# Ruff Love by Susan Garrett



## doodler (Sep 18, 2015)

I'm working off the Ruff Love dog training framework by Susan Garrett.

That means NILF for everything. 

1. Every single meal is fed by hand with each morsel given by hand only after he performs a task. Right now, that means SIT, DOWN, COME, or CRATE. He knows all four commands in a distraction-free environment fairly well.

2. He is in his crate; on a leash tied to something near me when I'm seated; or on a leash walking with me; AT ALL TIMES. I don't even let my girlfriend or kids play with him around the house because that inevitably leads to the puppy jumping on people, biting hands & toys, etc.

3. The only time he gets off-leash is if I'm doing recall training with him using a tug toy. He responds to the tug toy well. 

4. I intend to keep it like this until he is 1-2 years old (or earns more freedom by showing self-control and discipline).


Results after 2-3 weeks: 

He seems MUCH more focused on me. 

He is much more focused during training sessions (which doubles as meal sessions). 

He seems much more calm and less likely to go nuts as he used to.

He seems MUCH more submissive (I can tell by his demeanor and in his eyes)


The only downside is that he doesn't get as much socialization with people/other dogs as I don't have that much free time. I used to have a neighbor help me with this but cut her out as well for the time-being as she was too lax in what she allowed the dog to do.

Am I missing any element in rearing and training the dog?

Is this too strict or too much in any way? 

Thanks.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

It doesn't sound like much fun. I have dogs so I can enjoy their company. I suppose for certain behavioral problems, that would be a good protocol, but keeping it up for 1-2 years would make me want to step in front of a truck :/. But for some people I guess it would be OK.


----------



## dagwall (Mar 17, 2011)

Until he's 1-2 years old? I agree that kind of strictness just takes the fun out of owning a dog. Kids don't ever get to play with their dog for 1-2 years?


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

It's okay if you do that kind of program but you *HAVE* to work some down time in there for the dog and for you. The dog needs to blow off steam and play, and you probably need the mental break, too. Socialization needs to happen, but also just play free play. If you have to schedule some park trips in or something, do it. NILF is fine, but there is a limit and that limit is when every second of the dog's life is regimented to the point that it is either working or crated and asleep. A healthy puppy needs to explore, and experience, and romp and sniff and meet people, too.

And yeah, I do mean just plain ROMP, and sniff and explore and investigate, without having every move micromanaged.


----------



## TSTrainer (Aug 6, 2015)

Yeah I don't see the big deal with most of what you're doing, I plan to raise my dog similarly. BUT, CptJack is right, let your dog be a dog! He needs to play and explore and experience the world or you're setting yourself up for a bored, frustrated dog who has no real world experience and doesn't know how to appropriately meet or play with other dogs or people. 

Puppies are definitely a lot of work but they're kinda supposed to be fun to have around, too.


----------



## trainingjunkie (Feb 10, 2010)

Even Susan Garret would say that working the program for that long is TOO long. I strongly suggest that you read Susan Garret's blogs and other works. Everything in balance. 

There is a wonderful book by a Susan Garret fan and the book talks about Ruff Love. It's called, "Plenty in Life is Free" by Kathy Sdao. It's a thin little book that only costs about $8. And the author is a fan of "Ruff Love" and includes it on her suggested reading list. I would be so happy if you would consider reading it while you are working Ruff Love. I think that you and your dog will be glad you did.


----------



## BKaymuttleycrew (Feb 2, 2015)

I agree with the others - the element you're missing is *FUN*. I am a huge proponent of a NILIF type program (my personal favorite version is Dr. Yin's 'Learn to Earn') but to this extent, for the first 2 years of the puppy's life? yikes! Training can be incorporated into lots of fun games. Impulse control can be taught by letting the dog get a *little* rowdy, and then slowing things down & getting him regain control. If the dog is never allowed to 'step out of line' so to speak, what in the world will he do on the day that you are no longer there to micromanage his every second? He'll never have learned to make good choices.

