# Aggression



## ruhroh (Dec 26, 2013)

I saw something completely new this morning. My three-month-old (today!) puppy bared his teeth and growled at me, with his tail low and his ears back. It was just before his usual nap time in the morning, and he tends to get fussy and nippy when he's sleepy, but always playfully so. The aggression only lasted about a minute, and it was punctuated by playfulness (wagging tail, "let's play" rear-up crouched position). 

Was it actual aggression? He didn't nip me and I immediately kenneled him (he's now asleep). My understanding is that when puppies play aggressively there's always a sign that's it's play and not actual aggression (wagging tail, etc.). I had just taken away one of my son's Legos that the puppy was trying to gnaw on. I've taken things away in the past, though, and never had this reaction. 

Thoughts?


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

ruhroh said:


> I saw something completely new this morning. My three-month-old (today!) puppy bared his teeth and growled at me, with his tail low and his ears back. It was just before his usual nap time in the morning, and he tends to get fussy and nippy when he's sleepy, but always playfully so. The aggression only lasted about a minute, and it was punctuated by playfulness (wagging tail, "let's play" rear-up crouched position).
> 
> Was it actual aggression? He didn't nip me and I immediately kenneled him (he's now asleep). My understanding is that when puppies play aggressively there's always a sign that's it's play and not actual aggression (wagging tail, etc.). *I had just taken away one of my son's Legos that the puppy was trying to gnaw on. I've taken things away in the past, though, and never had this reaction. *
> 
> Thoughts?


Could be the beginnings of resource guarding. Take a look at this article for more information: Resource Guarding: Treatment and Prevention.


----------



## HollowHeaven (Feb 5, 2012)

I agree with Cookieface. Read that information and nip that in the bud.


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

I would just say NO, in a manner that he knew I was serious. They learn in packs essentially the same way. If you're out of line you get corrected.


----------



## HollowHeaven (Feb 5, 2012)

Iceweasel said:


> I would just say NO, in a manner that he knew I was serious. They learn in packs essentially the same way. If you're out of line you get corrected.


A puppy is not going to know what 'no' means. And if you punish a dog for growling, you teach the dog not to growl. The next time they feel the need to guard their things, you're not going to get a warning. The dog is going to go straight for the bite. 

You teach the dog that nothing bad is going to happen when you take something of theirs. You don't punish them for feeling that way.


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

HollowHeaven said:


> A puppy is not going to know what 'no' means. And if you punish a dog for growling, you teach the dog not to growl. The next time they feel the need to guard their things, you're not going to get a warning. The dog is going to go straight for the bite.
> 
> You teach the dog that nothing bad is going to happen when you take something of theirs. You don't punish them for feeling that way.


Dogs learn like people do. A child doesn't know what no means either, but they learn. Even a puppy knows a negative reaction when they see it. They will learn quickly and my dogs do not feel the need to guard things from me because they trust me. It takes time but they do learn from ositive and negative responses. I don't know why so many feel no negative reaction is the best way to train a dog, I sure see a lot of the consequences at the dog park.


----------



## jsca (Dec 10, 2013)

Iceweasel said:


> I don't know why so many feel no negative reaction is the best way to train a dog


I don't think that Hollow was implying that no negative response should _ever_ be taken, just that in this particular situation it is not the best or most correct way to deal with this behavior. I, and many others, agree that taking away the dog's "ability" to growl is dangerous.

I do feel you though on people who believe that dogs should have no negative consequences ever. I believe 110% in R+, but there's some things that I also feel need to be handled with a correction.


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

I agree with that but don't consider No a punishment. My dogs stop immediately when they hear it.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

Iceweasel said:


> Dogs learn like people do. A child doesn't know what no means either, but they learn. Even a puppy knows a negative reaction when they see it. They will learn quickly and my dogs do not feel the need to guard things from me because they trust me. It takes time but they do learn from ositive and negative responses. I don't know why so many feel no negative reaction is the best way to train a dog, I sure see a lot of the consequences at the dog park.


To me, part of building the trust in a dog that you won't take things away from them willy-nilly is teaching them that it is worth their time to give something up. No, you don't always have to have treats for ever and ever in order to ask the dog to give up an object, but by playing the "trading game" and rewarding the dog for willingly giving up an object and slowly phasing out and randomizing those rewards, you create a mindset that says "eh, it isn't so bad for my human to reach to my mouth and take something cause sometimes I get something even better. even if I don't get something better, nothing bad happens at least"

I don't have a problem with corrections in and of themselves. The issue with corrections is that they have to be well timed and specific to the action, otherwise the dog can easily misinterpret them. I don't like to correct something unless I have shown the dog that there is a better alternative and given the dog the opportunity to chose that better alternative. In the case of something that can result in creating aggression, I always error on the side of positive training: aggression begets aggression IMO. I'm not imply that merely saying "NO" is "aggression" or a huge correction, but it is a negative and it isn't really telling the dog what they _should_ be doing. Depending on the dog and the tone of voice, some dogs will react much more to a voice correction than others. 

Correcting a growl doesn't teach the dog that it is okay to give up an object to the human, it teaches them not to growl. It doesn't get to the root of the behavior which is basically insecurity.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

If it was punctuated by play bows, then it was probably play. Some puppies get pretty mental, especially right before nap time.


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

Shell said:


> To me, part of building the trust in a dog that you won't take things away from them willy-nilly is teaching them that it is worth their time to give something up. No, you don't always have to have treats for ever and ever in order to ask the dog to give up an object, but by playing the "trading game" and rewarding the dog for willingly giving up an object and slowly phasing out and randomizing those rewards, you create a mindset that says "eh, it isn't so bad for my human to reach to my mouth and take something cause sometimes I get something even better. even if I don't get something better, nothing bad happens at least"
> 
> Correcting a growl doesn't teach the dog that it is okay to give up an object to the human, it teaches them not to growl. It doesn't get to the root of the behavior which is basically insecurity.


Taking an object from a dog isn't willy nilly. Taking it one day, letting them have it another, then his toy and letting him have the toy is willy nilly. I have never rewarded my dogs for good behavior with treats, I am dead set against it. Praise works. Rewarding them for something means they do the something for food, not because it's the right thing to do. Right, meaning what makes the master happy. 

I also disagree about growling. If ever they need to growl for something serious, like something outside the house, they will do it. People are amazed at how well my dogs behave around humans and dogs, they are very well socialized on both counts. And they do growl if something is outside. Could be a mouse or a team of Ninjas, I can't tell, but they do growl.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

sassafras said:


> If it was punctuated by play bows, then it was probably play. Some puppies get pretty mental, especially right before nap time.


Wild biting leaping zoomies!!! Some dogs do growl a lot during play both with other dogs and with humans (like playing tug or using a flirt pole particularly). You just gotta know your dog to know what he's trying to say, ya know?



Iceweasel said:


> Taking an object from a dog isn't willy nilly. Taking it one day, letting them have it another, then his toy and letting him have the toy is willy nilly. I have never rewarded my dogs for good behavior with treats, I am dead set against it. Praise works. Rewarding them for something means they do the something for food, not because it's the right thing to do. Right, meaning what makes the master happy.
> 
> I also disagree about growling. If ever they need to growl for something serious, like something outside the house, they will do it. People are amazed at how well my dogs behave around humans and dogs, they are very well socialized on both counts. And they do growl if something is outside. Could be a mouse or a team of Ninjas, I can't tell, but they do growl.


Then you and I disagree on a fundamental part of training. There are plenty of dogs that couldn't give a rat's behind about praise. It just isn't their personality. To them, another currency works. For many dogs, that is a food reward. For some, a toy or game. Rewarding them with food doesn't mean they do something for food-- the food tells them that they have done the right thing and that doing the right thing is the preferable option. 

The thing about growling isn't about them not growling when something scary may be happening, like a break-in in the home or a stranger on the street approaching as a threat. The problem is that a growl is a communication-- growls aren't inherently aggressive or a sign of aggression-- but IF the growl is saying "Stay Away, I'm uncomfortable" and either the human doesn't listen to the growl or the human has reprimanded the growl enough that the dog is like "Ain't gonna make that noise that angers the human but yet I still have issues" then the dog can skip right to his next line of communication, biting. 

In this case, it is a puppy. It could be play, it could be the minor beginnings of some resource guarding which is generally quite trainable. I wouldn't freak out or anything if a 3 month old puppy growled at me and especially not if the dog was also giving play bows. My guess is that the dog was considering the child's toy as his toy and wanting to engage in play. Nearly every dog I've cared for has growled a lot while playing tug for example.


