The Training/Behavior "Chatter" Thread

• 01-14-2008 11:52 PM

  In reply to Kim_MacMillan

  snownose Joined on 09-29-2006 Michigan to Southeast Posts 5,178 Points 405	Re: The Training/Behavior "Chatter" Thread Reply Contact Kim_MacMillan: snownose: Is your family running the breeding program, then? Yes, it is my parents' breeding program. Thank you for the information......that is what I kind of figured........
  	Post Points: 0

• 01-15-2008 8:36 AM

  In reply to snownose

  glenmar Joined on 09-10-2007 Northwestern Michigan Posts 11,480 Points 405

  Re: The Training/Behavior "Chatter" Thread Reply Contact This past week I saw my absolute first reaction to a thunder storm from any of my crew.  It's Janaury, snowing to beat the band and we are getting thunder and lightning??  NOT a common occurance. Sheba, Tyler and Shadow were hanging out with me in the office.  Streak of blinding lightning followed by a HUGE crash of lightning and Shadow started to bark and tried to hide all at the same time.  Now *I* am afraid of electrical storms, but I always put on my brave front with the dogs around and try hard not to jump and I repeated to him my thunder mantra "it's just the storm" which let him know that the noise was OK, and "sure is a funny time of the year for one, hunh Shadow?"  By this time he was standing quietly by my side looking suspiously out the window.  Another streak of lightning "opps, here comes more" followed by the crash of thunder and total silence from Shadow. That evening, same thing happened with all 8 dogs in the livingroom.  And I just repeated the calm mantra.....I don't say "it's just thunder" since I have a DOG named Thunder.....they were starting to all give him the fish eye when it stormed!  LOL! There is a real difference between calm reassurance in a stressful situation and coddling.  Given my fear of storms, I'm very lucky that my dogs are generally so calm about them.  At the vet?  If someone is fearful, well, to me coddling would be holding or hugging the dog and baby talking.  Calm reassurance involves nothing more than talking to my animal and letting him know what's going to happen and why.  My dogs though are so rarely fearful of anything that I pay attention when they are. A house without fur is not a home. Glenda

  Post Points: 0

• 01-25-2008 8:09 AM

  In reply to glenmar

  FourIsCompany Joined on 07-30-2007 Posts 4,738 Points 1,135

  Re: Punishment page 69 Reply Contact Here's what I've discovered in the past week or so and I wanted to bring the discussion back to this thread so as not to mess up any other threads that are going with similar subjects. I hope we can always come back to here with the "straggler" discussions. Subject: Positive Punishment The phrase "positive punishment" has a precise meaning as regards Operant Conditioning and Learning Theory, but amazingly, I have found that some people who employ positive punishment; many of the same people who criticize others for using positive punishment, are actually using it themselves but calling it something different. The purpose of this discussion is to make clear exactly what positive punishment is and to take away the emotionalism that so many people attach to it in an effort to come to the realization that we are more alike than we are different. And that phrase is more true than ever, I find.   Definition: Punishment is a term from Psychological Learning Theory that has a precise meaning; it refers to something that causes a behavior to lessen in intensity. There is nothing that is intrinsically punishing. A thing is called punishing if, when it is applied, it results in the reduction of behavior that you want to reduce. Source  Positive punishment is something that is applied to reduce a behavior. The term "positive" often confuses people, because in common terms "positive" means something good, upbeat, happy, pleasant, rewarding. Remember, this is technical terminology we're using, though, so here "positive" means "added" or "started". Also keep in mind that in these terms, it is not the animal that is "punished" (treated badly to pay for some moral wrong), but the behavior that is "punished" (in other words, reduced). Positive punishment, when applied correctly, is the most effective way to stop unwanted behaviors. Its main flaw is that it does not teach specific alternative behaviors. Source   Note: According to the most strict definition of positive punishment, the act of walking straight through a low doorway is punished with a bonk on the head, and therefore +P. However, I'm not interested in discussing accidental punishers, as that's an entirely different subject. So, for the purpose of this discussion, I would prefer to keep it to intentional acts we do or vocalizations we make that decrease a behavior in our dogs. So, the criteria for positive punishment (+P) are: A) Something added (+) to an environment and B) Something that reduces (P) a behavior Anything that is added to the environment that reduces (not necessarily extinguishes) a behavior is positive punishment. If you say, "Eh-eh"! and the behavior is reduced, you have just used positive punishment. It doesn't matter if you redirect and praise afterward. It doesn't matter how kind a voice you used. It's doesn't matter what you call it. If you have said something or done something that reduces or lessens the behavior, you have used positive punishment. Examples of +P (providing they actually reduce a behavior):   A mouse trap on a counter A shock collar Saying, "No" Yelping when a puppy bites you "Tssst" Shaking a can of coins A collar correction A Citronella collar Hot Sauce on a garbage can My point here is that I have been completely honest and up-front about using +P since I've been here and have been criticized pretty seriously for it. I have found out that the very people who have been criticizing me also use some of these techniques, but they don't "consider" them punishment... And I just want to let you know that we are all using the same techniques. The fact that you don't "think of" them as punishment or don't "call them" punishment makes no difference. We are more alike than we are different. And when you jump on people for using positive punishment, you are probably exercising a double standard and being quite hypocritical. Because you probably use it too, whether you call it that or not.   What I would hope is that people who use these techniques could become comfortable with the non-emotional, technical definition and embrace (and admit?) the fact that they use punishment and have that be okay. It doesn't mean you harm the dog, it doesn't mean your dogs are shut down, it doesn't mean that you're mean or cruel or bad in any way. It just means that there are some behaviors our dogs do that we want to stop and we use the most effective way to stop them. And that's positive punishment, coupled with redirection and positive reinforcement.   LSTM (Laughing Silently to Myself) Click Daily to Give Free Food and Care to Animals: http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/clickToGive/home.faces?siteId=3

