Monthly Archives: January 2013

Recently I wrote a blog post on “common knowledge” where I suggested that training didn’t necessarily need to end on a positive note.

Several facebook posts picked up on this thread, with back and forth discussion about the potential pros and cons of ending on a positive or negative note.  Lots of thoughtful points of view!

There are two major reasons why I believe you’d want to “end on a positive”.  One was the original issue of escape/avoidance training – you never wanted to teach the dog that failure to perform might get them out of work.  As I said in the original post, this made sense in a time when training was rougher and rather unpleasant.

However, there is a kinder (and still relevant) reason for ending on a positive – to leave the dog with a positive association about training.  That makes sense to me as well.

So what exactly did I mean by saying “don’t bother ending on a positive?”

I didn’t  mean that you HAVE to end with failure, just that if training begins to go wrong you do not need to push through until the dog performs correctly.  That is the misconception – that you must push through.

There are two occasions under which I see particularly bad training.  The first is when the trainer becomes angry.  Angry trainers and good training are simply an oxymoron – the cannot co-exist.  If you want to set your training back months, get mad and push through until you “end on a positive.”  It’s a recipe for dog abuse.

The second place I’ve seen really bad training is when a session has gone poorly and the trainer cannot instantly assess how to go about fixing the problem.   Rather than putting the dog away and giving it some serious thought, the trainer will start running through random and various options, with very little thought to what really makes sense.  In short, they begin to dig.

Devising a good training plan – including problem solving – takes thought.  An experienced trainer might be able to problem solve on the fly, but a less experienced trainer almost always needs to think about what is happening.  There is no reason for the dog to watch you stumble around – someone is supposed to be leading and my dogs expect that to be me.  If I don’t  know what I’m doing or where I’m going, I’m going to have a terrible time telegraphing that sense of control and leadership that allows my dogs to follow confidently.

I don’t ALWAYS end when something goes wrong, but when training gets weird and unexpected, the majority of the time I need to stop and think about what is happening.  With a young dog, training often goes poorly because the dog is tired or over faced - better to stop training at these early warning signs rather than waiting for that brilliant moment where the dog figures it out. Yes, the dog might figure it out.  Or you might be digging a very deep hole.  Honestly, I’ve seen more holes than light bulbs.

In training, there are very few rules or absolutes.  What separates an experienced and confident trainer from a less sure trainer is the ability to figure out, in the moment, what is the best decision.  It might be to push through,  to change exercises, or to end training immediately.  Sometimes you might choose to hang out and take a break.  It depends on the trainer and the dog.  It depends on the root cause of the failure.  Most important, it depends on your mood and how you are reacting to the mistakes.

So in short, it depends,  which was my point in the first place.  Good training is not a function of rules and common knowledge.  It is a much deeper (and more challenging) pursuit that involves two beings with good days, bad days, and very unique temperaments.

So…do I believe it’s important to end on a positive?  No.  Do I think it’s important to end on a negative?  No.  What matters is that my decisions allow my dog and myself to form a richer and more trusting partnership.   Absolutes make that close to impossible.

There is another reason why I choose to end on a negative – sometimes I’m specifically doing it to punish a dog for a choice they have made.  I’ll talk more about that in an upcoming blog.

Thanks to all who consistently manage to engage in interesting, articulate, and well thought out discussions about various topics that I bring up here.  I love to read your thoughts, even when I don’t necessarily agree with your conclusions.

And on a completely different note….several of you have asked me to let you know when I teach an online heeling class.  Registration will open Feb 1st for Precision Heeling; you can get more information here on my blog from the tab above called “Class Schedule -Local and Online”

When precision heeling ends I’ll offer a class on heeling games.  Precision heeling will be a prerequisite skill for heeling games, so please at least observe this class if  you’re interested in working or auditing the next class.  See the website for any questions you may have!

Here’s a simple video showing how I’m working on Lyra’s retrieve over high jump.

She knows how to fetch.  She knows how to jump.  She knows how to stay.  She has a reasonable clue about fetching over a jump in the outbound direction, but definitely shakier about the return.

Now I’m focusing on proofing the return – teaching her to find her way back to the jump when the dumbbell is off center.  To accomplish this, I use “obility” and substitute an object for a dumbbell.  This allows many more repetitions and I can keep her enthusiasm up since there are no “stay”, “front” or “retrieve” components to worry about.  The more I can isolate the issue, the better my chances of success.

I do need to work on her front with the dumbbell.  Had it for awhile but guess it’s lost now.

How old is your toolbox?   If it’s old, it probably has a lot of tools in it.  Indeed, you might find that it’s so full, you’ve switched to a truck  to carry your various props.  Some of your tools are surely tried and true.  You’ve met the goals you set out to meet using them and quite possibly reached some very nice success.  Success, security, knowledge, admiration from others – as humans we need these things.

