# At what point is positive only not good enough?



## ayln (Dec 23, 2012)

I have a now 6 mos old corgi puppy who has been a handful from the get go. She's an outlier from her litter; I keep in touch with her breeder and one of her brothers and she is definitely the most independent, energetic, and dominant -- in the dog-to-dog sense -- of her siblings. She's a bully to other dogs, mostly disregards commands, and knows exactly when she can sneak into something she shouldn't be getting into. Despite months of positive only clicker training and NILIF with only verbal corrections for very unacceptable behavior (chewing socks & underwear, trying to get to the trash, eating poop), she is still the same bratty old self she has always been. She's even started to resource guard things she finds and claims as hers, such as sticks, peach pits, dropped toys, and will growl, snap and BITE both humans and dogs.

Ignoring her bad behavior doesn't solve anything because she's so independent that she simply doesn't care about my approval or attention -- in fact she would prefer that I ignore any bad behavior because then she can get away with more. Withholding a reward for not complying with a command doesn't do anything because she either self-rewards (leaving to find a toy or drink water or anything else) or she just stares at me.

So, at what point do you break out the big guns? Or do you just keep on chugging with the positive only and hope it eventually pays off?


----------



## lil_fuzzy (Aug 16, 2010)

Doesn't really sounds like you've been applying positive training correctly, so even if there was a time to introduce harsher methods, you're definitely not there yet.

You don't ignore bad behaviour in positive training, you prevent it from happening. Either you control the environment (pick up anything you don't want your dog to get to) or you control the dog by using a leash, crate or playpen. While you're preventing unwanted behaviour, and the only option for the dog is the correct behaviour (i.e., no shoes/socks on the floor to chew on, only her own toys) you reward her for the correct behaviour. Over time this becomes habit, and when the dog is a bit older it won't matter if there's other stuff lying around.

Make the wrong thing hard, make the right thing easy. Reward for the right thing so this can become habit.

When you give a command in positive training, you don't let the dog walk away and self reward. There's a couple of things wrong here. Firstly, if the dog is walking away when you ask her to do something, she's not motivated to do it in the first place. This isn't her fault, this is your fault for not motivating her by making training fun and rewarding. So back to basics and train it in a way that's more motivating for the dog.

Secondly, once she knows the command, but she sees something else that she thinks is more fun, you prevent her from getting to it by keeping her on leash. If she's not reliable, she shouldn't be off leash anyway. If she ignores a command, move her further away from what she really wants, and ask again. If she ignores you again, keep moving further away and eventually out of sight of what she really wants. Don't get angry, just very calmly move her away. As soon as she does what you want, release her and run back with her to what she really wanted. This way she learns that the only way to get what she wants is by listening, and through repetition she will learn that it's quicker to do it the first time.

This also means you're not limited to just using treats and toys as rewards, you can use anything she loves and wants. She wants to chew the stick? Do a sit first, then be released to the stick. Then it doesn't matter what distractions are in your environment, because she knows if she just listens to you, she can have it. There will be times when she can't have things, but if you practise this lots and lots, she will know there's a very good chances she can have what she wants, and so she will listen to you in the hopes of getting it.


----------



## ayln (Dec 23, 2012)

Wow, if my trainer had explained this to me the first time, I probably wouldn't have been so frustrated. Guess it's back to being really vigilant with her toys and keeping her in the pen. Should I be keeping her on leash in the house too? I gave up doing that in the beginning because she would chew on it when I wasn't looking, and she still does if she gets bored enough and I forget to take it off her.

Also, would it let her basically learn to listen only when the leash is on -- she's kind of learned that if she's in the pen, she better obey or else she's not coming out or not getting a reward AND she's still stuck in the pen, but once she is loose in the house everything is basically fair game. I keep her in a large room that does have some blind spots but is small enough for me to still keep an eye on her. She also tends to ignore MORE and be more disobedient when the leash is on. I can probably get her to heel better without the leash than with.


----------



## lil_fuzzy (Aug 16, 2010)

If you supervise in the house and keep stuff off the floor, she should be able to be off leash. If she needs to be on leash, you could try a chain leash, as most dogs don't like to chew them.

If you always have a leash on her and train her to listen really well, it won't matter when the leash comes off, because she's in the habit of listening. Just make sure you're not using the leash as a crutch, like don't pull on the leash to move her around. Get in the habit of using only your voice and hand gestures to move her, that way she's not learning that if you don't have a leash on her, you can't control her. When you get to the point where you can't remember the last time you actually had to use the leash, that's when it's time for it to come off. Or transition to a long line to give her a bit more freedom while still being in control.

If she's worse with the leash on, I'd say there's probably a big distinction between the leash being off and the leash being on, meaning you probably use it to control her. I see so many people use the leash to control their dogs, so naturally when the leash comes off they have no control, and the dog learns to hate the leash. The leash should just be there as an extra safety measure, it shouldn't be used to actually guide and position your dog. That's what your voice is for, and you should be able to just point to where you want her.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

lil_fuzzy - Awesome response! You should save this for other threads where people don't understand or correctly implement positive reinforcement-based training strategies.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

lil_fuzzy said:


> Doesn't really sounds like you've been applying positive training correctly, so even if there was a time to introduce harsher methods, you're definitely not there yet.


That was my thought too.

Lilfuzzy's response was very good. In this situation I don't see how a correction will really help at all or at least beyond a verbal correction. 

One of the big issues I see is just poor trainers who teach their students wrong. 

Also remember, she's a 6 month old pup so don't expect too too much all the time as far as things go. Chewing is pretty normal as is not quite having a brain. No matter what 'school' of dog training you subscribe to a lot about raising a puppy is simply management vs anything else. Stealing socks, chewing inappropriate things, is all totally normal for a 6 month old. Mia had to be tethered to me if I couldn't keep 100% of my attention on her at that age or she'd get into stuff all the time. She wasn't being dominant, she was just a very active young dog with a very busy little mind. But it sounds to me like she may not know the commands as well as you think if she's ignoring them. I'd go back to square one and start very very basic. I find it also helps to turn the sit/downs into a game. My dog gets bored when we drill something very dull like that. For puppies, sessions need to be really short and thoroughly engaging. don't start too hard and don't expect her to generalize to everything just yet.

I'd also work on keeping her engaged/relationship work. By that I mean arm yourself with rewards your dog likes and when she's paying attention REWARD HER! For training the very first thing you should do is start by asking for active participation. You don't actually have to teach anything solid at first. Just look at me and Oh boy, we are having fun! Chase games are fantastic for building drive to learn. We do games like sit, run and catch me, sit, release, reward. Just ideas to make things more fun and less drill.

I also like shaping to teach a dog to engage and to start getting their brain to work with you. But overall it sounds like you need to be more fun and engaging to her.

For the resource guarding have you tried trading items with her?


----------



## trainingjunkie (Feb 10, 2010)

Best. Thread. Ever.


----------



## Emily1188 (Jun 21, 2011)

You've gotten great advice thus far and there's no need for me to echo it, but I just wanted to say that I have the same dog you - female corgi, outlier of the litter, the pushiest, most driven, most energetic of the bunch, and I can tell you that punishment with her gets me _nowhere. _ You know that attitude she has? It's gonna come back 10x stronger if you start using force with her. Corgis, on the whole, do not handle compulsive training well. They either shut down, or they get ready to bite you - or first they shut down, and THEN they bite you. IME especially the independent bitches. I'm sure she has that "I don't need you" attitude already - don't fan the flames, trust me.

So along with what you've learned already, I urge to you remember that the trick to training this kind of dog is to sneakily convince her that what YOU want her to do is what SHE wants to do. Life will get easier if you follow that motto. It also helps if you let them think things are happening on their terms, even if you're manipulating the situation to make it happen that way.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

that's kind of what I do, do you want [insert thing here]? then you have to do [this] first! If she doesn't then she goes to time out & doesn't get to do it at all, when playing she is NOT allowed to touch the other dog who fetches with her (usually bear, the jack Russell) if she barks at him or puts her mouth on him in ANY way, even if he doesn't yelp, I go & get her & put her on tie out, I don't say anything to her, I am not angry at her, the play session just simply ends for her. 

She is the only one that really does anything "wrong" the others are pretty much "wash & wear" dogs per say, they really don't do anything wrong.


