Staranais

Or NZ? Seriously though, thanks Steve for your time (and everyone else who replied), I've got heaps more to think about now.

Yes, I can see that. The dog thinks that the best way to satisfy his drive is to ignore you and run after the prey item. He does not think that obeying you will result in him achieving drive satisfaction, so that is why he ignores you and you have to correct him to keep his attention. But, with a dog like this, is it too late to retrain him any other way? He's already had many years of learning that he can get drive satisfaction on his own, without the intervention of any person. Would it be to late to try to teach him that drive satisfaction comes only from listening to and obeying commands, since he's already accustomed to satisfying himself? I'm asking since it seems to me this method would work best on dogs that you have raised since they were puppies, since then you could control their experiences and ensure they never have the experience of achieving drive satisfaction on their own.

So if I'm understanding you right K9, initially you train with a e-collar stim for every command. When the dog is great at that, you wean him off the stim, so there is a stim only for non-compliance (which should be very rare anyway). Am I right yet? Another dumb question coming up - if your dog's dashing off as you describe, he's already in full drive, right? So is an ecollar stim really going to be enough to interupt his focus? I'm just thinking of my own dog - he's very biddable when he's relaxed, but when he's in full prey drive, I swear I'd have to pick him up by the unmentionables before he broke his focus on the prey item. (I generally try to interupt his focus before he decides to take off, for this reason.) Thanks for answering all my stupid questions - I'm learning heaps, and I'm sure everyone else is too.

Fair enough, but just from my own (limited) experience, I do think it's desirable that a pet dog acheives a reliable level of obedience without needing the tap of an ecollar. Even if the dog is always wearing the collar, life is full of surprises and you don't always have your finger ready on the button. If you're trying to carry the shopping from the car to the house, for example, you're not going to have your transmitter right there in your hand ready to use, so it's desirable that your dog will recall anyway. Or am I misunderstanding?

You're right, I think who is 'rude' depends on which breed you own! That's a fair call when the dogs are loose, even friendly staffies are not the most subtle of dogs. But on the other hand I've talked to staffy owners who say that their dogs will form a strong dislike to BCs even if they're only seen the BCs from a distance. I'm sure the staffs are thinking: "that dog's staring at me, he wants a fight, he wants a fight!"

Please do, this is really interesting. Can I ask one question in the meantime, though? If you always stim the dog before issuing a command, doesn't this result in the dog becoming habituated to the stim so that he needs the 'tap on the shoulder' to work? Or do you eventually wean him off the 'shoulder tap' somehow?

I find it really interesting you say this, because I've noticed that about BCs can be different too. A number of bully owners I've talked to have agreed that their dogs have a particular aggression problem with BCs, and we came to the conclusion it was because BCs often seem to have a tendency to give other dogs "the eye". Which some dogs (bullies in particular) interpret as a deliberate challenge.

OK, thanks pgm, I'll put them on my xmas wish list (along with the other gazillion dog training books on there... )

Very interesting philosophy. I have not heard of this style of training before - most training methods I have heard of rely heavily on extrinsic rewards (whether they are prey drive, food or social acceptance based rewards). Are there any books you could recommend to me to get a better overview of your training style, just for my own education?

Can I ask then, what if the dog isn't particularly interested in verbal praise? Obviously, the stronger the bond you have with your dog, the more interested he will be in your approval. However, some dogs are more independent than others, and don't overly care for praise. And others are so driven that, even though they might like praise, it's just not the highest priority for them (for example, if all I had ever offered my dog was praise, I really think that if you bounced a tennis ball near him he'd be off like a shot. He stays in this situation because he has a history of prey drive satisfaction and correction in response to my commands, not because he wants the praise). How would you deal with this type of animal?

OK, I think get it. You still use an external reward in the teaching phase, and no corrections? Then in the proofing/correcting phase, reduce the reward to verbal praise, and add in corrections to keep the dog's focus on the activity. Have I got it?

So what does he get if he wins, pgm? Or is it just the satisfaction of playing the game? Just asking since some training isn't inherently fun for a dog in the same way that rough-housing is. If I ask my dog to heel, he's going to do it because he thinks there might be something in it for him (either the chance to earn a reward, or the chance to avoid a correction), not because he particularly likes the actual 'game' of heeling. If I stopped ever rewarding and/or correcting his heel, he would probably eventually stop heeling when I asked, since the motivation to obey me would be gone. And even those activities that are inherently satisfying to the dog (like agility, retrieving, target games) aren't satisfying till the dog learns the rules. I normally think that the dog needs an extrinsic reward in the teaching phase, to keep his interest until he's learned the 'rules' of the fun activity. Do you differ? Hope I'm making sense.