Plus, it worries me just a bit to read your description that he seems "MUCH more submissive" and that you can tell by his demeanor & see it in his eyes... I worry that what you are seeing is the beginning of him shutting down or becoming fearful of ??? I'm all for working towards a well trained dog, but I don't want to see you create a robot.


----------



## lil_fuzzy (Aug 16, 2010)

I'm a fan of preventing dogs from self rewarding until they reliably respond to your cues, and I wouldn't have a dog off leash in an area where they could practise bad habits.

However, if you look at how Susan Garrett raises her puppies, there is a *lot* of fun. Playing with her, outings to socialise and build confidence, meeting and socialising with people, socialising with other dogs, off leash play time, etc.

As soon as your dog is reasonably reliable with certain cues, they should gradually be given more freedom. For instance, if you are working on the recall around the house, try having her off leash in the house (prevent access to things you don't want her to have), then try the recall. If she's ok with that, try it outside. Etc. If she fails, you work on it some more for a week and try it again. The goal of Ruff Love is to be able to give the dog loads of freedom to be a dog.


----------



## Wirehairedvizslalove (Oct 24, 2015)

It seems to me that there are different levels of nilif - anywhere from very strict & isolated to just simply asking for a sit when clipping the leash. I am working on finding a happy medium for my dog. My goal is to create more structure in his life, but to also have fun because I am very fun spirited and not a strict person myself. Take for example, he has to earn just about everything but we have fun doing it...His meals are hand fed and turned into fun short burst training sessions, he is not aloud any squeeky toys unless I initiate with it then he can run around and play with it until I choose to put it away, I put him away in the other room for a couple hours a day instead of him having free reign 24/7 but he still has plenty of free run of the house, and on weekends we go hiking and he has total free will off leash as long as he comes back when I ask him too. If he does not come back when called, back on leash he goes. We play lots of games - controlled tug of war, fetch with cues in the mix...I guess what I'm trying to say is that I think it is important that you two have fun together and he doesn't just see you as a heavy handed no fun owner.


----------



## HollowHeaven (Feb 5, 2012)

doodler said:


> I'm working off the Ruff Love dog training framework by Susan Garrett.
> 
> That means NILF for everything.
> 
> ...



He has to earn his dinner? Each damn piece? Holy crap. I'm sorry, but to me that just seems awful. One meal by hand, in portions, I could see. But every meal, each piece, he has to do something to entertain a human? I would not do that to a dog, especially not a puppy.

So... your dog isn't allowed to play? He's not allowed to run and romp? Nobody is allowed to enjoy him but you? For 2 years?

I think this is crazy. Rules sure, boundaries, yes. But keeping a dog as a statuesque slave for 2 years? Why even have a dog? Not even service dogs have to deal with that. I would be shocked if the dog has a personality or a spirit at all in 2 years.


----------



## trainingjunkie (Feb 10, 2010)

For me, it's a little more than that. A dog is a living, thinking, feeling being. I think that attending to the dog's quality of life is more important than attending to the dog's obedience. And I am a person who values obedience. But sane, balanced, and happy dogs come first. Obedience comes second. 

There's a way to accomplish both. But in my world, the dog's happiness is paramount.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

trainingjunkie said:


> For me, it's a little more than that. A dog is a living, thinking, feeling being. I think that attending to the dog's quality of life is more important than attending to the dog's obedience. And I am a person who values obedience. But sane, balanced, and happy dogs come first. Obedience comes second.
> 
> There's a way to accomplish both. But in my world, the dog's happiness is paramount.



Yes. This, this, this.

I mean, honestly? I could not tell you the last time Molly or Kylie just got fed out of a bowl. Molly works for handfuls of food sometimes (when I'm short on time), but mostly does something for, yep, every single kibble. Kylie ALWAYS works for every single piece of food. 

Here is the thing: 

THE DOGS ARE HAVING FUN. It's not being used as an 'enforcement' protocol, they're not being drilled. They find training to be the most fun thing in the WORLD. It is their very, very favorite game. So when I say spin, or touch, or beg, or whatever silly trick they're doing to get those bits of kibble, they're tail wagging and bouncing around because it's *a really good time*. If they're learning something new, even better. All the 'every single kibble is earned' does for them is spread the game out so it lasts longer, and for them that's a plus.

