another nail in the "alpha dog dominant pack leader" coffin

[quote user="Angelique"]

spiritdogs

I don't recall anyone saying they wanted a dog to bite someone.  The way I took "stick it to" was that the dog would refuse to perform or do something to make the handler look bad.  I don't know what was really meant, but to be honest, in either case, those are the dogs that seem to find their way "gone", because to certain types of people a non-performer that refuses to aggrandize the handler is about as useful as a dog that bites them...

Uh-huh...sure, right. That may be your perspective. But then why personally add the comment that the dog would never be heard from again?

[/quote user="spiritdogs"]

[/quote] 

Because they end up either rehomed or out of competition in favor of the next new puppy.  And, if they do bite someone, perhaps they get euthanized.  Either way, I would never suggest wanting a dog to bite someone, because the dog always gets the short end of the stick on that one.  I may be someone you love to hate, but I'm not a lier.  

Angelique

But I do agree that every paw up is no more "dominance" in every interaction than every lick of the lips is a "calming signal". It's all about the individual context of the "conversation" between dog and owner.

That's exactly right.

Angelique

I just think certain folks spend far too much time painting general and extreme emotional tapestries with regard to anyone who is not part of their belief system in order to sell that belief system.

 Get real and get honest. We aren't selling cars here.

You seem to be one of those folks, too.  This is an Internet message board - it's a place where people share their *opinions*.  And, if they want to spend an inordinate amount of time doing it, it's a free country.  Get over it.

Angelique

Hmmm. Can't say seeing a dog bite people is someting I would enjoy.

Painting all trainers who use a social (dominant/subordinant) philosophy with the same brush as all being brutes is rather extreme.

*sigh* Misinformation and putting an emotional spin on the topic isn't productive, or new.

 I was talking about the dominant dog people that I know and have experienced in my dog traiining career. I am quite a good observer and generally to me they are boring people with control issues I did NOT paint all trainers this way and i believe wrote it in such a way that most would not.. I do though  think that their atttude towards life and dogs in general has taken obedience as a sport to a dangerous precipice in my area of the woods as many of my generation took one look at he gool old boys and girls and the rubbish rules (have you noticed this ... the attitude often requres rules that exclude other thraining methods and ideas??. I guess that's what dominace takes :) ) such as no toys no food and run off to agility. I am sure that it isn't the same everywhere. .That is my experience and I refuse to be polite about a misapplied philosophy that has been corrosive to me and my dogs and my club in the past.

I do believe that dogs have a fluid social structure that can be and is hierachercal at times. This is based on the best observations that science has at the present time. I don't assume that my own micro observations are more important than many of these macro observations. Often people would say for shorthand that my old Lab was an Alpha dog, and he certainly did have a charmed life with other dogs. I gues it might have been so, i don't know or care a lot. Very simply he is dead and  I miss him a great deal, and i miss the extra years of an alive active dog I missed becuase of this corrosive incorrect phiosophy.

This is an obvious emotionial response.  Despite spenidng the greater part of my day in  a very pragmatic applied science, I undestand that pretending that belief, cogniition  is somehow divorced or not influenced by emotion has nearly no credibility in modern pyschology. Certainly emotion has much to do with the creation of many of our finest scientific theories. (This is a long arguement...)

Emotion has a lot to do with thei back slapping, close minded,  pusedo  intellectualism that often passes for thought in some of this sector of the dog world that I have experienced here. The emotion ( in my opinion)  is suppresed and shows as a need to control people dogs and organisations . It is not open and is often not able to be named. Imagine saying that i am running this club in this autocratic way becasue i feel frustrated at my passage through life and thes dogs and people are it????

Personally i believe in a much more important theory. It is as provable as dominant dog. It is the three breed theory. when I wake up , the house seems too quiet as we are missing two of the three breeds. we have a miniature poodle, but are missing the standard poodle and the toy poodle.I am sure that if got the two other breeds the house would be noisy again. :)

Meanwhile, all I can say is get stuck into your dogs.. with love kindness, and I do this great treat mixture. For my absolute failure of a mini , :) I work with a mixture of edam cheese, smoked chicken and the odd hunk of dried lamb. Some times I beat her up with the tail part of a tennis tail and we play tug...

poodleOwned

 I was talking about the dominant dog people that I know and have experienced in my dog traiining career. I am quite a good observer and generally to me they are boring people with control issues I did NOT paint all trainers this way and i believe wrote it in such a way that most would not.. I do though  think that their atttude towards life and dogs in general has taken obedience as a sport to a dangerous precipice in my area of the woods as many of my generation took one look at he gool old boys and girls and the rubbish rules (have you noticed this ... the attitude often requres rules that exclude other thraining methods and ideas??. I guess that's what dominace takes :) ) such as no toys no food and run off to agility. I am sure that it isn't the same everywhere. .That is my experience and I refuse to be polite about a misapplied philosophy that has been corrosive to me and my dogs and my club in the past.