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

Shell said:


> Wild biting leaping zoomies!!! Some dogs do growl a lot during play both with other dogs and with humans (like playing tug or using a flirt pole particularly). You just gotta know your dog to know what he's trying to say, ya know?


Yes, they have a limited vocabulary. Hair standing up and teeth showing is a serious growl.


> Then you and I disagree on a fundamental part of training. There are plenty of dogs that couldn't give a rat's behind about praise. It just isn't their personality. To them, another currency works. For many dogs, that is a food reward. For some, a toy or game. Rewarding them with food doesn't mean they do something for food-- the food tells them that they have done the right thing and that doing the right thing is the preferable option.


...which means food if that's the reward. That may well be the true motivation. If your dog doesn't care for his master's praise, something is very wrong. 


> In this case, it is a puppy. It could be play, it could be the minor beginnings of some resource guarding which is generally quite trainable. I wouldn't freak out or anything if a 3 month old puppy growled at me and especially not if the dog was also giving play bows. My guess is that the dog was considering the child's toy as his toy and wanting to engage in play. Nearly every dog I've cared for has growled a lot while playing tug for example.


Yes, and that should be easily discernable from a threatening growl. I wouldn't freak out either but the puppy would soon learn that a threatening growl is a mistake.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

Iceweasel said:


> ...which means food if that's the reward. That may well be the true motivation. If your dog doesn't care for his master's praise, something is very wrong.
> *Different dogs are different. Different breeds are different. Not all dogs care about praise and it has nothing at all to do with how much their care about their humans. The food is a motivator, so what? Don't all animals work for what motivates them basically? Using treats doesn't mean a dog will only work for treats, it means they work in the hopes of something that makes them happy. *
> 
> Yes, and that should be easily discernable from a threatening growl. I wouldn't freak out either but the puppy would soon learn that a threatening growl is a mistake.
> *But teaching the pup that a threatening growl is a mistake does nothing at all towards fixing WHY the pup feels the need to growl.*


You can train however you want, I'm just explaining where my training advice is coming from and the reasoning behind it.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Iceweasel, do you do any advanced training? I find most people dead set against using treats ever... don't. I find once you start working on more complex and precise behaviors, treats can become a lot more useful. 

Anyways, to the OP, it could be play but could be resource guarding. It's a very common issue though and can be worked through.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Iceweasel said:


> I agree with that but don't consider No a punishment. My dogs stop immediately when they hear it.


 Maybe you don't but your dogs consider it a punishment, at least by definition. I get a strong feeling that somewhere along the line, you've paired the word with something negative. Like a physical correction for example.


----------



## taquitos (Oct 18, 2012)

lol Iceweasel I'd love to see you try to handle my extreme resource guarder. You try yelling no and taking that high value item away? He'll bite your arm off hahahaha

Yeah don't do that with a puppy showing signs of resource guarding  Teach him the trade up game, and eventually teach him a solid drop it. A good way to teach drop is also to teach it paired with "take".


----------



## HollowHeaven (Feb 5, 2012)

Iceweasel said:


> I sure see a lot of the consequences at the dog park.


Between dogs and dogs.
But I also see a lot of injured and dead dogs at the dog park too. Lol.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Dogs don't do anything, ever because "it's the right thing to do." They don't give a crap about what "the right thing to do" is. They're far more simple than that. They give a crap about doing what gets them what they want. 

And sometimes what they want is to not get a correction.


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

Laurelin said:


> Iceweasel, do you do any advanced training? I find most people dead set against using treats ever... don't. I find once you start working on more complex and precise behaviors, treats can become a lot more useful.


I know what works on my dogs, if someone's training says it won't they are full of it. I never said I don't give them treats, I said I don't use treats for training. If I wanted a dog doing circus tricks I probably would, but I like my dogs just being dogs. 

If it offends some people that some people don't train with treats they need to get over themselves.



petpeeve said:


> Maybe you don't but your dogs consider it a punishment, at least by definition. I get a strong feeling that somewhere along the line, you've paired the word with something negative. Like a physical correction for example.


I don't get your point. I said I use no and it WASN'T what I consider punishment. It's teaching and learning like with humans. I think I've met some dogs and kids for that matter that never heard the word no.


taquitos said:


> lol Iceweasel I'd love to see you try to handle my extreme resource guarder. You try yelling no and taking that high value item away? He'll bite your arm off hahahaha
> 
> Yeah don't do that with a puppy showing signs of resource guarding  Teach him the trade up game, and eventually teach him a solid drop it. A good way to teach drop is also to teach it paired with "take".


Extreme resource guarder? I don't use dogs for weapons, I have better tools. My dogs are my pets.



sassafras said:


> Dogs don't do anything, ever because "it's the right thing to do." They don't give a crap about what "the right thing to do" is. They're far more simple than that. They give a crap about doing what gets them what they want.
> 
> And sometimes what they want is to not get a correction.


You're wrong. Your opinion does not match my reality. Some of you need more reality and less theory.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

petpeeve said:


> Maybe you don't but your dogs consider it a punishment, at least by definition.





Iceweasel said:


> .I don't get your point. I said I use no and it WASN'T what I consider punishment.


Maybe YOU don't consider it a punishment, but your dogs DO. Clearer ?

I think some of you need more theory, less 'reality'.


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

petpeeve said:


> Maybe YOU don't consider it a punishment, but your dogs DO. Clearer ?
> 
> I think some of us need more theory, less 'reality'.


Clear as mud. I'll stick to reality, it trumps theory every time.


----------



## taquitos (Oct 18, 2012)

Iceweasel, yeah, my 7 lbs dog is a weapon to me LOL

Do you even understand what resource guarding is...???


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

Iceweasel said:


> I know what works on *my* dogs, if someone's training says it won't they are full of it. I never said I don't give them treats, I said I don't use treats for training. If I wanted a dog doing circus tricks I probably would, but I like my dogs just being dogs.
> 
> You're wrong. Your opinion does not match *my* reality. Some of you need more reality and less theory.


Notice the highlighting of "my" -- that's exactly the thing. Your dogs are not anyone elses' dogs and what has worked for you thus far could fail miserably or backfire massively if applied to another dog. 

I agree with Sass. Dogs do what works for them to get them what they want. Training is just shaping the dog's behaviors using that natural motivation. 

I'll say that if I'd tried to use only praise as a training "reward" for a dog like Luna, she would have stayed crazy and unadoptable. Instead, treats (and praise, and fetch, and attention) allowed me to take a basically feral dog who'd been locked in a crate 22 hours a day for the previous 7 months and turn her into a well mannered, CGC certified dog that was adopted by a great family instead of dying in a shelter. That's MY reality.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

So I guess all that time studying theory was wasted.

If you're simply shouting no at a growling dog and actually GETTING long-term positive results, I'd like to know your secret.


----------



## Sarah~ (Oct 12, 2013)

My GSD would skip food and water, playing, anything, for my praise. He lives for it. He will not take food, not even raw meat, during training. He is weird.

My pit mix couldn't give a crap about praise, she wants FOOD. I can get her to do anything I want for a simple piece of kibble. Does she love me? She is my shadow, always climbing in my lap, licking my legs when I walk past, curling up on the couch with me for a nap. My dogs adore me  Just because a dog does not obey just for praise doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the relationship between the dog and owner! It means you need to use something a little more convincing, at first. Treats are usually faded out at least in my experience.


----------



## BostonBullMama (Apr 20, 2013)

My bulldog is food motivated. He will sit, dance, stay/wait, go home, roll over, lay down, speak, touch/come, give a high 5, leave it, get it, go play, and more if there is food involved. I use treats to train, and slowly wean them out so that they are not expected by the dog every single time. My dogs recall is good - he will return when playing with another dog and it's rare at this point that he doesn't. My dog listens and has 1 ear aimed at me on a walk. 
I don't have to shout 'No' at him very often any more (puppyhood was a different story...) I don't have to redirect his behaviors any more. He's not food aggressive and will sit and wait while my cats eat from HIS bowl. He doesn't resource guard, I can walk right up to him and take whatever it is he has and that's the end of it. 

Any way, my point is all dogs ARE different. Breed plays a small part in that role, same as race in the 'human world'. African American people can generally run faster than Caucasian people. A greyhound can easily outrun a shepherd. My bulldog is attentive and high energy, his breed standards suggest he should be lazy and not really care about much. 