  Filed under: Positive Punishment, Punishment Post Points: 0

• 01-25-2008 8:40 AM

  In reply to FourIsCompany

  tssst Joined on 01-12-2008 Posts 108 Points 0

  Re: Punishment page 69 Reply Contact Great Post FourIsCompany, I for one, am in the punishment camp. I am also in the reward camp. Both work for me when the time is appropriate. I have also found that behavior manipulation and molding tends to be much higher in frequency with new dogs and puppies who need to learn you and your families "new" rulebook than dogs that have been with you for years and know the system well. Almost all of our own adult dogs need hardly any training and behvior modification at all. The younglings who are naturally rambunctious need more direction at times when they thnk they can get away with roughhousing inside of our house. I do have a question about the definition: Punishment has been deined as adding something to a dogs environment that causes a behavior to lessen in intensity. Are we talking about immediate sort term behior reduction and/or elimination or long term behavior reduction and/or elimination? Perhaps both? I have seen an "eh eh" get immediate results; The dog stops barking at the doorbell but the next time the doorbell rings, the dog barks as if it has learned nothing at all and this behavior continues on and on throughout the dogs life. So in this case, wher long term learning and change is not occuring, would the "eh eh" be classified as punishment, an interruptor, or possibly both?

  Post Points: 0

• 01-25-2008 8:53 AM

  In reply to tssst

  FourIsCompany Joined on 07-30-2007 Posts 4,738 Points 1,135

  Re: Punishment page 69 Reply Contact tssst: Are we talking about immediate sort term behior reduction and/or elimination or long term behavior reduction and/or elimination? Perhaps both?   I haven't found any sort of 'official' answer to that, although I plan to keep looking, but I would guess that it would be some kind of lasting effect. Maybe not permanent and not a complete elimination of behavior, but something that caused a measurable reduction for some time OR intensity, I would consider punishment. So, yes, in your dog barking at the doorbell scenario, I don't think I would consider that punishment if the next 10 times someone knocked at the door, the dog barked just as much. LSTM (Laughing Silently to Myself) Click Daily to Give Free Food and Care to Animals: http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/clickToGive/home.faces?siteId=3