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

I find that getting into head-on conflicts with strong-willed dogs rarely works well. For one, it's frustrating to me and damages the bond I feel with that dog. For another, it sets up this weird adversarial relationship between the dog and I, where everything becomes a battle of wills. Finally...it just doesn't work.

I had to learn all that the hard way with my Carolina Dog, who was super-smart but not really biddable at all. She came hardwired with no real desire to please humans. Compulsive training just escalated things and would make her even more defiant. I had to learn how to handle her differently than most dogs I'd had before her. When I stopped fighting against her and instead began to control her environment so that doing what I wanted resulted in the things she wanted, the relationship began to change. Instead of us standing toe to paw against each other, we were on the same side and working together.

I never completely got great at it because we weren't given that kind of time together, sadly, but I learned a lot from it and I find that the same techniques work very well with my headstrong pup now. If you've ever seen movies where there is a husband who is very stubborn and a wife that makes him _think_ he's in charge, all the while playing him like a fiddle to get him to do what she wants...you get the picture.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

packetsmom said:


> I find that getting into head-on conflicts with strong-willed dogs rarely works well. For one, it's frustrating to me and damages the bond I feel with that dog. For another, it sets up this weird adversarial relationship between the dog and I, where everything becomes a battle of wills. Finally...it just doesn't work.
> 
> I had to learn all that the hard way with my Carolina Dog, who was super-smart but not really biddable at all. She came hardwired with no real desire to please humans. Compulsive training just escalated things and would make her even more defiant. I had to learn how to handle her differently than most dogs I'd had before her. When I stopped fighting against her and instead began to control her environment so that doing what I wanted resulted in the things she wanted, the relationship began to change. Instead of us standing toe to paw against each other, we were on the same side and working together.
> 
> I never completely got great at it because we weren't given that kind of time together, sadly, but I learned a lot from it and I find that the same techniques work very well with my headstrong pup now. If you've ever seen movies where there is a husband who is very stubborn and a wife that makes him _think_ he's in charge, all the while playing him like a fiddle to get him to do what she wants...you get the picture.


Geeze do we have the same dog? LOL. Josefina was an orphan with no mom & she was bigger then her three brothers that she bullied mercilessly. Not to humanize or anything, but she is a very "selfish" dog who doesn't give a hoot about humans, or if you are ok or what you are doing. she will do things "for" you but only if there is something in it for her... which I think is that she loves learning TBH. but I always make sure there is a reward also. 

But she isn't what I would call a "good" dog.


----------



## Amaryllis (Dec 28, 2011)

Loving this thread!

This is what my mom told me about a battle of wills with a dog or a child: once you've entered the battle, you've already lost. There's no reason to get into a battle of wills with dogs or children, you're the adult, you're in control of everything, there's nothing _to _battle.

I usually remember this awesome advice after I'm already in the battle, but you know, still good advice.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Amaryllis said:


> This is what my mom told me about a battle of wills with a dog or a child: once you've entered the battle, you've already lost. There's no reason to get into a battle of wills with dogs or children, you're the adult, you're in control of everything, there's nothing _to _battle.


I love this quote.

My pup is almost a year old and I still heavily manage his environment because when he's bored, he's going to look for things to get into. Pick everything up so she doesn't have a chance to do anything bad. Work on trading games so that when she does have something you need back, she will give it up happily because it's all part of the trading game. NILF definitely comes to mind with a dog like this - she needs to pay attention to you and offer you a "good" behavior before she gets what she wants. If she isn't offering something you like, wait her out until she does. Play a lot of attention and relationship building games to get her to focus on you and think you're the most fun thing ever.

I have a dog who can't be trained with compulsion and it's all about making him think it's his idea. Hold him down for brushing or nail trims and he squirms like crazy while mouthing. Ask him to sit politely and hold up his paw for nail trims, rewarding every so often, and he's great. Some dogs really need to think it's their idea to comply, and the more you work on this, the more they trust you because you're not forcing them to do anything. It just takes more patience sometimes, but it's way easier than fighting with them about it.


----------



## ayln (Dec 23, 2012)

You know, I agree with all of you and I've been using those techniques, but it's like in any case where I simply can't control the environment/her she will definitely get into something that I can't bribe her out of. To her, there is nothing better than "stick". She understands bribing with food and she will not give sticks up for food, playing with another dog, a toy, nothing. Working up to a stick in "drop it" training has not been fruitful because she has two levels of item (and I'm not exaggerating) -- "go ahead and take it" (things I give her under NILIF) and "I WILL HURT YOU" (things she finds or some very high value item like rawhide, even when I'm holding it). Add that to me being a first time owner, and well... it's a lot of stress trying to believe that positive training can turn my puppy around and yet seeing her just be constantly disobedient and extremely reluctant to follow commands, even though I always enforce AND reward my commands (treat lure or body block depending on the command).


----------



## PatriciafromCO (Oct 7, 2012)

all good things already given.. I just wanted to add that poop eating is not a punishable offense and a waste for a correction... I think drawing huge attention to it marks its stronger for the activity. It is icky seen the phase in my own pups,,I don't try to stop them or take it from them,, my own instruction is not to bring it in the house... lol .. get the pooper scooper and go look to see if there is any more where that came from.. Love the Corgi's hang in there...


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

Amaryllis said:


> This is what my mom told me about a battle of wills with a dog or a child: once you've entered the battle, you've already lost.


Put in my signature.


----------



## ayln (Dec 23, 2012)

Patricia, I only give her an "ah-ah" if she's not on leash. She will leave it alone then. However, if I don't catch it (sometimes she drops a last phantom poop that I don't see) she will go after it. If it's a phase it's been a really long phase... she did it as a very little pup and she was doing really well not eating any poop for a while until I realized she would still eat it if I wasn't there to lead her away. So I still have to take her out on leash, even though she's housetrained.. I can't trust her not to eat poop, tear up the yard, steal something bad (peaches and peach pits) and then play keep away, etc.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

ayln said:


> Patricia, I only give her an "ah-ah" if she's not on leash. She will leave it alone then. However, if I don't catch it (sometimes she drops a last phantom poop that I don't see) she will go after it. If it's a phase it's been a really long phase... she did it as a very little pup and she was doing really well not eating any poop for a while until I realized she would still eat it if I wasn't there to lead her away. So I still have to take her out on leash, even though she's housetrained.. I can't trust her not to eat poop, tear up the yard, steal something bad (peaches and peach pits) and then play keep away, etc.


My dog goes out on leash because we don't have a fence and it's really not the end of the world (especially since most house trained dogs only need to go out a couple times per day). I would do only on leash potty breaks with her for a couple months and try to break the poop eating habit. The tearing things up and stealing things is totally normal 6 month old behavior, so once again, management is your best solution.


----------



## Amaryllis (Dec 28, 2011)

KBLover said:


> Put in my signature.


My mommy's famous!



> You know, I agree with all of you and I've been using those techniques, but it's like in any case where I simply can't control the environment/her she will definitely get into something that I can't bribe her out of. To her, there is nothing better than "stick". She understands bribing with food and she will not give sticks up for food, playing with another dog, a toy, nothing. Working up to a stick in "drop it" training has not been fruitful because she has two levels of item (and I'm not exaggerating) -- "go ahead and take it" (things I give her under NILIF) and "I WILL HURT YOU" (things she finds or some very high value item like rawhide, even when I'm holding it). Add that to me being a first time owner, and well... it's a lot of stress trying to believe that positive training can turn my puppy around and yet seeing her just be constantly disobedient and extremely reluctant to follow commands, even though I always enforce AND reward my commands (treat lure or body block depending on the command).


First, what about another stick? Present her with another stick, then mark the exact moment she drops the first stick to take the other, then give her back the first stick. Eventually, add the command to the action of dropping the stick. The point of this training is to show her that when she does what you want and drops it, she does not lose out. Instead, she gains. Eventually, you won't have to show her a second stick, she'll know that with you, she always gains more than she loses.

Are sticks optimal chew toys? No. Could you use a stick at this stage of the game for training? Yes. Just check her gums for splinters.

As for being disobedient, you need to look at it differently. Dogs are not disobedient. Dogs are untrained, bad at generalization or distracted, but not disobedient. To be disobedient, one must have intent. Dogs don't have intent. Dogs operate purely on "how do I get what I want right now?" Training is simply showing them, over and over and over, that "I get what I want by doing what she says." That's it. But when you view a dog as disobedient, you're putting an intention, a morality even, to a dog's actions that will cause you to get frustrated and angry and considering a good old-fashioned leash yank. 