For the OP; my suggestion would be to redirect unwanted behavior. So when you take that lego piece from your puppy again, make sure you replace it with a toy he is allowed to chew up. This shows him that you're not trying to ruin the fun but that it's inappropriate for him to chew on lego and better if he chews a squeaky bone. Exercise is another HUGE key factor. If your puppy is bored he's more likely to get into trouble. If he's well exercised then when he's home, he'll be fairly lazy and snooze around - which isn't a bad thing at all. Your things will be safe from your little landshark and you'll have a happy puppy. Hand in hand, redirective training and exercise will truly improve the situation.


----------



## jsca (Dec 10, 2013)

Sarah~ said:


> My GSD would skip food and water, playing, anything, for my praise. He lives for it. He will not take food, not even raw meat, during training. He is weird.
> 
> My pit mix couldn't give a crap about praise, she wants FOOD.


no not weird at all lol, i swear that is a GSD thing. my GSD could seriously care less about food, 95% of the things i offer him he won't touch unless he's really hungry. i had a PPD trainer i really respected tell me "no dog ever does anything for your approval, only food," and i couldn't stop laughing because that is 112% not true of Jager. when i am even mildly disappointed with him, it's like his whole world just comes crumbling down (an otherwise _very_ confident dog), and when i'm pleased with him hooooooly crap he just won the doggy lottery. 

my husband's pit mix on the other hand was the exact same too, if you didn't have a food reward for her she didn't give a damn. 

it all comes down to...



sassafras said:


> Dogs don't do anything, ever because "it's the right thing to do." They don't give a crap about what "the right thing to do" is. They're far more simple than that. They give a crap about doing what gets them what they want.


some dogs are motivated by praise, some are motivated by food, some are motivated by a favorite toy. i'd be willing to bet that less than 10% are motivated by praise alone though. even with that being said, when teaching new behaviors i still ALWAYS use treats - even if he doesn't wind up eating them, when i treat him he knows that means i am ultra pleased and that he did it right.


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

taquitos said:


> Iceweasel, yeah, my 7 lbs dog is a weapon to me LOL
> 
> Do you even understand what resource guarding is...???


Do I even care? No. I care about what I spoke about not what people like to call things.


Shell said:


> Notice the highlighting of "my" -- that's exactly the thing. Your dogs are not anyone elses' dogs and what has worked for you thus far could fail miserably or backfire massively if applied to another dog./quote]So?
> 
> 
> > I'll say that if I'd tried to use only praise as a training "reward" for a dog like Luna, she would have stayed crazy and unadoptable. Instead, treats (and praise, and fetch, and attention) allowed me to take a basically feral dog who'd been locked in a crate 22 hours a day for the previous 7 months and turn her into a well mannered, CGC certified dog that was adopted by a great family instead of dying in a shelter. That's MY reality.
> ...


----------



## BostonBullMama (Apr 20, 2013)

Quoted weird so; 

Iceweasel: Have you been a member here before? Your awfully defensive and it's familiar to me.. Your dog isn't called 'Roman' is he? 
nobody is attacking you, we're just stating that your suggestion won't work for *every* dog and offering up our own experiences for the OP to take from.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Iceweasel said:


> *Do I even care? No. I care about what I spoke about not what people like to call things.*
> 
> 
> Shell said:
> ...


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

Sarah~ said:


> Just because a dog does not obey just for praise doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the relationship between the dog and owner!


...unless you've had him or her for a while. If your praise means nothing someting is wrong. Dogs are a domesticated breed, not livestock.

If you said your goat only responded to treats I'd say that sounds about right. Your dog probably does care to make you happy but is holding out for the food.


----------



## Sarah~ (Oct 12, 2013)

jsca said:


> no not weird at all lol, i swear that is a GSD thing. my GSD could seriously care less about food, 95% of the things i offer him he won't touch unless he's really hungry. i had a PPD trainer i really respected tell me "no dog ever does anything for your approval, only food," and i couldn't stop laughing because that is 112% not true of Jager. when i am even mildly disappointed with him, it's like his whole world just comes crumbling down (an otherwise _very_ confident dog), and when i'm pleased with him hooooooly crap he just won the doggy lottery.


Lol, that's funny, it must be! GSDs in a nutshell: picky, vocal, drama queens


----------



## BostonBullMama (Apr 20, 2013)

Iceweasel said:


> ...unless you've had him or her for a while. If your praise means nothing someting is wrong. Dogs are a domesticated breed, not livestock.


Not all dogs respond to praise. Some react with "oh thanks for petting me" and trot off, they don't connect that being petted and a happy toned "GOOD DOG!!" means that they should continue responding with whatever it was they did.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Iceweasel said:


> You're wrong. Your opinion does not match my reality. Some of you need more reality and less theory.


No, you are wrong, and learning theory proves it. 

There is a time and a place for opinions, but attributing characteristics such as morality/a sense of right and wrong to animals that aren't capable of it isn't the time OR the place.

An animal in active avoidance or learned helplessness, with all its behaviors suppressed, looks a lot like a "well trained" or "well mannered" dog. You should do some reading about how dogs learn. It's all sciencey and stuff.

ETA: Praise absolutely is motivating for SOME dogs. But not all dogs, not by a long shot. A good trainer will use what motivates the individual dog in front of them, not try to force every dog into a cookie cutter mold of what s/he thinks "should" motivate a dog.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

There's also a difference between "praise meaning nothing" and it not being a strong enough motivator on its own for training.


----------



## taquitos (Oct 18, 2012)

Iceweasel said:


> ...unless you've had him or her for a while. If your praise means nothing someting is wrong. Dogs are a domesticated breed, not livestock.


It really doesn't. Have you never met independent dogs, dogs that were bred to work alone instead of with people, or "hard" dogs who couldn't care less about someone's tone of voice????

Dogs do what they do because they benefit from it. For some dogs praise just isn't a big enough reward. Dogs who are bred to be companions, or dogs who are bred to work with people may care about things like praise, but for a lot of dogs it isn't enough of a reward at the beginning of training any new behavior.

Just because they're domesticated does not mean all of them will die for just praise.


----------



## RabbleFox (Jan 23, 2013)

There is a dog at daycare who finds being sprayed with water in the face/mouth rewarding. I can make him do anything for just a couple droplets of water. He's a weirdo. Spray bottle is like an 8 on his reward scale. Food is a 5. Praise is a 2. 

Pepper likes treats so I use treats. Bae liked treats and play so I used treats to shape behaviors and then play to reinforce them. Merlin likes treats and praise so I use treats to shape behaviors and praise to reinforce them. That's my reality and what's worked for my dogs. 

Training is about rewarding appropriate behaviors. What one dog finds rewarding might be worth 0 on another dog's scale. Pepper doesn't find play or praise rewarding in the least. He loves us, yup, but that doesn't mean he is going to work for free. If your dog works for praise, good for you. I just find most dogs don't find praise rewarding, especially at first. 

I also find that shouting "no" doesn't do much. 

OP, I highly suggest the "trading game". Start now so you don't end up with an 8 month dog who shan't give anything that is "his" up! He may have giving you a play growl. I wouldn't punish it, personally.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

Iceweasel said:


> Do I even care? No. I care about what I spoke about not what people like to call things.


If you don't know or care what resource guarding is, then what is the point of commenting with training advice on a potential resource guarding issue?

I don't think anyone here sees your way to training as a personal attack. As I said, you can train however works for your dogs. But when suggesting training advice to others, realizing that different dogs are motivated differently and particularly in your case, that your dogs are likely out of the norm in terms of being sufficiently motivated only by praise.



Iceweasel said:


> ...unless you've had him or her for a while. If your praise means nothing someting is wrong. Dogs are a domesticated breed, not livestock.


No one is saying that praise "means nothing" -- they are saying that depending on the behavior, the situation (distraction level, fear level, etc), that praise is quite often not a sufficient motivator. My dog loves attention, he loves curling up and getting ear scratches and such, but my saying 'Good boy" ain't going to do jack when he's focused on a deer. His brain is wired to hunt, it is the ultimate reward for him.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Iceweasel said:


> ...unless you've had him or her for a while. If your praise means nothing someting is wrong. Dogs are a domesticated breed, not livestock.


LOL, livestock ARE domesticated animals. Unless you think there are herds of wild Jersey cows roaming the hillsides. 

Again, there is nothing wrong with a dog who isn't motivated by praise, nor with the owner of that dog. It's just a dog that isn't motivated by praise. Different dogs are motivated by different things, just like different people are motivated by different things. None of them are "right" or "wrong."

