Paws Abilities Behaviour and Learning Centre

The Milgram Experiement - will people do anything if ordered???

2012-01-24T08:40:00.001+02:00

The first attempt at posting this article seems to have boobed – so here goes again! Definitely worth a read!

BECOME AN EXAMINER

The Milgram Experiment and how it relates to dog training

Add a comment

Leah Roberts

, Orlando Dog Training and Behavior Examiner

July 9, 2010 - Like this? Subscribe to get instant updates.

21 comments

The Milgram Experiment - OverviewIn 1961 Stanley Milgram set out to explain how so many people could heartlessly participate in the horrors of the Nazi concentration camps. Many war criminals justified their actions by saying that they were ordered to carry out these atrocities on other humans and had no choice. Were the Germans inherently cold and evil, or was this a phenomenon that could be repeated under the right circumstances? To answer this question, Milgram created an experiment to research the effect of authority on obedience.

Forty subjects from all different walks of life were recruited. They were told that they would be participating in an experiment about memory and learning where they could be assigned as either "Learner" or "Teacher." The Teacher would ask the Learner questions and administer an electrical shock if the answer was incorrect. In reality each subject was assigned the role of Teacher and the Learner was an actor, but the subjects were unaware of this. Each one believed that he had just as much of a chance to end up in the Learner chair hooked up to the electrodes as he had of being the one to administer the shocks.

The fake shock generator had 30 different switches marked for levels of voltage ranging from 15 to 450, at 15 volt increments. Descriptions accompanied these labels, such as "slight shock" for the lower levels and "strong shock" at the 180 volt level. The level that went up to 420 volts was labeled "danger:severe" and the highest level, at 450 volts, simply "xxx." At each wrong answer, the Teacher was instructed to increase the level of shock he administered. The actor playing the part of the Learner would respond to an audio prompt to react to the different levels of shock by starting out with grunts, and escalating his reactions as the shock levels were increased. By 280 volts he would let out agonized screams and complain of heart pain. After 330 volts, he was instructed to go completely silent. The authority figure was the Experimenter. If the Teacher hesitated in delivering the shock, the Experimenter would verbally prod him to continue.

As the actor's reactions to the different levels of shock were predefined, so were the levels of pressure from the Experimenter, from "please go on" to "it is absolutely essential that you continue." As could be expected, most of the subjects were very reluctant to inflict pain on the human trapped in that chair, believing that they could have been assigned that position themselves. And yet every single one of the subjects administered shocks up to the 300 volt level, past the point of screams, begging for mercy, and complaints of heart pain.

Amazingly, 65% of the subjects continued to administer shocks all the way to the maximum level of 450 volts after the man in the chair went totally silent. Some of them believed they had already killed the man, and yet they continued caving to the pressure of the Experimenter to deliver more shocks.This experiment proved that 65% of the subjects - people like you and me - would torture another human being even to the point of death if a person they believed to be in a valid position of authority demanded it.So how does this relate to dog training?The veterinarian After adopting a new puppy or shelter dog, the first authority figure the owners encounter is usually their vet. Though vets are surely experts in medical issues, those who are also well-educated in training and behavior are few and far between. They should be answering questions about training by referring owners to a trainer or behaviorist, but unfortunately some of them take it upon themselves to spout advice based on old wives' tales and myths. For example, most young puppies will nip their owners in play and need to be instructed in a scientifically-based and humane way how to behave more appropriately. Far too many vets are telling people to take these trusting, impressionable little tykes, throw them on their backs, and pin them to "show them who's boss," an archaic technique referred to as an alpha roll. The owner will certainly feel uncomfortable forcing this technique on a frightened puppy, but usually will do so if their vet tells them to. Dr. Ian Dunbar, author, veterinarian, founder of the Association of Pet Dog Trainers and creator ofSirius Dog Training, says, "A wolf would flip another wolf against his will ONLY if he were planning to kill it. Can you imagine what a forced alpha roll does to the psyche of our dogs?"

Another common piece of advice handed out by otherwise well-meaning vets is to handle potty training accidents in the home by dragging your dog to the puddle or pile, forcing him to smell it, and then disciplining the dog either by yelling or smacking him with a rolled-up newspaper. This is a good way to teach your dog not to ever eliminate in front of you, and could possibly cause fear of paper products and/or your hands coming at him. This nonsense does not help to teach him where to eliminate appropriately. In fact, good luck with rewarding your dog for going outside if you have made him afraid to go with you standing there.Do people want to drag their dogs to a puddle of piddle and bop them in the nose? Not usually. But if your vet tells you to, you probably will - even if it makes you uncomfortable to do so. Question training and behavioral advice that comes from somebody whose expertise lies in a different field. That's pretty obvious. What's not so obvious is that there are far too many "authority figures" out there who claim to be experts in behavior and training, but their actions prove otherwise.

TV trainers People love to watch reality shows on TV, proven by the proliferation of them over the last decade, and there doesn't appear to be any abatement of new ones cropping up yet. But is there any reality in reality TV? TV shows have one purpose, and that's to entertain and titillate viewers so that they continue to tune into the show. If you were to sit down and watch an entire date shown on the Bachelorette, for example, you'd probably be bored out of your mind. So editors choose certain sound bytes, add dramatic music, even use takes from scenes not related to the one being shown to add the element of drama they're trying to create. By the time that edited portrayal of the date makes it onto your TV screen, what you see may in actuality have very little relevance to what really happened between the two people. Unfortunately for dogs everywhere, TV shows about dog training are presented in the same way, for entertainment value alone. Showing a course of therapy for afear-biter using valid and humane desensitization and classical conditioning techniques would be quite boring. However, setting a dog up for failure bythrusting him into a situation that guarantees a dramatic reaction, and then choking him into a physical collapse makes for very entertaining TV. Real dog trainers watch that clip and are aghast at the abuse that they see. Innocent dog owners who watch it on TV are subject to the Milgram Effect. Cesar Millan and his publicity machine has portrayed him as an ultimate authority on dogs, and therefore not only is the general public blind to the cruelty, many would gladly choose to have it inflicted on their own beloved pets by their TV hero. This very popular TV personality has brainwashed millions of dog owners into believing that their dogs are trying to achieve "dominance" over them, and that is his rationale to justify the sometimes extreme use of force that he portrays on his program. For a sensible look at what "dominance" means and does not mean, see The Dominance Controversy and Cesar Millan. With the success of this show has come, and will come, others trying to milk the same cash cow. In Canada there is a popular TV personality namedBrad Pattison who makes Millan's techniques look almost valid. Pattison hits dogs in the face, yanks them violently off their feet for no apparent reason,grabs them and screams in their faces, (later in the same show portrayed in that clip he "teaches" a dog not to go through a door by slamming it on him), and commits other acts of violence in the name of "training." It's hard to believe that he has a growing fan club of people who laud him and support his methods. These are not people who hate dogs, they are caring dog owners brainwashed by the Milgram Effect. A TV personality is a powerful authority figure in this society, possibly one of the most powerful.The fall-out So if you have a dog who bites, and you have watched these popular programs convincing you that this problem can and should be beaten out of him, would you have considered hiring this trainer? Jeffrey Loy claims himself to be "the world's leading authority on the rehabilitation of fighting and biting dogs." When a couple in NJ needed help with their 6 lb. biter, they hired him for $1,000 a session. After baiting the small dog into biting him, the owners stood by and watched while he viciously beat the small Shih Tzu with a PVC pipe and his bare hands, more than once, and for several minutes at a time. The dog suffered a broken rib, a bruised kidney and liver, and a ruptured blood vessel in its eye, requiring $1,100 in vet care. The owners stood by and watched. If they had been out walking the dog and a stranger came over and started beating it with a PVC pipe, do you think they would have reacted differently? But here was a self-proclaimed expert that they believed to be an authority figure, so they stood by and allowed this violent beating of their 6 lb. dog to continue. The Milgram Effect. This is just one isolated recent case of dog abuse perpetrated by an individual who claims to be an expert. Most cases of abuse don't result in such grievous injury, so much of it is never reported. In fact, again due to the brainwashing power of the media, loving dog owners are often blind to the fact that what is being done to their dogs in the name of training IS abuse. Some of these abusers' strongest supporters are those whose own dogs have suffered violence at their hands. What can you do to protect your dog? If you have a training or behavior issue with your dog, be very careful whose advice you listen to, and especially careful who you hire to help you. There is never a need to use fear, physical force, intimidation or pain in order to train a dog. If an "expert" tells you to do something that makes you in the least uncomfortable, listen to your heart! There are common-sense guidelines to help youchoose a dog-friendly trainer, determine whattraining tools are necessary and what aren't, and on the Truly Dog Friendly website are a list of trainers in both the Orlando area and all over the world who have been screened to assure the use of only humane and scientifically-based techniques. (Note: Even though the Association of Pet Dog Trainers mentioned above was created specifically to educate the training community about humane, scientifically-based, dog-friendly training methods, the website's list of members includes those trainers who use electrical shock collars, spiked prong collars, and other force-based tools and methodologies. Using that listing to choose a trainer is not a guarantee that your dog won't be subjected to unnecessary intimidation at the very least.) If you like to watch dog training on TV, you are not completely out of options. Victoria Stilwell is a very competent TV trainer with good, solid advice. For more information on the Milgram Experiment, see Milgram's Experiment on Obedience to Authorityand Stanley Milgram Experiment - Will People Do Anything if Ordered?

The Milgram Experiment and how it relates to dog training!

2012-01-24T08:27:00.001+02:00

BECOME AN EXAMINER

The Milgram Experiment and how it relates to dog training

Add a comment

Leah Roberts

, Orlando Dog Training and Behavior Examiner

July 9, 2010 - Like this? Subscribe to get instant updates.

21 comments

Stanley Milgram's experiment to determiine the effect of authority of obedience

Credits:

Photo courtesy of photobucket.com

The Milgram Experiment - Overview

In 1961 Stanley Milgram set out to explain how so many people could heartlessly participate in the horrors of the Nazi concentration camps. Many war criminals justified their actions by saying that they were ordered to carry out these atrocities on other humans and had no choice. Were the Germans inherently cold and evil, or was this a phenomenon that could be repeated under the right circumstances? To answer this question, Milgram created an experiment to research the effect of authority on obedience.

The authority figure was the Experimenter. If the Teacher hesitated in delivering the shock, the Experimenter would verbally prod him to continue. As the actor's reactions to the different levels of shock were predefined, so were the levels of pressure from the Experimenter, from "please go on" to "it is absolutely essential that you continue."

As could be expected, most of the subjects were very reluctant to inflict pain on the human trapped in that chair, believing that they could have been assigned that position themselves. And yet every single one of the subjects administered shocks up to the 300 volt level, past the point of screams, begging for mercy, and complaints of heart pain. Amazingly, 65% of the subjects continued to administer shocks all the way to the maximum level of 450 volts after the man in the chair went totally silent. Some of them believed they had already killed the man, and yet they continued caving to the pressure of the Experimenter to deliver more shocks.

This experiment proved that 65% of the subjects - people like you and me - would torture another human being even to the point of death if a person they believed to be in a valid position of authority demanded it.

So how does this relate to dog training?

The veterinarian

After adopting a new puppy or shelter dog, the first authority figure the owners encounter is usually their vet. Though vets are surely experts in medical issues, those who are also well-educated in training and behavior are few and far between. They should be answering questions about training by referring owners to a trainer or behaviorist, but unfortunately some of them take it upon themselves to spout advice based on old wives' tales and myths.

For example, most young puppies will nip their owners in play and need to be instructed in a scientifically-based and humane way how to behave more appropriately. Far too many vets are telling people to take these trusting, impressionable little tykes, throw them on their backs, and pin them to "show them who's boss," an archaic technique referred to as an alpha roll. The owner will certainly feel uncomfortable forcing this technique on a frightened puppy, but usually will do so if their vet tells them to. Dr. Ian Dunbar, author, veterinarian, founder of the Association of Pet Dog Trainers and creator ofSirius Dog Training, says, "A wolf would flip another wolf against his will ONLY if he were planning to kill it. Can you imagine what a forced alpha roll does to the psyche of our dogs?"

Do people want to drag their dogs to a puddle of piddle and bop them in the nose? Not usually. But if your vet tells you to, you probably will - even if it makes you uncomfortable to do so.

Question training and behavioral advice that comes from somebody whose expertise lies in a different field. That's pretty obvious. What's not so obvious is that there are far too many "authority figures" out there who claim to be experts in behavior and training, but their actions prove otherwise.

TV trainers

People love to watch reality shows on TV, proven by the proliferation of them over the last decade, and there doesn't appear to be any abatement of new ones cropping up yet. But is there any reality in reality TV?

TV shows have one purpose, and that's to entertain and titillate viewers so that they continue to tune into the show. If you were to sit down and watch an entire date shown on the Bachelorette, for example, you'd probably be bored out of your mind. So editors choose certain sound bytes, add dramatic music, even use takes from scenes not related to the one being shown to add the element of drama they're trying to create. By the time that edited portrayal of the date makes it onto your TV screen, what you see may in actuality have very little relevance to what really happened between the two people.

Unfortunately for dogs everywhere, TV shows about dog training are presented in the same way, for entertainment value alone. Showing a course of therapy for afear-biter using valid and humane desensitization and classical conditioning techniques would be quite boring. However, setting a dog up for failure bythrusting him into a situation that guarantees a dramatic reaction, and then choking him into a physical collapse makes for very entertaining TV. Real dog trainers watch that clip and are aghast at the abuse that they see. Innocent dog owners who watch it on TV are subject to the Milgram Effect. Cesar Millan and his publicity machine has portrayed him as an ultimate authority on dogs, and therefore not only is the general public blind to the cruelty, many would gladly choose to have it inflicted on their own beloved pets by their TV hero.

This very popular TV personality has brainwashed millions of dog owners into believing that their dogs are trying to achieve "dominance" over them, and that is his rationale to justify the sometimes extreme use of force that he portrays on his program. For a sensible look at what "dominance" means and does not mean, see The Dominance Controversy and Cesar Millan.

With the success of this show has come, and will come, others trying to milk the same cash cow. In Canada there is a popular TV personality namedBrad Pattison who makes Millan's techniques look almost valid. Pattison hits dogs in the face, yanks them violently off their feet for no apparent reason,grabs them and screams in their faces, (later in the same show portrayed in that clip he "teaches" a dog not to go through a door by slamming it on him), and commits other acts of violence in the name of "training." It's hard to believe that he has a growing fan club of people who laud him and support his methods. These are not people who hate dogs, they are caring dog owners brainwashed by the Milgram Effect. A TV personality is a powerful authority figure in this society, possibly one of the most powerful.