  Post Points: 0

• 01-25-2008 2:03 PM

  In reply to FourIsCompany

  Kim_MacMillan Joined on 11-21-2006 Eastern Canada Posts 1,103 Points 200

  Re: Punishment page 69 Reply Contact FourIsCompany: Here's what I've discovered in the past week or so and I wanted to bring the discussion back to this thread so as not to mess up any other threads that are going with similar subjects. I hope we can always come back to here with the "straggler" discussions. Alright, I'll tackle it with ya! FourIsCompany: Examples of +P (providing they actually reduce a behavior):   A mouse trap on a counter A shock collar Saying, "No" Yelping when a puppy bites you "Tssst" Shaking a can of coins A collar correction A Citronella collar Hot Sauce on a garbage can I've struck out the ones that I do not do, or absolutely will not do, to make it easier to talk about. I've been thinking upon the yelping when a puppy bites you. And I've been thinking on what I've said before in another post on puppies. In the case of a yelp (and no walking away, just yelping), if the behaviour lessened it would certainly be P+. However, When when a word is paired with a consequence, such as walking away, it becomes known as a conditioned punisher (also called sometimes a Secondary Positive Punisher) . Something we don't and haven't discussed much here. Gary Wilkes calls it the "negative clicker" (although I don't like that term, and I'll explain why in a bit). It is usually named either a CP or a CP+. A conditioned punisher is something (a word, tone, facial expression, hand signal, etc) that indicates a punishment will occur if a behaviour continues. It is a cue, if you will, to relay information to a dog. The dog then makes the choice to either do the behaviour anyhow, and go through the punishment, or stop doing as it was doing, and avoid the punishment. There is debate as to whether or not a conditioned punisher is actually P+. Some say it is, as you are "applying" the cue. But others argue that it's just information just like "Sit" is information, and the dog decides what to do with that info - listen or ignore. I lean more towards the second, because just as I think the cue itself is not a punisher, the cue "sit" itself is not a reinforcer (or punisher). It's just a cue. The reason I don't like it called the "negative clicker" is because it's not an exact opposite. Every time you click the clicker - a treat always follows (for 99% of people who use this anyhow *G*). Everytime you use your CP, a punishment does not always follow - the dog makes the decision as to whether or not the punishment occurs. Which lends more support to the "information" argument rather than the "P+" argument. Those arguments aside though, I do use a conditioned punisher for some things. One example is indeed for bitey puppies. I use the cue "Ouch" as the CP. In the beginning it is paired with P- of walking away. Eventually the cue "Ouch" develops meaning - if I keep biting she will walk away. So that eventually you can give the cue and just wait and see the dog's response. If the dog understands the cue (after some trials in the beginning to build the association), then it will lessen the biting when you say it without having to walk away. The pup learns the meaning of "Ouch", and learns to modify its behaviour as a result. Like reinforcement, sometimes it needs to occur again in order for it to remain strong. So you say "Ouch", and the pup thinks for a minute, but then decides to bite anyhow. So you walk away, and the pup realizes that you're game all the time, so he should be too. The thing is, for proper CP development, just as with a clicker development, you need to give your CP "cue" first, and then punish. It doesn't work to say the word after the punishment occurs, or during. It needs to follow the same ABC pattern that teaching a reinforcing cue does. Give cue - behaviour - reinforce. In this case it is unwanted behaviour - CP - punishment. And of course the best course of action is to follow up with reinforcement of the desired behaviour (refraining from biting, not pulling, moving away from object, etc), just as the dog begins to do it. So, if you lean more towards the "P+" side of it, then you would say I used a P+, and I won't feel badly for that. But I look at a CP as simply a cue. Just as I don't call the "sit" cue a positive reinforcer (or punisher), I don't call the "Ouch" cue a positive punisher. They are information that is conveyed to an animal, in which the animal knows the results of either complying or not complying, and depending on the motivation chooses which path they will take. There is said to be a lot of benefit for the use of a conditioned punisher rather than just using a punisher on its own, whether used with P+ or P-. Firstly, it gives the dog the opportunity to avoid the actual punishment. So if the punishment is something painful or uncomfortable, it allows the dog to avoid that punishment by performing a different behaviour, rather than just giving the punishment without warning. It gives the dog some control over the situation, and this can relieve a lot of anxiety for dogs. Knowing simply that you can avoid the punishment can actually take some of the stress associated with punishment away (honestly!). More on CP's here: http://www.phoenixzoo.org/learn/animals/Animal_Training_Protocol_The_Phenix_Zoo.pdf http://www.wagntrain.com/OC/Part2.htm http://www.clickertraining.com/node/87 http://clickandtreat.com/Clicker_Training/GG/GG001/GG002/GG003/gg011.htm  In the dog training world, there is also often the distinction between P+ and environmental punishment. When most people discuss P+ in relation to dogs, it usually is a reflection of the human applying some sort of punishment themselves. Why, I don't know, as it's not an exact match to the "Learning Theory", but that distinction is made. Even trainers who use a lot of P+ in training will differentiate between human-applied P+ and what is called "Environmental Punishment", it's sort of......commonly agreed to I suppose you would say (although that's bad, I know). That would likely be why most people don't put environmental punishment under the heading of P+. In terms of strict operant conditioning, though, environmental punishment is a type of P+ (or possibly P-, depending on the punisher), yes. And I have used environmental punishment on occasion, certainly, so I would suppose by the classic literature I can't say that I haven't used P+. Again, I have no issues with the word punishment. It doesn't hold emotional baggage or any of that. *G* So to say that I use environmental punishment rarely, as a P+, it doesn't hurt my feelings.  But I tend to refer, like others do, to it as environmental punishment to distinguish between punishment applied by the person, and punishment applied independent of the person.