Remember, it's all the trainer. When I get into a battle of wills with a four year old, as I did yesterday, that's all me. She's just being a four year old. I'm the one being stupid. I know better, I have better tools at my disposal, I foolishly allowed myself to get annoyed and not use them. We all do it, the trick is to recognize when you're doing it and stop.


----------



## ayln (Dec 23, 2012)

Elrohwen, what would you do to break her of the habit? Like I said, I thought she was being really good for a while when I was taking her out on leash, but the one time I let her out by herself I caught her eating poop.

Amaryllis, it's definitely hard not to think of it as a "disobedience" sort of thing, especially when she's staring me down with the cogs in her head turning. I could be standing 5 feet away with her bowl, making it exciting for her to come (not using the command), and she will stare at me like I'm crazy. Very hard not to just walk away in annoyance at that point. Guess I will have to try harder.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

Amaryllis said:


> As for being disobedient, you need to look at it differently. Dogs are not disobedient. Dogs are untrained, bad at generalization or distracted, but not disobedient. To be disobedient, one must have intent. Dogs don't have intent. Dogs operate purely on "how do I get what I want right now?" Training is simply showing them, over and over and over, that "I get what I want by doing what she says." That's it. But when you view a dog as disobedient, you're putting an intention, a morality even, to a dog's actions that will cause you to get frustrated and angry and considering a good old-fashioned leash yank.


Well, I think it's possible for a dog to disobey - though not because he's (to use Wally as an example) trying to "show me what's up" or whatever. Usually, it's because he's nose deep in some scent, too wound up to listen (he's just going to do whatever and "make" it work or because he wants to do it instead), or because he's confused/just made a mistake. Oh and trying to cut corners. Like a kid might do "why do I need step 3, I'll just 1, 2 and 4 and be done faster". They say dogs think like 7 year olds...

Even then, it is still the trainer to resolve it in a way that doesn't lead to a battle (which, at least for Wally, would just be even more confusing) and not to put any sort of intention on it. Understand why your dog messed up and take the steps you deem necessary and consider how to possibly prevent it - like when I was confusing him with "down" and "downstairs" - changing "down" to "drop" solved the issue without a battle. Or with the all of two whistle cues we've gotten so far - I'll adjust the pitch/stretch out the tones, etc. 

And of course, the first question is:

"Does the dog truly know what I want in this situation?" That's going to take repetition (either "formal" training or just establishing a day-to-day habit/routine/pattern, which dogs pick up on naturally over time) and association (using your cue/command just before engaging in the routine and/or at the right time during "formal" training).


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

My dogs generally aren't ready to be off leash in a non-puppy proofed area at 6 months. Their brains are actually even more fuzzy at that age than younger, with the teenage stage setting in.

If it were me, I'd pick up the poop if I didn't want her eating it. There are things you can feed your dog also to make their poop less tasty, but if I'm going to regularly be allowing my dog to be off-leash in a certain area, I feel it's up to me to puppy-proof that area. For a poop eater...that means picking up poop.

For the sticks, I'd just trade her for something she likes even better. There has got to be a treat or chewy she likes more than a stick. I'd keep those with me and then trade her for the stick when she goes after one.

I think you'd benefit a ton from reading some books about how dogs think. It might help you not take it so personally when the dog doesn't follow your commands. Some good ones are "The Other End of the Leash," "Don't Shoot the Dog, " and "Culture Clash." From the sounds of it, you're giving your dog credit for motivations that are far beyond a dog's limited ability to scheme and plan. Dogs do blow off commands, but just like with kids, you also have to keep in mind their developmental stage and the one she is at now is prime time for her fuzzy brain not to be fully all hooked together.

Patience, repetition, and managing her environment better will help you both get through this stage with your sanity intact and a good relationship built with your dog!  It does pass!


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

ayln said:


> Amaryllis, it's definitely hard not to think of it as a "disobedience" sort of thing, especially when she's staring me down with the cogs in her head turning. I could be standing 5 feet away with her bowl, making it exciting for her to come (not using the command), and she will stare at me like I'm crazy. Very hard not to just walk away in annoyance at that point. Guess I will have to try harder.


Try moving away. Perhaps standing, you're boring and she's wondering "what is she up to? what is she planning to do?" and watching for your next move, literally? Then, if she starts moving after you, you have something to praise and further encourage.


----------



## ayln (Dec 23, 2012)

Oh, she definitely knows what I'm asking of her. And yes, she does cut corners -- when I was teaching downs I would only reward down, and now when I tell her sit, she will do a down instead thinking she should get a reward for that! I just give her a "no reward" cue (Like "I don't think so") and either lure, make her smell the treat, or wait for her to sit up. That I don't count as "disobedience". What I'm talking about is her knowing the command, staring me straight in the face, knowing that I have a reward, and just not doing it. She's focused, no distractions, she knows what I'm asking, still just not doing it. I've read many many dog training books and I know that, rationally, she's not given enough motivation to do it. Any lesser dog owner (or me when I'm getting frustrated) would definitely think that was disobedience.

As for her following me -- she's far too independent for that. There are very few situations in which she'll follow me, and her food bowl is not one of them (she's not a great eater and not all that food motivated). I do practice recall with running with treats and toys and "stay", but she doesn't come when I'm "boring".


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

To be honest, some of this is sounding like she's 6 months old. Thud's 8, but he's a really immature 8 months (slow maturing as heck). 

He's a dog who is kind of independent, and a little stubborn, but up until the past few weeks was the most beautifully behaved dog, ever. Well trained, easy going, did what he was ask with a goofy grin and wagging tail. The past couple of weeks? Nope. Everything's some sort of game, he has the attention span of a gnat, and he wants to know 'what happens if I-' for a lot of things. Like seeing if the rules have changed. 

I just kind of grit my teeth, adjust my expectations, and remind myself that by the time he's 3ish, his brain will be back in his head. 

Sometimes it's not a training problem, it's a people psychology one.


----------



## PatriciafromCO (Oct 7, 2012)

Am glad it not a harsh correction about it eating poop  (I honestly don't care, if they eat poop,, "if that is what fascinates you (the pup) you just go for it) reminder to self no kissing the poo poo mouth... .. do you think your trying too hard all the time for everything? Not meaning anything in a bad way. there is so many different directions you are getting (wish they were different) responses,, wondering if just focusing on one to work on will be less stressful. I totally agree Corgi's are very strong individuals they are manipulators to be so small but get their jobs done  one of the breed aspects I love them so much. Do you ever feel you are too accessible to the pup? Ever try playing hard to get your attention, spending a day never saying a word, do you feel you do all the work and the dog has all the choices.... I don't know you so am not meaning anything by what I am asking.. just brain storming for solutions of where you stand to your dog.


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

ayln said:


> Oh, she definitely knows what I'm asking of her. And yes, she does cut corners -- when I was teaching downs I would only reward down, and now when I tell her sit, she will do a down instead thinking she should get a reward for that! I just give her a "no reward" cue (Like "I don't think so") and either lure, make her smell the treat, or wait for her to sit up. That I don't count as "disobedience". What I'm talking about is her knowing the command, staring me straight in the face, knowing that I have a reward, and just not doing it. She's focused, no distractions, she knows what I'm asking, still just not doing it. I've read many many dog training books and I know that, rationally, she's not given enough motivation to do it. Any lesser dog owner (or me when I'm getting frustrated) would definitely think that was disobedience.
> 
> As for her following me -- she's far too independent for that. There are very few situations in which she'll follow me, and her food bowl is not one of them (she's not a great eater and not all that food motivated). I do practice recall with running with treats and toys and "stay", but she doesn't come when I'm "boring".


The books I'm recommending aren't training books, but more about how dogs think and what they are and are not capable of, cognitively. Like a lot of dog owners (ok, really most), you tend to see your dog's behavior through the perspective of a human and how a human thinks. This is bound to leave you frustrated, particularly when dealing with a teenaged dog.

As CptJack said, with dogs this age it often just isn't much about motivation or training...sometimes it's just the dog testing boundaries or going through a stage where they don't have the attention span or focus needed. When that happens, about all you can do is be patient and consistent and wait it out. We just went through a period like this with our puppy, at 4 months and I don't doubt we'll have more of them.

