You Don't Understand +R

I think I can reply to this in a way that will probably offend everyone. A grand slam, as it were.
 
First. When Shadow sits near me, sometimes I pet him, sometimes I don't. At such times, he really just wants to nap next to me. When he wants to chase the cat just for fun, I call him with "here" in his launch and he will come to me. At that point, he is in a happy mood. Truth be known, the cat instigates a lot. Other times, when I am feeding him by hand and she appears to intefere, he will go after her. I don't have to move a bit. I call "off" and he's off her and back to me, because I understand his motivation. He is wanting the meat, more than he really wants to fight the cat. He just thought she was going to get some and that's what set him off. Is it resource guarding? Yes, it is, and I use it to get him off of the kitty.
 
In the same breath, if he is physically misbehaving and commands are not doing it, I will physically control him without causing pain. If he is fighting or about to get in a fight, even one he did not start, I will use leash and harness to lead him away even as he is trying to be defensive. If he is off-leash and gets in to trouble I will have to get my hands on him at some point to at least re-leash. In the past, I have grabbed him by the scruff and he knows what that means coming from me (stop what you are doing and watch me) and he will roll himself. But he may not always be in arm's reach. At full speed, he does every bit of 30 mph and maybe more and I can't run that fast, so I can't always rely on physical control. Therefore, I work on recall, which has to be positive reinforcement.
 
+R is, to me, a way to channel the drives. You cannot change a dog into a human. But you can channel their behavior. Back to the other side, being a leader is more than just the physical strength and speed to scruff. It is a state of mind. The best leader I have ever seen never talks down to people or punishes them. He simply walks in expecting completion and perfection. It's in his pores. A dog pulls. Many breeds were bred to pull. But in our modern world of liability, we can't have dogs pulling everywhere, so we have to redirect that energy with either a special collar or patient training. Even when a momma dog scruffs and pins a pup, she is re-directing. She is not punishing for the energy, just creating a momentary diversion to get the puppy off of that track and releases when the puppy's mood calms. So, how can we humans affect a change? Obviously, many do.
 
He who's name we dare not speak is often working to let the dog know that it is not in charge so that proper training may begin. That is one viewpoint. The other viewpoint is to motivate the dog into obedience because we provide what it wants, which still makes us leader, otherwise the dog would go and get it for himself.
 
And there's not a simple answer. Yes, dogs look to us. Yes, they may establish a pecking order amongst themselves, separate from their relation to us. And yes, we do have to lead, at some point, though I don't have to prove to my dog every second that I am lord and master. But I must have enough control over him or ability to channel his drives away from destructiveness (in our opinion) to ensure well-being. I never forget that he will always act like a dog because he is a dog. It is up to me to lead him to behavior that makes living together possible.
 

I'm not offended, try again.

Rats, and all that typing, too.
 
I just have opinions and observations that sometimes coincide and sometimes go against the grain, depending to whom I am conversing. As anyone who knows of me here can attest, I can be great or the bane of existence, depending on who it is and what day it is. It's just a natural talent.
 

I don't recall saying anything about this was "black and white".  I also didn't say that I never use "punishment", but I don't immediately go to the most usual corrections that are mentioned on this board, such as:
saying (or yelling) "no", leash tugging or popping, using a prong collar, or an "illusion" collar, etc.  First, I always train a NRM (no reward marker).  Mine, for Sioux is, "Not that" - it isn't harsh, it's just information, and tells her that no reward is coming, try another behavior.  So, because she isn't afraid to try another behavior, she does.  If it's the right behavior, she gets liver.  If not, she gets to try again.  Rarely does it take too many NRM's before she "gets" what I am after, or gives me a partial response that I can "shape" (that's another interesting discussion in the making).
Sequoyah's NRM is "ack" (so it doesn't sound like any of the other dogs' NRM's).  Maska's is "too bad".  And, yes, you could use "no" as a NRM, but humans overuse the word as it is, and don't usually know how to convey the meaning to the dog.  They say "no" and stop there.  I say "oops" or "too bad" and wait for a second response.  Since my dogs don't get punished by leash pops for being wrong, they simply try to be right, not avoid being wrong, if you catch my drift.
They don't *start* countersurfing, because I prevent it, so that I don't have to correct it.  I know the general public isn't doing this, but that doesn't suggest that punishing the dog inappropriately is ok.  A dog doesn't deserve punishment for not doing a behavior that is not already on cue, which, unfortunately happens all the time.  (From the "He knew he was wrong" crowd)  You are asking the impossible, then, and that isn't fair to the dog.  If he has heard the cue, understands what it means (critical), and then blows you off, you have the option of enacting a humane penalty.  But, a dog with a spotty recall, who is not even facing you, and you are not calling as you normally do (because you are screaming instead), does not deserve punishment.  He deserves a better trainer.  Which is why I advocate learning about methods that make for better communication between dogs and owners.