  Post Points: 0

• 01-25-2008 2:48 PM

  In reply to tssst

  Chuffy Joined on 12-17-2006 UK Posts 5,437 Points 10

  Re: Punishment page 69 Reply Contact tssst: I have seen an "eh eh" get immediate results; The dog stops barking at the doorbell but the next time the doorbell rings, the dog barks as if it has learned nothing at all and this behavior continues on and on throughout the dogs life. So in this case, wher long term learning and change is not occuring, would the "eh eh" be classified as punishment, an interruptor, or possibly both?   I think I see what you are saying here and I agree.  I sometimes say "ah ah!" to interrupt a behaviour, but it doesn't mean the dog won't REPEAT the behaviour in future.  I really do think that "punishment" is something that reduces the likelihood that behaviour will be offered again.  Sure, it stops the behaviour NOW, but the dog may well do it again tomorrow or the next day.  That is my understanding of the definition. This is where I like to use the word "correction", because although I could be on my own here, I think it fits quite nicely.  You correct (as in alter) the dogs behaviour IN THAT MOMENT - and it might be using an "interruptor" (calling the dogs name, saying, ah ah! or whatever) or it could just as easily be physically leading the dog away.  So, in that case, if the "eh eh" only worked on the dog for that moment, and didn't reduce the likelihood of him repeating the behaviour next time the doorbell rang, I would say that you used a mild correction, but it wasn't punishment for the dog.  It was, as 4IC likes to say, just information for the dog - hey, don't do that.  I like Clothier's term; "dog math":  "I do this and this happens".  If it is something the dog wishes to avoid happening, he avoids doing it.  THAT is a punishment.  If the dog has no compunction about you saying "eh eh!" then no, it's not punishment.  When he goes to bark at the door, the notion he might get "eh-eh'ed" doesn't make him hesitate, he does it regardless, waits for your signal and quits.... well, THEN it is JUST a signal, NOT a punishment.  Just my random ramblings......  In short though, as ever, if you are using the Learning Theory definition of the P-word, then it is defined by the dog.   "Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life." (Pratchett, Jingo) "I used to look at [my dog] Smokey and think, 'If you were a little smarter you could tell me what you were thinking,' and he'd look at me like he was saying, 'If you were a little smarter, I wouldn't have to.'" - Fred Jungclaus

  Post Points: 0

• 01-25-2008 2:56 PM

  In reply to Kim_MacMillan

  FourIsCompany Joined on 07-30-2007 Posts 4,738 Points 1,135

  Re: Punishment page 69 Reply Contact Very interesting Kim. Thank you for your reply. Would you agree that a CP+ is a "warning" of sorts? Because I use the phrase "no-bunny" while walking on lead sometimes and we both see a bunny. I think I do it just so they won't go to the end of the leash and I won't feel the "need" for a leash correction. I think of that as a warning and I even say it in that tone of voice. LSTM (Laughing Silently to Myself) Click Daily to Give Free Food and Care to Animals: http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/clickToGive/home.faces?siteId=3