Dogs absolutely can learn that praise is a bridge to whatever does motivate them, just like they can learn a clicker or a marker word is a bridge. In that case the praise is really a verbal marker, but that doesn't mean they're motivated BY the praise.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

sassafras said:


> LOL, livestock ARE domesticated animals. Unless you think there are herds of wild Jersey cows roaming the hillsides.


Best mental image of the morning.


----------



## jsca (Dec 10, 2013)

just a random thought/different perspective on the subject.

when i was a young kid, praise from my family and personal satisfaction was enough motivation for me to get good grades in school. i had friends whose parents would offer them "x" amount of dollars for every high grade they got. it's not that these friends didn't like the praise, but that alone was just not enough of a reward for them to put in the effort of studying, homework, etc. because let's face it there's way more fun ways to spend time as a kid. 

it's not much different for dogs, they're just as much of individuals as people are. just because some dogs cannot work off praise alone does not make them bad dogs, or mean that their bond with their human is any less tight than that of one who will work off praise alone.


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

BostonBullMama said:


> Not all dogs respond to praise. Some react with "oh thanks for petting me" and trot off, they don't connect that being petted and a happy toned "GOOD DOG!!" means that they should continue responding with whatever it was they did.


If YOUR gog doesn't respond to YOUR praise then yes, something is very wrong.



sassafras said:


> No, you are wrong, and learning theory proves it.
> 
> There is a time and a place for opinions, but attributing characteristics such as morality/a sense of right and wrong to animals that aren't capable of it isn't the time OR the place.


I didn't say anything about morality. Dogs in the wild learn right from wrong, like not taking food from a superior dog. 


sassafras said:


> LOL, livestock ARE domesticated animals. Unless you think there are herds of wild Jersey cows roaming the hillsides.
> 
> Again, there is nothing wrong with a dog who isn't motivated by praise, nor with the owner of that dog. It's just a dog that isn't motivated by praise. Different dogs are motivated by different things, just like different people are motivated by different things. None of them are "right" or "wrong."
> 
> Dogs absolutely can learn that praise is a bridge to whatever does motivate them, just like they can learn a clicker or a marker word is a bridge. In that case the praise is really a verbal marker, but that doesn't mean they're motivated BY the praise.


Yes, cows are domesticated livestock, bad choice of words, but dogs are not livestock. If a child didn't care about his mom or dad's praise then there's something dysfunctional going on.


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

jsca said:


> just a random thought/different perspective on the subject.
> 
> when i was a young kid, praise from my family and personal satisfaction was enough motivation for me to get good grades in school. i had friends whose parents would offer them "x" amount of dollars for every high grade they got. it's not that these friends didn't like the praise, but that alone was just not enough of a reward for them to put in the effort of studying, homework, etc. because let's face it there's way more fun ways to spend time as a kid.
> 
> it's not much different for dogs, they're just as much of individuals as people are. just because some dogs cannot work off praise alone does not make them bad dogs, or mean that their bond with their human is any less tight than that of one who will work off praise alone.


Your relationship with your dog isn't going to progress much beyond your childhood state. Did your parents have to give you treats to behave correctly? 

Yes dogs are individuals and have personalities, that's why we love them. Working with a dysfuntional dog or getting a very specific task done is different. Mine wouldn't try to stand on a stool without a reward but as I said, I don't train mine for tricks.


----------



## Sarah~ (Oct 12, 2013)

We are talking about in training, not in general. My dogs respond to my praise when I do it just randomly but when I am asking my mix to do something it just isn't enough. 

You know dogs aren't children, right?


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Iceweasel said:


> Your relationship with your dog isn't going to progress much beyond your childhood state. Did your parents have to give you treats to behave correctly?
> 
> Yes dogs are individuals and have personalities, that's why we love them. Working with a dysfuntional dog or getting a very specific task done is different. Mine wouldn't try to stand on a stool without a reward but as I said, I don't train mine for tricks.


This whole comment indicates to me that you probably have a limited understanding of what positive reinforcement training actually entails. 

It certainly isn't "your dog needs a treat always if you want them to behave, or else they'll blow you off". If that's the result you get, you aren't applying the techniques correctly.

Treats are used when learning new behaviours and reinforcing behaviours you like. (such as not jumping, staying with you on leash, being calm and patient, waiting to go out the door, etc)

It is *not* only useful for tricks and treats are supposed to be faded out once your dog learns the command/the behaviour becomes habit


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

Iceweasel said:


> Your relationship with your dog isn't going to progress much beyond your childhood state. Did your parents have to give you treats to behave correctly?
> 
> Yes dogs are individuals and have personalities, that's why we love them. Working with a dysfuntional dog or getting a very specific task done is different. Mine wouldn't try to stand on a stool without a reward but as I said, I don't train mine for tricks.


Tons of parents give rewards AND praise. An M&M for using the potty during toilet training. An ice cream cone for getting an A+ on a test. People-- children and adults-- generally enjoy praise but as the difficulty or complicated nature of a task increases, without greater reward than just praise it is normal to lose motivation or not put full effort into something. Even workplaces provide things like pizza parties for employee morale or for completing a large project. A "good job" from the boss is nice for a small task and well appreciated, but people don't work their hardest for praise alone any more than the average dog will. 

There isn't really any difference in training a trick versus training any other behavior that requires a high level of concentration. Some "tricks" are really easy for a dog while something that looks simple to us humans can be enough counter to a dog's natural reaction that is needs a higher motivator.


----------



## jsca (Dec 10, 2013)

Iceweasel said:


> If a child didn't care about his mom or dad's praise then there's something dysfunctional going on. [...] Your relationship with your dog isn't going to progress much beyond your childhood state. Did your parents have to give you treats to behave correctly?


lol i don't think you entirely read my post. no, my parents didn't have to give me "treats" to behave correctly, but as i stated for some of my friends their parent's praise/pride in them was not a sole motivator and they needed an extra reward in order to get maximum performance. again, as i also stated: "it's not that these friends didn't like the praise, but that alone was just not enough of a reward"

shell's boss/employee relationship example mirrors what i said as well. and i agree with the stance that trick training and obedience training are pretty much one in the same. my dogs get trained "sit" in the same method they are taught "spin."


----------



## BostonBullMama (Apr 20, 2013)

I think Iceweasel is a lost cause here and that they are of the thinking that their way is the 'right' way and no other way is even possible. 
Iceweasel seems to think we all suck and have bad relationships with our dogs because not all of them will do tricks for praise. 
I think at this point, we're all just beating a dead horse. Clearly this person isn't willing to have an open mind about this.


----------



## jsca (Dec 10, 2013)

:deadhorse:



lol i've been waiting for the right opportunity to use this emoticon : )


----------



## HollowHeaven (Feb 5, 2012)

jsca said:


> :deadhorse:
> 
> 
> 
> lol i've been waiting for the right opportunity to use this emoticon : )


Excellent usage.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

My boss can praise me and it's a good thing. If our society functioned differently I might do my job just for the appreciation on nice days. But if I didn't get paid for it I darn well wouldn't go out in a blizzard, lol.


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

Sarah~ said:


> We are talking about in training, not in general. My dogs respond to my praise when I do it just randomly but when I am asking my mix to do something it just isn't enough.
> 
> You know dogs aren't children, right?


No, thanks for that. Mine are pretty well trained with no treating involved. My point was that if you believe you can only train with treats that's wrong. For some situations yes but certainly not universally. 



ireth0 said:


> This whole comment indicates to me that you probably have a limited understanding of what positive reinforcement training actually entails.
> 
> It certainly isn't "your dog needs a treat always if you want them to behave, or else they'll blow you off". If that's the result you get, you aren't applying the techniques correctly.
> 
> ...


I don't think you read my posts then. I haven't used treats so clearly it isn't always necessary. If you refuse to believe me that's fine but it doesn't change anything. Not everyone trains with treats or needs to. I have two dogs that I get complemented on all the time. They know the right thing to do and usually do it on their own. 

For example, I take them to an area to run around. When I'm ready to go I wait up on the trail, they come to me and stand besides me for me to put on the leashes. No treats were ever used, I didn't even train them to do it. They learned by observation, like humans do, and do it every time. 


Shell said:


> There isn't really any difference in training a trick versus training any other behavior that requires a high level of concentration. Some "tricks" are really easy for a dog while something that looks simple to us humans can be enough counter to a dog's natural reaction that is needs a higher motivator.


And I haven't disagreed with that. If I asked one of mine to jump up on a stool, they would. To get them to repeatedly do it or stay there, I would need to up the ante and offer them something besides praise. Like I said, I don't care for those things so treats are treats, not rewards.