The fall-out

So if you have a dog who bites, and you have watched these popular programs convincing you that this problem can and should be beaten out of him, would you have considered hiring this trainer?

Jeffrey Loy claims himself to be "the world's leading authority on the rehabilitation of fighting and biting dogs." When a couple in NJ needed help with their 6 lb. biter, they hired him for $1,000 a session. After baiting the small dog into biting him, the owners stood by and watched while he viciously beat the small Shih Tzu with a PVC pipe and his bare hands, more than once, and for several minutes at a time. The dog suffered a broken rib, a bruised kidney and liver, and a ruptured blood vessel in its eye, requiring $1,100 in vet care.

The owners stood by and watched. If they had been out walking the dog and a stranger came over and started beating it with a PVC pipe, do you think they would have reacted differently? But here was a self-proclaimed expert that they believed to be an authority figure, so they stood by and allowed this violent beating of their 6 lb. dog to continue. TheMilgram Effect.

This is just one isolated recent case of dog abuse perpetrated by an individual who claims to be an expert. Most cases of abuse don't result in such grievous injury, so much of it is never reported. In fact, again due to the brainwashing power of the media, loving dog owners are often blind to the fact that what is being done to their dogs in the name of training IS abuse. Some of these abusers' strongest supporters are those whose own dogs have suffered violence at their hands.

What can you do to protect your dog?

If you have a training or behavior issue with your dog, be very careful whose advice you listen to, and especially careful who you hire to help you. There is never a need to use fear, physical force, intimidation or pain in order to train a dog. If an "expert" tells you to do something that makes you in the least uncomfortable, listen to your heart!

There are common-sense guidelines to help youchoose a dog-friendly trainer, determine whattraining tools are necessary and what aren't, and on the Truly Dog Friendly website are a list of trainers in both the Orlando area and all over the world who have been screened to assure the use of only humane and scientifically-based techniques. (Note: Even though the Association of Pet Dog Trainers mentioned above was created specifically to educate the training community about humane, scientifically-based, dog-friendly training methods, the website's list of members includes those trainers who use electrical shock collars, spiked prong collars, and other force-based tools and methodologies. Using that listing to choose a trainer is not a guarantee that your dog won't be subjected to unnecessary intimidation at the very least.)

If you like to watch dog training on TV, you are not completely out of options. Victoria Stilwell is a very competent TV trainer with good, solid advice.

For more information on the Milgram Experiment, see Milgram's Experiment on Obedience to Authorityand Stanley Milgram Experiment - Will People Do Anything if Ordered?

Barking Dogs

2012-01-22T16:29:00.001+02:00

BARKING DOGS – CAUSES AND SOLUTIONS:

By Louise Thompson (Accredited Animal Behaviour Consultant & professional dog trainer)

Noise pollution is one of the most common behaviour problems experienced with certain breeds of dogs today, especially with owners and pets living in cluster homes or complexes.

Dog noise pollution is a major factor of modern living and can lead to costly legal bills and major disagreements with frustrated neighbours who have endured sleepless nights and have a desperate need for some peace and quiet!

There is nothing more frustrating that trying to have a quiet Sunday nap or beingwakened up in the middle of the night, by yapping mutts! Caring pet owners have been known to have to relocate in order to protect their dogs and themselves from prosecution and to achieve harmonious living with neighbours!

In many municipalities there are laws governing the amount of “acceptable” noise that is produced by dogs. Several legal warnings are usually given and if not treated or if the barking does not improve, owners may be required by law to get rid of their beloved pet! In some complexes there are clauses in the lease in this regard and governing bodies have legal recourse to enforce dog owner’s compliance.

The most common breeds that exhibit this unwanted behaviour are toy or miniature breeds like the German Dachshund, Miniature Schnauzer, the Yorkshire Terrier, Jack Russell Terrier, SA Maltese “Poodle” (which is in fact part terrier) Miniature Pincher, Toy Pomeranians etc. In fact, most terriers are prone toyapping if there behaviour is not moulded or shaped/redirected from an early age

APPROACHING THE BARKING ISSUE!

Is the dog is barking in the garden – either at the moon or as a long or short range communication with neighbourhood dogs or is he barking to demand attention (to be let inside or to get his own way), or because it is excitement when playing or due to the dog suffering from stress and anxiety?

The above needs to be considered as they have a direct bearing on the cause of the barking. If you are in doubt contact an accredited animal behaviour consultant who will be able to advise and assist you.

You also need to take into account the frustration level of the dog. Does he receive enough of your time? Does he have enough exercise off the property (walks runs)? Does he receive enough mental stimulation?

Does he have anything to do when you are absent from the home or asleep at night (chews, bones, cow hooves etc)? All of the above can also have a bearing on the dogs noise pollution levels!

WHY DOES MY DOG BARK?

Barking is a normal behaviour and is a natural way for dogs to communicate (especially over distance!) It is normal for a dog to bark when someone passes your house, or when the postman comes!

When this “normal “barking becomes excessive that is when it presents a problem, as the resulting noise pollution can be a nuisance to family and neighbours alike.

Barking can also be an expression of frustration and confinement stress (un-socialised yard dogs kept in permanent solitary confinement) It can be a way for your dog to let you know that he is stressed, unhappy, anxious, bored, or just plain fed up! It is also a way for them to inform you of any danger

If the dog is barking in the garden – during the day or at night YOU MUST GO AND CHECK TO SEE IF YOU CAN FIND THE CAUSE OF THE BARKING.

THIS MUST APPLY EACH AND EVERY TIME! After all, the dog could be warning you of a prowler orburglar, Or a young child having fallen in the swimming pool (there have been many cases of the above examples!) Never leave a barking dog just to bark without checking up on him. He couldjust save you, or a member of your family’s life!

If the dog is barking outside a door as a demand to be let in, he must only be let in the second he is quiet. Reward the positive and ignore/distract the negative.

Often dogs bark as an expression of excitement or hyperactivity – if this is the case the game should stop immediately. It can continue after a couple of minutes or when the dog is quiet, but then the second it gets too excited and the barking commences it must again stop. This will have to be constantly repeated to have a lasting effect.

The most common causes of excessive barking are:-

Confinement:
Yard dogs kept in solitary confinement with little or no interaction with their owners.

Lack of mental and physical stimulation.
Boredom and mental inactivity
Inappropriate stimulation: Getting a calm dog “wound up” for fun and family entertainment.
Learnt behaviour – unintentionally encouraged when the dog was a pup - It was cute for a while but soon becomes a pain in the ……
Neglect and cruel treatment.
Stress and anxiety (Including separation anxiety)
Lack of confidence and fear related behaviours
Over-indulgence. The dog that barks to get his own way! This can also be described as a learnt behaviour!
Attention seeking behaviours and the spoilt dog brat – syndrome!

Often the easiest way to teach a dog not to perform an inappropriate behaviour is to teach him to perform the behaviour on command. Barking is a good example ofthis premise.

Dogs often perform inappropriate behaviour to receive attention from their owners! From a dogs point of view the owner’s attention is often one of the most valuable things in his life!

It must be remembered that even negative attention (punishment – shouting/smacking/cross face, strong disapproving eye contact) can be rewarding to a dog, as he is getting what he wants the most – YOUR ATTENTION!

WAYS TO SOLVE OR MANAGE THE PROBLEM: TEACHING “SPEAK”:

If you have been punishing the dog for barking – this must STOP IMMEDIATELY!

This includes both verbal, physical punishment, cross disapproving eye contact, angry body language response, thewagging finger, angry body language – all must cease immediately.

Use the basic rule – ignore and distract negative behaviour and only respond and or reward positive behaviour!
Each and every time the dog barks, smile and give him the command “speak” or “talk” and pop him a tasty treat or titbit.
Make sure that you always use the same command, in the same tone of voice with identical body language and happy facial expression.
Initially this should be constantly reinforced and repeated each and every time the dog barks until the dog is actually barking on command.
Remember the second the dog responds the treat is to be popped into his mouth with a big smile and lots of happy fuss and verbal praise!

TEACHING NO SPEAK – HUSH (SILENCE IS GOLDEN!)

Once the dog is reliably barking on command and being instantly rewarded for the bark - the next step is to make being quiet rewarding.
Give the command “Speak” and allow the dog one or two barks.
Do not treat yet!
Gently enclose the dogs muzzle in your hands lovingly and softly give the command “Shh – Quiet” The second the dog is silent (and it only has to be for a second in the beginning) pop a treat in his mouth with lots of happy voice praise and a big smile!
Again as described in the section on “Speak” this has to be continually repeated and reinforced to have a lasting effect.

Most dogs learn this “game” (and it has to be taught in a non-stressful manner as a game) in a matter of a week or two, and although the barking is not eliminated the barking is controllable! It must be remembered that barking is a natural behaviour - abet an undesirable one.

14 ADDED TIPS TO HELP KEEP THE PEACE:

1. Exercise him often. A couple of good walks or play sessions a day can help your dog be calm, Instead of barking all day, he may sleep all day." A tired dog is a good dog!

2. Let him chew it over. Your dog will have a hard time barking if he's busy chewing on bones or doggie toys. Chewing is a real stress-reducer and occupier of time If you're going to be gone, give your dog his very favourite chew treat just before you leave.

3. Give him something to think about! If your dog often gets lonely - and vocal - when you are away, try rubbing your hands all over hischew treat before leaving. The scent will remind him of your, and he may not miss you as much.

4. Mask outside or competing noises. If your dog is supersensitive to noises in the environment, try blocking some of that noise so he's not as inspired to bark. White noise machines can do the trick. So can playing your stereo at a normal level.

5. Catch up on your cleaning. Turning on the vacuum cleaner can also block unwanted noises - the approaching steps of the postman, for example - and prevent your pet from going into a barking frenzy.

6. It does not hurt to occasionally give your pet a treat after the noise stops. What you are doing is taking his mind off the barking and making him realise that it is so good when he stops,

7. Leave the party. Some dogs, like people, hate talking without an audience. So if all your praise and commands fail to keep him quiet, leave. Chances are your dog wants you to hang around, so turning your back and leaving the room can make him see he's doing something wrong.

8. To reinforce the lesson, ring a bell (or sound a tuning fork) before leaving .Let it ring for a couple of seconds, and when you think the dog hears it, leave, Over time, your dog will learn to associate the ringing with your leaving, and he will be more likely to keep his thoughts to himself. It also helps to praise your pooch once he stops barking.

9. Seek deliverance from the postman. If your dog goes ballistic whenever people come to the door, you may need an accomplice. One possible solution is to have your postman slip a tasty treat through the door slot. Your dog may stop seeing these people as threats and might not feel the need to bark.

10. Bring him inside. If your dog sleeps outside and likes to exercise his vocal cords at night, you may want to bring him indoors. "He will have less to bark at.

11. Know when to switch strategies. If you have not seen improvement within three to five days of using one anti-bark technique, try another one.

GADGETS, COLLARS AND QUICK FIXES!

There are also various gadgets and gizmos available to treat inappropriate barking issues.

I must emphasise that THERE ARE NO “QUICK FIX SOLUTIONS” TO THIS PROBLEM. It takes time, patience and effort to modify this behaviour!

· Electric shock collar where the dog is shocked on the throat.

The electric shock is trigger by the dogs bark:

I believe that this is a cruel and inappropriate device that can produce untold negative and even dangerous behaviours in dogs. For example if a dog happens to bark and receive a “jolt” at the precise second a young blond little girl walked past him, he could associate that pain and trauma with the little girl.

This could develop into a permanent dislike of blond girl children – which could have disastrous catastrophic results. PAIN OFTEN IS A TRIGGER FOR AGGRESSION and in some individuals could be enough to trigger an attack!

NOTE:

Under the law in SA it is considered a criminal offence “To attach any device or contraption to an animal that could cause pain or discomfort”

The use of these cruel devices could leave you open for prosecution under the animal protection act!

How NOT to use a clicker!

2011-12-27T12:37:00.001+02:00

ON SHODDY CLICKER TRAINING AND THE IMPORTANCE OF PREMACK

by Casey Lomonaco KPA CTP

HOW NOT TO USE A CLICKER

"The other day my puppy was outside off leash. She took off chasing a deer. I called and called and she didn't come back. I clicked her a few times and she still didn't come back. She returned about an hour later, breathless. I put her in her crate when she came back to punish her for running off."

Every time I hear things like this, I get a few new grey hairs.

The first problem is, puppies should not be off leash unless they are in a securely fenced enclosure. A reliable recall, especially calling a dog off chasing a prey animal, is PhD level training. Most puppies are only at kindergarten level training. Even if they "normally" have a nice recall, chances are the behavior is not reliable enough to stand up to the holy grail of dog events, the deer chase. If dogs could receive titles in the sport of recall, I think the titles would include calling the dog mid-deer chase, thus earning the championship title TDC. Other notable levels of achievement in recall training include TSC (the squirrel chase) and RFP (recall from play).

Many people want to start their dog out with TDC, TSC, and RFP titles. Much like you can't write your dissertation before you know your ABC's, your puppy cannot be expected to recall off a prey chase if he hasn't received adequate training, and this type of training requires a substantial training commitment and investment.

That's all I'll say about recall training today. It's such an important topic it really is deserving of its own blog entry. Included in that entry will be a word of caution about ever punishing your dog for coming back to you, which will address the problematic last sentence in the quote above.

What I want to address in this particular post is this section: "She took off chasing a deer. I called and called and she didn't come back. I clicked her a few times and she still didn't come back."

Let's review the things that a clicker is and the things that a clicker does briefly.

A clicker is: a conditioned reinforcer. The most easily recognizable conditioned reinforcer for people is money, or a paycheck. Just as there is nothing inherently rewarding to people about possessing green pieces of papers covered in pictures of deceased presidents, there is nothing inherently rewarding to a dog about the sound of the clicker or the presentation of any other marker. The clicker has value because it is repeatedly paired with access to things the dog wants, most frequently food or play. Paychecks have vallue because they open the door of opportunity - through our paychecks, we can acquire the things we want or need. The click must always be followed by a reinforcer. Clicking without giving providing a reinforcer is like having your paycheck bounce. Would you go back to work the next day?