I so totally agree with Anne on this one.  I use ACH, EH EH, UNH UH and leave it a lot.  No is a word that rarely comes out of my mouth and when it does, it has some major impact.  Foster pup getting ready to chomp down on a power cord?  NOOOO.  Leave it.  Loose pup who backed out of the collar and is heading for the road?  NOOOO, come.  50 foot of drag line wrapping itself around my ankle and biting into my flesh, in some spots all the way down to the bone?  NOOOOOOOO!!  and by golly, all three stopped cold when they had been in hot pursuit of the tennis ball.
 
It's not a word that I use because it's not a word that tells them what I WANT them to do.  It might make them stop a behavior, but it doesn't tell them what they should do instead.  I would rather say "eh eh, leave it" or just a "leave it" when something thinks that the wastebasket smells good or when something thinks it's ok to swipe someone ELSES bone.
 
The "unh uh" or eh eh or whatever stops the behavior and is followed by an instruction or request.  Mine don't counter surf either...it never starts with my pups and doesn't come up later in life because it isn't a habit that they have been rewarded for by finding something good on the counter.  I can leave raw meat on the counter and go to the bathroom, I can leave my lunch on my desk, and nothing is ever molested.
 
And, had Anne been on this forum when I was leash training Thor, I'd never have needed to resort to the use of a prong.  But, like her, I started with all the gentler steps first before finally going to the prong.  But subsequent pups, you better believe I'm LEARNED from what Anne has posted, and they've never SEEN a prong, let alone needed to wear one.

For some reason, I just can't make "no" not be my NRM. It just comes out and after using it so much, it just sort of is what it is. But I don't go "NO!!!!!". It's said more like you would say "no" in the sentance, "No, silly, try again!" But I still feel all self-concious when I'm in dog-training typed places and everyone else is going "eh-eh" and "too bad" and I'm going "no...." because we've all been told not to use that word.  I know logically why trainers say not to use it, becasue it can become a monster, and I know that I don't actually use it like that. But I still feel a little bit ashamed that I'm saying it.
 
My major smack-down attention-getting utterance is "HEY!" Which generally winds up as "HEY! What are you doing??! Down." I sometimes instinctively clap if they're engaged in something that's making them bark, but I try not to because I usually use clapping as an aid to recall when we're at the dog park and they're really far down at the other end. Marlowe loves it when you clap for him, he gets all waggy.
 
"Leave it" is most definately next on our training agenda and I'm officially opening up the floor to PMed suggestions on how to most effectively teach it to two dogs who would sell their souls for a rotting piece of meat on the sidewalk. I rarely need it in the house though because they both know that if it's on a plate and/or on a table, it ain't theirs. It's awesome because our TV room is actually sort of Japanese style with low seats (I made them by upholstering old wooden pallets) and a low coffee tabel that is just a few inches off the floor, and I can leave my dinner on it and go the bathroom and come back to find two drooling, downing dogs and one full plate of food. Ah, the power of NILIF.

1. This affection bugaboo is funny. I think CM is talking about a specific kind of owner, who wants the dog for the same reasons little girls want dolls and is not interested in training or setting boundaries or doing anything other than providing affection. IMO, this is a real issue, it creates little dogs that bite, and it's interesting in a larger sociological context that Jon Katz started writing about in The New Work of Dogs.