BostonBullMama said:


> I think Iceweasel is a lost cause here and that they are of the thinking that their way is the 'right' way and no other way is even possible.
> Iceweasel seems to think we all suck and have bad relationships with our dogs because not all of them will do tricks for praise.
> I think at this point, we're all just beating a dead horse. Clearly this person isn't willing to have an open mind about this.


Wow, you are mean! Most ironic thing I've read in a while though. Please back up your ill mannered comment where I said no one should use treats.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I missed all this and haven't read the second pages.



> I know what works on my dogs, if someone's training says it won't they are full of it. I never said I don't give them treats, I said I don't use treats for training. If I wanted a dog doing circus tricks I probably would, but I like my dogs just being dogs.
> 
> If it offends some people that some people don't train with treats they need to get over themselves.


I don't care if you use treats or not. It's your choice. I personally think it's very limiting to not use treats, but whatever. Smart trainers use what they have to get the dog to happily perform what they want. Not all dogs and all things with any particular dog can be fixed with just verbal praise or correction.

Note: I do use some corrections and I do not use treats for a lot of my basic manners. That said, I find there are plenty of times where treats are useful in various ways.

What I do care about is this idea that dogs should just do what you say because it's the 'right thing to do'. I see this a lot and it baffles me. Dogs don't have morals and typically are out to get what they want- be that food, fun, whatever.


----------



## Galathiel (Apr 11, 2012)

My dog has no morality. I've talked to him about it at great length, but he still is uncommitted to a moral lifestyle. However, he CAN be persuaded to do the right thing either through treats, toys, or redirection/correction. He will not work for praise. At least not now and may never. I've never had a German Shepherd that was as hard and independent as he is. Makes it more ... interesting...to train ('eye roll')


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I think there's a big difference between saying 'I don't need to use treats to make my dogs well behaved' and 'no one needs to use treats to get their dogs to behave'. 

There's a lot of difference between dogs and if you've only ever had super biddable breeds/individuals, I think that can color things very differently for you. I've always had herding breeds and papillons, which are all at the very most biddable end of things generally speaking. My dogs are very well keyed in all the time to me and generally their worlds revolve around me. It's easy to make oneself look like a much better trainer with those dogs. I can point somewhere and my dogs go there without any training. My dogs walk on a leash great without much work. My dogs have been off leash from day 1 without me ever worrying about them running off. ETC. Other types of dogs are much more independent or you get them in situations where their drive for something else is so high that you have to actually work to make yourself more valuable than the stimulus.

TLDR: I'm not that impressed with generally well behaved dogs as a feat of someone being a fantastic trainer, especially if those breeds are very biddable. It's just not very specific or even very difficult for some dogs. My shelties never went to a training class or even had much work with them at all and were all very easy dogs to live with and were well behaved in public and at home. As such I always side with people who use their methods on difficult cases- like the feral dog case mentioned above or people who train dogs to do complex tasks amidst heavy distractions.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Laurelin said:


> *I think there's a big difference between saying 'I don't need to use treats to make my dogs well behaved' and 'no one needs to use treats to get their dogs to behave'. *
> 
> There's a lot of difference between dogs and if you've only ever had super biddable breeds/individuals, I think that can color things very differently for you. I've always had herding breeds and papillons, which are all at the very most biddable end of things generally speaking. My dogs are very well keyed in all the time to me and generally their worlds revolve around me. It's easy to make oneself look like a much better trainer with those dogs. I can point somewhere and my dogs go there without any training. My dogs walk on a leash great without much work. My dogs have been off leash from day 1 without me ever worrying about them running off. ETC. Other types of dogs are much more independent or you get them in situations where their drive for something else is so high that you have to actually work to make yourself more valuable than the stimulus.
> 
> TLDR: I'm not that impressed with generally well behaved dogs as a feat of someone being a fantastic trainer, especially if those breeds are very biddable. It's just not very specific or even very difficult for some dogs. My shelties never went to a training class or even had much work with them at all and were all very easy dogs to live with and were well behaved in public and at home. As such I always side with people who use their methods on difficult cases- like the feral dog case mentioned above or people who train dogs to do complex tasks amidst heavy distractions.


Exactly. *too short*


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

Iceweasel said:


> No, thanks for that. Mine are pretty well trained with no treating involved. My point was that if you believe you can only train with treats that's wrong. For some situations yes but certainly not universally.
> 
> I don't think you read my posts then. I haven't used treats so clearly it isn't always necessary. If you refuse to believe me that's fine but it doesn't change anything. Not everyone trains with treats or needs to. I have two dogs that I get complemented on all the time. They know the right thing to do and usually do it on their own.
> *No one is saying that treats are always necessary. Treats are necessary for many dogs for a variety of training areas if you want to stick with positive reinforcement. Not all the time, not every action, but there has to be something to motivate the dog, basically either a carrot or a stick so to speak *
> ...


Your repeated insistence that if a dog won't work just for praise then something is really wrong in the dog-human relationship is what is coming across as particularly insulting and why people are trying to illustrate that it simply isn't true.

This ---


> If YOUR gog doesn't respond to YOUR praise then yes, something is very wrong.


 -- is basically saying that a huge number of people here have dysfunctional and poor relationships with their dogs so I would hope you can see why people are explaining how that isn't so.



Laurelin said:


> TLDR: I'm not that impressed with generally well behaved dogs as a feat of someone being a fantastic trainer, especially if those breeds are very biddable. It's just not very specific or even very difficult for some dogs. My shelties never went to a training class or even had much work with them at all and were all very easy dogs to live with and were well behaved in public and at home. As such I always side with people who use their methods on difficult cases- like the feral dog case mentioned above or people who train dogs to do complex tasks amidst heavy distractions.


Yep. It is like the difference for me between getting compliments on the demeanor and training of my former foster Freckles who just happened to have the most easy going and soft personality and was instantly house trained at age 4 months from the day he set foot in my house versus the demeanor and training of Cupcake who, at the same age, arrived absolutely terrified of all strangers and took hours and hours of confidence building to move from a mental mess to a normal puppy. I just can't take credit for Freckles "training" because it was just who he was, but I sure will take credit for the work I did with Cupcake.


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

Laurelin said:


> I don't care if you use treats or not. It's your choice. I personally think it's very limiting to not use treats, but whatever. Smart trainers use what they have to get the dog to happily perform what they want. Not all dogs and all things with any particular dog can be fixed with just verbal praise or correction.


For some reason people can't receive what I said. I can understand why a trainer would use treats for someone else's dog. That isn't what I was talking about. And how on Earth is it limiting if I don't do it? They do get treats, but not for training. 


> Note: I do use some corrections and I do not use treats for a lot of my basic manners. That said, I find there are plenty of times where treats are useful in various ways.
> 
> What I do care about is this idea that dogs should just do what you say because it's the 'right thing to do'. I see this a lot and it baffles me. Dogs don't have morals and typically are out to get what they want- be that food, fun, whatever.


I don't have to bribe my dogs, so not everyone needs to. I said nothing about morals.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Iceweasel said:


> And how on Earth is it limiting if I don't do it?


You are choosing your dog's reinforcers for him. Arbitrarily. That's limiting.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Iceweasel said:


> I don't have to bribe my dogs, so not everyone needs to.


 I don't know if you use punishment/"corrections"/etc., but punishment is bribery just as much as rewards are. . .


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Iceweasel said:


> For some reason people can't receive what I said. I can understand why a trainer would use treats for someone else's dog. That isn't what I was talking about. And how on Earth is it limiting if I don't do it? They do get treats, but not for training.
> I don't have to bribe my dogs, so not everyone needs to. I said nothing about morals.


I'm just going to quote you:



> If YOUR gog doesn't respond to YOUR praise then yes, something is very wrong.





> ...which means food if that's the reward. That may well be the true motivation. If your dog doesn't care for his master's praise, something is very wrong.





> ...unless you've had him or her for a while. If your praise means nothing someting is wrong. Dogs are a domesticated breed, not livestock.


^ If you're not trying to say everyone's dogs should respond to praise only then what ARE you trying to say?

How is rewarding with a treat any more bribery than rewarding with playing a fun game or rewarding with a belly scratch and 'good dog!' All of those cases, the dog is doing the thing because it's a positive outcome for the dog in question.

You also said the dog should do something because it's 'right'. Nothing is 'right' or 'wrong' to a dog. They do the 'right' thing because it's favorable to them or they avoid the 'wrong' thing because it's not favorable for them. You are imposing some moral judgement in there...