Here's an example that might be similar to the behavior you're seeing. Our pup knows that he has to lay down before we will give him his food. We give the command "down," which he's known for a long time, and he is expected to stay in that down until we put the food bowl down. He's done this for almost the entire time we've had him, successfully. These past couple of weeks, we give the command and he stares at us blankly. We wait and he still refuses. What do we do? We put the food bowl aside and he does not get his food. We come back to it later, but he doesn't get his food until he finally gives in and does it. He'll often get frustrated and even bark at us when the food doesn't come and we put the bowl away...but that's how it goes.

Basically, when he refuses to do a command, we don't move on until he does it. If this means I'm stuck waiting for a sit, then that's what it means. Eventually he gives in and then it seems like something just kind of clicks after a few days of this and he goes back to obeying the command on the first try. When that happens, I throw a party with treats and praise. Rinse and repeat every time it pops up.

I know it's tough because I struggle with it, too, but I try not to take it personally when he does this. It's just a part of his development and part of him growing up. I like to think of it kind of like a 2-year-old's temper tantrum and expect that he will grow out of it when it finally clicks for good that it isn't going to get him what he wants.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

PatriciafromCO said:


> Am glad it not a harsh correction about it eating poop  (I honestly don't care, if they eat poop,, "if that is what fascinates you (the pup) you just go for it) reminder to self no kissing the poo poo mouth... .. do you think your trying too hard all the time for everything? Not meaning anything in a bad way. there is so many different directions you are getting (wish they were different) responses,, wondering if just focusing on one to work on will be less stressful. I totally agree Corgi's are very strong individuals they are manipulators to be so small but get their jobs done  one of the breed aspects I love them so much. Do you ever feel you are too accessible to the pup? Ever try playing hard to get your attention, spending a day never saying a word, do you feel you do all the work and the dog has all the choices.... I don't know you so am not meaning anything by what I am asking.. just brain storming for solutions of where you stand to your dog.


I was thinking the same thing. 

I see many many people worry about rules and being textbook with their dogs. Being uptight and frustrated about things will not help at all. I think taking a step back and thinking of ways to restart some of this training would be good. Take a week off and just try to enjoy the dog without 'training' worries. Play lots of games. Hang out. Start putting two and two together on what really makes your dog tick. Figure out how to use those things she Loves to your advantage. Then I would tackle a couple things. Not everything at once. And I would keep one of those things to purely to play more with your dog. 

A lot of this is really normal for a 6 month old. Mia was a mess at that age and sometimes I just had to stop and laugh. That's the only way you keep sanity.


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

Laurelin said:


> Take a week off and just try to enjoy the dog without 'training' worries. Play lots of games. Hang out. Start putting two and two together on what really makes your dog tick. Figure out how to use those things she Loves to your advantage. Then I would tackle a couple things. Not everything at once. And I would keep one of those things to purely to play more with your dog.


^^^^SO very much this.  If training feels like work for you, your dog is not going to be as engaged and it's not going to help the relationship. I find the more time I spend with my dogs playing and having fun with them, the easier it is to work with them in training. Training should be fun...for both of you and the more you can make it like play and a game, the better time you both will have.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

packetsmom said:


> ^^^^SO very much this.  If training feels like work for you, your dog is not going to be as engaged and it's not going to help the relationship. I find the more time I spend with my dogs playing and having fun with them, the easier it is to work with them in training. Training should be fun...for both of you and the more you can make it like play and a game, the better time you both will have.


Training IS play. That is what I like to keep in mind. 

(Obviously slightly simplified but you should approach the bulk of your training the same way you approach play. You want the dog involved and engaged and having fun. You don't want to make training a chore for you OR the dog)


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

CptJack said:


> he wants to know 'what happens if I-' for a lot of things.
> 
> Sometimes it's not a training problem, it's a people psychology one.


Yep - and that's the kind of dog I want - one that experiments and tries things. More the does, the more I can give feedback on, but then I use shaping which is reliant on that. Some might prefer a dog like the way Wally used to be (don't do anything unless explicitly told), but for me that was not going to work.



Laurelin said:


> Training IS play. That is what I like to keep in mind.
> 
> (Obviously slightly simplified but you should approach the bulk of your training the same way you approach play. You want the dog involved and engaged and having fun. You don't want to make training a chore for you OR the dog)


Agreed. Training is play and play is training. After all, play is practice (training) for adult behaviors in a safe/non-risky situation and games have rules, can teach discipline, etc.

Might as well adapt that to anything else you want your dog to learn


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

ayln said:


> Elrohwen, what would you do to break her of the habit? Like I said, I thought she was being really good for a while when I was taking her out on leash, but the one time I let her out by herself I caught her eating poop.


I would not let her out by herself. She obviously finds it rewarding, and if you are not right there to stop it, she'll keep doing it. I think you're overthinking this, rather than taking the most obviously solution of just not giving her a chance to continue.

Maybe someday 6 months from now you'll let her out alone and she won't do it, but you have to have her on leash long enough for her to forget that she ever did it in the first place.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

KBLover said:


> Yep - and that's the kind of dog I want - one that experiments and tries things. More the does, the more I can give feedback on, but then I use shaping which is reliant on that. Some might prefer a dog like the way Wally used to be (don't do anything unless explicitly told), but for me that was not going to work.


Oh, don't get me wrong. The potential is ENDLESS in him, because of that mindset. We've managed to teach him to throw things away rather than drag things out of the trash, turn on lights and the bathroom water faucet, start the dryer and all sorts of fun things that a dog who wasn't interested in exploring his environment on that level wouldn't be. 

But he's still an 80lb 8 month old puppy (who is super immature for his age, actually) and that means I want to strangle him at least 3 times a day.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

CptJack said:


> Oh, don't get me wrong. The potential is ENDLESS in him, because of that mindset. We've managed to teach him to throw things away rather than drag things out of the trash, turn on lights and the bathroom water faucet, start the dryer and all sorts of fun things that a dog who wasn't interested in exploring his environment on that level wouldn't be.
> 
> But he's still an 80lb 8 month old puppy (who is super immature for his age, actually) and that means I want to strangle him at least 3 times a day.


LOL 

I hear you - my mom caught Wally actually taking food from someone else. I was like "I didn't teach you to not be scared of people so you can go mug their food!" My mom also got him to push the trash can out of the way to get some food. I was like "be careful what you teach him because he WILL run with it." I can just imagine him either learning how to tip the trash over by nudging a corner, or pushing it all over the kitchen thinking there's perpetually food under it.

A lot of this is taking the good with the "bad" and doing what you can. It would be boring if everything worked perfectly! 

I can only imagine what an 80 lb pup (whew) can get into  Sometimes I wonder what Wally would be like if he were taller and stronger - he might be raiding the refrigerator right now LOL


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

ayln said:


> Oh, she definitely knows what I'm asking of her. And yes, she does cut corners -- when I was teaching downs I would only reward down, and now when I tell her sit, she will do a down instead thinking she should get a reward for that!


It is far more likely that she does not yet understand the distinction between those two words, than that she is cutting corners. Pretty much all dogs have trouble distinguishing between a couple cues at first, but once they have learned many they understand that a cue means one and only one thing. My dog still makes the sit vs down mistake sometimes. If she is lying down when you ask for a sit, she needs more work understanding which cue means which, and that will come with time. 

I think you're giving her too much credit for being "bad" and setting your expectations too high. Many 6 month old puppies are total idiots who forget everything and have no attention span. That's totally normal for their age. 

I completely agree with the others that maybe it would be best to take a step back and just focus on play and enjoying time with her, rather than obedience. I know first hand how frustrating this time can be (mine is 11 months old and still sort of in this phase) but focusing on it more isn't going to make her brain grow in any faster. Just build your relationship with her by having fun and keep your expectations super low. I trained a lot of fun tricks during this phase and didn't worry about or care if any of them were ever finished or on cue. I just tried to do things that Watson found fun that involved working with me and using his brain. As a result I have 4+ tricks all half finished, but who cares! He had a good time and I didn't worry about obedience so much.


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

ayln said:


> Oh, she definitely knows what I'm asking of her. And yes, she does cut corners -- when I was teaching downs I would only reward down, and now when I tell her sit, she will do a down instead thinking she should get a reward for that! I just give her a "no reward" cue (Like "I don't think so") and either lure, make her smell the treat, or wait for her to sit up.