Your toolbox likely carries physical props (treats, toys, special collars, sticks, etc.), information (solutions to specific problems), cutting edge options (highly adjustable e-collars, remote ball launchers). and “common knowledge” for your sport (“your dog MUST perform”, or “it’s always the handler’s fault”).

If you’ve been around awhile, odds are excellent that you’ve invested a good deal of time, money, and emotional energy building up your toolbox.  Odds are also good that you haven’t thought too deeply about what you have and why you have it.

If you’re getting queasy, you can relax.  I’m not going to question your beliefs about the need for a prong collar or how many cookies you use in a training session.  I’m not going to ask you to look at your  physical tools or choice of training techniques.   I’m going to start with a simpler and less threatening query – specifically, when was the last time you took a  good look at your “common knowledge” about dog training?  Not necessarily with an eye towards changing, but with an eye towards ensuring that your common knowledge is still compatible with your current training methodology.

I’m going to mention five pieces of common knowledge that I lived with for many years and that I have since thrown out.  Maybe you’d like to play along and see where you stand as well.

1) Do not feed your dog before a trial.

a)   My food driven dog gets frantic when she misses a meal, my “routine driven” dog vomits bile, and I know that for myself, my mental capacity is reduced when I’m distracted by hunger.  So why is it that my dogs did not eat before trialing for close to 20 years?  Because I never bothered to think about where I had received that information and whether or not it made sense in my circumstances; I simply did what I heard because it was standard practice – common knowledge.  Personally, I don’t  care if you feed your dog the morning of a trial, but you might want to consider what your practices are, and why.  What makes sense for you and your dogs?

2)  End training on success.

a)  My dogs live to train.  Love to train.  If I ended when they were doing it right, they’d be punished for figuring out what I want.  That’s silly.  Once upon a time this approach made sense, because training was quite unpleasant for the dog, so all the dog really wanted was to have the misery end.  But if your dog loves working and training, then “ending on a positive” just doesn’t  make much sense anymore. Personally, I tend to wait until my dog gets distracted or sniffs to end the session.  Now the mature dogs don’t normally make mistakes in training, so I end when I’ve had enough.   The days of escape/avoidance training are long gone for me.  What makes sense within your training system?

3)  Always precede a command with the dog’s name.

a) This made sense when dogs did not pay attention to their handlers.  It was a warning – “fido, heel”.  If Fido woke up on his name then he avoided a correction.  If not, then Fido paid the price.  Indeed, it was a kindness – a way of allowing the dog to avoid a correction.  But if your dog pays attention because it is impossible to perform correctly without attention, then why are you using their name? When you are directing another person, do you precede each request with their name?  Not only is it a waste of time but worse, it teaches your dog to simply ignore the first second of each cue you give.   Does it cause great harm to use the name?  No.  But consider why you do it – maybe you have a good reason, like training multiple dogs at the same time.  Just think about it.

4)  Don’t let your dog sniff.

a) Dogs like to sniff.  Personally, few things are more irritating than listening to a handler command “leave it! Leave it!’ every 20 seconds.  Why leave it?  Why do you care if your dog sniffs while you chat with your friend?  Sniffing is not the first step towards canine world domination, nor is it the first step towards sniffing during heeling in the ring.  For Pete’s sake; you’re not heeling; you’re standing around talking to your friend.  Dogs use their nose to examine their environment in order to feel safe and to be able to focus, much the same way humans use their eyes to take in a new environment.  Physically preventing your dog from sniffing doesn’t  make your dog not want to sniff.  It makes you an irritation that your dog will wish to get rid of – so he can sniff.  All of my dogs sniff, and not one time, not once, have I had a dog sniff in the competition ring.  That’s because sniffing is an incompatible behavior with working, and I focus on getting what I want, not what I don’t want.  Is it ok if your dog sniffs?  Think about it.

5)  Don’t let your dog get away with any failure to perform.

Seriously, who cares? So your dog failed to do something.  You’ll get a lot further in your training if you figure out why your dog would not or could not perform than if you focus your energy on the behavior that didn’t happen.  Sometimes my dogs don’t  want to do something.   Maybe they are experiencing physical pain.  Maybe they aren’t sure how to perform.  Maybe I’m a dead boring trainer and I cannot motivate them to care.  Regardless of the reason, “making” them perform probably doesn’t progress your training goals, and it certainly doesn’t progress your relationship. At most, it makes you feel like you’re doing something, but doing something and training your dog don’t have a lot in common.

The more I examine my beliefs, the less common knowledge seems to make sense for me.  As I shed my common knowledge, I find myself freed up to focus on what does matter – developing a training relationship that works for me and each specific dog, regardless of what my friends or fellow trainers might find works for them.