And yes I agree with petpeeve. I find it incredibly limiting to decide you can use only one specific kind of reinforcer with your dogs. I am always looking for different ways to reinforce my dogs' behavior and what works best depends on what the task at hand is and what the circumstances are (and which dog I am dealing with too).


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Dogs who *seem* to work for praise alone, are often just working to avoid a correction. That's my observations.


----------



## RabbleFox (Jan 23, 2013)

petpeeve said:


> Dogs who *seem* to work for praise alone, are often just working to avoid a correction. That's my observations.


Even if that correction is saying "No". Some dogs are softer than others and a stern tone would be considered a correction.

Some dogs actually do like working for praise but I find those far and few between. Good luck trying to get a Husky to come to you without some kind of reward. Here is a hint: "Good dog!" ain't gonna cut it. Lol.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Iceweasel said:


> If YOUR gog doesn't respond to YOUR praise then yes, something is very wrong.


Nope. Praise isn't an inherent motivator for some dogs. Some dogs learn it is a predictor of another, better reward (eg it's a bridge) and some dogs learn that it means they WON'T receive a correction/punishment, but... some dogs don't care about it at all, and there's nothing wrong with those dogs or their owners. Plenty of dogs who aren't praise motivated are trained to very high levels in sports and other activities. 



> I didn't say anything about morality. Dogs in the wild learn right from wrong, like not taking food from a superior dog.


Concepts of "right" and "wrong" ARE morality, lol. Dogs in the wild learn what behaviors help them get what they want and avoid what they don't want. Right and wrong don't have anything to do with it.



> Yes, cows are domesticated livestock, bad choice of words, but dogs are not livestock. If a child didn't care about his mom or dad's praise then there's something dysfunctional going on.


Are we talking about children or dogs?


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Laurelin said:


> What I do care about is this idea that dogs should just do what you say because it's the 'right thing to do'. I see this a lot and it baffles me. Dogs don't have morals and typically are out to get what they want- be that food, fun, whatever.


Right? It's just projecting human ideas onto an animal who is such a joy to be around in part because they are so very NOT human, and so transparent and simple in their desires and behavior.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Is "superiority" a thing ? Oh my, not another can o' worms.


----------



## pawsaddict (Apr 17, 2013)

Shell said:


> To me, part of building the trust in a dog that you won't take things away from them willy-nilly is teaching them that it is worth their time to give something up. No, you don't always have to have treats for ever and ever in order to ask the dog to give up an object, but by playing the "trading game" and rewarding the dog for willingly giving up an object and slowly phasing out and randomizing those rewards, you create a mindset that says "eh, it isn't so bad for my human to reach to my mouth and take something cause sometimes I get something even better. even if I don't get something better, nothing bad happens at least"
> 
> I don't have a problem with corrections in and of themselves. The issue with corrections is that they have to be well timed and specific to the action, otherwise the dog can easily misinterpret them. I don't like to correct something unless I have shown the dog that there is a better alternative and given the dog the opportunity to chose that better alternative. In the case of something that can result in creating aggression, I always error on the side of positive training: aggression begets aggression IMO. I'm not imply that merely saying "NO" is "aggression" or a huge correction, but it is a negative and it isn't really telling the dog what they _should_ be doing. Depending on the dog and the tone of voice, some dogs will react much more to a voice correction than others.
> 
> Correcting a growl doesn't teach the dog that it is okay to give up an object to the human, it teaches them not to growl. It doesn't get to the root of the behavior which is basically insecurity.


Couldn't have said it any better myself :thumbup:

Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## BostonBullMama (Apr 20, 2013)

Iceweasel, my "ill mannered" comment directed at you is simply a statement and fact. You are treating everyone elses posts as though they are wrong and your way is the *right* way, turning this entire well-intentioned thread, into a drama fest. 
You have repeatedly offended dog owners across the board by saying that we are clearly lacking in a dog-person relationship if our dog is not willingly working for praise. Which is 1000000% untrue. My dog loves to be praised. He will sit for praise, he will stay for praise, he will come for praise. But to teach him to do that, I had to use treats and phase them out over time. 
POINT BEING: Not all dogs will work JUST for praise and that has NOTHING to do with the relationship the dog has with the human. I consider my dog to be my best friend but I wouldn't ask him to do something for me without offering something in return. 

You have been repeating yourself OVER and OVER that there is something wrong with everyone else if their dog won't accept praise as the ultimate reward. I think that is the most closed minded way of thinking and is quite matter of factly absolutely wrong.


----------



## cshellenberger (Dec 2, 2006)

Iceweasel said:


> Dogs learn like people do. A child doesn't know what no means either, but they learn. Even a puppy knows a negative reaction when they see it. They will learn quickly and my dogs do not feel the need to guard things from me because they trust me. It takes time but they do learn from ositive and negative responses. I don't know why so many feel no negative reaction is the best way to train a dog, I sure see a lot of the consequences at the dog park.



Better to teach the puppy the desired behavior via training than to scare them. I tend to start teaching "leave it" (via doggy zen as posted in the training forum) from the first day the pup is home and start "drop it" shortly after. Training is continuous, with some things being standard and others conditional to the dog.


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

ruhroh said:


> I saw something completely new this morning. My three-month-old (today!) puppy bared his teeth and growled at me, with his tail low and his ears back. It was just before his usual nap time in the morning, and he tends to get fussy and nippy when he's sleepy, but always playfully so. The aggression only lasted about a minute, and it was punctuated by playfulness (wagging tail, "let's play" rear-up crouched position).
> 
> Was it actual aggression? He didn't nip me and I immediately kenneled him (he's now asleep). My understanding is that when puppies play aggressively there's always a sign that's it's play and not actual aggression (wagging tail, etc.). I had just taken away one of my son's Legos that the puppy was trying to gnaw on. I've taken things away in the past, though, and never had this reaction.
> 
> Thoughts?


It's kind of impossible to tell just from this exactly what was going on. Dogs growl for a lot of different reasons and only one of them is actual aggression. It could be fear, playfulness, an upset tummy...who knows? I view growling and barking as communication and I encourage my dog to communicate when it's appropriate, so I wouldn't correct a dog just for growling unless I knew WHY the dog was growling and that was worthy of a correction. I want my dog to growl before he reacts more severely, if that makes sense.

It sounds most likely that this was an over-tired puppy that wanted to play being bratty, in which case I'd do exactly what you did and crate him for a nap. If you suspect resource guarding to be an issue (google it or search the threads here for examples), then I'd start trading games early, but I would not worry too much. It's fixable, particularly when you're starting with a young puppy.

Most of all, though, the most important advice for ANY puppy is...take pictures. Tons of them. And share them. Preferably here.


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

op2:
Wow, look what I get when I'm busy for a few days....



petpeeve said:


> Dogs who *seem* to work for praise alone, are often just working to avoid a correction. That's my observations.


I just wanted to comment on this. I've got to say, I'd never quite looked at it that way, and I will also say I do think you are very right....especially if you consider "no" on a soft dog to be a correction. 

I'll also follow this up a bit (I'm going to TRY to stay out of the rest of the drama fest lol)...Praise is a reward, although, for many dogs a pretty minor one without the correction to contrast it with. I trained Caeda's recall with an e collar (after extensive treat-based training as a basis first...but that is sort of besides my point), she is a tough, stubborn girl, and very independent. I will say that she seemed more responsive to praise as the sole reward when the e collar was being used. I did use treats as well for the most part, especially during the training when I used the (very low) stim, though I did not use treats 100% of the time. Also, the rare time I did "issue a speeding ticket" if she blew me off badly (ie: higher stim, this only happened later in the training, when unforeseen things came up), I found that when she came she seemed quite content at that point with praise and wasn't acting as though she expected a treat (I always gave her one though when she recalled from something that was obviously hard for her to do....HUGE rewards if the collar wasn't used). I've seen the odd exception of a dog that is SO incredibly praise and handler driven, but not what I would consider the standard...whereas Caeda is a bit on the opposite end of that spectrum of praise driven. 

I really don't want a debate started on e collars, or the ethics/cruelty, of it or other aversives, I'm just offering up something that came to my mind reading petpeeve's statement...I hope my explanation makes sense. Well put Petpeeve! Thanks for putting that perspective so succinctly.


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

When you think of most animal behavior, INCLUDING humans, there is some sort of reinforcer involved. I think with humans, it gets more complicated, because those reinforcers can be internal, like adhering to a belief structure, etc. In animals, it's usually a bit easier to see because those reinforcers are more straightforward.