My dog did that and still sometimes does. He doesn't do it because he's lazy, he does it because I inadvertantly taught him that downs usually follow sits and I also inadvertantly taught him that if a sit is good and down is even better! He also does it when he isn't sure what I want...it's called offering behaviors and that is a very good thing to see your puppy starting to do...it means things are going well! So, I chalk it up to either my issues being clear with my training or him just trying to overachieve or anticipate what I might want when it's unclear. It's not a big deal and I just say "nope" in a neutral voice and then try again and reward when he gets it right. 

It's kind of funny...when I'm teaching him something new, he'll often resort to going through a whole buffet of anything he's already learned and get frustrated when none of these behaviors "work." To me, it makes me smile because it means he's actively engaged even though he's frustrated and that he's trying everything he knows to try to figure out what I'm trying to teach. To me, that's exactly what I want.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

In the old days I used to swat with rolled up newspapers & whatever, but now the most aversive I get is when Josefina is being REALLY bad, as in NOT listening at ALL, I will pluck her up & plop her down in time out & make sure she knows by body language that I am NOT happy with her. 
With buddy I just redirect him, I try not to use no with him if I can help it.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> In the old days I used to swat with rolled up newspapers & whatever, but now the most aversive I get is when Josefina is being REALLY bad, as in NOT listening at ALL, I will pluck her up & plop her down in time out & make sure she knows by body language that I am NOT happy with her.
> With buddy I just redirect him, I try not to use no with him if I can help it.


I've done that picking up thing with Wally before. He was like WTF? 

What's your body language cues that you're upset? I get really quiet and just point him around and basically act like I don't have a dog and don't let him follow me around. He's like "WHY WON'T YOU TALK TO ME AND LET ME GO WITH YOU?!?!?!?"


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Josefina ate poop for a while ... But it stopped on its own when I switched her to a higher quality food.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

elrohwen said:


> It is far more likely that she does not yet understand the distinction between those two words, than that she is cutting corners. Pretty much all dogs have trouble distinguishing between a couple cues at first, but once they have learned many they understand that a cue means one and only one thing. My dog still makes the sit vs down mistake sometimes. If she is lying down when you ask for a sit, she needs more work understanding which cue means which, and that will come with time.
> 
> I think you're giving her too much credit for being "bad" and setting your expectations too high. Many 6 month old puppies are total idiots who forget everything and have no attention span. That's totally normal for their age.


Agreed. 

When we practice sit a ton of times in a row, dogs might look like they know the cue when they really don't because they might have learned to simply give you the same thing over and over. Then we switch to something else and practice it a bunch of times in a row. Then we start to mix those things up and the dog may know the skill but they're not completely solid on the actual cues and they... just plain guess. 

Like, they know HOW to sit and how to down, and that sometimes you want those things, but they haven't actually worked out exactly which word or hand cue means which one. So they just pick one and offer it. Or some dogs freeze in the same situation and it kind of looks like they're being defiant but they really just don't know what to do.


----------



## hanksimon (Mar 18, 2009)

If you are positive that she understands, that she's not confused, and that she may be 'blowing you off' then it's OK to break the rules occasionally. Set up to terminate the training session, try to be clear that you aren't rewarding the blow off, and simply toss a treat or two for free ... Sometimes that's enough motivation to get training back on track...


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Oh mine get NOTHING for blowing me off, if they do & there is no reason for it other then they just are blowing me off for the sake of blowing me off then I will give them a sharp "AHT!" & go inside & cease further interaction for a while, this includes if they dont come when called, or blow off bringing a toy back during play.

But, cattle dogs are a bit different then most other breeds, its like they almost need to know there is come kind of negative consequence for not choosing "right" so to speak. In no way am I cruel, I dont "get after" them or use harsh methods (think CM). They are raised to LOVE interaction with me, I always make interaction the BEST thing in the world, so taking that away is like ... the worst punishment I can do.


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> Oh mine get NOTHING for blowing me off, if they do & there is no reason for it other then they just are blowing me off for the sake of blowing me off then I will give them a sharp "AHT!" & go inside & cease further interaction for a while, this includes if they dont come when called, or blow off bringing a toy back during play.
> 
> But, cattle dogs are a bit different then most other breeds, its like they almost need to know there is come kind of negative consequence for not choosing "right" so to speak. In no way am I cruel, I dont "get after" them or use harsh methods (think CM). They are raised to LOVE interaction with me, I always make interaction the BEST thing in the world, so taking that away is like ... the worst punishment I can do.


I find this the case with other working breeds as well. With Sam I do use ending the "fun" if he blows me off. Playing tug and you grab a hand? Tug done. Playing in the backyard and you refuse to come when called? We go back inside. Getting loved on and you choose to jump up? I walk away and come back later.

To me, it's important that he knows that there are consequences when he makes bad choices. I don't think those consequences need to be harsh at all, but they do need to be consistent.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

packetsmom said:


> I find this the case with other working breeds as well. With Sam I do use ending the "fun" if he blows me off. Playing tug and you grab a hand? Tug done. Playing in the backyard and you refuse to come when called? We go back inside. Getting loved on and you choose to jump up? I walk away and come back later.
> 
> To me, it's important that he knows that there are consequences when he makes bad choices. I don't think those consequences need to be harsh at all, but they do need to be consistent.


Is there a subtlety I'm missing not being conveyed in text?

I ask because it seems that any consistent and reasonable training would make it clear that there's desirable and undesirable consequences based on the choices the dog makes? That's the whole point of using operant conditioning is it not?


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Yeah, I'm confused about how that's a "working dog" thing. That's part of positive training... it's negative punishment, right? "Being a tree" when a dog is pulling is negative punishment because it takes away what the dog wants (to keep moving forward). Going into another room when a puppy is biting so that he can't get to you is negative punishment because it takes away what the dog wants (you). It goes hand in hand with positive reinforcement (rewarding a dog for doing what you want it to do) much of the time. And it works well for all breeds; it's not a working dog thing. It's how many of us here trained our dogs, and we don't have magical ACDs that apparently think differently from other breeds. 

(I suspect this goes back to the belief some people have that positive trainers simply ignore "bad" behavior, which is not the case.)

(And seriously, based on everything I've read about ACDs here, they sound like clever and stubborn dogs, but they also sound like many dogs of various breeds that I've met, including my own. They are not magical and they do not need to be trained differently from all other breeds.)


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Everyone thinks their own breed is the most specialist.... 

Some dogs do seem to need more clearly stated rules and consistency than others but I seriously doubt it's a 'working dog' thing. It is going to depend on the individual dog and their temperament. Summer is one of those 'naturally good' dogs. And by that I mean that if you give her a rule once, then the rule is the rule and Summer wants to follow the rule. Mia on the other hand is a dog that will test boundaries and rules to see if she can bypass them. Not because she's 'dominant' or anything, she's crafty and she can spot inconsistencies like you wouldn't believe. If she can get away with it then she will.  Makes me a better trainer.

My first trainer with Mia had 7 'power'/working breed dogs.... she could not get Mia to work at all.

ETA: I still think the papillon wiki should've kept the part about them being psychic. lol


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Yea I think that's pretty much a "dog" thing.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

sassafras said:


> Yea I think that's pretty much a "dog" thing.


Except for Summer because she's perfect.


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

Geez...I'll be more careful to censor myself.

By "working dog," I meant any dog has a component of their personality that makes them tend to try to see how far they can push things. Sure, breeds other than those typically listed as "working dogs" sometimes exhibit that tendency. Sure, individuals of any breed can exhibit those tendencies. However, some breeds, most commonly referred to as "working dogs" are well-known for it. Having had both working dogs and dog breeds from other groups, I can safely say, in my anecdotal experience, that I've seen differences. If that's my isolated experience, then fine and I will forfeit the internets to you without complaint.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Laurelin said:


> Everyone thinks their own breed is the most specialist....
> 
> Some dogs do seem to need more clearly stated rules and consistency than others but I seriously doubt it's a 'working dog' thing. It is going to depend on the individual dog and their temperament. Summer is one of those 'naturally good' dogs. And by that I mean that if you give her a rule once, then the rule is the rule and Summer wants to follow the rule. Mia on the other hand is a dog that will test boundaries and rules to see if she can bypass them. Not because she's 'dominant' or anything, she's crafty and she can spot inconsistencies like you wouldn't believe. If she can get away with it then she will.  Makes me a better trainer.
> 
> ...