A clicker is: an event marker (also known as a "bridge"). I tell students to think of their clicker as a camera. You are using your clicker to "take a picture" of the behavior you like as the dog offers the behavior. The clicker functions in this capacity to tell the learner, "I like that behavior. Do it more often. Reinforcement is on the way!" (Can you see why a clicker is a more concise marker? It takes a long time to communicate all of those sentiments through spoken or written word!) When you are taking a picture, you can click the shutter button too early or too late and miss the shot. New photographers and clicker trainers are often too late and end up "taking a picture" of the wrong behavior. (You see this frequently in targeting. Students try to click when the dog's nose hits their hand. If the click is a fraction of a second too late, you click the dog turning away from your hand. Four or five clicks later, the dog won't even look at your hand, because she had been clicked for looking away. Click when the dog is in motion toward your hand!)

So what did the dog in the previous example get clicked for? Blowing off a recall and chasing a deer. We clicked her for running away after we cued the recall. What reinforcer followed the click? The opportunity to chase a deer, which more frequently than not trumps any kibble, hot dogs, or turkey you may be holding. (In my experience, no single treat will trump the allure of quickly moving prey. Liverwurst usually doesn't compete with something as exciting as a prey chase - a strong reinforcement history does.) Never underestimate the power of environmental reinforcers to work for (Premack) or against (blowing off cues) you in your training. When it works for you (Premack), you control access to environmental reinforcers. When it works against you, the dog controls access to environmental reinforcers and learns the owner is irrelevant in distracting environments.

So we called the dog, she ran away, and we clicked as she was running away. The behavior was reinforced heavily by what was likely one of the most exhilerating, exciting experiences of this young dog's life.

When you use the clicker as an "attention getter" or signal to your dog to focus on you, what you are actually doing is reinforcing the behavior of looking or running away from you. The clicker is a wonderful, precise communication tool but it is a double-edged sword - to be most effective, clicker trainers must really practice honing the mechanical skills of appropriate timing and reinforcement delivery. You must also be clear in what the clicker is (a conditioned reinforcer and an event marker) and what it is not (a recall cue or focus cue).

Instead of clicking your dog for looking or moving away from you, use it to capture any focus on you. Build a strong reinforcement history for focused attention.

Behavior is changed through the handler's ability to manipulate its consequences effectively. We must appropriately manipulate reinforcers, be they conditioned or unconditioned, primary or secondary, environmental or gastrointestinal, to work for us instead of against us.

BE THE BROCOLLI

Many dog handlers see deer, squirrels, other people or dogs, fast moving objects as hindrances, obstacles blocking the path to their dog's reliability. In fact, too frequently, the dog sees the owner as the obstacle, coming in between the dog and everything she wants in the world. I believe a paradigm change may greatly increase training success for dogs and their people. This paradigm shift is known as the Premack Principle. In dog training, Premack often means "thinking outside the treat bag."

The Premack Principle states that more probable behaviors (squirrel chase) will reinforce less probable behaviors (look away from squirrel and at mom). In laymen's terms, "if you eat your brocolli, you can have your ice cream."

Don't feel bad about being the brocolli. I'm the brocolli too. We're all the brocolli when it comes to competing with prey distractions.

We may be able to prevent our dog's access to these environmental reinforcers some or all of the time, but the fact is that we frequently can't modify our dog's instinctive attraction to prey objects, things that move fast or squeal, etc. What we can do is modify our training approach to take advantage of these doggy instincts. Change the focus from competing with these stimuli to putting them to work with you. "I see my dog wants this. How can I channel their attraction to this object into our training sessions?"

By becoming a squirrel chaser yourself. That's right, I said it. Be a little more "doggy" in your training style. If your dog is staring at a squirrel and then finally breaks her stare to give you eye contact, use a a clicker or other marker followed by an on-leash squirrel chase to reward the focus. Chasing the squirrel she was staring at is probably, in this context, more important to her than your hot dog bits. Following an event marker with something as exciting as a squirrel chase is something your dog will not soon forget.

This can be a revelation for some dogs. Instead of thinking, "I might be able to chase that squirrel if I could find a way to get past mom," your dog learns, "I might be able to chase that squirrel if I find a way to please mom!" A "mom" who will chase squirrels is infinitely more interesting to a dog than a "mom" who is a spoilsport and says "No squirrel chasing, no way, no how!" Vary your rewards so that your dog doesn't expect a squirrel chase every time he sees a squirrel...sometimes tug, sometimes great treats, sometimes a ball throw, sometimes do the "happy dance" with your dog, sometimes reward with an all-out sprint on the leash (running is a very potent reinforcer for my Chow!). If chasing the squirrel is a jackpot for your dog, save that platinum reinforcer and use it to reward her best efforts - the fastest eye contact, the quickest hand targets.

Clicker training is effective, but only if you use the clicker effectively. You get what you click. Only click behaviors you want, use effective reinforcement and management strategies, and put that deer to work for you instead of against you in your future training endeavors.

Happy training!

A vets assessment of the book Ceasar's Way ......

2011-12-25T01:22:00.001+02:00

Book Review: Cesar’ s Way, by Cesar Millan. Cesar’s Way: Definitely NOT a Whisper

By Kathy Meyer, VMD

Although the jacket claims that the book offers a “natural, everyday guide to understanding & correcting common dog problems,” Cesar’ s Way, by Cesar Millan (aka the Dog Whisperer) delivers very little usable information for dog owners. The book is aptly named, as its main focus is Cesar, not the dogs. Instead of providing revolutionary insight into dog psyche, Cesar’s Way largely describes Cesar’s own interpretation of various problem dog behaviors and his methods of treating. The typical dog owner can’t use these methods, as they involve 4 or 5 hours of vigorous exercise a day, time with a pack of 40 to 50 dogs, and physical corrections and intimidation to achieve submission. Cesar’s various and sometimes peculiar philosophies and beliefs are woven throughout the book, making it more a treatise on his views of how dogs and owners (and even men and women) should construct their relationships rather than a useful guidebook to promote a harmonious life for dog and owner.

The most glaring faults of the book are not so much what is included, but what is not. First, there is no acknowledgement of the dog’s ability to quickly and easily learn dozens of words to create a common vocabulary between dog and owner. This is otherwise known as training...something that has been very helpful over the thousands of years of human/dog interactions. Communication in this way has allowed dogs to be trained for very complex, useful behaviors in their complex lives as 21st century pets in a developed country. Cesar, however, strives for a “primal” relationship between dogs and their owners, epitomized in his view by homeless people and their dogs. In this primitive construct, Cesar uses no words to communicate with his dogs. Instead, the only sound he will issue is a harsh hiss, which will generally cause dogs to display submission when he is displeased. So, instead of teaching a dog to sit or down/stay and then asking the dog to remain calm so it can “earn” its dinner, Cesar expects the dog to just “figure it out,” regardless of how confused, hungry, and frustrated the dog becomes. Likewise, the poor fearful dogs Cesar “rehabilitates” could be easily taught to sit and stay while desensitized to his approach rather than being subjected to forceful, terrifying intimidation tactics described in the book. Cesar states that he will repeat these techniques “a thousand times” if necessary with fearful dogs.

Also related to training, or lack thereof, is Cesar’s method of “discipline.” The book doesn’t specifically advise owners on how to stop their dogs from doing what Cesar feels should be forbidden. Other than taking the dog on long marches on the end of a short lead with a noose around the most sensitive area of the neck and projecting calm, assertive energy, the reader is at a loss as to how he or she is to change her dog’s behavior. Based on his “Dog Whisperer Show,” the method of discipline appears to involve punishment delivered verbally (his “hiss”) or through tightening of the choke collar to the point of shutting off the airway. Cesar does discuss the “alpha roll,” in his book, but wisely cautions owners from doing it on their own dogs except under theguidance of a trained professional. I suspect the advantage to this is that the trainer will end up in the emergency room rather than the owner. The purpose of discipline is to educate the dog, and the approaches alluded to in this book do not instruct the owner to show the dog what the owner would like him or her to do instead of the undesirable behavior.

In addition to the above-mentioned omissions, there are no recommendations made for simple environmental manipulations that could minimize or even solve many problems. For example, Cesar mentioned a dog that bit mail carriers to the point that the USPS would not deliver mail for the entire neighborhood. This case was featured on a Dog Whisperer episode, which I did review. Not once did Cesar advise the owner to keep her dog under control by not allowing it to run at large, unsupervised, in the neighborhood. Although Cesar’s appearance dressed up in a postal uniform was perfect TV schmaltz, it’s unlikely this one-time encounter will affect that dog’s future behavior toward the real mail carriers. Another case described in the book involved a dog that walked in perfect submission, unleashed down a city street to its owner’s photography studio. However, at the studio, the dog began to display aggression toward clients. Cesar dramatically described the horrible outcomes, including euthanasia, if this behavior could not be stopped! However, he did not mention simply leaving the dog at home or using a leash, gate, or crate at the studio until adequate training could be achieved. More to the point, he didn’t even describe how the owner was to stop behavior. Cesar simply advised him to act like a leader. Sadly, Cesar not only missed opportunities to easily direct the reader to successful strategies, but glamorized the walking of a dog off-lead in a busy city, which is unlawful in many jurisdictions and could prove fatal for a dog.

While Cesar’s opening autobiography in the book provides a touching “rags to riches” story, it is of no particular help to the dog owner. However, it does provide great insight into Cesar’s perception of the perfect life for a dog. His ideas were clearly formed during his childhood, where he observed the behavior his grandfather’s nearly feral farm dogs. The dogs lived outdoors, were not regularly fed, and received no health care, save hosing for severe infestation of external parasites. The dogs were not trained, but just “naturally” knew what to do. This construct of the perfect life for a dog reappears later in the book, when Cesar declares that the happiest dogs in America are those owned by homeless people, as they engage in the proper following behavior required of all dogs if they view their owners as “dominant”.

As Cesar goes on to describe various types of aggression he treats, he uses terms such as “unbalanced” and “negative energy.” These vague terms do little to help advance our understanding or aid owners in preventing or treating problems. His rehabilitation techniques, while interesting, are simply descriptions of what he, himself, does at his facility. In general, it involves heavy exercise to induce a “calm, submissive state,” exposure to the pack of dogs, and a feeding process where only the calmest dogs are given their food. As previously noted, these techniques do not easily transfer to the typical dog owner.

Throughout the book, much is made of popular “dominance theory” and its application to dog training. Cesar maintains that a dog that jumps up during greeting, pulls on a leash, or walks through the door first is dominating the owner. These assertions are patently false. Many dogs jump during greeting while displaying obvious submissive behaviors. They are whining and licking! The reason they jump is to sniff the owner’s face, which is simply vertically oriented rather than horizontally oriented, like other dogs. Likewise, pulling on the lead or going through the door first usually relates to a simple lack of training and the dog’s ability to move much faster than its human companion. Cesar’s description of wolf pack behavior is not supported by the latest research. There is no constant scrabbling to be top wolf. The pack structure is simply a family, with mother and father at the top and several years’ worth of maturing offspring. Placement in the hierarchy is based on sex and age.

In the final section of the book, Cesar offers up the closest thing to advice for owners in the book. I do agree with many of his questions prospective owners should ask themselves prior to taking on a puppy. However, while I agree exercise is important, his recommendations for exercise in excess of 1.5 hours of walking per day, are not practical for most people. I am particularly concerned about the potential for injuries to dogs worked out on the treadmill, and joint damage to dogs under the age of two who may be asked to wear a backpack full of filled water bottles, as he suggests. Under the discipline section, Cesar repeatedly will advise owners what not to let their dogs do, such as wake them up in the morning or greet them too enthusiastically upon their return. As noted above, he doesn’t tell owners how to stop the behavior or what alternate behavior the dog should be taught! The most concrete advice I could find was for owners to always behave in a calm assertive way. I do endorse this concept but it would be much more helpful for Cesar to instruct readers on exactly what they should do with the dog while being calm and assertive.

“Cesar’s Way” will make a fine read for you if you want to learn about Cesar and how he claims to dramatically rehabilitates dogs to live in his pack. His is an impressive story of human ambition and resolve, which makes a nice marketing package for simplistic, outdated, and sometimes downright dangerous techniques. However, if you are a dog owner looking to deepen your relationship with your dog and/or improve your dog’s behavior, I would direct you to authors such as Patricia McConnell, Jean Donaldson, Ian Dunbar, and Sophia Yin. By using more advanced, humane techniques of true dog training, you will surely improve the quality of life for both you and your dog. And the book won’t be centered on the messenger; it will be centered on the message.

ANOTHER GEM FROM LEAH IN THE USA LOOSE LEASH WALKING!

2011-12-07T19:44:00.001+02:00

How to teach your dog to walk on a loose leash without pulling

Add a comment

Leah Roberts

, Orlando Dog Training and Behavior

3 compaments

I want to go OVER THERE!!!

Credits:

Photo Courtesy of Laura Felgenhauer

Why does a dog pull on leash? When that question is asked in a classroom, usually at least one person will answer, "Because he wants to be in charge." In truth, the reason a dog will run out to the end of his leash and lunge has absolutely nothing to do with a desire for world domination. The simple answer is that your dog pulls because he wants to go over there. Wherever over there is, there are smells or activities going on that attract him. Most of the time when your dog pulls on the leash to get somewhere, you oblige him by walking in that direction. So one answer to that question is a dog pulls because it works.

If pulling on leash works for your dog, it follows that the way to teach him not to pull is to stop it from working. He wants to keep walking in a certain direction. As soon as the leash tightens, the walk should stop - or even suddenly continue in the opposite direction. If your dog learns that he only gets to go where he wants when the leash is loose, he will begin to pay more attention to where he is in relation to you so that there is no tension on the leash. To even further strengthen your dog's choice to remain by your side, he should receive yummy treats and praise when he is in the desired position.

Loose-leash walking, commonly referred to in training circles as LLW, is not the same as heeling. A heeling dog is required to walk with his nose at his owner's leg at all times. This is necessary in an obedience trial, comes in handy when walking across a busy street or in a crowded area, but too restricting for most casual strolls around the neighborhood. LLW simply requires your dog to stay on one side (no criss-crossing to trip you up) and pay enough attention to you to keep himself within the length of the leash. He can sniff, look around, and thoroughly enjoy his walk while at the same time allowing you to enjoy yours - without you becoming his tug toy!

The bad news is that LLW is one of the most difficult behaviors for your dog to master. Reasons for this include:

He knows how to sit and lie down. You're just teaching him the names for these behaviors. But when you try to teach him to walk beside you, it's an entirely new concept to him.

Whenever you teach a dog any behavior, it's best to start in the most quiet, distraction-free environment possible so that he has the best chance to succeed. If you look at this as a "kindergarten environment," as soon as you step out the front door you're in "graduate school."