For a dog that works "solely for praise," it's likely that there is more than just the praise going. The dog may be smart enough to have connected the praise with some other reinforcer. Master is happy and when Master is happy he plays with me or feeds me treats, whether that happens right when I make Master happy or not. Or, it could be, as others have suggested, a negative reinforcer, as in, when Master is happy he doesn't give me a leash correction. When he's not happy, sometimes that happens, so I want him to be happy.

Dogs are pretty darn smart and often can figure out our convoluted attempts at communication. Even my early dogs, before I got better at timing rewards and corrections were able to figure out that doing what I wanted led to good things in one way or another and doing things I didn't want either didn't lead to good things or even led to unhappy things like time outs or corrections. Then, they were smart enough to figure out exactly what things I liked and did more of those and what things I didn't and tried to do less of those. That doesn't mean my dog had the capacity to determine that what I liked (what got the positive reaction from me) was "right" and what I didn't like was "wrong."

I like to think of dogs as visitors from another planet encountering a potentially hostile, bigger species that communicates in grunts and wild arm gestures. They experiment, trying out different behaviors and watching the big beast cautiously to see what reaction the beast gives. If the beast looks calm and relaxed or happy, then they do more of that. If the beast looks uneasy or aggressive, ok, maybe less of that. Using well-timed rewards and/or corrections can really help make things clearer so that the dog does not have to guess or try to puzzle out what we're asking for.

Since I can't bark particularly well in a way my dog understands, well timed rewards and/or corrections are my best way of communicating more clearly. Reinforcers are present whether we want them to be or not, both in our own lives and behaviors and our dogs'. The way I see it, I can either try to ignore that, or use it to my advantage as a handler.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

Very well said Packetsmom.


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

petpeeve said:


> You are choosing your dog's reinforcers for him. Arbitrarily. That's limiting.


Huh? I don't treat train them so I'm choosing their reinforcers? Is that supposed to make sense?


Willowy said:


> I don't know if you use punishment/"corrections"/etc., but punishment is bribery just as much as rewards are. . .


I don't agree with the idiotic belief that teaching a dog the word no is punishment in the first place. I've never heard bribery used that way either, I'll stick with standard definitions.


Laurelin said:


> I'm just going to quote you:
> 
> ^ If you're not trying to say everyone's dogs should respond to praise only then what ARE you trying to say?


How is rewarding with a treat any more bribery than rewarding with playing a fun game or rewarding with a belly scratch and 'good dog!' All of those cases, the dog is doing the thing because it's a positive outcome for the dog in question.[/quote]I didn't use the words bribery or punishment or some of the other nonsense thrown around. You need to take that up with those who hold the beliefs. I said what I said very simply, apparently some people take exception to the fact that not everyone treat trains their dogs. I don't surprise easy these days but that's surprising. Nor did I say what everyone should do, you are resonding to false assertions made by those people, not what I said.


> You also said the dog should do something because it's 'right'. Nothing is 'right' or 'wrong' to a dog. They do the 'right' thing because it's favorable to them or they avoid the 'wrong' thing because it's not favorable for them. You are imposing some moral judgement in there...


Odd twist. So not pooping in the house is imposing my morality on them? I don't share those definitions. What is right or wrong is what pleases or displeases me. Rules, not morality. I gave an example, them coming up to me for the leash, they know it's right and running off is wrong. No treats involved. Is that really so controversial? If so all I can say is WOW.


> And yes I agree with petpeeve. I find it incredibly limiting to decide you can use only one specific kind of reinforcer with your dogs. I am always looking for different ways to reinforce my dogs' behavior and what works best depends on what the task at hand is and what the circumstances are (and which dog I am dealing with too).


I deal with my two dogs and it works for me. And it works very well. The fact that someone doesn't approve is meaningless to me.


----------



## Sarah~ (Oct 12, 2013)

I think really the thing you said that rubbed everyone wrong the most is that because our dogs do not want to work for a "good boy" or a belly scratch, but food instead, that our relationship is wrong. Our dogs still really enjoy those things but my mix would just look at me if I told her to sit. Praise doesn't get her focused like a treat does, it actually amps her up and makes her want to play instead of learning to sit or stay or come, so the opposite of what I want to do. We always play after we train but when I am giving her a command I need her to be in training mode, not bouncing off the walls excited like when it's playtime.

My GSD is totally praise driven but he is older, been training longer, a different breed and a different dog


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Iceweasel said:


> I didn't use the words bribery or punishment or some of the other nonsense thrown around. You need to take that up with those who hold the beliefs.


Quoting you



> I don't have to bribe my dogs, so not everyone needs to.


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

BostonBullMama said:


> Iceweasel, my "ill mannered" comment directed at you is simply a statement and fact. You are treating everyone elses posts as though they are wrong and your way is the *right* way, turning this entire well-intentioned thread, into a drama fest.


I didn't produce the drama. I said I dont use treats, the drama was created by others. Your facts are way off and you lied about what I said.


> You have repeatedly offended dog owners across the board by saying that we are clearly lacking in a dog-person relationship if our dog is not willingly working for praise. Which is 1000000% untrue. My dog loves to be praised. He will sit for praise, he will stay for praise, he will come for praise. But to teach him to do that, I had to use treats and phase them out over time.


That's also a lie. I said your dog should value your praise, if they don't, something is wrong. I'm not talking about a new dog, puppy or someone else's dog. I can't believe that's even controversial. If you want to consider it controversial and get offended then so be it but you must get offended a lot. If I disagree with someone I don't get offended, why go through life being offended? I don't get it.


> POINT BEING: Not all dogs will work JUST for praise and that has NOTHING to do with the relationship the dog has with the human. I consider my dog to be my best friend but I wouldn't ask him to do something for me without offering something in return.


My dogs value my praise so they get something in return, something they value. How hard is that? Seems like you've taken it very personally that not everyone uses treats or needs to. That's fine but there's no need to misrepresent opposing opinions.


> You have been repeating yourself OVER and OVER that there is something wrong with everyone else if their dog won't accept praise as the ultimate reward. I think that is the most closed minded way of thinking and is quite matter of factly absolutely wrong.


I didn't say that either. I don't use treat training, never have and have two of the best behaved dogs around. That means that not everyone needs to do so, if that's what they believe, they're wrong. The closed mindedness comes from those unwilling to accept it.


cshellenberger said:


> Better to teach the puppy the desired behavior via training than to scare them. I tend to start teaching "leave it" (via doggy zen as posted in the training forum) from the first day the pup is home and start "drop it" shortly after. Training is continuous, with some things being standard and others conditional to the dog.


I agree but don't consider teaching a dog (or a child for that matter) the word no is scaring them. If I grabbed the ears and screamed it, that would scare them. I didn't say I used scare or punishment tactics. Those words were inserted into what I said.


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

Laurelin said:


> Quoting you


I believe we were discussing me using the word 'no' or praise as bribery somehow. I don't agree.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Iceweasel said:


> Huh? I don't treat train them so I'm choosing their reinforcers? Is that supposed to make sense?


I'm curious. Have you actually done trials, where you've experimented with various rewards, carefully observed your dog's response level for each reward, and determined that your dog responds best of all for praise ? 

It's all about allowing the dog to choose his own reinforcers, and having enough presence of mind to listen to and abide by his choices without imposing our misguided beliefs. Like, for example, treats are for circus tricks.


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

Sarah~ said:


> I think really the thing you said that rubbed everyone wrong the most is that because our dogs do not want to work for a "good boy" or a belly scratch, but food instead, that our relationship is wrong.


OK fine. Please post where I said that. Some may have taken it that way but I said what I said, not what they think I said. Maybe it's too emotional an issue for some. 


> Our dogs still really enjoy those things but my mix would just look at me if I told her to sit. Praise doesn't get her focused like a treat does, it actually amps her up and makes her want to play instead of learning to sit or stay or come, so the opposite of what I want to do. We always play after we train but when I am giving her a command I need her to be in training mode, not bouncing off the walls excited like when it's playtime.
> 
> My GSD is totally praise driven but he is older, been training longer, a different breed and a different dog


Both of mine sit on command without treats. Mine don't do specific feats requiring special focus, like rolling over or whatever. If I wanted them to then I would need treats too.


----------



## Iceweasel (Jan 6, 2014)

petpeeve said:


> I'm curious. Have you actually done trials, where you've experimented with various rewards, carefully observed your dog's response level for each reward, and determined that your dog responds best of all for praise ?
> 
> It's all about allowing the dog to choose his own reinforcers, and having enough presence of mind to listen to and abide by his choices without imposing our misguided beliefs. Like, for example, treats are for circus tricks.