I do believe that dogs have a fluid social structure that can be and is hierachercal at times. This is based on the best observations that science has at the present time. I don't assume that my own micro observations are more important than many of these macro observations. Often people would say for shorthand that my old Lab was an Alpha dog, and he certainly did have a charmed life with other dogs. I gues it might have been so, i don't know or care a lot. Very simply he is dead and  I miss him a great deal, and i miss the extra years of an alive active dog I missed becuase of this corrosive incorrect phiosophy.

This is an obvious emotionial response.  Despite spenidng the greater part of my day in  a very pragmatic applied science, I undestand that pretending that belief, cogniition  is somehow divorced or not influenced by emotion has nearly no credibility in modern pyschology. Certainly emotion has much to do with the creation of many of our finest scientific theories. (This is a long arguement...)

Emotion has a lot to do with thei back slapping, close minded,  pusedo  intellectualism that often passes for thought in some of this sector of the dog world that I have experienced here. The emotion ( in my opinion)  is suppresed and shows as a need to control people dogs and organisations . It is not open and is often not able to be named. Imagine saying that i am running this club in this autocratic way becasue i feel frustrated at my passage through life and thes dogs and people are it????

So once again:

Angelique

*sigh* Misinformation and putting an emotional spin on the topic isn't productive, or new.

Your point has been proven Angelique

 I was wondering Angeliique what madie it that you don't need to offer observations etc from your own experience, data from papers that may disagree with the paper offered?

What gives t yoiu have a right to stand on the sidelines offering little else than grandiose statements and criticism?

Are you working hard trying to prove my statement about control issues ?

 I would love to here from you how having an attitude different to mine has helped you and your associates build better realtionships wiht your dogs in your community. This way  I might learn something and have a conversation rather than spending time writing a post and having a one line what we call here "a slag" or sledge at the end of it.

 poodleOwned, I have been avoiding dog trainers and professionals for years now because of these control issues you talk about, and have recently met yet another trainer determined to play their alpha games not just on my dog but on me. It ended in both of us in tears after a right screaming match over the phone that this person instigated and me vowing to stay away from professional bloody trainers forever.

But I'd come to your club!  

espencer

Thats why people should be always calm and assertive

Being calm assertive is not a magical ointment you can plaster all over a poor technique, or a harsh one, to make it better.  Beating a dog is abuse.  Beating a dog while remaining calm-assertive is STILL abuse.  (I am not suggesting anyone actually does that.)  If a technique is by it's very nature confrontational, then it will STILL be confrontational if done calm-assertively.

Calm-assertive is not some kind of cure-all.  Sure - be calm assertive!  Great attitude.  But not so great that all kinds of *&^% can be done in the name of training or rehab, with the rider "Oh its OK - I am being calm-assertive!"

Social Learning. Isn't that the notion that a dog or wolf learns to behave in a group out of desire to belong to the group? So that inclusion in the group is a reward for desired behavior? Once again, proving that pos reward trains faster than anything, even a supposed understanding of social behavior?

Is it really fair of me to us logic and point out that the process of OC truly is at the bottom of everything we think we can theorize about a dog's behavior? Is doing so mean of me?

"I'm on the highway to Hell..."

dyan

spiritdogs

As a trainer, I can attest to that part of the study regarding the snatching of things from dogs' mouths.  Even when not done in anger, which it often is (how much did you say those Ferragamo shoes cost ya?), the dog perceives that humans always want what is his (dogs think anything that's on the floor for the taking is theirs). 

 

Gee...I have always taken what I don't want my dog to have out of their mouth.   I have gone the LEAVE IT way over and over....and it only works occasionally. Meanwhile they are eating something that might make them sick and I'm standing there saying "leave it!"

Ummm....  Just wanted to point out....

the dog perceives that humans always want what is his (dogs think anything that's on the floor for the taking is theirs).

Maybe I have misunderstood SD, but I thought this bit meant keep them way from things they should not have while the training takes place.  We also encourage the dog to generalise (a la Ron and Shadow).  Our dogs will usully bring you pretty much anything they've got, to "show" it to you.

dyan

Gibby for instance....we spent many weeks teaching him "leave it" with treats.

You mean you spent many weeks bribing him to drop it with treats   Don't get me wrong, luring can be a gret way to show a dog what you want, but you need to be sure that it's only used the first few times, and get rid of the food asap or it becomes like PART of the cue.  The word alone means little or nothing to him.  Start over and this time, simply WAIT for him to drop it, then throw a party, and SURPRISE him with something yummy.  Make it a super good thing to start "dropping stuff" and he will offer it more frequently, without being bribed.  Then just make "game continuing" the reward and just end the game if he doesn't play by your rules.