  Post Points: 0

• 01-25-2008 7:31 PM

  In reply to FourIsCompany

  ron2 Joined on 09-10-2007 far north central Texas Posts 9,782 Points 500

  Re: Punishment page 69 Reply Contact FourIsCompany: Anything that is added to the environment that reduces (not necessarily extinguishes) a behavior is positive punishment. If you say, "Eh-eh"! and the behavior is reduced, you have just used positive punishment. I agree to that. People who might differ are those who use Eh as an NRM, which means try again, as opposed to stop it. Whatever word means stop it, if it is effective, is a punishment. FourIsCompany: I have found out that the very people who have been criticizing me also use some of these techniques, but they don't "consider" them punishment... You don't have to name names but could you provide an example? FourIsCompany: And when you jump on people for using positive punishment, you are probably exercising a double standard and being quite hypocritical. Because you probably use it too, whether you call it that or not.   Seems more like a supposition to justify calling people hyprocritical. An insult. I may disagree with you on something but I won't call you names. That's not to say that others may not call names by implication. But then, I've been called all kinds of things. Fortunately, I don't have any feelings left. FourIsCompany: It doesn't mean you harm the dog, it doesn't mean your dogs are shut down, it doesn't mean that you're mean or cruel or bad in any way. It just means that there are some behaviors our dogs do that we want to stop and we use the most effective way to stop them. And that's positive punishment, coupled with redirection and positive reinforcement. And people shall have differing opinions. As for shut down, that requires some qualification. To some, shut down is a dog that will not offer new behaviors and you can get that effect with lure/reward, as well as punishment. But then there are dogs that will try not to do anything, if everything is bringing punishment (and I'm not saying everything you do is punishment.) Also, for example, if you use more +P than I use, that doesn't mean I think less of you and me disagreeing with your use or view of punishment is not meant to be a slight against you. I also wanted to reply to something Tssst asked about. Is a punishment stopping a behavior forever or just at the moment. In many cases, I think it is only stopping the behavior at that instant.And that's what I mean when I say that punishment doesn't train, it just stops something. For example, when I would scruff and pin Shadow, he couldn't continue the behavior as long as I had ahold of him because I was physically restraining him. But it didn't stop behavior in the future. For a punishment to truly stop a behavior in the future, the punishment must be severe enough in the first, maybe second application, that the dog never does it again. Time will tell. If the behavior stops after the first punishment and never again recurs, then it is truly stopped. However, the definition is to decrease the likelihood of recurrence. In an extreme example, Frawley will hang dogs that are aggressive or obstinate. If the dog is aggressive again after the first hanging, it may be PTS. If it is not aggressive again, then the procedure is counted as a success. And sometimes, the dog is hung too long and dies, in which case the aggression issue is "solved." As opposed to old school stockmen who didn't have time to "rehab" a problem dog. They just shot them behind the barn and only the nice dogs made it to breeding. So, if you are administering a punishment and the dog is stopping at the moment, the punishment is working, so it would seem. If the dog does it again in a few minutes or tomorrow, then the punishment wasn't strong enough to stop it, though, I might concede that if the punishment is regular, then the dog may choose to either disobey or finally act the way you want, just to avoid future occurence of that punishment. Another punishment I have used is body blocking. Which meant I was just another obstacle to get around. I have never used collar popping. For one thing, when I walk him, I walk him in a barrel or I-back harness. With the collar, he will just pull, hack and cough and pull again. That is the pressure on his neck doesn't mean anything except he can't breath. I could just stand there and let him strain until he stops but that would count as either an "accidental" punishment or even -R. He has a great, deep bark and growl that will rumble your guts and I don't want to damage that with collar techniques. I remember you mentioning that you or your DH have used a scruff to stop and lead a dog away. And the dog did not seem angry at you. Did that move stop the behavior or was it a physical control to temporarily confine the dog's movement? The way you treat your dog in this life determines your place in heaven. - chukchi proverb

  Post Points: 0

• 01-25-2008 7:43 PM

  In reply to FourIsCompany

  Kim_MacMillan Joined on 11-21-2006 Eastern Canada Posts 1,103 Points 200

  Re: Punishment page 69 Reply Contact FourIsCompany: Would you agree that a CP+ is a "warning" of sorts? See? See? Now you're making me think! And my review paper on Canine Color Vision is not getting done! *G* I really need better impulse control. I suppose you could look at it as a warning, for if the dog continues a punishment will ensue (the leash correction). However if you are also apt to reinforce if the dog decides to refrain from pulling (in this example), I would likely call it "information" rather than warning. There's no concrete "definition" here, so I'm just pondering my thoughts. A warning seems to me "If you do this, then this will happen". Whereas information is "Here is what I'm asking. Choose knowing the consequences" (as long as the dog knows the consequences). Either way it wouldn't really matter if you call it a warning. That part's really subjective, and we could call it either and be fine. Or we could just call it a CP+. I would agree that in the above example, it would warn your furries that if they continued a punishment would follow.

