Is more exercise always the answer?

I also think a most interesting part of the article is the "foraging" part.

I am beginning to understand just how important (and entertaining) this is for a dog..

I was reading somewhere that one owner would just throw the dog food in the yard and the dog would have to hunt for it.

At that time I just wasn't grasping the importance or relevence.

Now I have been implementing a modified program into Zeus' routine.

Not only does he show greater interest in food these days,  but he thinks it is great fun.

So this morning, instead of a stressful hour long power walk. (and it is stressful for him due to being on guard for loose dogs)  It was 30 minutes on leash in the field,  exploring, sniffing,  then 20 minutes in our yard "foraging".

 I probably should clarify that I am involved in the foraging game. It is interactive.

ORIGINAL: espencer

Oh no i have never said that +R does not work, of course it does IF i want to teach my dog how to sit, heel, roll over, retreive, etc which would be impossible with behavioral techniques and actually i could say the same about some +R people and "I don't get is how you refuse to even acknowledge that any other method (than your own preferred method) is viable and might actually work." []

Good gosh no.  I know that lots of training techniques "work" other than R+.  I also know (this part is fact) that if punitive methods are used, the dog (or any animal, human, horse, goldfish, cat, whatever) becomes hesitant about offering new behaviours.  They get dumber.  The saying "you can't teach an old dog new tricks" is an old one and stems from a time when most dogs were trained by physically punishing them when they got it wrong.  A dog trained his whole life with a clicker for instance will still learn new things readily whatever his age but his isn't the case with a dog taught by using a check - IME.  R+ is also infinitely more humane and because it modifies the behaviour and the dog's emotional state, rather than stopping the undesirable bhvr (the tip of the iceberg) it is usually more reliable and it's effects last longer.

Anyway back on topic - exercise is not really that important.  Some breeds do need more than others in order to be content and some behavioural problems do stem from boredom.  Where that is the case, more stimulation is a viable remedy.  But if the dog's problem stems from anxiety or confusion or a lack of socialisation as a puppy (the latter being the most common IME) then more exercise  won't address the issue.  And note I use the word stimulation, not exercise.  Dogs need both mental and physical stimulation to be content.  Hours and hours of walking on a short lead or treadmill will result in an exhausted dog, not a contented one.  Training and play are just as vital as physical exercise.  Plus, a method like clicker training has the dog use all his mental faculties and really think and problem-solve.  This is a good way to achieve a tired dog and you can't overdo it!  Whereas too much exercise can be debilitating for the animal.
 
ETA - just read the article referenced and have to say I agree whole hearted with it on nearly all levels.  However, the statement "dogs are not wolves" is rather misleading and implies we can learn nothing about our pets by studying wolf behaviour, which is not (IMO) the case.  Dogs may have been domesticated 16,000 years ago - or even 100,000 yrs ago - but that is still almost like yesterday in evolutionary terms.  We as humans retain many basic instincts from the days we lived in caves and were still wondering how to make that hot sparkly stuff - and that is much further back.

I was reading somewhere that one owner would just throw the dog food in the yard and the dog would have to hunt for it.

Either that or feeding out of a buster cube, kong or similar gadget. The behaviourist we consulted for my dog's "issue" strongly suggested that.

ORIGINAL: eley

I was reading somewhere that one owner would just throw the dog food in the yard and the dog would have to hunt for it.

Either that or feeding out of a buster cube, kong or similar gadget. The behaviourist we consulted for my dog's "issue" strongly suggested that.

 
I like hiding treats throughout the condo before I leave for the day.  Some are hidden in non-conspicuous places and some are right out in the open.  I have fun watching the dogs try to find these treats, and there are also cat treats hidden in places only accessible to the cat.  It's funny because the dogs will not relax unless they are sure they've found every treat in every possible place.

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

That's leadership, but it doesn't always involve slapping the dog on a treadmill or tying it to a moving object and trotting it to the point of exhaustion.  That really doesn't teach the dog anything except that they are tired - tired dogs are good dogs, but only until the tired wears off.  For them to default to a good behavior, such as seeking permission from the handler, requires training of a more lasting nature. 