Not only does your dog have to break the habit of pulling on the leash, so do you! Chances are that you are so used to keeping tension on that leash in order to try to control your little Tasmanian devil that you will have a difficult time training yourself NOT to hold it tightly or yank it.

The ultimate answer to the question, "Why does a dog pull on leash?" is simply: "Because he hasn't been taught another way!" Learning to LLW with your dog is like both of you learning to dance together.

Continue reading on Examiner.com How to teach your dog to walk on a loose leash without pulling - Orlando Dog Training and Behavior | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/dog-training-and-behavior-in-orlando/how-to-teach-your-dog-to-walk-on-a-loose-leash-without-pulling#ixzz1fs7KNVDU

DOGS IN NEED OF SPACE

2011-12-07T17:01:00.001+02:00

Hi All,

I just love this post! Hope you all enjoy it and in a way – think we can all relate to this one!

Cheers for now

Lou

There is epidemic happening across the country and no one is safe. It’s occurring on crowded city sidewalks and spacious country walking trails. It doesn’t discriminate based on race, age, or economic status.

Innocent dogs and their owners are being terrorized, chased down the street, pinned into corners by…other dog owners.

But, you ask, don’t all dogs like to meet, greet, and play with other dogs, even unfamiliar ones? How rude of them not to greet me and my dog! Not so, kind hearted dog lovers, not so at all.

In every city, town, and suburb, loving, law abiding families share their lives with dogs that, for a variety of reasons, cannot or would rather not, socialize with other dogs.

Today I call on all dog lovers to take a stand on behalf of dogs that walk in public while they simultaneously cope with one or more of the following:

contagious diseases
leash reactivity
service or working dogs
injuries and painful physical conditions
intolerance of other animals
recovery from surgery
fearful of unfamiliar or rowdy dogs
aging and elderly
learning self control around other dogs
are owned by people that want to be left alone

To keep it simple, these dogs and their owners shall be known as Dogs in Need of Space (DINOS)™

These DINOS have every right to walk the streets, using a standard 4-6 foot leash, without interacting with strangers, human or canine. And yet…they are hounded, day after day, by cheery, well meaning dog owners who insist on meeting them.

Despite frantic efforts to cross the street or hiding between parked cars, DINOS are chased down by other people walking dogs, who refuse to believe that there is someone out there that do not want to meet them.

How do you spot these terrorists? You can recognize these people by their battle cry, “My dog is friendly!” Henceforth known as My Dog is Friendly (MDIF).

Pick any corner of any town in America and you’re likely to see a scene similar to this one:

A DINOS is working on his manners, let’s say it’s leash reactivity. He has some issues with strange dogs, but is in training so that he can learn to stay calm in their presence. DINOS spots another dog coming and, like their trainer instructed them, they create some distance and do a sit-stay with eye contact. The goal: to keep cool while the other dog passes.

But they didn’t realize they were being stalked by an eager MDIF. Look! There’s one now, crossing the street, speed walking in a beeline right towards the seated DINOS, their own dog straining at the collar.

The DINOS steps further away, trying again to create distance. Any anthropologists (or kindergartner) can read the clear body language in play from DINOS. Observe: no eye contact or smiling, they are facing away from MDIF, perhaps glancing frantically around themselves, looking for an escape.

MDIF is impervious to body language and insists on coming closer. The DINOS signals become escalated, and like a dog losing its patience with a rude puppy, DINOS issues a quiet, but firm warning, “My dog doesn’t like other dogs.”

Unable to understand their native language, MDIF continues their advances until DINOS is trapped and begins to lose his ability to stay cool. See: lunging and barking, coupled with awkward struggles to get away. Now, like a dog that’s being humped relentlessly by a teenage dog with no manners, DINO snaps, so the message is clear, “Stop! Don’t come any closer!”

And, without fail, MDIF calls out their cheerful, pleading battle cry, “My dog is friendly!” Usually this is received by the back of the DINOS as they jog away.

Then, often followed by a hurt look, the MDIF mutters, “What’s your dog’s problem?”

The DINO, shaken, wonders why they are working so hard on improving their dog’s manners when the humans around them have the social skills of, well, a dog with no social skills.

A brief interlude from the author:

Quickly, let’s turn to the similar epidemic of off leash dogs that are not under voice control. It’s the law: Put your dog on a leash. No one but ME gets to decide who my dog interacts with. Not you, with the “friendly” dog who just wants to say “hi” or you, with the dog who “knows” not to leave your property, but charges me up my porch steps. I, and I alone, will decide if my dog will be interacting with your dog and when you let your dog run loose you are ROBBING ME of my right to choose whether or not we want to interact with your dog. Not cool.

And now back to our Public Service Announcement:

Dogs In Need Of Space are good dogs. They may not want to socialize with your dog, but they have the right to walk with their owners, on leash, without harassment from strangers who insist on a forced greeting. Their owners do not want to cause a scene or yell, in a panic, at strangers. They don’t want their dog to act inappropriately, get hurt, backslide on their training, or frighten anyone. Please, dog lovers of the world, allow these dogs and their people some space and, if they are walking or turning away from you, keep your dog close by and pass them without comment.

All they want is to walk their dogs in peace, without having to hide under a park bench in order to escape the relentless pursuit of dogs owners who call out…

“My dog is friendly!”

Why it is GOOD when a dog growls!

2011-12-07T16:38:00.000+02:00

Thank your dog for growling

By Leah Roberts, Orlando Dog Training and Behavior Examiner

Dobie’s story

Dobie started growling at children while on walks. On a recommendation by his vet, his concerned owner brought him to see a trainer who followed traditional training methods. Here she was taught to correct Dobie’s growling by giving a short, quick yank on a choke collar and saying “No!” After a week or so of following this advice, she was very happy to see that Dobie had stopped growling at children.

And then a while later, a child ran up to the dog while on a walk and reached out her hand to pet him. Because Dobie didn’t growl, the child was not hesitant and the owner was not concerned. Suddenly Dobie turned and bit the child’s hand. His owner described this incident later as “It happened out of nowhere!”

Growling is a valuable warning signal

Did it really come out of nowhere? Not at all. Dobie’s growling was a way of telling his owner, “I am afraid of these children who come by while we are on a walk.” It was also his way of telling the children, “Please get away from me.” For whatever reason, Dobie had begun to perceive children as a threat. Correcting his growling forced him to inhibit his warnings, but his feelings about children did not change. Therefore it was only a matter of time that some child would step over his fear threshhold, and without the warning growl Dobie’s only way to cope was to escalate to a bite.

Correcting a growl, snarl, or even a lunge/snap is like putting a bandage on an infected wound. It will disguise the problem for a period of time, but not solve it – in fact, it will fester and get worse. Aggressive acts are simply reactions to a fearful stimulus. Like humans, when dogs become fearful they have the choice of fight or flight. Some dogs hide behind their owners’ legs. Others act out in an aggressive manner.

When a warning display is inhibited and escape is not an option, the dog (or human) who feels helpless will shut down. Though Dobie appeared to be in no distress, one experienced in reading dog body language would have seen his signals. His head was down, his ears were tensely held close to his head, the whites were showing in his eyes, and his tail was held clamped down. Feeling cornered and with no way to express it, he panicked and bit the hand that he perceived as attacking him.

Not only does correction inhibit the dog’s way of communicating his discomfort, the owner’s tone and body language exacerbate it. To the dog, the child’s approach not only makes him nervous, it causes his owner to tense up and yell. This is powerful confirmation to the dog whose owner is his whole world that his fears are well-founded.

Wouldn't you prefer this warning to none at all?

Heal the cause, not the symptom

Fortunately, due to modern research in behavioral science, more humane and effective ways of dealing with aggressive acts have been developed. These methods are grounded in the use of desensitization and counter conditioning. On the Clicker Train USA website, it states: “We want to counter condition our fearful dog to accept other dogs. By combining counter conditioning and desensitization we can accomplish that. We will start exposing our dog to other dogs at a very low level – in this case a far enough distance (that’s the densensitization part). In addition, we will give the dog very tasty treats when he sees the other dogs (that’s the counter conditioning part). Gradually, we can convince the dog that other dogs mean good treats.”

Leslie McDevitt, MLA, CDBC, CPDT took this concept one step further when she developed the Look At That (LAT) game detailed in her book, “Control Unleashed.” Previously counter conditioning protocols required the dog to look away from the aversive stimuli (person or dog that frightened him). With this method, the dog is actually rewarded for looking AT the object of fear. The result is that the dog starts to seek opportunities to look at, and even eventually approach, the object that used to cause him to growl, lunge, or snap. Instead of thinking, “uh oh, here comes something scary,” his response changes to “oh yay, here comes something that makes GOOD things happen!”

Kellie Snider, MS, the Manager of Animal Behavior Programs at the SPCA of Texas, developed Constructional Aggression Treatment (CAT) as her graduate thesis under the direction of behavior analyst Jesus Rosales-Ruiz, PhD. In this revolutionary treatment, the dog is rewarded for calm behavior by allowing him to increase his distance from the feared object. Since it’s very important that the dog be kept below his fear threshhold at all times, the procedure requires that the initial distance be easy for the dog to handle, therefore helping to increase his feeling of safety when in the vicinity of the person or dog that frightens him.

On her website Kellie states, “In the CAT procedure we use the reinforcer the dog is already working for. It is usually distance from the aversive stimuli. In our treatment we provide the outcome he wants only when he behaves in safe, friendly ways.” As with the LAT method, there is an additional benefit that is not a result of procedures using corrections. ”But a funny thing happens in the treatment,” she continues. ”He learns to like other people and dogs.”

His body language will tell you everything you need to know.

Get help!

If your dog is displaying aggressive behavior, you need to see a trainer/behaviorist who is both a practitioner of dog-friendly methods based in modern behavioral science and also experienced with aggression issues.

If these issues aren’t addressed, it could result in a human or other dog receiving a serious bite. One of our local behaviorists is Belinda DeLaby, CBC, CPDT, the owner of Canine Action, Inc. in Oviedo. Belinda has been training dogs for 15 years and has extensive experience dealing with aggression.

Other resources for finding a good trainer who has the necessary experience and education in modern methods for aggression issues can be found at the bottom of the page of the Helpful Links page of the Dog Willing website. These listings include Orlando area trainers and behaviorists, but also list international resources.

What can you do?

Meanwhile there are several important things that you, the owner, should do if your dog is displaying aggressive behaviors towards a human or other dog:

Avoid contact with whatever it is your dog fears. If you usually walk him in a heavily populated area and he’s reactive to strange people, choose another more quiet place to walk him. The more exposure he has without therapy, the worse his fears are likely to get.
If you suddenly come upon an aversive stimuli (something that makes your dog react aggressively), STAY CALM. He will be taking his cues from you. Keep breathing, keep your voice calm and cheerful, and take him out of the situation as quickly and nonchalantly as you can. If possible, don’t put any tension on his leash – that tension travels right through him.
Call your local experienced behaviorist as soon as possible and make an appointment for evaluation.

Lastly, don’t assume that just because your dog is displaying aggressive behaviors, you have an aggressive dog. He is not a bad dog, he is a dog with a problem that can very often be resolved with the right behavioral modification therapy.

Leah Roberts has been training pet dogs in the Central Florida area for the last eight years. She specializes in clicker training, socialization.

The Evolution of Modern Day Dog Training!

2011-11-30T23:44:00.000+02:00

THE EVOLUTION OF MODERN-DAY DOG TRAINING

Today’s trainers owe much to their predecessors

By Mary R. Burch, Ph.D.

By the 1980s, there was a paradigm shift toward more positive methods in dog training. Only 20 years before, many trainers felt that dogs had to be “broken” in order to be trained. These changes in thinking matched what was happening in the treatment of people with disabilities and mental health problems. In the 1960s, humans were often treated with shock therapy and the use of aversive stimuli. By the 1980s positive behavioral procedures were commonplace in both dog training and human services settings.

Starting in the 1980s, the dog training world seemed to ‘discover’ operant conditioning. The principles of operant conditioning are far from new and this discovery was actually a re-discovery of principles that dog trainers had been using nearly a century ago.

Beginning in the 1800s, without using the technical terminology or being aware of the scientific theories related to training, dog trainers were using many operant conditioning procedures. The early dog trainers played a critical role in developing the world of dog training as we know it today.

After the cavemen brought wolf cubs into their dens as companions, domesticated dogs were used for purposes such as hunting, herding, droving, pulling sleds, and killing vermin. Tibetan Terriers are thought to have been bred and raised by monks in Tibetan monastaries as long as 2000 years ago to serve as pets and assist with the care of flocks and herds. In the 1790s, during her imprisonment, Josephine reportedly used her Pug to carry messages to Napoleon. In the 19th Century, Asian tribes were using sled dogs to carry loads. All of these dogs had some training that was most likely provided by the owners and based on trial-and-error. There were no obedience training classes and no manuals or videotapes designed to teach you to teach your dog to carry messages out of your prison cell.

Dogs shows in taverns

Beginning in the late 1700s, in England, informal dog competitions were held in events much like county fairs. By the 1800s, informal dog activities had become popular. Many events were held in local taverns and the townspeople came to cheer on their favorite dogs. A British tavern called The Blue Anchor was the main headquarters for the Toy Dog Club, and a specialty show for Toy Spaniels was held in The Elephant and Castle tavern in 1834.

In 1859, English dog fanciers held the first organized dog show. The show included only Pointers and Setters, showing the interest at the time in dogs who had been trained for sporting activities. Fourteen years later, The Kennel Club (England) held its first official dog show.

As in England, the earliest interest in organized dog training in the United States focused on sporting dogs. In the 1700s, George Washington maintained a kennel of foxhounds at Mt. Vernon and competitions involving pointers, setters, and hounds were popular. In 1884, a growing national interest in pure-bred dogs resulted in the formation of The American Kennel Club. Initially, the primary focus of the AKC was to maintain a stud book and serve as a central governing body for dog shows.

From the mid-1880s until the 1930s, there were no obedience events at AKC dog shows. An idea that was borrowed from other countries, dog training was becoming well known in the United States in the 1920s, even though there were no AKC obedience competitions. Owners could have their dogs boarded and trained by professional trainers. Some owners trained in groups and had local competitions. Training dogs for competition and to earn AKC titles didn’t begin in this country until 1933 when Helene Whitehouse Walker decided to show everyone that her Standard Poodle was far more than just another pretty face.