Anyway, give it some thought.

It’s easy to be a “motivational” trainer when everything is going right.  Feed cookies, play with toys and watch the behaviors accumulate.  It’s all good!

What do you do when it’s not going so well?  When you have a problem and you are struggling to fix it?  When all of the common  solutions offered resort to traditional methods that involve compulsion?  When you’ve run out of ways to make it clear to your dog what you want?  When your dog knows what you want, but chooses not to perform because disobedience is more fun than obedience?

Well, that’s pretty much where the rubber meets the road, isn’t it?

I’m in the midst of this right now.  I came very close to failing a trial a few months ago, because my dog didn’t much want to to let go of the protection decoy when I called her.  Biting is fun.  Recalling to mom – not so much.

I went into the trial knowing I wasn’t properly prepared, so my results weren’t a surprise and at nine years of age, it didn’t  seem wise to pass up the trial opportunity when I knew no harm would be done.

You can see the biting exercises here; note the multiple whistles where she goes into a barking guard rather than returning to me:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMlc6kIhQ6U

I’m going to explain the required behavior, where my dog is failing to perform, the traditional solutions, the traditional downfalls, and then I’ll go into the decisions I made and where I’m at now.  Many of you will want to stop reading right now, because this is quite detailed and specific – unless you are interested in ringsport or my approach to problem solving with my own dog, you can move on.

The required behavior is that Raika release her hold on a decoy who is fighting with her when I blow my whistle, and then immediately return to heel position.  I will be anywhere from five yards to fifty yards away, depending on the exercise.

The problem is that Raika almost never releases on the first whistle.   She often releases on the second whistle, but doesn’t necessarily return to me.  On the third whistle, she almost always returns correctly to heel.  The further away I am the worse she is.

The traditional solution would involve either a prong collar or an electronic collar.  Any failure to release and recall would involve a collar correction.  If the collar were a prong she would either be corrected by myself (holding a long line) or the decoy (reaching for a tab on her collar).  If the collar were an electronic collar, then I would supply the correction from across the field.

These methods would likely work on Raika.  She’s a sensitive enough dog that she would respond if she were compelled through pain compliance techniques.  Or at least they would work for awhile; it’s certainly possible that the pressure would have to increase over time or under high stimulation levels as she adapted to the training, or that I could inadvertently create other problems which would then need to be fixed.

The downfalls to this method could include the following:

1) Dogs learn when they can or cannot be corrected – wearing the special collars or being attached to a long line signals to the dog that they must be obedient.  That leads to the classic problem called “trial wise” behavior.  The dog learns that when the place “looks” like a trial – complete with a nervous handler, a judge on the field, no rewards visible, no collar on the neck, and all of the other cues that signal an “event”, then the corrections will not happen.

Another downfall includes the potential development of nervous or hectic behavior on the part of the dog.  Instead of focusing on the job, they remain in conflict between what they want to do (bite) and what the handler wants them to do (obey).  Note that I didn’t say the handler wants them to “release” because that is incorrect.  We are not trying to extinguish biting, we want them to release AND bite.  Corrections can create a dog who refuses to bite at all, or who becomes very nervous and frantic in their work.

Both of the above scenarios are more or less avoidable by a very sophisticated handler with good timing and a clear headed dog that isn’t easily stressed or worried.  Then again, very sophisticated handlers with good timing have fewer problems in the first place.

Regardless of whether pain compliance would give me my recall, I’m less interested in solving the problem than in seeing what I can accomplish using motivational techniques.   For all I know she’ll never compete again, but I still want to figure out the puzzle.

Solving the problem:

I started by teasing apart the problem – determining what she knew, what she might not know, and under what circumstances could she perform correctly, if ever.

I believe she knows the meaning of the whistle when she is not in drive.  If I blow the whistle while she is running about, she comes immediately and with  a bright attitude.

I believe she knows the meaning of the whistle when there is a toy she wants nearby.  If I blow the whistle she will come back to heel position and wait to be sent to the toy.

On the other hand, if I whistle her back when she is engaging another other person with a toy, then her rate of return suffers quite a bit, even if I also have a toy that is equal or better to use as a reward for her return.

If I have a toy and a second person is wearing a bite suit, then her rate of return is even lower.

From these data points I believe that she is able to respond to a whistle cue under simple circumstances, but not when her drive levels are brought up higher through the addition of a second person or a higher value bite toy (suit or sleeve).

Unfortunately, I rarely have an opportunity to work with a second person, so testing my hypothesis can be tricky.  Only so many people enjoy playing tug with my dogs, and even fewer want to wear a bitesuit.