Trials for what? Mine don't need treats to do this or that. If I wanted them to do circus tricks I would need treats. That isn't misguided, it's a fact. I don't let them decide when they get treats and for what purpose, I make those decisions.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Iceweasel said:


> Both of mine sit on command without treats. Mine don't do specific feats requiring special focus, like rolling over or whatever. If I wanted them to then I would need treats too.


 It's not merely about focus, it's about response, like I said previously. 

All so-called tricks aside. Sitting is one thing, it's a relatively passive behavior. But can you get a blistering recall, and I mean TRULY blistering, by rewarding your dog with simple praise. I doubt it.


----------



## Sarah~ (Oct 12, 2013)

Iceweasel said:


> OK fine. Please post where I said that. Some may have taken it that way but I said what I said, not what they think I said. Maybe it's too emotional an issue for some.
> Both of mine sit on command without treats. Mine don't do specific feats requiring special focus, like rolling over or whatever. If I wanted them to then I would need treats too.


Ok I found where you said it I'll post what Shell said then what you said back so you can see how we got the impression you said we had bad relationships with our dogs:




Shell said:


> Then you and I disagree on a fundamental part of training. There are plenty of dogs that couldn't give a rat's behind about praise. It just isn't their personality. To them, another currency works. For many dogs, that is a food reward. For some, a toy or game. Rewarding them with food doesn't mean they do something for food-- the food tells them that they have done the right thing and that doing the right thing is the preferable option.





Iceweasel said:


> ...which means food if that's the reward. That may well be the true motivation. If your dog doesn't care for his master's praise, something is very wrong.


The way I read this, and I think everyone else did too, was that you are saying if our dogs do not care for our praise as a motivator, then something is wrong. And that's not true at all, not every dog will do cartwheels just for a "good boy" but that does not mean that they don't love us.


----------



## pawsaddict (Apr 17, 2013)

jsca said:


> :deadhorse:
> 
> 
> lol i've been waiting for the right opportunity to use this emoticon : )


LOVE IT! lololol


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Iceweasel said:


> Trials for what?


Ho my. I give up. You win :clap2:


----------



## BostonBullMama (Apr 20, 2013)

Iceweasel; you seem to think I am offended that you do not use treats to train your dogs. I just wanted to clarify that I could really not care any less how you train your dogs. If your dogs accept praise as the reward - awesome! If not, whatever, who cares. I'm not offended that you don't use treats. I (and others on this board) am offended that you are acting all high and mighty by telling us that there is something wrong with our pet-handler relationship since our dogs may not choose to sit just for praise. And THAT is what has people riled. 

I'm done beating the horse now though. This is pointless. Maybe when you've calmed down a bit you'll re-read this thread and see why people are reacting the way they are.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Iceweasel said:


> I said I dont use treats, the drama was created by others.


You also implied that people who use treats "need" to "bribe" their dogs and that if praise does not motivate a dog, then there is something wrong with the dog, the owner, or their relationship. All of your statements are right there in black and white, no one is misrepresenting or lying about it. I assure you, nobody here cares how you train your dogs. What they care about are broad, inaccurate statements about how dogs learn and what training methods are effective for Dogs with a capital D. 

You seem to keep moving the goalposts... you say something, people object to it and counter it, then you deflect the conversation elsewhere and say you never said something or that people misunderstood it or that it is their problem if they got offended. If you don't see how that causes "drama" then I'm not sure what else there is to say to you.


ETA: When I find myself in a situation where it seems like I'm right and everybody else is wrong, I generally consider three possibilities: 1. I am some kind of visionary genius, 2. I am not articulating my point effectively/I'm not saying what I think I'm saying, 3. I'm actually wrong. Sadly, while most of us stubbornly cling to #1 it's usually #2 or #3. It's a good signal to examine if you're really saying what you think you're saying in your posts.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

Iceweasel said:


> That's also a lie. I said your dog should value your praise, if they don't, something is wrong. I'm not talking about a new dog, puppy or someone else's dog. I can't believe that's even controversial. If you want to consider it controversial and get offended then so be it but you must get offended a lot. If I disagree with someone I don't get offended, why go through life being offended? I don't get it.
> *How can it NOT be controversial to insult a huge number of people based on a poor understanding of dogs? There is nothing at all wrong with a dog that doesn't value praise sufficiently to train complex or difficult tasks. No one is saying our dogs or dogs in general don't value praise, we are saying that the majority of them do not value it all that highly for training purposes unless it is also paired with a higher value reward or the avoidance of punishment.*
> 
> My dogs value my praise so they get something in return, something they value. How hard is that? Seems like you've taken it very personally that not everyone uses treats or needs to. That's fine but there's no need to misrepresent opposing opinions.
> ...





Iceweasel said:


> Both of mine sit on command without treats. Mine don't do specific feats requiring special focus, like rolling over or whatever. If I wanted them to then I would need treats too.


Sitting is easy. I can walk a dog out of the shelter and have them sitting on command by the end of the day. What people are trying to explain is that what you keep calling "circus tricks" are for other people everyday tasks, sports skills, or work skills. You agree that your dogs would need treats for difficult tasks. Which is exactly everyone's point-- the DOG decides what is a difficult task so even though you're content with your dogs level of training using strictly praise for training, many people have either dogs that require higher value reinforcers and/or want to train to a higher level of tasks. 

The "circus tricks" that you deride are great mind exercises for higher energy, smart dogs. They are good for increasing focus and attentiveness. They are good for keeping a dog mentally healthy during long spells of bad weather or after a surgery or injury. They can be applied to useful tasks for those needing assistance dogs. There is a lot of good stuff to be said about trick training and opening one's mind to using treats (gasp) to train more than the basics is worth it.


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

Sure, you can train without treats, but you'll likely have to substitute some other kind of reinforcer, which it sounds like you are...praise and petting. That WILL work if you're training a relatively easy dog to train to do simple behaviors and I've trained a dog in the past myself with little else. She was a dog with a very high will to please built in to her and I never did anything beyond the basics needed for a pet dog. It worked great.

However, many of us here either do not have dogs that are heavily driven to please (which has little to nothing to do with the relationship and everything to do with the dog's breed and/or temperment) OR we are working on things beyond just house manners and basic obedience. We have people here who specifically work with dogs with behavioral issues for the purposes of rehabilitation. We have service dog owners who need their dog to be able to do specific tasks in very distracting environments. We have at least one person who does Search and Rescue with her dogs and their training could mean life or death for the people she is trying to find. We have agility folks who train their dogs to do amazing things and have so much fun together doing it. I train my dog in Schutzhund, so him enthusiastically following commands and being very precise about it isn't just important, it means keeping the people we're working with safe.

When you're doing stuff like this...you need a bigger toolbox and that really is all using treats is. It is a very easy way of delivering a high value reinforcer right away to tell the dog that yes, this is exactly what I want you to do. I use a combination of reinforcers to train my dog because I find that it is the best way for me to get the results I need, not because of something lacking in our relationship. Trust me, he is eager to please, that is not the issue. The correct use of reinforcers helps me to condition him to the point where responses are automatic, without him having to think through them, which means a much quicker response.

Think about the effect of conditioning on humans. Let's say you've been in a car accident. That's a pretty BAD reinforcer that will make you try to avoid the same situation again. However, what happens when you have your next near miss in a car? You may find yourself flinching or jerking your arm in front of your passenger or otherwise having a reaction BEFORE you even think the situation through, right? By using conditioning and reinforcers, I can train my dog to respond to a command without him having to think it through. This is how you end up with dogs being able to give an instant reaction to commands, such as what is needed for most dog sports or working dogs.

Hardly "circus tricks" if you're training a police dog or a service dog.

So sure, you CAN train without treats, but it is less efficient, less effective, and you have to have a dog with a very specific temperment. Either that, or you have to substitute a lot more corrections. Most of us would just rather do what works and that has nothing to do with how our dogs feel about us or we feel about them.


----------



## jp2mulhern (May 26, 2013)

Your puppy is trying to show you what is his and you do not want him to do that discipline him for that you are the leader not him but do not be mean or in time it could get worse.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

jp2mulhern said:


> Your puppy is trying to show you what is his and you do not want him to do that discipline him for that you are the leader not him but do not be mean or in time it could get worse.


If it needs to be said at this point... OP, please do not do this.


----------