Helene Whitehouse Walker

Walker was a breeder of Standard Poodles, dogs who were thought of by many at the time as “sissies.” She knew about the behavior tests that were being held in England for working dogs. An effective and persuasive woman, Walker began approaching dog clubs and breeders with her idea of holding competitive obedience tests at dog shows. In 1933, in Mount Kisco, New York, eight dogs competed in America’s first obedience trial. The slogan “Train Your Dog,” became popular across the country and in 1934, North Westchester Kennel Club and Somerset Hills Kennel Club held obedience tests at their conformation shows. By 1936, the American Kennel Club had developed and was using the “Regulations and Standards for Obedience Test Trials” at licensed obedience events.

On the road again

Inspired by the public’s enthusiastic response to obedience and dog training, in 1937, Walker, her friend Blanche Saunders, and their dogs went on the road in a 21-foot-long trailer to give obedience demonstrations across the country. In 1941, the New England Dog Training Club became the first obedience club to become a member club of the AKC. Dog training had arrived in the United States!

Rin Tin Tin: US Calvary’s most valuable soldier

From the 1920s to the 1950s, Americans of all ages watched with wonder as a German Shepherd entertained and amazed them. Lee Duncan, a World War I soldier, found a shell-shocked puppy in the French trenches. He took the dog home to the states and in 1922, Rin Tin Tin made his debut. Rin Tin Tin was so popular, he was credited for saving Warner Brothers from bankruptcy in the 1920s. Referred to as the “U.S. Calvary’s most valuable soldier,” Rin Tin Tin would make spectacular leaps in raging river rapids, hide under the water from a pursuer, and hold the reins in his mouth to drive a horse and buggy. Rin Tin Tin died at the age of 16 and was buried in Paris. At the time of his death, he was receiving 2000 fan letters every week, showing that people of all ages and backgrounds were fascinated with the idea of a highly trained dog.

Lassie: A 50 year tradition

A 1938 story involving a collie started a tradition that lasted more than 50 years. Joe was a boy whose family had to sell their collie because they could not afford to keep it. The story touched the hearts of so many people it was eventually made into a novel and feature motion picture with Elizabeth Taylor and Roddy McDowall. “Pal,” the original Lassie, made his debut in 1943 in Lassie Come Home. Rudd Weatherwax was Pal’s trainer and eight generations of Lassies later, Rudd’s son Bob was carrying on the tradition of training Lassies using positive training methods. For many people growing up in the 1950s, Sunday nights were the high point of the week. It was then that we could watch a beautiful, well-trained dog who was so devoted she would travel miles and overcome any obstacles to get to her owner. It was the human-animal bond at its finest.

Conrad Most: The beginning of training curriculums

In the early 1900s, Pavlov was in Russia studying reflexive responses in dogs. In their psychology labs, Thorndike was working on the Law of Effect and J.B. Watson was advocating a move toward the scientific, objective study of behavior. At the same time that these researchers were developing the foundations for operant conditioning, dog trainers were making their own contributions toward developing a technology for training. By the 1930s, Walker and Saunders were using an ancient, unair-conditioned Buick to pull a trailer across the country so that people could learn about training their dogs.

In Germany, Colonel Conrad Most was training dogs and explaining their learning tendencies from a dog trainer’s perspective. Most started training police dogs in 1906, and in 1912 he became the director of Berlin’s State Breeding and Training Establishment for police dogs. From 1919-1937 Most headed the Canine Research Department of the Army, and in 1931 he helped form the German Society for Animal Psychology.

In the 1940s, Most used his dog training knowledge to train the handlers and trainers of dogs at the German Dog Farm, a training center for guide dogs and their blind handlers.

Most demonstrated an understanding of operant conditioning concepts such as primary and secondary reinforcement, shaping, fading, and chaining some 28 years before the publication of B.F. Skinner’s The Behavior of Organisms. Most described reinforcement as “that agreeable experience when the dog has performed a correct behavior,” and he differentiated between primary and secondary reinforcers. He referred to secondary reinforcers as “secondary inducements,” and used his voice and soft tones much in the way some trainers use clickers today.

As with many trainers who came from a police or military background, many of Most’s procedures would be regarded as “heavy-handed” by today’s trainers. Nonetheless, it is important to recognize that an early dog trainer had independently discovered many of the relationships between consequences and behavior that Skinner would later describe in The Behavior of Organisms. Most’s 1910 manual Training Dogs was one of the first “how to train” dog books.

Josef Weber

Josef Weber came to the US from Germany, where he was an instructor in the Berlin Police Force. In addition to teaching military and police dogs, Weber had developed procedures for teaching guide dogs for people who were blind. Weber became an American Kennel Club judge and is credited as having a critical role in developing the formal obedience tests used in this country. Weber advocated training for all dogs and advised owners that they should “be proud of your dog’s manners.”

William “Bill” Koehler

Like Conrad Most and Josef Weber, Bill Koehler had experience training military dogs. He trained dogs and their handlers at two military training centers in California. Beginning in 1946, Koehler was the chief trainer for the Orange Empire Dog Club. This club was known for its consistently winning performances in team competitions and for large numbers of obedience titles acquired by members. Koehler and his son, Dick Koehler, also trained students at their own training facility. By 1960, more than 40,000 dogs were trained in classes instructed by Koehler or his instructors.

Koehler is credited for starting the use of long lines and light lines in training, methods designed to improve attentiveness and off-leash control. As the head animal trainer for Walt Disney Studios, he introduced millions of Americans to the potential of obedience training with his training of Wildfire, a Bull Terrier named the Outstanding Animal Actor in 1955 for his role in It’s a Dog’s Life. This prestigious award was given to another Koehler-trained dog in 1959 when “Chiffon,” better known to most of us as The Shaggy Dog, was voted the best animal actor.

The Koehler method of training is based largely on the principles of negative reinforcement and punishment. In operant conditioning, negative reinforcement occurs when the frequency of a response increases if an aversive event is removed immediately after the response has been performed. This means, if the dog starts doing what you wanted him to after you did something aversive, he was getting negative reinforcement from escaping or avoiding the aversive stimulus.

One of the most frequently used examples of negative reinforcement in dog training is the use of the “choke chain” or chain training collar. After experiencing unpleasant jerks on the chain, many dogs work hard to avoid the jerk. Koehler used choke chains in procedures such as turning quickly and going in the opposite direction of the dog when the dog was forging ahead or pulling the handler.

An example of punishment in the Koehler method is the use of “throw chains.” Koehler used throw chains to control the dog from a distance. For example, if the dog was called and did not respond, the chain would be thrown sharply at the dog’s rear. According to Koehler, as the chain hits the dog, the handler is to reel in the leash and have the dog sit front. When the dog is positioned in front, Koehler instructs handlers to provide lavish praise, showing that he believes in reinforcing dogs for what they have done correctly.

In training, Koehler advocated letting dogs make mistakes, providing consequences for those mistakes, and then providing praise for desired behavior. In cases where dogs had behavior problems such as digging, jumping on people, and barking, Koehler believed in the use of punishment. Punishment, in the operant conditioning, scientific context, is defined as providing a consequence that makes a particular behavior less likely to occur in the future.

Times have changed since Koehler started training dogs. While he stood by his techniques throughout his life, Koehler’s punishment procedures are not considered necessary, humane, or appropriate by many of today’s trainers. For dogs who were diggers, Koehler advised digging a hole, filling it with water, and putting the dog’s nose into the water. According to the Koehler methods, dogs who jump on people should receive a sharp knee in the chest, and dogs who bark excessively should be hit with a leather belt.

The paradigm shift in dog training seems to match changes that have occurred over the years in treating people with disabilities and mental health problems. In the 1960’s, patients in institutions were treated with shock therapy and aversive stimuli such as lemon juice and ammonia were routinely used with behavior-problem patients. It was believed then that punishment was the fastest, most effective way to fix a severe behavior problem. With the exception of a few unusual cases in highly specialized treatment facilities, these procedures are not used today and would be considered abusive. Like human therapies, for the most part, dog training has undergone an evolution and moved toward a more positive approach.

I met Bill Koehler and watched him work with dogs and students in the 1980’s. He appeared then to be a kind and gentle man and he clearly loved dogs. At the time Koehler developed his procedures, he was one of the few people in the country who was known for his ability to rehabilitate tough dogs. For many dogs, Koehler was the last hope. If he couldn’t “fix” them in a short period of time, they would be put to death. While the trend in the 1980s and 1990s has been toward positive approaches to dog training, and many of Koehler’s procedures are criticized, Bill Koehler can not be denied recognition for the major impact he had on dog training in this country. His 1962 book The Koehler Method of Dog Training is an obedience classic that has lasted nearly a half a century and has been used to train hundreds of thousands of dogs.

Blanche Saunders

After Blanche Saunders’ and Mrs. Helene Whitehouse Walker’s incredible cross-country journey to sell the benefits of dog training to the American public, Saunders continued to promote the newly emerging sport with missionary zeal. She organized obedience demonstrations at high visibility events such as the Westminster Dog Show, in Rockefeller Center during National Dog Week, and during intermissions in Yankee Stadium with 70,000 spectators.

In 1954, Saunders published her book, The Complete Book of Dog Obedience. This was the first book written specifically for obedience instructors and in it, Saunders outlined the format for procedures that would be adopted in dog training classes across the country.

Saunders showed an understanding of the principles of learning. She said, “Dogs learn by associating their act with a pleasing or displeasing result. They must be disciplined when they do wrong, but they must also be rewarded when they do right.” Saunders advocated the use of punishment procedures for some behavior problems. When dogs barked in class, owners were instructed to hold the muzzles and tell the dog to behave. If the dog continued to bark, Saunders wrote that the owner should hold the leash tight and the dog should be “cuffed sharply across the end of the nose.”

Negative reinforcement procedures played a key part in Saunders’ method. Perhaps the most frequently used negative reinforcement procedure (where the dog attempts to avoid something aversive) is the jerking of the choke chain. When a dog receives a jerk by the chain collar, the procedure is technically considered punishment. However, when the dog hears the “click, click, click,” of the chain collar as the trainer prepares for a correction and works to avoid the correction, the procedure is negative reinforcement.

In the Saunders method, to teach heeling, the instructor tells the handlers, “Forward.” Students are instructed to say, “Heel! Jerk! Praise!” Jerks are also used to both teach behaviors such as sit and down and to correct problems such as inattentiveness.

Food training was virtually unknown when Saunders was training dogs. Saunders felt that food should not be given “like a bribe” on an on-going basis, but that it was acceptable to use “a tidbit now and then to overcome a problem.” This was perhaps the beginning of the shift away from military and police training methods that relied primarily on punishment, escape, and avoidance behaviors. These methods specifically stated that trainers should never use food in training. Saunders primarily used pats and praise as reinforcers. To teach new skills, Saunders often used physical prompts. Dogs were taught to “down” by having the handler step on the shortened leash. In teaching dogs to “sit,” handlers would apply pressure to the dog’s shoulder to guide the dog into position.

Blanche Saunders made some major contributions to dog training. She was one of the first trainers of obedience instructors and she was an early seminar leader. Her book outlined a curriculum of carefully detailed week-by-week instruction for novice through advanced obedience classes. Throughout The Complete Book of Dog Obedience, Saunders set the tone for praising, kindness, and fairness. She listed “too little praise” as one of the most commonly made mistakes of owners. Saunders was perhaps the first author to stress repeatedly the importance of reinforcement in training, thus starting the trend toward the positive training methods used today.

Milo Pearsall

Milo Pearsall’s 1958 book Dog Obedience Training has been billed as a book that revolutionized dog training with a more gentle approach. Many of Pearsall’s training methods were the same negative reinforcement techniques described four years earlier by Blanche Saunders. Pearsall used snapping on the leash as a correction in teaching heeling, to get the dog to sit, and to improve attentiveness.

Pearsall also used punishment procedures for correcting problem behaviors. To correct dogs who jump on people, Pearsall suggested the person knee the dog in the chest. To stop car chasing, owners were told to tie a stick to a short length of rope hanging from the dog’s collar. As the dog ran to chase, the stick hit against the dog’s front legs. For housebreaking accidents, Pearsall suggested that owners push their dog’s noses near the accident (not in it) so that the dog could get the idea of what it had done wrong. In the Pearsall method, dogs who ran away were trained on a line. When they tried to bolt with the long line attached to their collars, they were jerked off their feet.

In 1958, aware of Pavlov’s research on conditioning that had been completed only a few decades earlier, Pearsall wrote, “The dog at first learns his lessons by the application of a primary stimulus – forcing him to sit, for example – and at the same time a secondary stimulus, the command is given to him. Soon, the secondary means exactly the same to him as the primary did. The best-known example of this primary-secondary transfer is the famous experiment of Pavlov on the salivation of dogs.” Unfortunately, while Pearsall knew that there was a connection between learning theory and dog training, he confused the concepts of respondent (reflex) conditioning with operant conditioning (learning). A dog learning when a physical prompt of forcing him into a sit has been paired with the verbal cue, “sit,” is clearly a case of operant conditioning.

Dogs are amazing creatures and they oftentimes learn despite confusing messages that we might send. For serious infractions, Pearsall said the dog should be struck under the chin (with the fingers). As soon as the dog was hit for misbehavior, he instructed the handler to then praise the dog immediately. Behaviorally, we now know that it would not make sense to give a reinforcer immediately after a punisher. Such a pairing would clearly cause the punisher to take on reinforcing qualities.

According to sound behavioral principles, the reinforcer (praise) would not be given until the dog had engaged in an acceptable behavior. Then, that behavior would be reinforced. Pearsall justified the practice of praise as soon as you punish by saying the handler needed to “let the dog know he was still loved” and that the handler was on the dog’s side.

In operant conditioning, the word “punishment” is a technical scientific term that means to provide a consequence that makes a particular behavior less likely to occur in the future. For example, if you grabbed the handle to a new pan that you were cooking with and you were severely burned, in operant terms, you were punished for grabbing the handle of this pan while cooking. Many dog trainers, from years past through the present time, think of “punishment” as having a different meaning. They equate it with a crime, retribution, or a person who is just trying to get even.

Pearsall, like many trainers, did not use the operant conditioning definition of punishment. He believed that as a first rule of obedience training, trainers should “keep also in mind that the dog is never punished. He is corrected. He does not, and never will, understand punishment.” Pearsall used the “crime” version of punishment, here, a distinction wholly lost on the dog.

Dog Obedience Training was a work that was very complete. It included information on selecting puppies, pre-training, and crate training in addition to providing general training information for all levels of instruction. Pearsall was a well-respected AKC obedience judge and instructor. Hundreds of thousands of dogs were trained with Pearsall’s training methods. Pearsall was an early supporter of “kindergarten puppy classes.” These classes for puppies were designed primarily to educate owners and promote socialization among the puppies. Pearsall stressed that these classes should be fun and they should not be formal training sessions that would deny puppies the right to act like playful, joyful, exploring puppies.