Buddy is like summer, give him a rule once & he is like "okay", Josefina is like Mia. She wants to please but if she knows you won't make her do it then she will blow you off. 

BUT neither are what I would call "good" examples of their breed. Josefina i dont think is full bred & Buddy's childhood didnt allow him to his full potential. A "true" ACD can be pushy because they were bred to push large stubborn animals, sometimes with force. So using force with them is counter productive, but you can't be too admissible either. I like this breed because as a whole, they are very "forgiving" of handler mistakes. More so IMHO then other working breeds.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Laurelin said:


> Except for Summer because she's perfect.


Well so is Pip.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

'Working breeds' incorporates a HUGE variety of dogs bred for all sorts of different tasks, temperaments, biddability, etc. Even then most breeds and dogs haven't actually been bred for working in a while. I just think it's a fairly useless categorization.


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

Laurelin said:


> 'Working breeds' incorporates a HUGE variety of dogs bred for all sorts of different tasks, temperaments, biddability, etc. Even then most breeds and dogs haven't actually been bred for working in a while. I just think it's a fairly useless categorization.


An opinion that you are certainly entitled to. 

For me, it's about as useful as "herding group" or "sporting group." I do find that it tends to group together dogs that I find seem to have similar temperaments and that most of the dogs I enjoy are in that group. That does not mean that there aren't individuals in that group that don't fit what I consider the common characteristics of that group or that there aren't other breeds or individuals with similar characteristics.

Do you also think that "herding breeds" or "sporting breeds" are useless categorizations or just "working breeds?" (Not trying to argue, just curious and wondering about the perspective you are coming from here.)


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Yeah, I mean... I don't think that many people consider a yorkie a "working dog," but they were bred as ratters and they can be scrappy little things that certainly test boundaries, and positive reinforcement/negative punishment works just as well on them as on a GSD or whatever. Papillons are companions through and through, yet I've known a bunch with Mia-like temperaments (although I don't think I've known any that are quite as devious  ).

That said, I am not objecting to the idea that some dogs might test boundaries more. I'm just pointing out that negative punishment isn't some kind of rarely-used technique that's needed on "working dogs" and not on others. It'll work on a shih tzu just as well as on an Aussie. We recommend it to pretty much everyone who posts asking for advice here, really -- how many times have we told someone to stop all play and leave the room when their puppy won't stop nipping?


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

packetsmom said:


> An opinion that you are certainly entitled to.
> 
> For me, it's about as useful as "herding group" or "sporting group." I do find that it tends to group together dogs that I find seem to have similar temperaments and that most of the dogs I enjoy are in that group. That does not mean that there aren't individuals in that group that don't fit what I consider the common characteristics of that group or that there aren't other breeds or individuals with similar characteristics.
> 
> Do you also think that "herding breeds" or "sporting breeds" are useless categorizations or just "working breeds?" (Not trying to argue, just curious and wondering about the perspective you are coming from here.)


Ah I see what you're saying. To me herding breeds and sporting breeds ARE working breeds... well some aren't anymore. They originally were and some are more likely to be a true blue working dog than most breeds in the working group. You're talking about the working group? ACDs aren't in that group nor are GSDs- they're in the herding group.

I think herding breeds and sporting breeds are better because you have dogs from a similar purpose whereas the working group is kind of a catch all of sled dogs and guardians, etc. But that's not what I was really meaning. I just mean that other than the toy breeds and a few others most breeds are/were working breeds at one point. Group herders, group guardians, group spitz, terriers, etc.... working is just too big.

I have a very narrow view of what is a 'working dog' compared to most people. If it ain't bringing home the bacon or doing a job a human can't.... it's not a working dog.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Oh I don't object to using "working" as a classification... I just meant that it just seems like every time someone says that their breed is so xyz, I think "every dog I've ever known is xyz."


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Yes, exactly, sassafras. Nicely put, as always. And with fewer words than the rest of us, too.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

sassafras said:


> Oh I don't object to using "working" as a classification... I just meant that it just seems like every time someone says that their breed is so xyz, I think "every dog I've ever known is xyz."


Yeah, this is kind of my thing. 

"If you have a X, Y, Or Z, you have to have special/different training methods! The standard ones don't work because they're so (insert thing of choice here)." 

Tailor to individuals, yes, and breed traits are breed traits for a reason, but I have small and large, fearful and confident, hard and soft, sharp and not, dogs and ultimately... they're dogs. I have to REMOVE some things for the super-soft Jack that work with the others and tailor that way, but I don't have to be any more consistent, patient, or, especially, rough with the 80lb hard-headed dog than I do the 12lb soft dog.


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

I think it's way overused as an excuse to use aversives, but I do think that different breeds lend themselves to different handling. It doesn't mean that with breed a versus breed y a whole different set of rules apply, but I do find that I have to adapt my handling quite a bit between different dogs and that often a lot of that, at least in my perception, comes from things that were either bred into that dog or weren't. This doesn't mean that any of my dogs were so special that normal rules didn't apply, but it does mean that I had to switch gears depending on the dog I had.

I do think I've had dogs that I've had to be more consistent with than others. Some were more forgiving than others and some were pushier than others. To me, looking at the dogs I've known, this seemed to be pretty consistent for their breed type or the mix of breeds involved.

Just to be clear, though, I don't think any dog breed benefits from being mistreated or the misapplication of any aversive and I think positive reinforcement should always be the default. When I'm talking about working breeds needing me to be tougher, I'm talking about more self-discipline on my side, not being harsh on them. If anything, some of the dogs I've had have made me need to be harder on *myself*.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

packetsmom said:


> I think it's way overused as an excuse to use aversives, but I do think that different breeds lend themselves to different handling. It doesn't mean that with breed a versus breed y a whole different set of rules apply, but I do find that I have to adapt my handling quite a bit between different dogs and that often a lot of that, at least in my perception, comes from things that were either bred into that dog or weren't. This doesn't mean that any of my dogs were so special that normal rules didn't apply, but it does mean that I had to switch gears depending on the dog I had.
> 
> I do think I've had dogs that I've had to be more consistent with than others. Some were more forgiving than others and some were pushier than others. To me, looking at the dogs I've known, this seemed to be pretty consistent for their breed type or the mix of breeds involved.
> 
> Just to be clear, though, I don't think any dog breed benefits from being mistreated or the misapplication of any aversive and I think positive reinforcement should always be the default. When I'm talking about working breeds needing me to be tougher, I'm talking about more self-discipline on my side, not being harsh on them. If anything, some of the dogs I've had have made me need to be harder on *myself*.



I think it's sort of a fifty-fifty thing, though. Some dogs, you're going to pay for lack of consistency and work more than others, absolutely!

But is there a dog out there who wouldn't benefit from more time, work, and consistency? If I was really super lax with, say, Jack, and was inconsistent and blase about everything, I'd still have a pretty nice, stable dog on my hands. If I tried that with Kylie or Thud, they'd burn the house down and eat my corpse. But Jack still benefits from patience, consistency, and training and is a lot better for it. So, yes! I CAN get away with more with Jack than I can Bug than I can Frost than I can Thud than I can Kylie-

But why would I want to?

I've got dogs. I'm not going to give less to the easy dog than I would the harder one. The small, soft, dog (though he's a terrier and atypical even for his breed) may not DEMAND anything of me, or have as dire consequences for me not doing the work, but he *still benefits from the work*, as much and possibly more as Thud. The difference is Thud or Kylie, the result is going to be physically painful or expensive of not providing. Jack's not going to make ME suffer for it, but HE will.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

My dogs have pretty individual personalities and ideal learning styles and tolerance for stuff like verbal corrections, but literally every dog I've ever known regardless of how "naturally good"** they are will do stuff like take advantage of any inconsistency on my part. Some more than others, but they all do it. That's just learning. And I just think it's silly to say any one particular breed ESPECIALLY needs to know that there are consequences (again not necessarily harsh) for ignoring a command when really ANY dog you are trying to train to do anything needs to know that. 

But I don't even mean just training talk. Anything that people attribute to their breed exclusively... Stuff like "You know you have an xyz breed when you can never go to the bathroom alone hahaha!!" or "you know you have an abc when they greet you by doing xyz!" often makes me internally think "yea that's pretty much every dog I've ever known." 