 
I agree with you about the dog looking for guidance, but what you said about the treadmill is a clear example of wrong comprehension about a technique, a treadmill is used ONLY when the owner is not able to take the dog for a walk, i.e a blizzard outside, getting early to go to work, owners disability, etc to which actually the treadmill is very helpful for both the dog an the owner, is 100 times better to take your dog for a walk yourself always because that also helps to achieve a leadership roll too
 

ORIGINAL: Chuffy


Anyway back on topic - exercise is not really that important.  Some breeds do need more than others in order to be content and some behavioural problems do stem from boredom.  Where that is the case, more stimulation is a viable remedy.  But if the dog's problem stems from anxiety or confusion or a lack of socialisation as a puppy (the latter being the most common IME) then more exercise  won't address the issue.  And note I use the word stimulation, not exercise.  Dogs need both mental and physical stimulation to be content. 

 
I agree with 90% of what you say there except on the "excersice is not that important" part, it really is important, lack of excersice will bring problems for sure, now is VERY  important to remember that when a trainer says that you have to excersice your dog that does NOT mean that the dog has to be at the end almost dead in the floor with the tonge out sleeping till the next day even if is only 5 pm, when they say excersice they mean walk the dog, walking the dog for 45 minutes everyday is enough excersice
 
If excersice was always the answer then i know a TV show that would not exist since the answer would be always the same which would make it pretty boring []

well now I have tried these... more than once.  But I don't have a problem with trying them again...again...and again.   Which I will today. So, thank you for reminding me.

Truthfully, the foraging game didn't go too well in the beginning either. But the more I keep at it, the more fun it is getting....for both of us.

ORIGINAL: eley

I was reading somewhere that one owner would just throw the dog food in the yard and the dog would have to hunt for it.

Either that or feeding out of a buster cube, kong or similar gadget. The behaviourist we consulted for my dog's "issue" strongly suggested that.

I definately agree that while physical exercise is important to keep many breeds of dogs healthy and in shape, it is not the key to most behavioral modification. I think its important to really vary your dog's routine so that they keep alert and interested and exploring and don't get into a boring rut. Instead of a morning walk I'll often just walk Marlowe as far as the park and then put him on a 30 foot line and let him track squirrels (and sometimes our other dog who's been through the park earlier with my husband!). I change up our walking routes a lot, go to different parks (we're in between several), sometimes have him wear a backpack, sometimes not, sometimes put him on the long line, sometimes keep him on the short leash. As I speak right now the two dogs are in the midst of a full-on play session and I really encourage that too. Sparring keeps them thinking and active as they play all the dirty little tricks that dogs play on each other. They get most of their food in Kongs and other puzzle toys. I like to think that I'm working towards a really well-rounded approach to keeping my dogs thinking and active.

I always get a little edgy when someone suggests more exercise as a "cure" for seperation anxiety. If you've ever seen a dog right after an episode, I think you can probably figure out that what's going on there has nothing to do with how tired the dog is. The amount of adrenaline running through a dog having an anxiety attack pretty much cancels out anything you could accomplish through exercise alone, unless you put that dog on a treadmill for 6 hours and take it to a dangerous level of exhaustion.

OT but for anyone interested in teaching your dog to be a more creative and higher-order thinker, read Karen Pryor's book Lads Before the Wind and the chapter on "The Creative Porpoise." I just finished that book and it was fascinating and inspiring. Having one traditionally trained dog and one clicker trained dog in the house, the difference in how they approach learning is really staggering.

I know that lots of training techniques "work" other than R+. I also know (this part is fact) that if punitive methods are used, the dog (or any animal, human, horse, goldfish, cat, whatever) becomes hesitant about offering new behaviours. They get dumber. The saying "you can't teach an old dog new tricks" is an old one and stems from a time when most dogs were trained by physically punishing them when they got it wrong. A dog trained his whole life with a clicker for instance will still learn new things readily whatever his age but his isn't the case with a dog taught by using a check - IME.

I wanted to include a longer quote because although I want to add a minor correction here, I don't want you to think I'm reacting out of context.

I totally understand what you are saying and agree with the jist of it. However, I do want to mention that "checking a dog will make him dumber" is not universally true. And it is not universally true that a dog that gets into a new situation and automatically reacts by offering random behaviors, is a happy dog.

