GO!

Saying 'No'

This is a place to gain some understanding of dog behavior and to assist people in training their dogs and dealing with common behavior problems, regardless of the method(s) used. This can cover the spectrum from non-aversive to traditional methods of dog training. There are many ways to train a dog. Please avoid aggressive responses, and counter ideas and opinions with which you don't agree with friendly and helpful advice. Please refrain from submitting posts that promote off-topic discussions. Keep in mind that you may be receiving advice from other dog owners and lovers... not professionals. If you have a major problem, always seek the advice of a trainer or behaviorist!

  
(Page 8 of 11: Viewing entries 71 to 80)  
1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  
Titus

Cave canis- vigilo omnis
 
 
Barked: Thu Nov 29, '12 5:18pm PST 
I have to agree with Rolo... Meals are too primal, too basic a need for me to feel comfortable delaying or feeding piecemeal.

I've been torched on this topic before in this forum but I stand fast: I'm morally obligated to provide food for my dog, to provide that feeling of satisfaction after eating, regardless of what they have done for me lately. I think it's unethical to deny that. I control nearly every aspect of my dogs' lives - this is one aspect that I don't have to have absolute control over.

And just an aside, if someone told me I had to do ANYTHING 5,000 times, I'd run far and fast. laugh out loud Better to say "a bazillion" to suggest many repetitions than to try to assign a specific number to it and scare the bejeebus out of folks. wink
[notify]
Rusty

Champion PPH
 
 
Barked: Thu Nov 29, '12 5:42pm PST 
thinking Love an ongoing debate on methods!

One thing I try not to do is use Rusty's name too often during commands. Use it too often and all he hears is "Rusty! blah...blah, blah, blah..."

To me, No is just a word. When did we all become so politically "correct" that such a little word is so horrific? I use the command "hurry up" when I want him to pee. Is this forcing him ruin his bladder by rushing the process? Honestly, folks, you can get your dog stop any behavior with any word. What matters is the tone & inflection you use. I generally use noise interrupters to stop an unwanted behavior, but have zero qualms about yelling No if it prevents a dangerous or threatening action. It's my job to keep him safe, and if he isn't paying attention to a hazard, I put his brakes on quick.

Rusty is a Cocker and harsh methods are not conducive to this breeds well being. BUT.....He needs to know that certain commands mean BUSINESS and he does. He is not damaged psychologically by corrections. If he was that delicate, I'd have to hide him in the basement. He is being taught to roll with what life throws at him, knowing to look to me for guidance. Good moms know when to say NO.

On the food thing, I am torn. I do not screw with his meals. He was starving for some time when he was found, and getting fed is HUGE. He will work treats, but I don't like to have a dog that only works for food. I don't like a fat dog and I do expect him to work for praise, which he eats up like a sirloin steak.

Edited by author Thu Nov 29, '12 5:55pm PST

[notify]
Lupi

I\\\'ll do- anything for a- treat!
 
 
Barked: Thu Nov 29, '12 5:43pm PST 
Rolo, Titus, Tiller, I understand where you're coming from; I really do. But my dog makes her own choices. Just as some feel it's cruel to kennel a dog, while others state their dog chooses his cozy kennel on his own, my dog consistently opts for the kibble that's earned over the kibble that's not.
But I do get why you might feel that way. It's like the way I feel about e-collars. Just not comfortable with them. The main thing is how the dog feels. What's cruel to us may be awesome to them, and what we may think they love could be downright distasteful.
It goes right back to the original question posed by Watson-the word no can mean different things to different dogs. Partly depending on how we use it, and partly depending on the dog himself.
[notify]

Tyler

Whippy- The- Whipador
 
 
Barked: Thu Nov 29, '12 5:45pm PST 
That's kind of the same with my friend's Lurcher, Mulder. She likes food and she will recall lovely for a piece of sausage but her owner admits that a game of tug is more of a reward for her than a treat. She is toy obsessed so it makes sense that she'd find that the greater reward. Her owners have used both treats and play in her training but it's clear to see what she gets more excited about when you're with her.
[notify]
G2

Be Scaredy of- Me, Dawg!
 
 
Barked: Thu Nov 29, '12 6:19pm PST 
"I have to agree with Rolo... Meals are too primal, too basic a need for me to feel comfortable delaying or feeding piecemeal.