**By "naturally good" I mean dogs whose natural everyday behavior happens to align perfectly with what I like in a dog I live with.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

sassafras said:


> But I don't even mean just training talk. Anything that people attribute to their breed exclusively... Stuff like "You know you have an xyz breed when you can never go to the bathroom alone hahaha!!" or "you know you have an abc when they greet you by doing xyz!" often makes me internally think "yea that's pretty much every dog I've ever known."


Yep. I mean dogs aren't interchangeable and I'm not saying they are, but I can't think of a single, solitary, truly unique breed trait. Not one. 

Never mind the ordinary stuff. It's ALL (breed trait and not) a variation of 'dog'.


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

With some of my "easier" dogs, yes, I did give less consistency and was less strict. I'm sure they might have benefitted from it, but it simply wasn't needed to have a nice housepet. With one, instead of having to ride herd on her all the time and not let her get away with things, I felt free to let her be a softer companion. Instead of so much time training, we spent time with me brushing her...for hours...while she listened to how much high school sucked. With other dogs I've had, that would have led to some major issues with the dog's behavior. With her, it led to none.

With another dog that also didn't need that level of consistency, I also felt like it gave me the ability to let go and enjoy his clownish side. Sure, he likely would have been a bit more obedient had I given him the same level of consistency as other dogs, but he didn't need that to be the basic level I needed in a house dog. As a result, he brought me so much laughter and we still spent time together doing other things.

I don't think either of these dogs necessarily suffered from the lower level of "uptightness" I was able to use with them, for lack of a better way to put it. Like you mentioned, those two weren't about to tear down the house without it. They also didn't lose any love or attention or interaction without it...we just interacted in a different way.

With the GSD's, the Carolina Dog, and Sam, I feel like they need me to be more disciplined and consistent with them. I can see how they benefit from it and suffer when I slack off and it's missing. It seems like dogs like this come into my life when I need that kind of order in my chaos and when I get more organized for them so I can provide it, it leaks over to me being more consistent and detail-oriented in the rest of my life.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

packetsmom said:


> With the GSD's, the Carolina Dog, and Sam, I feel like they need me to be more disciplined and consistent with them. I can see how they benefit from it and suffer when I slack off and it's missing. It seems like dogs like this come into my life when I need that kind of order in my chaos and when I get more organized for them so I can provide it, it leaks over to me being more consistent and detail-oriented in the rest of my life.


I don't know. I guess I'm fairly well balanced with most of mine, regardless. I'm not anymore strict with Thud than I am Jack - and that's not to say I'm 'strict' with Jack, but Thud is certainly free to be a clown and hang out and snuggle and be brushed for hours. He needs more EXERCISE, and he's got a different learning style, and I'll switch things up to give a dog what I believe it needs, but for me that's never a 'discipline' issue, or a limit to clownishness or requirement to be more structured. Routine's routine, training is training, and I'm not going to let him clown around and play and be a doof less than Bug. I'm not going to let Bug get away with growling or resource guarding anymore than him, either, but ultimately my requirements are my requirements, and desires are my desires, regardless of the breed of dog. 

They're safe, there are requirements for minimal training (which isn't really minimal) and there are house rules, and those will be followed regardless of the dog or breed. After that, it's down to the DOG's desires. That varies the ACTIVITY and AMOUNT. But it doesn't really require a shift in mentality on my end. I'm sure if there was just one of them, I'd see more differences, but I've honestly been a single dog owner for a combined 6 months of my life. The end result of that is that everyone is housebroken, everyone has a 150% recall, everyone is safe with people. Everyone has a solid sit, stay, come, down and leave it. Everyone follows basic house rules like staying out of the garbage and sitting for greeting and not chasing the cats. There is a zero tolerance police for all the dogs on those things. 

After that, there's divergence, but and how many times I remind Thud not to stick his nose in the garbage is higher than how many times I remind Jack, but if a dog's got its nose in the garbage they're getting a refresher in leave it. 

So it's not so much that I don't agree dogs are different, it's just that I don't see any real shift in how I handle living with or training them based on their breed. This is, admittedly, likely because the 'hardest (most difficult)' dog in the house sets the standard, and always has, and there's more than one dog. Ironically, though, the most demanding dog in my house weighs 12lbs and ain't the Pyr/GSD mix, however much I grump about him. The dog who will really burn the house down and take a mile if she sees an inch is Kylie. Who might be a herding mix, I absolutely grant you! But I think it's more likely that she's a muttly little mutt who just happens to be made out of piss, vinegar and genius.

And was a Perfect Puppy.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Ha I guess all my dogs are just conniving buttheads.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

sassafras said:


> Ha I guess all my dogs are just conniving buttheads.


Can I send you Thud? He'll fit in. I mean he's not conniving, but he's a butthead.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

CptJack said:


> Yep. I mean dogs aren't interchangeable and I'm not saying they are, but I can't think of a single, solitary, truly unique breed trait. Not one.


Papillons are psychic! I swear!

I actually have two dogs right now that would never ever try to take advantage of pretty much anything... Summer and Rose.

Ahhh Mia definitely is more demanding and definitely needs more consistency than Summer. I do treat them very differently because the two have very different needs. Obviously not breed related though.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Laurelin said:


> Papillons are psychic! I swear!
> 
> I actually have two dogs right now that would never ever try to take advantage of pretty much anything... Summer and Rose.
> 
> Ahhh Mia definitely is more demanding and definitely needs more consistency than Summer. I do treat them very differently because the two have very different needs. Obviously not breed related though.


I guess I *sort* of treat the dogs differently, but it's... the rules don't change, I suppose, it's just how I respond to the dogs. Jack and Frost are the same breed. I can't say 'no' to Jack, and Frost is a slightly mule-headed cracker-jack. Obviously they're having different interactions with me based on their temperaments, but it's not so much that there's more or less structure. It's just that Jack kind of... does what he does, and Frost does what he does, and my responses to them are different based on that. The structure's the same, but the dogs react differently to that, and so my interactions with them are changed as a result. 

And I'm not even sure how much SENSE that makes, outside my head, which is incredibly frustrating. 

(Kylie says she's an HONORARY Pap, and is waiting for her how to in mind-reading, but for now she fudges it pretty good.)


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> Except for Summer because she's perfect.


No. D:

Mia is perfect.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

packetsmom said:


> By "working dog," I meant any dog has a component of their personality that makes them tend to try to see how far they can push things.


But Wally doesn't push things, but he also understands positive and negative consequences. In fact, if the negative is "strong enough" he'll literally never do the behavior without all be being literally forced (or extremely heavily lured and reinforced)...even if later I want him to and the negative consequence was unintended (or random) but occurred while he was doing the behavior.

By no definition I've seen would Wally be considered a 'working dog'. Unless a 'housework dog' counts (opening doors, picking up rugs and other objects, carrying things for me, etc).


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

packetsmom said:


> I think it's way overused as an excuse to use aversives, but I do think that different breeds lend themselves to different handling. It doesn't mean that with breed a versus breed y a whole different set of rules apply, but I do find that I have to adapt my handling quite a bit between different dogs and that often a lot of that, at least in my perception, comes from things that were either bred into that dog or weren't. This doesn't mean that any of my dogs were so special that normal rules didn't apply, but it does mean that I had to switch gears depending on the dog I had.
> 
> I do think I've had dogs that I've had to be more consistent with than others. Some were more forgiving than others and some were pushier than others. To me, looking at the dogs I've known, this seemed to be pretty consistent for their breed type or the mix of breeds involved.
> 
> Just to be clear, though, I don't think any dog breed benefits from being mistreated or the misapplication of any aversive and I think positive reinforcement should always be the default. When I'm talking about working breeds needing me to be tougher, I'm talking about more self-discipline on my side, not being harsh on them. If anything, some of the dogs I've had have made me need to be harder on *myself*.


Doesn't it still just come back to tailoring to the individual dog?

I knew none of the "breed generalizations" about Cotons when I first started working with Wally (and when I did, I was like "that's not like Wally" over and over so it wouldn't have helped anyway). 

What I knew is there was a dog in my life scared of cords, books, pillows falling on his head and other random mundane stuff. I also discovered, especially once I helped him overcome his fears, that this dog would walk through fire if I wanted him to (and the prize was high enough).

I mean, what breed trait explains his love of Dora and learning things faster with Spanish words? I don't remember seeing "you might have to learn a foreign language" in the breed traits of a Coton


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

KBLover said:


> No. D:
> 
> Mia is perfect.