I do use correction to create what I call "impulse control" in a dog - that second of thought before doing something to make sure it's not something that was corrected before. Because what they would prefer to do is intrinsically reinforcing, I've got to step in and shape it artificially to something more constructive. To do that, I need a dog that is open to suggestion - if I say "No", I need the dog to say, "Oh! OK, how about this?"

So the correction cannot be so disruptive as to stop the dog thinking, but rather to make sure the dog IS thinking, to maximize the impression the "NO" makes. If you don't watch that line very carefully, then, yes, you'll end up with a dog that is afraid to take a step.

I don't know whether that makes sense.

I didn't say exercise is not important.  It is.  I said, it's not really all that important.  It's a perspective thing. 
 
Most dogs need at least one (if not two) good walks each day.  I would question, if an owner has a dog that they can't exercise, whether they should own that breed at all. 
 
I don't think treadmills are particularly useful.  They ONLY encompass the physical side of it, which is a very small part of "the walk".  When I used the word "exercise" I was referring solely to "physical exercise".  The mental stimulation and the freedom for the dog to express some of his natural behaviours is much more important. 

ORIGINAL: brookcove

I know that lots of training techniques "work" other than R+. I also know (this part is fact) that if punitive methods are used, the dog (or any animal, human, horse, goldfish, cat, whatever) becomes hesitant about offering new behaviours. They get dumber. The saying "you can't teach an old dog new tricks" is an old one and stems from a time when most dogs were trained by physically punishing them when they got it wrong. A dog trained his whole life with a clicker for instance will still learn new things readily whatever his age but his isn't the case with a dog taught by using a check - IME.

I wanted to include a longer quote because although I want to add a minor correction here, I don't want you to think I'm reacting out of context.

I totally understand what you are saying and agree with the jist of it. However, I do want to mention that "checking a dog will make him dumber" is not universally true. And it is not universally true that a dog that gets into a new situation and automatically reacts by offering random behaviors, is a happy dog.

I do use correction to create what I call "impulse control" in a dog - that second of thought before doing something to make sure it's not something that was corrected before. Because what they would prefer to do is intrinsically reinforcing, I've got to step in and shape it artificially to something more constructive. To do that, I need a dog that is open to suggestion - if I say "No", I need the dog to say, "Oh! OK, how about this?"

So the correction cannot be so disruptive as to stop the dog thinking, but rather to make sure the dog IS thinking, to maximize the impression the "NO" makes. If you don't watch that line very carefully, then, yes, you'll end up with a dog that is afraid to take a step.

I don't know whether that makes sense.

 
It makes total sense.  What kind of correction you use is highly relevant, as is how often you correct the dog. 

In my opinion, exercise is not a training tool or behaviour modification tool, but it is part of the groundwork that allows training and behaviour modification to take place. Exercise in itself will not improve the dog's manners (as the results of exercise are so short term), but without exercise you cannot expect the dog to learn and work with you.
 
To improve Scout's behaviour I like anything that makes her think - exercises like "touch" targeting on new objects, fast combinations of commands that she knows ("sit".."down".."stand".. etc) and recently we've started trying "find it".

Several thoughts.
 
No, inordinate amounts of exercise do not improve behavior but a daily walk that includes behavior training accomplishes both. The need to burn some energy, which is undeniably there, and to train the roles of dog and human. That should be the aim of that "walk" and to think that just a matter of wearing the dog out with a walk is, I think, to take it out of context. Which may work for hyperbole or straw boss debating but is not always accurate or fair.
 
Some breeds have a metabolism that responds to more exercise, in an ever-increasing cycle. Sled dogs are bred to pull hard and run fast. If you train them to do that, they will, then you end up feeding higher octane food, to give them the energy until, one day, you are spending 3 or 4 hours with your dog pulling 50 to 100 lbs at 10 to 15 miles an hour. And no, that doesn't solve dog aggression, nor does the dog wear out. Yes, they eat and rest after a run but they want to do it all again the next day. OTOH, even in that run, the musher is training the dog with directional commands and, by inference, to heed the human. Same with a walk, where in the human defines where and how the dog walks. It should be interactive.
 