Milo Pearsall was perhaps best known for the nationwide seminars and clinics that he conducted to promote dog training and his ability to demonstrate using problem dogs (from the audience) how quickly dogs learn in the hands of a skilled trainer.

Winifred Strickland

Winifred Strickland began competing in obedience in the early 1940s. She retired from competition in 1955, just about the time that Blanche Saunders and Milo Pearsall were influencing trainers with their seminars. Strickland, an AKC obedience judge, was one of the earliest “super trainers.” She earned 160 obedience titles, 40 perfect scores, 30 utility titles, three obedience trial championships, five national obedience championships, five tracking titles, plus hundreds of high awards.

In her 1965 book Expert Obedience Training for Dogs, Strickland outlined a sequenced curriculum for novice through utility training. She said that her method would produced dogs that were eager to work.

Strickland used snap-release corrections to teach heeling and to “teach the dog to behave.” If dogs refused commands, she would give them a sharp tap on the nose. For dogs who jumped on people, she used the commonly used procedure of a knee in the dog’s chest. In housebreaking dogs, she used verbal reprimands for when the dog had an accident, and she praised the dog when it was eliminating outside. When Strickland had to correct the dog, she believed that punishment should always be administered immediately and the lesson continued so the dog could do something right and get praised. Strickland emphasized the importance of good timing when delivering both punishment and praise.

To teach “down,” Strickland used physical prompts. She pulled the dog’s front legs out as she dropped it into a down position and said, “down, good down.” To drop the dog into a down at a distance, Strickland systematically faded her control of the dog by starting the training with the dog a short distance away and gradually increasing the distance.

Strickland taught her young dogs to do tricks using food as an incentive. She described how she would pair food with praise and eventually the dogs worked for praise alone (conditioned reinforcement). Like most of the other trainers of her times, Strickland advised against using food in training. She said that the use of food “is a crude approach to training and will work only with dogs that think more of their own stomachs than of their owners.” Despite this comment, in Expert Obedience Training for Dogs, Strickland described how food could be used to teach advanced skills such as the “go-out” exercise for obedience. This exercise involves the dog being sent away from the handler, instructed to sit, and then jump over a specified jump. Strickland would place small bits of food at the location to which the dog was directed. The dog would run out to get the food and Strickland would give a verbal signal to have the dog sit. Eventually, the food would be faded from the training and the dog would run out to the location when given a verbal command.

In the 1960’s, a number of leading trainers believed that dogs trained for formal obedience competition should live in kennels. The thinking was that the dogs would be so happy to have human contact they would work eagerly. Strickland disagreed with kenneling dogs. She felt that dogs should live in the home “as family members.” She cited numerous examples of how her German Shepherds practiced their training throughout the day by retrieving items and performing other functional tasks.

Praise was an “integral part” of Strickland’s training method and she advised trainers to “continually strive to instill a feeling of fun in your training to keep your dog enthusiastic.” Winifred Strickland was responsible for a dramatic advance in the movement toward the kinder, more humane training of dogs. Strickland’s comment, “Do not be embarrassed if someone overhears you praising your dog. Be proud of it,” shows us just how far dog training has come in the last 30 years.

Modern Day Influences

Ian Dunbar: Positive training for families

Dr. Ian Dunbar, a veterinarian, is perhaps best known for his work as an animal behaviorist, teacher, lecturer, and innovative promoter of dog training. After receiving his veterinary degree from the Royal Veterinary College in London, Dunbar completed a doctorate in animal behavior at the University of California.

The host of the British television series Dogs with Dunbar, California resident Dunbar has written numerous books and videos. In the 1980s, Dunbar produced the “Sirius” (the dog constellation) puppy training book and video. In a time when the emphasis in dog training was largely on training for formal obedience competition, Dunbar began stressing the importance of training pet dogs. His educational materials and seminars made a significant contribution to dog training by advancing the idea that the dog’s entire family could be taught to shape their dog’s behavior. Dunbar wisely recognized when he was working with families that most people do not like to use aversive corrections with their dogs. He developed a positive, motivational training method that unskilled owners could both learn to use effectively and feel good about the method they were using to train their dog.

By the time Dunbar arrived on the dog training scene, a number of trainers were beginning to promote a more positive approach to training dogs. Dunbar demonstrated in seminars and on videotapes how dogs could be taught new skills very quickly if food “lures” were used during training. Like trainers as early as Milo Pearsall, Dunbar stressed the importance of getting puppies off to a good start. He encouraged trainers to organize “puppy parties.” These parties were designed to socialize puppies, screen potential behavior problems, and get owners involved in the educational loop early in the process.

In 1994, Dunbar’s influence on the dog training world expanded exponentially when he played a key role in founding the Association of Pet Dog Trainers. APDT’s first conference in Orlando, Florida, that year drew 250 professional dog trainers who were interested in issues related to training pet dogs. By 1997, attendance at annual conferences was more than 1000 trainers each year. The 1997 conference program, in addition to a wide variety of other topics, included a number of presentations related to operant conditioning. Speakers talked about punishment, how to use and time reinforcers, stimulus control, and behavior modification techniques, showing that many dog trainers had an interest in the science of how dogs learn.

Karen Pryor

Karen Pryor is a scientist, writer, animal trainer, and seminar leader. For dog trainers in the 1980s and 1990s, Pryor also fulfilled an important role as a translator of basic behavioral concepts for those working in the animal training area. Prior to the 1980s, Pryor was a marine mammal trainer who used Skinner’s operant conditioning principles to teach dolphins and develop marine mammal shows. In 1984, she published her book Don’t Shoot the Dog, a user-friendly, popular press explanation of operant procedures for the general public. In Don’t Shoot the Dog, Pryor used real world situations to explain how operant procedures can be used to change the behavior of one’s children, spouse, roommate, or pets.

When Reader’s Digest, with its readership of more than 20 million readers, published an excerpt of Don’t Shoot the Dog, many behavior analysts were ecstatic that someone had successfully introduced operant conditioning to the general public. In the late 1980s Pryor gave the keynote address to behavioral scientists at the Association for Behavior Analysis International conference and the bridge between science and modern day dog training was established.

Pryor’s training materials and seminars showed how operant procedures can be used to provide training that is positive. Pryor also introduced trainers to concepts such as secondary reinforcement with her “shaping game” and examples of “clicker training.”

By the mid-1990s, there were several dog trainers writing and conducting national seminars on how to use clickers in training. Numerous dog trainers were giving workshops and writing on operant conditioning topics such as positive reinforcement, shaping behaviors, and decreasing undesirable behaviors. The long-term impact of these trainers on the field of dog training is not yet known.

Understanding the whole dog

In the years before operant conditioning was a term familiar to dog trainers, well-known trainers introduced new training methods or modifications of old ones with a steady regularity. However, despite a consistently growing number of books and seminars on “how to train,” leading trainers have understood for decades that more is required to train a dog than a set of procedures or bag of tricks.

The field of dog training has changed dramatically in recent years and the overall trend has been toward an increased use of positive reinforcement. While strategies have changed, some of the characteristics of good trainers have remained constant. Good trainers understand the whole dog. Although we can make some generalizations about learning theory and what happens when an animal is reinforced or punished, we cannot deny the role that genetics and breed or species differences play when we are trying to change an animal’s behavior.

How Dogs Learn by Mary R. Burch and Jon S. Bailey can be ordered through the NAIA Amazon bookstore. See a review of the book at http://naiaonline.org/articles/archives/burchbook.htm.

Positive training methods!

2011-11-29T08:48:00.000+02:00

Why We're Positive About Positive Training Methods

We've come so far since those dark days just over a decade ago when virtually all dog training was accomplished through the use of force and compulsion.

We know those days well; we were quite skilled at giving collar corrections with choke chains and attained several high-scoring obedience titles with our dogs using those methods.

Trainers, behaviorists, and dog owners are realizing that this is more than just a philosophical difference, or a conflict between an ethic that says we should be nice to animals versus a more utilitarian approach to training. While both methods can produce well-trained dogs, the end result is also significantly different. With positive training, the goal is to develop a dog who thinks and works cooperatively with his human as part of a team, rather than a dog who simply obeys commands.

One criticism of positive training is that the dogs are spoiled and out of control because, while the dogs are highly reinforced for doing good stuff, no one ever tells them what not to do. "Dogs," the critics say, "must know there are consequences for inappropriate behaviors."

We don't disagree with this statement. Positive does not mean permissive. We just have different ideas about the necessary nature of the negative consequence. When one is needed, positive trainers are most likely to use "negative punishment" (taking away a good thing), rather than "positive punishment" (the application of a bad thing). As an adjunct to that, we counsel the generous use of management to prevent the dog from practicing (and getting rewarded for) undesirable behaviors.

The result? Since all living things repeat behaviors that are rewarding, and those behaviors that aren't rewarded extinguish (go away), the combination of negative punishment and management creates a well-trained dog at least as easily as harsh or painful corrections and without the very real potential for relationship damage that is created by the use of physical punishment.

One of the most significant reasons for not using physical punishment or force with dogs is the potential for eliciting or exacerbating aggressive behaviors from them.

The most rewarding and exciting part of training for us is watching the dawning awareness on a dog's face that he controls the consequences of his behavior, and that he can elicit good stuff from his trainer by offering certain behaviors. We never, ever, experienced that in the "old days." We used to take "sit" for granted, because if the dog didn't sit when we asked, we made him do it.

Are dogs pack animals?

2011-11-22T11:33:00.000+02:00

Are Dogs Pack Animals?

written by jean donaldson

tuesday, 28 april 2009 09:04

When I first got into dog training, the mantra was “dogs are pack animals.” It was never questioned: dogs were strong bonding animals and fit into human families so well, sometimes to the point of developing bona fide disorders like separation anxiety. And a lot of behavior was deconstructed with social hierarchies in mind. Nobody examined what dogs do when they are not inserted into human families, i.e. are free-ranging. So a while ago I took a look at what is known about feral or semi-feral populations of dogs around the world. It turns out there are many such populations.

During the tenure of dictator Nicolae Ceaucescu, a poorly thought out reconstruction effort in Romania resulted in the demolition of thousands of houses and the relocation of thousands of families into small apartments throughout the country. For family dogs, this meant being turned out onto the street, where they have multiplied and eked out a marginal existence ever since.

A sad situation from every possible angle, the explosion of free-ranging dogs in Romania is an unintended experiment that challenges one of the most taken for granted aphorisms in the dog behavior world: that dogs are “pack animals.” The dogs in Romania have not formed packs. Their associations with one another are brief and casual: a couple of dogs may hang out together temporarily and then part company. Dogs are often drawn together by a scarce resource like a food source or estrous female but once this magnet is gone, they go their separate ways.

This contrasts with wolves who, while a genetically identical species to dogs, live in packs. As explained by University of Minnesota biologist David Mech, each pack is a nuclear family consisting of a breeding pair and their offspring. When the offspring reach maturity around two years of age, they disperse to avoid inbreeding depression and, if they live long enough, mate up and start their own packs.

The social lives of Romanian dogs may be the exception that proves the rule, so it’s necessary to examine all free-ranging populations in order to formulate a stronger hypothesis about dog social behavior.

Significant populations of free-ranging domestic dogs exist in sub-Saharan Africa, South America, India, Mexico, Tasmania (Cook Island Dogs), Hawaii, Bangkok and, in a situation paralleling that of Romania, in Moscow. Pariah dogs on the Indian subcontinent are thought to be the longest-running continuous population of feral dogs - on the order of 14,000 years, nearly as long as archaeological evidence has existed for domestic dogs.

There are cases of dogs buddying up with one or more dogs for days at a time, and dogs being drawn into proximity to each other by food sources, however none of the above populations form packs the way wolves do. Males, in fact, do not participate in the rearing of puppies, which is the foundation of a wolf pack. And, scavenging far outpaces hunting as primary food-acquisition activity, another difference from wolves, who hunt.

By contrast, the accounts regarding the social behavior of Dingoes are much more conflicting. Often the same source will in one paragraph say that Dingoes are primarily loners that only occasionally pack up with a few others to take down a large prey item and later state that Dingoes are pack animals with stable hierarchies, a la Gray Wolf. Recent genetics research has allowed for the teasing out of pure Dingoes from Dingo-dog hybrids most of the time. Interestingly, hybrids are often outwardly indistinguishable from pure Dingoes to an untrained eye. So to be generous, it could be that the disagreement between (and within) sources is partially due to some observations being of mixed ancestry animals and some of pure Dingoes.

A colleague of mine who has made trips to the Cook Islands to provide veterinary care to the feral dog population was struck by two things: the large numbers of short-legged dogs, and the absence of social cohesiveness. She fully expected and looked for packs, having heard and parroted for years, as have I, the party line of “dogs are pack animals.” Again and again, she witnessed what Dunbar has termed “loose, transitory associations” rather than packs.

If we are to support our contention that dogs are pack animals, we will need to account for these many populations where dogs, in the absence of the glue of human confinement and husbandry, simply do their own thing.

Brilliant article about the TV star!

2011-11-21T08:52:00.001+02:00

Deconstructing the Cesar Millan appearance on "60 Minutes" with Leslie Stahl.

"Actually what worries me is when you brought [your dog Parker] in,
because you told her to walk in front of you, so she's walking in front of Lesley Stahl," Millan said.

This doesn't really make sense. Leslie did what comes naturally, opening the gate and then the dog goes in. There is no significance. This denotes nothing about leadership or Leslie being a good dog owner or a leader, or anything. Just that she opened the gate (hard for dogs to do that without thumbs), and the dog went in.

"If your dog doesn't learn to follow,you'll never have a disciplined pet."

Interesting statement....watch 7:00 to 7:10 into this video - dogs are ahead of Cesar. Oh no, they must be in charge. Or maybe it's that larger dogs walk faster than we do.

In my opinion - the entire bit about Bo being in control of President Obama because he's pulling on the leash is all about PR for Cesar Millan. And, what a coincidence, Millan also has a book coming out.

"Aggression is never the problem, it's the outcome of a problem."

If Millan is saying aggression is the symptom or a result of something else going on - I totally agree with Cesar.

Leslie Stahl said, "(Cesar is) Soothing the savage beast when no one else can." That statement is absolutely untrue - there are lots of professionals who can ("soothe the savage beast"), and do it every day. They just don't have national TV shows. Also, they "soothe the savage beast" without collateral damage, and the affect is long-term.