This is true. I want a housework dog though. One that does laundry and dishes?

Kylie is definitely an honorary pap.

I guess I pretty shamelessly treat my dogs differently. Summer's just not.... into everything like Mia is. I think Summer's done.... one 'bad' thing in her entire time living with me and that was very recently getting into something. It's just not something I worry about with her whereas Mia is either in my line of sight or doing something bad. lol If I can't see Mia, something bad is happening. I will bet on it.


----------



## Emmett (Feb 9, 2013)

KBLover said:


> I don't remember seeing "you might have to learn a foreign language" in the breed traits of a Coton


You should add that to the Coton wiki!


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

KBLover said:


> Doesn't it still just come back to tailoring to the individual dog?
> 
> I knew none of the "breed generalizations" about Cotons when I first started working with Wally (and when I did, I was like "that's not like Wally" over and over so it wouldn't have helped anyway).
> 
> ...


And yet I think I've heard almost every dog person say, of one breed or another, "Oh, I wouldn't get x breed. For me, they're too much x,y, or z trait." So, there must be some generalizations that you can make among breeds...or else what is the point of having different breeds of dogs?


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

sassafras said:


> Ha I guess all my dogs are just conniving buttheads.


I think all dogs can be if you let them 

Wally tries to "manipulate" my mom all the time and I love watching it happen (I call it "reverse shaping"). Means I've got him using his brain...er I mean I make him do what he should do. Yeah. That's it. *whistles innocently*


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

packetsmom said:


> And yet I think I've heard almost every dog person say, of one breed or another, "Oh, I wouldn't get x breed. For me, they're too much x,y, or z trait." So, there must be some generalizations that you can make among breeds...or else what is the point of having different breeds of dogs?


I guess - but when I'm working with Wally - I don't think 'well he's just a companion dog so I don't need to worry about his fear of X because Cotons don't do Y'. When I'm working with him, I don't even think of his breed. I think of HIM and his personality, learning strengths/weaknesses, how he attacks problems and what tends to confuse him and what turns him on motivation-wise. Whether or not they match 'the standard Coton' isn't a factor.

I also wouldn't have a wavering 'standard' - I teach, you learn, then you're responsible for doing it. To me, that's just dog training. I don't see how that's specific to a dog or breed category. It's just consistent dog training so that the dog learns associations and expectations and can perform behaviors when you need/want them.

Not to mention that because breed "always" has X trait, it doesn't mean the individual of that breed being passed up on a stereotype/generalization is going to have those traits that person doesn't want. The individual should always be considered, imo.

And maybe I'm stupid, but I don't too much buy that there's things dogs can't learn because they aren't breed X. What's to say Wally couldn't learn to track even though he's not a hound? Or learn blind retrieves even though he's not a retriever. To me, the limit is handler (i.e. my) ability, Wally's physical ability (has to be strong enough, tall enough, etc) and opportunity to practice whatever skill.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

packetsmom said:


> And yet I think I've heard almost every dog person say, of one breed or another, "Oh, I wouldn't get x breed. For me, they're too much x,y, or z trait." So, there must be some generalizations that you can make among breeds...or else what is the point of having different breeds of dogs?



Breeds have traits. You can generalize. You can not generalize to the point that you ignore the dog you have in front of you. If you have a standard poodle that wants to eat people, it is not any different than a doberman who wants to eat people. If you have a border collie that is super independent, you don't treat it differently than a typical hound. You can limit that to some degree, stack your bets based on the lineage of the dog and parent's temperaments, but at the end of the day just like you can get out of standard appearances, you can get out of standard temperaments. 

Also, honestly, even within the breed there's a whole, wide, range. Dogs have personalities. "I have a german shepherd, so it's by necessity going to be more dog than a yorkie" is just not always the case. Crap happens.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> I want a housework dog though. One that does laundry and dishes?


Working on it.

I'm trying to get him to actually fold things so he could fold clothes or at least sheets/towels. Right now, he just wants to pick up, shake, and "kill"/throw stuff. Not much use for laundry, but for heavy stuff like rugs - it works because he can't pick it up, but if I want to clean the floor, having him move the rug is useful. Just don't expect him to want to do much around the vacuum LOL - working on that, too.

Oh and if we master this color thing - he could sort the clothes one day maybe. 

Dishes - that's gonna be tougher, but I figure maybe if there's a way to get a 'sink' down near him maybe he could pick up a sponge and push it around the plate or something. I'm trying to come up with a way for him to do it.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Laurelin said:


> I guess I pretty shamelessly treat my dogs differently. Summer's just not.... into everything like Mia is. I think Summer's done.... one 'bad' thing in her entire time living with me and that was very recently getting into something. It's just not something I worry about with her whereas Mia is either in my line of sight or doing something bad. lol If I can't see Mia, something bad is happening. I will bet on it.


This is sort of what I mean, though I'm still struggling to express myself. 

Thud likes swimming and really hot and heavy, fast flying fetch. So we do that with him. He has problems with herding and mouthing, so we work on those. Jack doesn't herd or mouth, so he's not being worked on with those, and he doesn't like water OR fetch, so we don't do those things. He DOES like the woods, and chasing squirrels, so we do that, instead. Kylie learns most new commands to verbal cues within three repetitions and gets bored quickly, so we train a ton of tricks to keep her mind engaged. Jack learns at the speed of slow mollasses, so we do a lot of repetition in teaching him things. 

But the rules don't change, depending on the dog and the amount of structure, per se, doesn't either. The household structure is what it is. I don't look at Thud and say 'well, he's a large guardian/herding breed mix, so he is absolutely going to be more stubborn, need more socialization, and x, y, and z, than Kylie because she's little, and totally discount the individual dog. Their interactions with me change based on HOW they are, not WHAT they are. I do expect Kylie to get in trouble if I'm not paying attention, and Jack to stay out of it, but I don't expect Thud to need more structure, discipline and activity because he's a large dog and I don't allow the others to break the rules because they're not.

A lot of this, I admit, comes from people who seemingly give me more 'dog cred' because I own a large dog with a mix of 'serious breeds'. You know what? KYLIE is STILL 10X more dog than Thud, and Jack and Frost don't enjoy or benefit from all the same things either - and they're not just the same breed, they're father and son! Could I give you RT traits? Yes. And you could still end up with a dog with a wide range of personality traits, quirks, and preferences that would result in them needing you to adapt your expectations and training style.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

CptJack said:


> This is sort of what I mean, though I'm still struggling to express myself.
> 
> Thud likes swimming and really hot and heavy, fast flying fetch. So we do that with him. He has problems with herding and mouthing, so we work on those. Jack doesn't herd or mouth, so he's not being worked on with those, and he doesn't like water OR fetch, so we don't do those things. He DOES like the woods, and chasing squirrels, so we do that, instead. Kylie learns most new commands to verbal cues within three repetitions and gets bored quickly, so we train a ton of tricks to keep her mind engaged. Jack learns at the speed of slow mollasses, so we do a lot of repetition in teaching him things.
> 
> ...


Ah yes, I agree completely. 

Mia has taught me the difficult dogs can come in a cute little tricolor fluffy package too. Good thing the difficult ones are so great. Can I have Kylie?


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Laurelin said:


> Ah yes, I agree completely.
> 
> Mia has taught me the difficult dogs can come in a cute little tricolor fluffy package too. Good thing the difficult ones are so great. Can I have Kylie?


I found Kylie on top of the stove today, licking a roast chicken. I thought of Mia. So, yes.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

CptJack said:


> I found Kylie on top of the stove today, licking a roast chicken. I thought of Mia. So, yes.


This happened recently. Twins?


bad dog by Summer_Papillon, on Flickr

Now we need KBLover's expertise to get her to wash the dishes while she's up there.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Laurelin said:


> This happened recently. Twins?
> 
> Now we need KBLover's expertise to get her to wash the dishes while she's up there.


Obviously! And if we work it right, Kylie can cook and Mia can do the dishes


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> Now we need KBLover's expertise to get her to wash the dishes while she's up there.


Holy crap - she jumped up there? 

Sheez - Wally needs get his hops on. Either that or I need to get a papillion ASAP.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

KBLover, I think you would absolutely love owning a papillon. I can't even imagine all of the cool things you could teach it to do! Most papillons I've met love to learn and to please their owners.


----------