Dogs can burn energy in all kinds of ways. Shadow runs back and forth along the fence flirting with the wiener dog next door, his new girlfriend. But I go out there and give him a challenge, too, usually with treats. I'll get us close to the barkfest and work on obedience. When I am out of treats, he's no longer interested. Though, once in a while, he'll break off a run and recall himself to me just long enough to sniff that I didn't get anymore treats. And I can now walk over there and insert myself between him and the other dogs and get his attention on me, on the remote chance that I might have a treat.
 
Also, these days, I take him with me to walk around the shopping center in Sherman. It may not be as long a walk as we used to have but it is safer, i.e., no loose dogs. Safer is less stressful and he can still sniff around and check pee-mail. He also likes going to the bank because a treat magically comes out in that shuttle and he will sit perfectly in the seat, waiting for it. The neat thing about his metabolism is that it is geared to activity. His appetite decreases if the work load decreases. There were some days where I get home late from work and we don't take a walk. A) Loose dogs. B) He hasn't eaten more than a bite all day, as he only eats in my presence. So, when I get home, he is hungry and a couple tosses of the ball is enough to settle him enough to eat. Later, we'll play and train. So, I too, don't see it as exercise purely for the sake of exercise but as a quality time, whether it is a long walk or a chance to run like crazy in the yard and play chase. He's too smart to think "I'll obey because I am tired." But I don't think anyone here views exercise as simplistically as saying that it is the panacaea for problems.
 
One problem I had with the linked article is that it down plays man's evolutionary status. We are primates, zoologically, great apes. We organize in troops or communities. We fight off rival troops. Mothers care for the young. The mountain gorillas of South America actually sing to their infants, as humans may do, though not the same words.
 
I don't think dogs are wolves but not for the same purpose as some training schools of thought think that dogs are not wolves.
 
I do think that quality of exercise and opportunities of training can provide enough challenge to a dog.
 
As for walking Shadow in a less dog-aggressive atmosphere with still plenty of public stimulation will, in the end, lead to better relationships with dogs, though I could be wrong. It's a pet theory that a dog gets used to a pattern. If all they ever get from other dogs is aggression while we are walking, that becomes the pattern, the universe. If they get well-behaved dogs or at least quiet walks, that becomes the norm, rather than confrontation.

The last paragraph makes some sense in terms of a dog's environment, but I think we still need to remember that some dogs will still react poorly to stimuli that they were not exposed to during critical periods of socialization, so even if a dog is exposed, on its daily walks, to quiet non-aggressive dogs, that does not mean that he will not be reactive to them.  Unsocialized, or poorly socialized, dogs often continue to have problems along those lines, and continuing to walk them in the presence of other dogs, however quiet, may only serve to let them "practice" reactivity.  It's often better to work with those dogs in a controlled setting using classical conditioning and attention training.  But, that's another subject - sorry for the OT response.

See, you are coming from the same place that I am.

I am thinking smaller safer walks, are a whole lot more beneficial than a long walk that increases the likelihood of a loose dog beating the old man (Zeus) down..  I have little doubt that he will fight to the death if need be. But it is not fair to be putting them in that situation.

I live in the same world... and it ain't a whole helluva lotta fun.

As far as your theory..I have been having the same thought and have been going in this direction.  It is just good to have some confirmation.

One theory that goes out the window on this one is socialization.  It seems like a few bad experiences trumps socialization. 

Sorry folks..I think I am going a bit OT. (sheepish)

 

ORIGINAL: ron2


As for walking Shadow in a less dog-aggressive atmosphere with still plenty of public stimulation will, in the end, lead to better relationships with dogs, though I could be wrong. It's a pet theory that a dog gets used to a pattern. If all they ever get from other dogs is aggression while we are walking, that becomes the pattern, the universe. If they get well-behaved dogs or at least quiet walks, that becomes the norm, rather than confrontation.

Unsocialized, or poorly socialized, dogs often continue to have problems along those lines, and continuing to walk them in the presence of other dogs, however quiet, may only serve to let them "practice" reactivity. It's often better to work with those dogs in a controlled setting using classical conditioning and attention training. But, that's

 
I do agree to that. In general, I agree to the ideal of quality over quanitity. We just haven't always agreed on how to define quality.