Whatever my dogs' problem is, I gave it to her?" asked Leslie Stahl.

Millan said, "Yes. So if we live our lives with nervousness, tension, frustration, anger, jealousy, insecurity, all those issues, they learn."

I agree with Millan, our pets do pick up on our emotions - but at some
point in time who doesn't have some of the emotions listed above? Does
this mean all our pets should have problems because we are victims of
the human condition? I don't think so.

Millan said out dogs would be smoking cigarettes, if the could - they don't have enough to do.

"They spend a lot of time behind walls, and so all that buildup gets them
really anxious. So that's why I suggest exercise. Exercise allows them
to drain the energy."

I think Millan is right on - our dogs don't have enough to do, they are
rarely given an opportunity to do anything like what they were first bred to do,
and they are under- exercised. I don't believe the treadmills Cesar suggests are a good idea (just because it's dangerous), but our dogs do generally require not only more exercise, but far more enrichment.

Stahl maintains that thanks to Millan's power pack that her dog Parker swam for the first time.
Well, we must have been watching different videos. To me it looked as if Millan took Parker and simply forced him (albeit gently) into the water. I agree that dogs are, as Stahl said, copycats. However, this is about the way dogs can learn, not about being in a pack. Cats are arguably even better observation learners - and while social, they are clearly not pack animals. In time, it's true, Parker might have jumped in the water himself, and I realize TV crews can't always wait or come back the next day.

When Millan got between the two fighting dogs, Stahl asked if he feels comfortable getting between two dogs having a disagreement. Cesar's reply,

"I know which dog to touch first, you know, so I see energy, I feel energy."

Energy to train dogs comes from here?

I wish I could translate what that means. Cesar Millan sounds like Christine O'Donnell or Samantha Stevens. Poor Cesar has been exasperated each time he's attempted to explain this energy thing to me - I just don't get it. Sorry.

A side note about Millan's mutt-i-gree program, which he said is in around 100 schools. It began as a result of what I believe is the now defunct Cesar Millan Foundation, which his wife, Illusion led. I'm not certain that program or the Foundation continues, though I hope it does - programs like that one are important. And Millan's comments here are quite eloquent, I think.

"The program is to teach empathy and compassion. Empathy and
compassion is something that is very important for the future of
America, for the future of the world. And so to have that empathy,
compassion, to animals, we can then practice that with humans,"

"Dogs need and crave discipline," he added.

NO!
YES, dogs crave structure and consistency. What creature on the
planet craves discipline? Please punish me? Dogs crave our attention,
and if they can't get our praise, they will often go for anything - but
no creature awakens each morning hoping to be disciplined.

Cesar
said dogs in America are spoiled.

It's one thing to think of our dogs as
little children, but I agree with the Whisper Man on this - dogs aren't
children, and treating them as children is not to their benefit.

"When I die, I want to come [back] as a dog in America," Millan said.
"You get to have your bed with your name on, your house with your name
on."

HOWEVER, - dogs also crave our attention, and offering
that attention appropriately on our terms - well, isn't that what a part of
having a dog is all about? I don't believe you can love your pets too
much. As for the bed with the dog's name or bling for Buster - what the
heck?

First, it's not my business how anyone else spends their money.
Second, by doting on your best friend, the bond strengthens. When
something happens, anything....say you're fired and affording the dog
becomes more challenging, or you need to move cross country - those who
keep the dog, who take the dog with, are likely the most bonded.

I have no problem with Cesar Millan - it's just what he says that often disturbs me.

Shock Collar Study

2011-11-19T18:56:00.000+02:00

Are Shock Collars Painful or Just Annoying to Dogs? A 2004 Study Reveals Some Answers

Posted On: Monday, January 24th, 2011

By Sophia Yin, DVM, MS

Trainers often debate about the use of electronic shock collars. Some trainers find these collars unethical and unsafe. The pro-collar camp takes a different stance. Some say it just distracts the dog, calling it “tap technology” and others say it may be painful at the instant but then the dog learns to behave and there are no lasting negative effects.

In 2003, researchers from the Netherlands, Matthijs Schilder and Joanne van der Borg, assessed the short and long term behavioral effects of dog training with the help of shock collars. They wanted to know three things:

Do shock collars cause pain and fear or just cessation of a behavior? This could be evaluated by looking for signs of fear and pain when dogs receive a shock.
If the shock collars cause pain and fear, do the signs of fear fade afterwards such that the dog is completely normal or do signs of fear and anxiety persist? For instance, if dogs have received shock on the training ground do they show more signs of fear during non-training times in the same area when compared to dogs that have not been shocked?
And lastly, the researchers wondered if they could distinguish shocked from non-shocked dogs by fear/anxiety responses outside the training grounds. That is, are dogs who have been shocked more fearful in non-training locations? If so, it indicates they associate the handler or being given commands with the reception of shocks.

The Study Group

Schilder and van der Borg used Malinois, Malinois crosses, German Shepherds and one Rottweiler from a group of dogs being trained for their official (IPO ) certificate as police dogs as well as dogs being trained for standard watchdog training for a comparable (VH3) certificate, which is the highest possible in this type of training. Because these were working dogs they differ from the general population of dogs in that they are higher energy, higher drive, and have a higher tolerance for the correction-based training for which they are bred.

The 32 shock-collar group dogs (S-dogs) received shocks during training. The control group received no shocks but did receive other harsh methods including choke chain corrections, pinch collar corrections, other physical corrections (C-dogs). The researchers had no influence upon the methods and aids used, rather they just observed the trainers during the routine training sessions and “free walking” sessions in which the dog was not being trained or given corrections.

Overall they observed 32 shock collar-group dogs receiving 107 shocks and 16 control dogs who received other types of corrections instead. They evaluated control and experimental dogs in three situations:

First a free walk on the training grounds in which the dog was walked on leash but no orders were given to the dog. This was to see if there was a behavioral difference between the non-shocked vs the shock collar dogs and whether the type of correction had a lasting effect outside of the correction-situation.
An obedience work session on the training ground which included the following commands—sit and down in motion, heeling in slow, normal and fast walking speed with changes of direction, and recall to the handler. This situation was to determine whether the S-dogs showed signs of fear or pain when corrected.
A protection work session on the training ground in which the dog performed a number of exercises such as search for criminal, hold and bark at criminal, escape and defense, followed by attack by the criminal, and finally transport back.
They also filmed the dogs during a “free-walk” session at a park (a new location) and then an obedience session at the park. This was to see whether there was a difference between control dogs and S-dogs and whether S-dog associated the shock correction with the handler.

The Affects of Shock-Collar Corrections on Body Posture

The study found that in the 32 dogs that received a total of 107 shocks, there was an immediate direct effect in which the dogs most commonly:

Lowered their of body posture (22 of 32 dogs)
Gave high-pitched yelps (17 of 32 dogs)
Gave tongue flicks (18 of 32 dogs)
Lowered their tail (13 of 32 dogs)
Squealed (13 of 32 dogs)
Turned their head down and to the side to avoid the shock (7 of 32 dogs)
Moved away (avoidance) (14 of 32 dogs)
Gave a barking scream (5 of 32 dogs)
Crouched (6 of 32 dogs)

Dogs also lifted their front paw, lowered their back, jumped, licked their lips, circled, trembled, and sniffed the ground. All of the listed behavioral responses are signs of fear, pain, or anxiety and stress. Seven dogs showed no reaction.

The Effects of Previous Shock-Collar Corrections on Behavior at the Training Ground

Dogs that had been shocked previously showed more signs of anxiety and fear then the control dogs during free-walking on the training grounds as well as when they were being trained. During the free-walking and obedience work, S-dogs exhibited significantly more lip licking and lower ear positions indicating lasting effects of shock on overall fear and anxiety. During the protection work they showed more paw-raising.

The Effects of Previous Shock-Collar Corrections on Behavior in a New Setting (The Park)

Dogs that had been shocked previously showed more signs of fear an anxiety in the park situation than the control dogs. They showed a higher frequency of low ear position during the free walk than the control dogs and lower ear position and tongue flicking during obedience exercises in the park.

Behavior on the Training Ground Vs the Park and When Being Trained Vs on Free Walk.

Dogs that had previously been shocked were more frightened on the training ground than in the park. They carried their tails lower on the training ground than in the park and lifted their paw more. They were also more frightened during training than when being walked—ears and tail position were lower when being trained. However, non-shocked dogs also showed more signs of fear when being trained than when being walked.

The Take Home Messages

Overall the researchers concluded that even when compared to working dogs trained using choke chain and pinch collar corrections, dogs trained with electronic shock collars showed more fear and anxiety behaviors than those trained by other traditional police dog and watchdog methods. They concluded that:

Avoidance behavior and fear postures during the shocks indicated that the shock elicited both pain and fear and therefore were not just a distraction or nuisance.
The fact that the dogs showed more fear than control dogs both in the non-training situations in the familiar training grounds as well as in the park indicates that dogs are learning to associate the shock, not just with the unwanted behavior, but also with the location/environment as well as the trainer. The researchers found some evidence that some dogs had also learned to associate commands with shock. For example they state that one dog, shocked immediately after getting a “heel’ command, yelped after getting the next “heel” command without being shocked. The authors point out that the dog was not given a chance to respond after given the “heel” command, rather the command was immediately followed by the correction, hence increasing the likelihood that this type of aversion association would be made.
The researchers state that in the presence of the handler, the dog has learned to expect something aversive. “The enormous rewards the dogs experience during training, i.e., chasing down, catching a criminal and winning the sleeve, do not counter the negative effects of getting shocked. This is in spite of the fact that handlers of non-shocked dogs admitted that they use prong collars and that their dogs experienced beatings and other harsh punishment, such as kicks or choke collar corrections.”
Both dogs trained using electronic shock collars and those trained with other traditional coercive methods (choke chain, pinch collar, physical punishment) showed more signs of fear and anxiety when being trained than when on a free walk.

Interestingly, the results did show that 7 dogs out of 32 (22%) showed no signs of fear or pain while actually receiving the electronic collar shock which indicates that some dogs bred for high drive and to withstand the demands of the coercive-type training appear to have no pain or fear of the shock. The study does not indicate whether these 7 dogs failed to show fear and anxiety in the other test situations though.

Their final thoughts—it would be interesting to see whether the shocked dogs also show more signs of fear with a different handler and the next step is to compare protection and guard dogs in a more “friendly” way.

Schilder, M., Van der Borg, J., 2004. Training dogs with the help of the shock collar: short and long term behavioural effects. Appl Anim Beh Sci, 85, 319-344.

For more information on dominance-based training, read Experts Say Dominance-Based Training Techniques Made Popular by Television Can Contribute to Bites and Trainers with Jackhammers Need Not Apply

You can also read Lucy Learns to Earn: How to Get a Perfect Pup in 7 Days for examples of positive reinforcement methods.

How people are brainwashed into using aversive techniques!

2011-11-15T23:08:00.000+02:00

Hi Everyone!

Found this fascinating article on the examiner .com

The Milgram Experiment and how it relates to dog training

Stanley Milgram's experiment to determine the effect of authority of obedience

Credits:

Photocourtesy of photobucket.com

The Milgram Experiment - Overview

In 1961 Stanley Milgram set out to explain how so many people could heartlessly participate in the horrors of the Nazi concentration camps. Many war criminals justifiedtheir actions by saying that they were ordered to carry out these atrocities on other humans and had no choice. Were the Germans inherently cold and evil, or was this a phenomenon that could be repeated under the right circumstances? To answer this question, Milgram created an experiment to research the effect of authority on obedience.

Each one believed that he had just as much of a chance to end up in the Learner chair hooked up to the electrodes as he had of being the one to administer the shocks.

The fake shock generator had 30 different switches marked for levels of voltage ranging from 15 to 450, at 15 volt increments. Descriptions accompanied these labels, such as "slight shock" for the lower levels and "strong shock" at the 180 volt level. The level that went up to 420 volts was labeled "danger:severe" and the highest level, at 450 volts, simply "xxx." At each wrong answer, the Teacher was instructed to increase the level of shock he administered. The actor playing thepart of the Learner would respond to an audio prompt to react to the different levels of shock by starting out with grunts, and escalating his reactions as the shock levels were increased. By 280 volts he would let out agonized screams and complain of heart pain. After 330 volts, he was instructed to go completely silent.

As could be expected, most of the subjects were very reluctant to inflict pain on the human trapped in that chair, believing that they could have been assigned that position themselves. And yet every single one of the subjects administered shocks up to the 300 volt level, past the point of screams, begging for mercy, andcomplaints of heart pain. Amazingly, 65% of the subjects continued to administer shocks all the way to the maximum level of 450 volts after the man in the chair went totally silent. Some of them believed they had already killed the man, and yet they continued caving to the pressure of the Experimenter to deliver more shocks.

So how does this relate to dog training?

The veterinarian

For example, most young puppies will nip their owners in play and need to be instructed in a scientifically-based and humane way how to behave more appropriately. Far too many vets are telling people to take these trusting, impressionable little tykes, throw them on their backs, and pin them to "show them who's boss," an archaic technique referred to as an alpha roll. The owner will certainly feel uncomfortable forcing this technique on a frightened puppy, but usually will do so if their vet tells them to. Dr. Ian Dunbar, author, veterinarian, founder of the Association of Pet Dog Trainers and creator of Sirius Dog Training, says, "A wolf would flip another wolf against his will ONLY if he were planning to kill it. Can you imagine what a forced alpha roll does to the psyche of our dogs?"

Do people want to drag their dogs to a puddle of piddle and bop them in the nose? Not usually. But if your vet tells you to, you probably will - even if itmakes you uncomfortable to do so.

TV trainers

TV shows have one purpose, and that's to entertain and titillate viewers so that they continue to tune into the show. If you were to sit down and watch an entire date shown on the Bachelorette, for example, you'd probably be bored out of yourmind. So editors choose certain sound bytes, add dramatic music, even use takes from scenes not related to the one being shown to add the element of drama they're trying to create. By the time that edited portrayal of the date makes it onto your TV screen, what you see may in actuality have very little relevance to what really happened between the two people.

Unfortunately for dogs everywhere, TV shows about dog training are presented in the same way, for entertainment value alone. Showing a course of therapy for a fear-biter using valid and humane desensitization and classical conditioning techniques would be quite boring. However, setting a dog up for failure by thrusting him into a situation that guarantees a dramatic reaction, and then choking him into a physical collapse makes for very entertaining TV. Real dog trainers watch that clip and are aghast at the abuse that they see. Innocent dog owners who watch it on TV are subject to the Milgram Effect. Cesar Millan and his publicity machine has portrayed him as an ultimate authority on dogs, and therefore not only is the general public blind to the cruelty, many would gladly choose to have it inflicted on their own beloved pets by their TV hero.