I started experimenting.  She returns on the first whistle the vast majority of the time when she is not actively biting, even if she is facing the other person.  Good!  This reaffirms my belief that she understands the whistle.

Next, I had a friend play with a low level toy and then I whistled.  Failure.  Sometimes she comes back.  Sometimes she lets go but stays with the person.  And sometimes she thrashes all the harder.  Hmm.  She either doesn’t understand when in higher drive or  she simply doesn’t want to return so she refuses to recall.

I decided to try negative punishment.  I allowed her to play tug with my helper.  If she returned on one whistle, I immediately sent her back to play some more.  If she failed to return or went into a guard, I placed her on a “time out” in a crate or alone in a training room for a minute or so – no more biting.  She didn’t like this at all.

After several sessions, I saw no improvement.  Indeed she appeared worse; becoming more hectic, barking, and even less likely to return at the whistle.

The hectic behavior suggests that she truly doesn’t understand what I want or is unable to perform in her current drive state.  She gets hectic because she knows she is about to have a  time out, but she is unable to make a good decision to avoid that scenario.

If she is not learning from punishment, then I need to find a way to make her right often enough that she can keep a clear head and make the decision that will get her sent back to her bite as soon as possible.  But what exists between facing a dead toy on the ground and being whistled off (at which she runs close to 100% success)  and a dead toy that my friend is holding (at which she runs no more than 30%  success and declining?)

Logically, if she understood why she was getting the time outs, she’d simply change her behavior and cooperate.  She is not.  Now what?

Who could I ask for help that would understand the problem and possibly have some solutions?   Very very few people have experience with this sort of challenge and motivational problem solving.

I called my friend Shade Whitsel, a motivational trainer who competes primarily in Schutzhund.  The first ten minutes was a thorough review of what I had done along with a description of Raika’s temperament and training background.  After this initial discussion, Shade suggested the following directions to explore:

1) separate out the whistle/recall from the release.  Whistling off of an object requires two behaviors; the first is letting go and the second is returning. To begin, I was to play tug with my dog.  On the whistle, I was to ask for a release, until the whistle automatically meant release.  That part was easy since I could work on it as much as I like – it didn’t  require another person.  After very little time, Raika was cleanly releasing her toy on the whistle command.  Her reward was re-engaging her in the game.  So far so good.

But I still had the recall to work through.  How to do that without a second person?

Shade suggested hanging a bite suit to a strong object.  Send Raika to bite the “dead” bite suit.  Whistle off – and immediately send back if she succeeded. I haven’t tried this yet because I have to hang the suit somewhere.  Also, I’m not sure how enthusiastic Raika will be about biting a suit with no one in it.  Regardless, it is a path to try.

Finally, she mentioned another ringsport trainer who trains alone. This person taught her dog that the whistle meant release the suit and return to a spot behind the dog (the start line).  Basically, teach the dog to go back to the line of departure where the handler would normally be standing on the whistle cue.  Hmm.  Interesting.  Now the whistle would no longer mean recall as much as run away from the direction of the bite.  if a second person were available, then I’d be standing at that spot (start line).

I thought about this last option.  My biggest concern was teaching her that my whistle meant to leave me (the handler) rather than to recall.  On the other hand, once I’m wearing the bitesuit  I’m no longer the handler, I’m the decoy.  There is no handler.    Play tug, whistle, and send her back to a spot.  Over time, work to the point where the whistle was the cue to go back to the spot.  The reward for cooperation?   Let her bite again.

Then I asked Shade the classic question that I get asked all the time by traditional trainers.  What do I do if she does it wrong?  And she gave me the answer that I should have known – do nothing.  The same as when she learned the out in the first place – be patient.  Wait, and let her be right enough that she can succeed.  Focus on what I want, not what “might” happen.  Ignore the mistakes in the training process and work hard to set her up for success.

And we’ve begun.  If this program doesn’t work then I’ll try something else.  Eventually one  of two things will happen.  Either I will decide it is a viable training option (in which case I will suggest it or variations of it to others struggling with this problem), or it will fail, in which case I will not suggest it to others, and I will go back to finding a solution.  Regardless, I have won.

There’s nothing like having someone to brainstorm with, so thanks to Shade for talking me through this.  And thanks to the many folks and decoys who are intrigued by my challenges with no force training and who give a good effort to implement whatever plan I come up with – whether they agree with my choices or not.

Note:  Nine days later: It’s clearly working:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhudpkbBXJE

Note: Sixteen days later:  Tested with a new decoy working Raika – not perfect but a huge improvement in whistle recall.  *happy dance*:).

Working through this has been a huge high for me – applying what I know,  asking for help as needed, staying true to my beliefs, and making progress.  I’d guess that we will kick this in a couple of months – then we need another trial.