But I don't think this is the problem with every dog, or that normal affection should be discouraged because of that kind of overaffection. Being the one to give affection is fine, it's a leadership activity--it teaches the dog that all good things come from you and makes the dog do good behavior in order to make those good things come out of you. Providing affection and praise makes ignoring a bad behavior (say, a housetraining mistake when the rule has been peeing=treats and/or lavish praise) carry real weight.

IMO, the affection thing is a function of what makes good television. CM is very much about the battle of the sexes, and that is, unfortunately, very black and white, and also unfortunately very titilating.

2. I don't get what the fuss is about punishment. Punishment is like a sledge hammer. Sometimes it's exactly the tool you need, but usually it's too big and too crude and will do more harm than good.

Establishing yourself as the leader and the Fountain of All Good Things When Dog Does It Right creates a dog that genuinely wants to be near you and is always looking to you for another opportunity to get more good things. In this world, withholding bad things (ie, attention, the frisbee, play, treats) is completely noticed by the dog, and is noticed as something the dog can do something about.

The dog can't do anything about punishment, and the goal is to get the dog to figure out how to behave well, right? So it behooves us to keep the dog trying to figure out what *to* do. Punishment stops that cycle.

This sounds like a well-educated thread, maybe someone can explain to me how to apply +R properly in my situation...
 
Scout (6 months old) sometimes barks at us when we don't do what she wants. Specifically, when she wants to play and we don't give in, she barks. I always immediately turn around and ignore her for 30 seconds, then when she is quiet and sitting down on her own, I pet & play. I take it from these postings that me ignoring her is -R?? Is there a better way I should handle this? I am practicing NILF and our only real issue with Scout is this pushiness when she wants to play. She does the same thing with other dogs.

She's figured out that if she is quiet for 30 seconds while your back is turned she will get what she wants. You ought to give the clicker to her, she's trained you well!

Don't bother turning around, just ignore it and walk away. Or sit there and ignore it and let her bark at you but, don't give in and eventually she will realize that it doesn't work.

From over a half century ago, I remember my 3rd grade teacher, Sister Damitrius using the clicker to control the class.  I remember 2 clicks meant kneel and 4 rapid clicks meant silence.  Can anyone finish my post?

Yeah, actually I agree with Richard. I would walk away and ignore it, too, although I doubt you're turning it into a game. It's just easier, and I think a clearer message.

You are right that ignoring and turning your back are both examples of -R, and it that is as it should be. The whole point of positive reinforcement is that it is withheld until the dog does what you want. Otherwise you are a sucker, not a trainer.

If you want to do a +R thing too, the best +R technique around is Catching Em Being Good. Example: my puppy was not particulary good at figuring out how to entertain himself--he tended to bark and whine for attention. Ignoring him when he was needy was very important (-R). And I also gave him a little praise and maybe a treat flung his way when he was doing what I wanted (+R).

Now he knows that entertaining himself with a bone makes good things happen (+R), and knows that barking and whining for attention is totally ineffective (-R).

How do I get my dogs to calm down when they see the treats? They get so excited they start going through all the different tricks they have learned at once.

Are you serious or are you making fun?

On the off chance you are serious, the answer is (duh) ignore it. Turn away for a second and wait for them to calm down. Otherwise they are training you, silly.

Exception to this is maybe a default behavior you are working on, like sitting when people enter a room or laying on a rug while folks are eating. In that case, if the dog is offering the behavior, then the dog gets petted, treated, whatevered.

Oh, and don't let them see the treats. Treat bag in the back, keep the treats on a table, in your pocket, in the refrigerator...

...unless you are luring a brand-new behavior you certainly don't want to front with the treats. You want something like a treat (belly rub, sprint, game of tug, etc.) to be a consequence of the dog's choice to do the behavior, not some kind of quid pro quo (see, I've got a treat--will you sit now?).

It is just as easy to teach them that only calm behavior and attention to me gets a treat.  Treats are often in view and even in close accessible areas.  Access however is dependent on compliance and attention.