It's hard to believe that he has a growing fan club of people who laud him and support his methods. These are not people who hate dogs, they are caring dog owners brainwashed by the Milgram Effect. A TV personality is a powerful authority figure in this society, possibly one of the most powerful.

The fall-out

So if you have a dog who bites, and you have watched these popular programs convincing you that this problem can and should be beaten out of him, would you have considered hiring this trainer?

What can you do to protect your dog?

If an "expert" tells you to do something that makes you in the least uncomfortable, listen to your heart!

(Note: Even though the Association of Pet Dog Trainers mentioned above was created specifically to educate the training community about humane, scientifically-based, dog-friendly training methods, the website's list of members includes those trainers who use electrical shock collars, spiked prong collars, and other force-based tools and methodologies. Using that listing to choose a trainer is not a guarantee that your dog won't be subjected to unnecessary intimidation at the very least.)

If you like to watch dog training on TV, you are not completely out of options. Victoria Stilwell is a very competent TV trainer with good, solid advice.

For more information on the Milgram Experiment, see Milgram's Experiment on Obedience to Authority and Stanley Milgram Experiment - Will People Do Anything if Ordered?

Continue reading onExaminer.com The Milgram Experiment and how it relates to dog training - Orlando Dog Training and Behavior | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/dog-training-and-behavior-in-orlando/the-milgram-experiment-and-how-it-relates-to-dog-training#ixzz1doHPnCiy

Breed Talk

2011-11-14T10:41:00.000+02:00

Please find below info about our upcoming Breed Talk:

Date: 20 November 2011

Time: 2pm to 4pm

Cost: R50 per person

Presenter: Glenda de Taranto

Topic: Toy Breeds

The aim of our Breed Talks is to educate the general public about the different breeds out there, to help them choose the breed that will suit their life style best. Glenda is a show judge herself and will be bringing along some breeders with examples of popular toy breeds on the day.

Kind regards,

Lindi De Beer

ThinkingPets Practice Manager

) 0820499209

3 086 669 1259 (fax)

www.thinkingpets.com

Ian Dunbar on the Misconceptions of the Mythical Alpha Dog

2011-11-11T10:33:00.001+02:00

MISCONCEPTIONS OF THE MYTHICAL ALPHA DOG

People are fond of extrapolating popular, but misunderstood and bowdlerized accounts of wolf-behavior to dog-human interactions and training methods. The assumption is that the dog is out to dominate us and as a result, far too much training advice is unfeeling and adversarial with a sickening reliance on physical domination. So many pop-psychology training books have been written as if people are wolves, rather than humans with supposedly superior brainpower. If only the fall-out from this absurd view were not so unpleasant, the whole premise would be utterly laughable. People seem to be hung up on the questions, “But WHY did he do it?” “Why does he act that way? Why don’t we simply teach dogs how we would like them to act. If we find a dog’s behavior to be inappropriate or unacceptable, we must take a little responsibility here because we are the dog’s teacher and so, why don’t we just change the dog’s behavior to our liking.

Notions of a “dominance hierarchy” with an “alpha wolf” being the all-powerful, supreme leader are simply incorrect. Such a muddled and simplistic view is a bit of an insult to the wolves’ most complex and sophisticated social system. This is not the way that wolves live together. Wolves live together in large groups based on family units — in fact, not that much different than the way large groups of humans live together.

Moreover, dog behavior is very different from wolf behavior, especially in terms of their social interactions with people. In fact, few dogs live in packs at all. When dogs do live in groups, certainly they organize themselves in hierarchies ranked from topdog to underdog, but the hierarchies are neither created nor maintained by physical dominance. Very young puppies may play-fight when establishing hierarchy within their litter, but when the puppies enter the group there is simply no contest — developmental nolo contendre. The mere thought of a competition between an eight-week-old puppy and a six-year-old adult male would be too silly for words. All puppies enter an adult group on the bottom rungs of the social ladder and there they remain until older dogs pass on. In groups of domestic dogs, hierarchies are not created or maintained by physical domination and aggression, rather the hierarchies are created to prevent aggression, disagreements and dogfights.

My dogs have informed me that they would like similar relationships with people. Dogs would much prefer to just get along. Dogs don’t want to be physically bullied all the time; they very much wish that physical aggression and domination be excluded from their social relationships with people. Dogs simply cannot understand why some people want the relationship to be so adversarial.

Today the Family — Tomorrow the World!

From an assortment of books, I have discovered the following cautionary “advice” for owners. Never let a dog stare or jump-up, never stand, crouch or kneel down in front of a dog, never look a dog in the eyes, or reach over his head, never loom over a dog and reach down around his neck, never get down on the floor or allow a dog to stand over you, never give a dog food treats or human food, never allow a dog to eat before the family or go out of a door first, never allow a dog on furniture, upstairs, in the bedroom, or on the bed, never let a dog mount your leg, never let a puppy mouth or bite, and never play chase, tug o' war, or play-fight with a dog. Instead, novice owners are routinely advised to enforce “elevation dominance”, “dominance down-stays”, physical restraint and discipline and especially, the “alpha-rollover” — grabbing a dog by the jowls and forcing him onto his back.

All of these recommendations destroy the fun and enjoyment of living with a dog, most recommendations are just too silly for words, some are counterproductive and others are downright dangerous.

The above behaviors and actions were misconstrued as the dog's intention of dominating people even though these behaviors and situations have absolutely nothing at all to do with social rank or aggression during dog-human interactions. Basically, if an owner is OK with the dog’s behavior, then there is no problem, whereas if the owner is worried about the dog’s behavior and can neither prevent nor control it, then there is a problem.

Misconceptions of the Mythical Alpha Dog

A number of dog training texts cite pilo-erection, prolonged barking and growling, snarling and snapping, food protection, and otherwise threatening people as examples of aggression and alpha-status. Usually though, these behaviors are indicative of insecurity and may be easily prevented or resolved by comprehensive socialization, desensitization and oodles of classical conditioning. Dogs feel the need to threaten people because they themselves feel threatened by people. In terms of dog-dog interactions, threatening, growling and fighting are characteristic of middle-ranking male dogs that lack confidence of their social standing. Top dogs seldom growl or threaten, they don't need to. Underdogs seldom growl or threaten, they would be silly to. In our study of dog social hierarchies, the two top male dogs were pretty cool customers — they seldom threatened and growled and hardly ever fought. Instead they were perfectly happy to share a bone with other dogs, whereas the middle-ranking males protected the bone with extreme machismo — a noisy and embarrassing advertisement of their lack of confidence.

Counterproductive Advice

No handling and gentling? No puppy-biting? But physical restraint and dominance instead? This has to be the most time-consuming, difficult, and potentially dangerous way to “train” any animal! Many of the above cautions are not without reason. However, whereas they may be sound advice when dealing with an unfamiliar dog, and good advice for children interacting with any dog, such recommendations are just too silly for words when generalized to living with a dog that you know.

Puppy biting is normal, natural and necessary. In fact, it is the puppy that doesn't mouth and bite that augurs ill for the future, since he has never had the opportunity to develop bite inhibition. Of course puppy biting has to be eliminated before adolescence, but via a specific four-step process, whereby the pup first learns to inhibit the force of his biting before he is taught to stop biting (now modified to gentle mouthing) altogether.

Similarly, if played correctly, games of tag, tug o' war and play-fighting all serve to maintain the dog's bite inhibition, to teach specific rules and to practice control at times when the dog is excited. If the owner does not play by the rules and is out of control, the dog will become out of control and overly excited. Since many people (especially men and children) are going to play these games with the dog anyway, we should teach them how to play with the dog properly in a controlled fashion so that the games become both beneficial and enjoyable.

The dog's supposed desire for domination offers a convenient excuse to psychologically and physically abuse the dog under the guise of training. These misconceptions prompt procedures in which people are recommended to physically dominate and/or intimidate the dog, rather than building the dog's confidence and teaching him that there is no need to feel threatened by people and therefore, no reason for biting them. For the general dog-owning public, the very concept of physical domination is as ridiculous as it is dangerous. Certainly, an experienced trainer might be able to flip the majority of dogs into supine restraint (although I fail to see why), but few novice dog owners would be silly enough to try, and no child and few adults could possibly succeed. How can a dog possibly view a four year-old child as an alpha animal, and how can a child possibly physically dominate any dog. The very concept is preposterous pop-psychology. Sillier yet, is when adult humans try to impersonate dogs during training — trying to reprimand dogs with open-gape pins, scruff shakes and “alpha rollovers”.

Certainly there is no more effective reprimand than a bitch chastising her pups; unfortunately, less than one owner in a thousand could match the sheer speed, the precise timing and the gentleness of a bitch's rebuke. It is important for dog professionals to recommend training procedures and reprimands that are within the skill-set of all dog owners, especially children, i.e., to teach control methods, to teach compliance — happy and willing compliance.

Come on, let’s wise up and train this dog properly, rather than citing dominance as an excuse to vent our frustrations on the poorly educated critter. Reading a dominance motive into the dog's behavior and responding with physically aggressive control measures severely restricts the dog from enjoying life as a dog, just as it inhibits dog owners from enjoying life as owners.

No Fun for Dogs?

No barking, urine marking, stealing food, jumping-up and mounting? But all these are signs of a perfectly normal, healthy dog. Excessive barking may be controlled by feeding the dog only from chewtoys and by teaching the dog to “Woof” and "Shush" on cue. In-house scent marking is the signal for some basic housetraining. Stealing is indicative of an ill-trained dog living with an owner who continues to leave tempting items within reach. Dogs jump-up as a natural greeting and friendly appeasement gesture that has been unintentionally reinforced since puppyhood. Train your dog to "Sit" when greeting people and maybe to "Give a Hug" on request, when and if appropriate. Not coming when called has absolutely nothing to do with dominance, rather it simply advertises insufficient training by an owner who continues to let the dog off-leash in distracting and potentially dangerous settings. Mounting is the result of a misdirected sexual urge — but the dog is trying to “love us to death” not kill us. The dog wants to mount something and a cat, a cushion, or a great aunt's left leg, are sometimes the best options at hand. I wouldn't dream of allowing my dog to mount an unfamiliar dog, let alone a person. Mounting other dogs may lead to dog-dog fighting and owner-owner aggression. But the point is, we manage to control our equally vibrant, human sexual impulses in public and dogs can do likewise, if so educated. Simply request your dog to sit or lie down. Check out amorous Dolce, who is about to mount another dog until his owner requests him to sit. End of problem. (SIRIUS® Adult Dog Training DVD)

No Fun for Owners?

No hugs, no pats, no treats, no gazing in the dog's eyes? I mean, what on earth is the point of owning a dog if you cannot enjoy his company? It’s as silly as not being alloed to hug your spouse. At times I love Dune to jump-up and give me a canine clinch on request but I would never let him jump-up on me or anybody else of his own accord. Dune is happy, he can sometimes jump-up and I like the occasional happy hug. Many times he stands over me, when I'm lying on the floor, sacked-out on the couch, or when he checks to see if I am awake in the mornings. I play with him on the floor. We have a lot of fun together. Of course, he doesn't realize that much of the play (patting, gazing, hugging) is gentling and other anti-aggressiveness exercises (reaching/grabbing, staring and restraint). He has to feel secure and confident standing over people and staring in their faces because he looks down on many children when they are standing up. And anyway my niece and nephew seem to spend most of their time playing on the floor. I allow him (and little Hugo) to settle on the couch with us and watch nature programs on the telly. I allow him to rest his chin on the bed for an early morning nuzzle and once I am truly awake, every morning, I invite each dog up on the bed for a wakey-time smooch. They are happy for the comfort and the privilege and I am happy for the companionship.

Rules for Rules' Sake

It would be severely negligent not to build up the dog's confidence regarding the actions of family members, friends, children and strangers, or not to perform essential bite-inhibition and confidence-building exercises. However, whether or not to allow the dog indoors, in the living room, on the couch, upstairs, or on the bed, whether the dog should have an armchair for to himself (as Claude does), or whether to play specific controlled games should be left to each individual dog owner. If the owner wants the dog on the couch — Fine! If the owner thinks that the dog's place is on the floor, downstairs, or outside — Fine! (Although most Dobermans and Greyhounds would have a dim view of the disparity between human luxury and canine Spartan existence.) Each owner should make there own rules and teach them to the dog. That specific rules and regulations will vary considerably between households is of little concern; what is important though, is that the dog has been taught the relevant rules and the owner is always in control. We allow our dogs to enjoy many activities. Our philosophy is to allow our dogs a lot of comforts and a lot of freedom, but with lots and LOTS of rules.

Personally I allow my dogs to do all the things listed in the first paragraph. Nonetheless, in an endeavor to make our dogs as trustworthy as possible, I always make sure that I am in control. I would never allow the dog to initiate or engage in most of these activities without my OK and I would never allow a dog to engage in any activity unless I knew that I could control the dog with a single command, for example: "Sit", "Shush", "Outside", "Downstairs", "Off", "Look at your paws" (look away), "Bow" (playbow), and "Say Hello" (wag your tail), etc. And of course, let's not forget the Omega-Rollover — "Bang!" i.e., to supinate for a tummy rub for a dog that is eagerly and happily compliant.

To be in control is the key — to try to understand and respect a dog as a dog and as much as possible, to meet his needs and establish a mutually enjoyable household.

This article is based on Dr. Dunbar's Behavior column in the August 1990 issue of the American Kennel Gazette. Reprinted with the permission of the author and the American Kennel Club.

Nov 5th - Guy Fawks - grrrr

2011-11-04T18:00:00.000+02:00

I am going to really pray for heavy rain both for tonight, tomorrow and Sunday night!! Don't forget to keep your pets indoors and safe for the weekend. Please also stay at home with then so that you can make sure they are safe.

If your pets are only mildly concerned about the noise there are various homeopathic remedies availabe. If your pet has a severe phobia or fear then please speak to your vet in advance - to prescribe some appropriate tranquillisers to ensure that your pets are safe!

Also don't leave your dogs in a courtyard or outside (even if they have a kennel available) Many dogs will panic - escape and can not only cause injury to themselves but also can present a danger to traffic and worse!

Ideally pets should be prepared long in advance for this time of the year - if you have not prepared your pet then take precautions and keep them safe!

Good luck and lets all pray for rain rain rain rain........

Cheers for now
Lou