and the anticipation that he will be). At training, the stimulation (fear or excitement) at all the other dogs that are there.

I've read that too, K-i. Only thing I figured was that for extinction to occur, the dog would have to receive zilch reinforcement (self-reinforcement inclusive) from the exhibition of the "unwanted behaviour". One would have to be very careful about increasing reinforcement unless they were aware of what reinforcement the dog was receiving that brought about the unwanted behaviour in the first place.

A dog that is zoned into returning to you as quickly as possible is not as likely to be distracted by other things in the environment along the way by comparison to a dog who ambles or trots back. Apart from which, I'm impatient and when I call I want my dog with me asap

Thank you Showdog. I'm always referring to it as Canine Cough not Kennel Cough and I think it would do well for everyone (including Vets) to do the same. Otherwise it does give the unsuspecting/inexperienced person the impression that their dog is safe from it if they don't go to kennels. The higher concentration of dogs together the bigger the chance of catching it. But it doesn't exclude the off-chance of picking it up from even only a one-dog meeting (directly or indirectly). Like Showdog said - it's like kids at school.

Revolution treats ear mites - but if your dog doesn't need to be treated for all the other things that it (or any other spot-on) does, ask your Vet if there is another way to treat the mites by itself. There are holistic ingredients which can be blended and used in the treatment of ear mites, but I'm not an expert on them and it would do to check with your Vet and/or a Holistic Vet before using. Once you've cleared the mite infestation I believe that periodic cleaning of the ears by wiping out that part of the ear canal you can see with a mix of white vinegar and water promotes an environment that is not conducive to mites. Just something I remember reading from years ago when my previous girl had ear mites but thinking on it now and not remembering where I read it, I'm not sure of the truth in it.

Oh . I thought it was me giving you a kick in the pants to do it that got you there.

Fantastic - thank you Alanglen. That is exactly what I wanted to hear. And thanks Inspector Rex. At this stage of the game I think I'll run with the recommendation of my Vet/s (who I trust implicitly) and also with the confirmation of support that the referred Vet/acupuncturist has received here. But I can always refer back here if I need to know another name.

Thanks all. You know, I really have been just taking each thing as it presents itself, and dealing with it the best way I believe I can. But beyond that (and lamenting on the expense of the vet bills, special diet, etc etc .... hey, ya gotta be allowed a whinge every now and again ) I really haven't thought much other than moving on and forward. But I didn't realise how much your support (just from your understanding and sympathy) actually means until you've expressed it. Thanks . It helps. And yes - there always seems to be something that I have to deal with for Mandela. I'm trusting that I'm just getting rid of all the bad stuff in one hit and that when things come right it will be smooth sailing for the rest of his life :D. Cheers! She'll be right (mate) ! :D Erny