  Post Points: 0

• 01-25-2008 7:50 PM

  In reply to ron2

  Liesje Joined on 03-02-2007 Grand Rapids, Michigan Posts 7,053 Points 850

  Re: Punishment page 69 Reply Contact Sooooooo......tonight we had two firsts for my pack! 1.  Coke chewed one of Phil's best shoes.  He gets home work in 15 minutes.  Hmmmmm..... 2.  Kenya went after Coke, not aggressively, but I am still annoyed with her.  I saw him digging around in a corner, looking for food (sometimes I drop a kibble or two when I'm scooping the food so he is always checking).  I saw Kenya walk up behind him like she was stalking him, snap him on the neck, and then sort of hold on.  Not real hard, not really different than their play, but it seemed like she was correcting him for no reason.  He was a bit startled and stood up, froze, and avoided her glance.  She stood pressed up against him sort of standing over him, even though he's 4 inches taller.  He was up against my desk and tried to back away from her and she snapped at him again.  Someone gave a short growl (I'm honestly not sure who) and right then I decided to intervene so I stood up and said "HEY!"  Normally I don't correct my dogs for rough play or corrections of each other, but she really went after him for NO reason, he was minding his own business in a corner and didn't even have a toy!  So I said "NO!" and Kenya slinked over to me and rolled over so her belly was up.  I went over and put the toys up high, making it obvious I was taking them away even though they weren't playing with them at the time, and then I pet Coke.  Coke seemed fine so I went over to Kenya and started petting her once she got up (I don't pet her when she is being overly submissive).  Normally I support her as the alpha and I allow deserved corrections and warnings like lip curls, but I draw the line at her being a bully!  I don't know what she was trying to do, pick a fight? vankelderdogs.dutchbingo.net U-CH Alta-Tollhaus-Krieger Lamb Chop RA CL1-F CL1-R TT HIC TDI CGC (GSD) VPC's Coca-Cola CGC (All American) Alta-Tollhaus' Bono (GSD)

  Post Points: 0

• 01-25-2008 11:22 PM

  In reply to ron2

  tssst Joined on 01-12-2008 Posts 108 Points 0

  Re: Punishment page 69 Reply Contact Hi Ron, I saw your ounce of deadpan humor over here and over there but I wanted to correct you on something you've said here. You've asked whether punishment stops a behavior forever or just at the moment. Then you went on to say "In many cases, I think it is only stopping the behavior at that instant.And that's what I mean when I say that punishment doesn't train, it just stops something." Like anything else, repetition is involved in learning things. Some dogs are fast. Some dogs are slow. Rewards work great in training dogs but I would like to ask you whether offering a dog a single click and a single treat is enough to train a dog, even the simpleist of tricks or behaviors such as sit? I believe it takes repetition. The same holds true for the other aspects of training and behavior modification which utilize punishments. At first, a touch might divert a dogs attention away from lunging at another dog while on a walk only for the moment. But repetition will eventually rehabilitate the dog out this behavior altogether, provided one is consistent. The same holds if you decide to go with the reward approach with lunging dogs, as long as one is consistent. So I believe what you've stated here simply reflects your own bias and does not really represent the truth accurately. But you did qualify your statement with an "I think" [;] I think, therefore, I am. Is deadpan humor anything like dogpan humor?