I've been torched on this topic before in this forum but I stand fast: I'm morally obligated to provide food for my dog, to provide that feeling of satisfaction after eating, regardless of what they have done for me lately. I think it's unethical to deny that. I control nearly every aspect of my dogs' lives - this is one aspect that I don't have to have absolute control over."

applause Absolutely agree with this. It is, to me, unethical to make a dog work for what should be their daily sustenance. Extra treats? Sure - but their daily bread, so to speak? Ummm, no. That's tantamount to forcing them to comply or not eat at all. Not really that positive, imho.
[notify]
Tiller- (Skansen's- Ira in the M

I DO Exist...To- Drive You Batty
 
 
Barked: Thu Nov 29, '12 6:44pm PST 
I think *IF* you have a dog who is a definite foodie, that's his big reinforcer, but weight issues are a concern, that's when it is ok. Better he get trained and have fun with it rather than it being nothing but frustration and the bond suffering. Lots understandable there.

That aside, I am totally in line with Mulder....utterly bemused. It doesn't matter "if they'd die without it" but rather what motivates them best. And with that dog, the concept of adapting him to better food response by cutting out his meals has mad scientist written all over it. If the dog doesn't light up for food, the option of finding his strong motivator vs cease giving his meals is to me just disturbing. Particularly, siding with Mulder, if a dog lights up with a ball and is all joy, thirst and focus with it, really....what's the problem? That's GOOD. You found his joybox. Isn't that the point of positive reinforcement?
[notify]
Augusta,- CGC, RN

Such a Good Dog!
 
 
Barked: Thu Nov 29, '12 7:26pm PST 
Hmm, have to say I don't get distinguishing "treats" from kibble . . .when it comes to food rewards .thinking To the dog it's all something edible on degrees from "o.k." (like kibble) to "Wow! that's quite an aromatic edible that I WANT WANT WANT! How high should I jump?" (like a bit of tripe). Low to high value to the dog.

I often use Gus's canned food in a squeeze tube in agility class--very handy and a little lick goes a long way.

It's only calling it a "treat" that makes it so to the human--there's no rule that whatever is used for food reward means it has to mean unhealthy carp or a lot (in fact the higher the value--the tinier the piece could be) --if that's the concern. If the concern is just being able to say I use food rewards but technically not "treats" --then I guess I'm just confused . . ..

I have discovered that the offer of chase and tug from a distance is a great recall tool for Gus . . .. . she loves to "come get me." And if I'm out of immediate sight, it's even more exciting to find me.
[notify]
G2

Be Scaredy of- Me, Dawg!
 
 
Barked: Thu Nov 29, '12 8:57pm PST 
"Hmm, have to say I don't get distinguishing "treats" from kibble . . .when it comes to food rewards"

The difference here is the same as the difference between boiled chicken and chocolate cake - the boiled chicken keeps you alive, but is not a tasty treat, while the chocolate cake is. Kibble keeps the dog alive, but is not a high value treat like tripe. The only reason a dog works for their daily kibble is because they have to or they don't eat - not because the kibble is an exciting high value reward. If they don't work, they starve - and if you withhold their food until they become thrilled about a piece of kibble, that's coercive. Huge difference, and again, not all that positive, imho.
[notify]
Duncan

Because I'm- Duncan, that's- why

moderator
 
 
Barked: Thu Nov 29, '12 9:12pm PST 
wave I haven't read this whole thread, but on this page, G2 said: "It is, to me, unethical to make a dog work for what should be their daily sustenance."

Really? I always make my dogs sit and wait for their meal. Or in the case of Chachi, sometimes he is asked to "dance" instead.

I don't know if I'd withhold the meal if they refused, though! They literally have never done so!

Is that weirdly coercive? Maybe it's because I'm such an alpha. thinking
G2

Be Scaredy of- Me, Dawg!
 
 
Barked: Thu Nov 29, '12 9:19pm PST 
"Maybe it's because I'm such an alpha."

laugh out loud Well, I'm not talking about basic manners, a la sitting down so they can be fed - I'm talking about the rationing out of a tiny sliver of kibble at a time - being used as a 'high value reward' in general training. Those are two different things to me, Ms. Alpha-head. wink

Edited by author Thu Nov 29, '12 9:20pm PST

[notify]
  (Page 8 of 11: Viewing entries 71 to 80)  
1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11