I get you, I think. Your dog has to focus harder on heeling, since he knows you're going to be tricky and try to catch him out, and he wants to avoid the correction. You're increasing the behaviour (of focused heeling) by adding the possibility of correction. Hmmm, very interesting.

You just need a scarier looking dog, Melisski! The threat of "put your damn dog on a leash, or I will let mine off" works really well when your dog has a face like this... I can imagine it wouldn't work so well with a pretty border collie, though.

I have heard of people who have had this happen to them as well. Dog thinks he is being corrected for growling and posturing, so he stops growling and posturing - but he will still attack if he gets half a chance! I don't normally correct my dog just for growling, but if I see him getting a little bit antsy in the presence of other dogs, I normally give him a job to do ('sit', 'look at me', 'target my hand', whatever). The chance to earn a reward gives him something to keep his mind off the other dogs. And I'm happy to correct him for disobeying a command in the presence of other dogs - I don't think that will have the dire consequences that Myzska describes. Don't know if that makes sense to anyone else - but it works for us.

Dark chocolate is a no-no since it's packed full of theobromine, and milk chocolate isn't very good for them either. White chocolate should be fine in small pieces (I seem to recall that dogs have to eat several times their own body weight in white chocolate for it to have averse effect, so my dog still chows down on milky bar with me!)

No offence Dennis, and not trying to start a bunfight here, but I don't think your definitions of positive reinforcement/negative reinforcement are particularly accurate. In OC, a reinforcer (negative or positive) is something that increases the frequency of a behaviour, not decreases it. It's not that important, just that if you intend to join the discussion, it's better if we all understand what eacg other is talking about.

No, not referring to the ecollar. I have nothing against using e-collars, as long as it is low stim. I like the way an e-collar can be used to make it crystal clear to the dog when he's done the right thing. I'd probably call low stim ecollar more of a communication device, rather than a correction device. It's the prong that's confusing me - I've used a prong collar on myself, and would definately call that a correction. I just don't see how you can prong a dog continuously and have him retain a happy attitude towards his work. Do I make sense now?

K9, help!

But doesn't that give the dog a kind of negative feeling towards the command, since he doesn't understand why he's being corrected? Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against correcting a dog who understands a command and is choosing not to obey. But I'm concerned that correcting a dog if he does not understand why will just give the dog a bad attitude towards the work. Edited to add - sorry pgm, for some reason I thought you used that method too, don't know why.

Hmmm, so you're basically giving the dog numerous small corrections, like repeatedly hitting the nick button on an e-collar? So it is a form of negative reinforcement, since when the dog has complied with the command, you stop correcting him, right? Sort of like using an e-collar, but without having an e-collar. Is this in the learning stage, or the proofing/correcting stage?

Or could you answer my question about active training with a prong collar, PGM?

Kavik: I'm a bit confused by all this. Can you explain further? I understand how 'active training' would work with the e-collar, it's simple negative reinforcement (escape training). The collar turns on, you give the command, the dog complies, the collar turns off. The dog has learned that he must obey you, and only then will the collar turn off. It is in his interest to obey quickly, because that means the collar turns off quickly. Right? But how does this apply to a prong collar correction, for example? You give the command, prong the dog, he complies. But what has he learned? And what if you give the command, prong the dog, and he does nothing? Just prong him again? Then what was the point of pronging him the first time? I think I must be missing something here, sorry.

Ah but the hijacks are always interesting, and I always learn from them - hijack away! And having said that, here's a mini-jack all of my own... If you're aiming for a speedy response, wouldn't it be better to either: 1) use negative reinforcement (e.g. e-collar set VERY low), turned off when dog completes requested task so that it is in dog's best interests to comply very quickly; or 2) selectively positively reinforce only the fastest responses with a prey drive type reinforcer? Why do people think this 'active training' is a better route than these two options?

Perhaps threat is the wrong word then. I don't think Erny means that the dog crawls through heeling, dreading the possibility that he will be punished. If the dog fully understands what earns punishment and what doesn't, there is no need for him to dread or fear anything, since he has the choice whether to be punished or not. Perhaps a better word is 'possibility'. The dog understands that there will be a possibility of punishment should he fail to keep in the heel position. Therefore he makes the choice to stay in heel position, since he knows this will mean he is not punished. (Correct me if I'm wrong, Erny. Not trying to put words in your mouth. )