  Post Points: 0

• 01-25-2008 11:51 PM

  In reply to Liesje

  tssst Joined on 01-12-2008 Posts 108 Points 0

  Re: Punishment page 69 Reply Contact Hi Liesje, 1. Kenya went after Coke, not aggressively... 2. I saw Kenya walk up behind him like she was stalking him, snap him on the neck, and then sort of hold on.... 3. She stood pressed up against him sort of standing over him... 4. He was up against my desk and tried to back away from her and she snapped at him again.... "I don't know what she was trying to do, pick a fight?" If Kenya was trying to pick a fight, then wouldn't that be aggression? Although I think that you might be in denial (because you love Kenya who's such a good dog) per item 1 above. If a dog goes after another dog such as indicated in items 2, 3, and 4, then I would certainly consider that Kenya did go after Coke in an agressive fashion. Unless, of course, it was play that somehow sounded quite different from their normal playtime rituals. If it was me, I would be taking a closer look at these lip curls instead of empowering them through consistent allowance of them to remain unchecked because it sounds like this behavior has the potential to escalate. Of course, I could be wrong but sometimes, it is better to error on the side of caution with large powerful dogs like this because those lip curls and snarls can escalate ummm, real fast and cause some damage. tssst

  Post Points: 0

• 01-26-2008 12:07 AM

  In reply to Kim_MacMillan

  corvus Joined on 08-02-2006 Australia (NSW) Posts 2,124 Points 80

  Re: Punishment page 69 Reply Contact Thanks for this explanation of CP, Kim. It helps me figuring out these grey areas of OC I've been thinking about lately. I like the information theory because it seems to make more sense to me. With my animals, I've taught them that "ah-ah" means if they don't stop what they're doing I'm going to come over there and chase them away. It's kind of become a bit of an indicator of my level of commitment, if you like. When I say "ah-ah" or "Oi!" the animal knows that I'm commited to stopping whatever it is that they're doing. They know I won't hurt them or frighten them and I'll leave them be if they move away or stop doing what they're doing and do something else instead. The worst the punishment will get is my half-serious chase. They always move when I do that, but I don't think it's very aversive. In fact, sometimes my hare deliberately pretends to chew on something he knows I will chase him off to get me to come and chase him. Nonetheless, chasing an animal off something no matter how playfully done does seem to decrease the repetetion of the behaviour overall. On the one hand, if they don't want to be playfully chased they tend to abandon the object I don't want them near in favour of one I'll let them chew in peace, but if they do want to be playfully chased, they were never really interested in the object anyway and are easily distracted. Usually what started out as a warning turns into a game somewhere else with the object completely forgotten. I think the sound decreases the repetition of the behaviour more because may animals at this stage more often don't want to be chased than do. If I try this on my puppy when I get it, I'm envisioning a whole lot of mischievous attacking of off-limit objects to get me playing. I'm okay with that. So in the end I see this sound as a communication. It's me telling them "Keep doing that and I'm gonna GETCHA!", which might be an aversive somedays but a reward on others.  They have the choice. If they want to be chased, they stay and provoke a chase and then we go play and forget about the off-limit object whatever it was. If they don't want to play or be chased, they leave the object and go do something else. This leaves me open to being exploited because if they want a game and I'm not paying attention, they can get what they want by pretending to attack an object they know I won't let them near. I'm okay with this. I can't help but find it amusing when my animals deliberately press my buttons. It tells me they know me and they're trying to tell me they want me to play. I'm always delighted when they find a way to tell me something, even when I should be more concerned about the way they're telling me something. The important thing to me is they're not particularly bothered by my warning sound, not intimidated by my method of getting them to understand what this sound means, and ultimately learn what it does mean for future reference. The only problem is Penny has learnt that if she wants to keep that tasty chicken bone she found on the road, the warning sound simply means she'd better eat it real fast because I'm coming over to take it away. Of course, if I'd thought about what I was doing when I started using this sound 12 years ago, and knew what I knew now, I'd use trading up to teach Penny that the sound means I might just give her something better than what she's found if she gives me a chance to look at it. I think my warning sound needs some refinement before I start teaching it to a puppy.  Melissa's family: Penny - corgi, Kit - wild hare, Bonnie - rabbit, Kivi Tarro - Finnish Lapphund "She's always talking about her hare."

  Post Points: 0

• 01-26-2008 12:16 AM

  In reply to corvus

  corgipower Joined on 09-10-2007 new jersey Posts 780 Points 0	Re: Punishment page 69 Reply Contact corvus: The only problem is Penny has learnt that if she wants to keep that tasty chicken bone she found on the road, the warning sound simply means she'd better eat it real fast because I'm coming over to take it away. I believe that is a corgi trait. Proud member of the tenth place CISRA 2008 team!! tweleve.org corgipower.com My Dog Votes!
  	Post Points: 0