Chuffy

Being calm assertive is not a magical ointment you can plaster all over a poor technique, or a harsh one, to make it better.  Beating a dog is abuse.  Beating a dog while remaining calm-assertive is STILL abuse.  (I am not suggesting anyone actually does that.)  If a technique is by it's very nature confrontational, then it will STILL be confrontational if done calm-assertively.

Calm-assertive is not some kind of cure-all.  Sure - be calm assertive!  Great attitude.  But not so great that all kinds of *&^% can be done in the name of training or rehab, with the rider "Oh its OK - I am being calm-assertive!"

At first, I had to lure Shadow to drop it. Then, he began offering it on his own, freeshaping in his own time, finally. And generalizing, as well. He has two kongs and a tug toy. Whatever is nearest or most obvious is what he will bring and drop in my lap. And I'm a total control freak by encouraging that. Yes, I'm creating treat and reward dependence in my fanatically dropping it and offing dog.

I do recall talking once or twice or a hundred times about how I trained off with reward program, even if it meant getting off my butt to get something, slot-machining from the baked flour nothings that I buy at Petco by the pound to whatever drippy meat leftovers I have in the house. And, for a while, he would chase after Jade, not because he really wanted to but because he knew I would call off and would reward the off. That is, he found off (disengaging from whatever) more rewarding than the original behavior and I encouraged the heck out of that.

So, at times, I don't have to strive to generalize. I let Shadow offer the behavior in different contexts and reward it and the behavior seems general. It may eventually be general.

And it's partly your fault, Chuffy. You are the one with a bright insight for one so young. You said dogs seem to have the credo that more is better and why not use that to have them help guide their own training. And that's what Shadow does. If dropping the first kong gets me rewards, what can I get for dropping the other one, too? And the tug toy? What if I break off of whatever I can get into? Dogs are capitalists. Resources and acquisitions. They do share for the benefit of the group, which may seem socialist but in any case, shared resources ensure greater survival, including personal survival. Last time I checked, surviving seemed rewarding, too.

Chuffy

You mean you spent many weeks bribing him to drop it with treats   Don't get me wrong, luring can be a gret way to show a dog what you want, but you need to be sure that it's only used the first few times, and get rid of the food asap or it becomes like PART of the cue.  The word alone means little or nothing to him.  Start over and this time, simply WAIT for him to drop it, then throw a party, and SURPRISE him with something yummy.  Make it a super good thing to start "dropping stuff" and he will offer it more frequently, without being bribed.  Then just make "game continuing" the reward and just end the game if he doesn't play by your rules.

Yeah...pretty much a bribe.  I praise him always....tons when he does anything good....and sometimes I do give him him a treat also. But for sure tons of praise.  I do keep on guard,,,and most of the time catch him before he picks up something he shouldn't have...but if I miss....he gets really excited and he plays a game while I waste my time trying to get him to drop it.  He will literly chew it up and swallow in front of me. I no longer give him that oppertunity.  But he still gets praised when I get it.......

 I think Kivi deliberately grabs random things off the ground and then sits there looking at us, chewing away, waiting for us to tell him to leave it so he can spit it out and get a treat. Seriously, though, our world is full of old cooked chicken bones! Kivi finds them wherever he goes. We continue to make a fuss of him and feed him every time he spits something out when we tell him to. The trick is to remember to move him away from it before he finishes the treat and picks up the forbidden thing again. He spat out prawn heads yesterday, which was pretty impressive. However, the couple of times he's decided not to spit it out I've pretty much pounced on him, pried his mouth open, and scooped out whatever was in there. He decided it was better to spit it out and get the treat.

Now we just have to change the meaning of "leave it" from "spit it out" to "don't pick it up in the first place".  

corvus

Now we just have to change the meaning of "leave it" from "spit it out" to "don't pick it up in the first place".  

Let me know how that works out. I'm happy to have an offered "drop it."

Yep, I've taught both a "Mine" (leave it alone) and "Drop it" cue, and you should see the speed with which Gaci will spit anything out of her mouth! I think it's beneficial because we aren't always going to be within a foot of our dogs, and if my dogs pick up something 100 feet away from me, I want to be sure they'll drop it from their mouth before I have to run over there and watch it being swallowed.

ron2

corvus

Now we just have to change the meaning of "leave it" from "spit it out" to "don't pick it up in the first place".  

 

Let me know how that works out. I'm happy to have an offered "drop it."

 

I wouldn't change the meaning.  Just have 2 cues.  One for drop (I use "leave it" too) and one for "oh no you don't!" before they pick it up (I use "don't touch";).

For the preventative cue, just hold a treat in your hand and let the dog sniff it.  He is likely to sniff or paw or lick your hand to try and get it; when he stops and makes the slightest movement AWAY from your hand, mark and reward with something BETTER from your POCKET.  You can start with relatively dull items in your hand and work up.