The reason Thud and Jack and Bug *don't* work for every kibble? It's not fun for them. They still get trained, sure, have boundaries and all but. Training isn't a game for them AND they don't have the food drive for food to make it legitimately so. so we play different training games, but they're not working for their lunch beyond going into their crate for it. 

It's just - it's a game. It's a game the same way fetch is a game, with a few rules in place that also help teach them things (ie: we're not playing keep away, that's not how it works) but the dog having a really, really good time and being happy and playing with me is WAY more important than it being a stringent sort of... protocol. They like to train. I use their kibble because they both get fat if you look at them sideways. Win/Win - for me AND the dog.

And even with them, and all their love of tricks and play - they *still* need a chance to sleep on the couch, or play with another dog, or go romping through the woods where the rules are basically down to 'you come back when I call or you get put on a leash', or fetch where the only rule is 'bring the toy back if you want it thrown again', or - I don't know, just whatever. There are rules and structure but there's also *fun for the dog*.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Also, I think the kind of thing being described her (maybe - it doesn't seem entirely clear) absolutely ignores 'functional rewards' that are also part of training.

I touched on it a little bit in my last post, but.

The dog who doesn't bring the ball back doesn't get the ball thrown again. The dog is, in effect, having bringing the ball back rewarded by the next toss and a game they like continuing. 

The dog who doesn't sit at the door to be leashed pretty well ends up having to wait longer before going out. Once the dog does sit and gets the leash put on, the sit was rewarded by the trip outside. 

The dog who dashes off/ignores a recall looses the ability to play off leash by being leashed. The dog who comes back is rewarded by the ability to continue to sniff and play. 

Those are all super simplistic and they all amount to the same sort of 'ruff love' or NILF protocol but aren't "Perform command to get treat" militance, for want of a better word. Living life with you and having basic, general, requirements for your dog will do a WHOLE LOT of training for you, without it all being ... a formal command leading to the performance of a specific behavior leading to a reward given by your hand. 

There's more to training dogs than teaching how to perform specific commands on cue.


----------



## doodler (Sep 18, 2015)

Just an update on this as I know people were worried:

I work from my laptop from the local cafe, typically 4-5 hours a day. So I take the puppy to the cafe and let him go 'off-leash' (the cafe owners are kind). He usually wanders around in the cafe, interacts with the other customers, and if he gets too crazy, I have him stay in the DOWN position while getting fed occasionally to encourage the behavior.

I figure 4-5 hours interacting with anywhere from 20-40 different people per day is probably a lot more socialization and play-time than the average American dog gets (who's usually left at home in the 'burbs while the owners are off working).

The rest of the time, he's still either on leash, crated, or being trained outside.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

doodler said:


> Just an update on this as I know people were worried:
> 
> I work from my laptop from the local cafe, typically 4-5 hours a day. So I take the puppy to the cafe and let him go 'off-leash' (the cafe owners are kind). He usually wanders around in the cafe, interacts with the other customers, and if he gets too crazy, I have him stay in the DOWN position while getting fed occasionally to encourage the behavior.
> 
> ...


I'm kind of confused... the dog is well enough behaved to be let loose in a café for 4-5 hours with random strangers and food/drink all over the place, but not well enough behaved to be let off leash in your own home? What exactly are you currently trying to accomplish with this method that your dog isn't already displaying?


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

doodler said:


> Just an update on this as I know people were worried:
> 
> I work from my laptop from the local cafe, typically 4-5 hours a day. So I take the puppy to the cafe and let him go 'off-leash' (the cafe owners are kind). He usually wanders around in the cafe, interacts with the other customers, and if he gets too crazy, I have him stay in the DOWN position while getting fed occasionally to encourage the behavior.
> 
> ...


I'm confused then. In your original post you said he's only off leash for games or recall work, but now you say he's off leash 4-5 hours a day. You also said that your girlfriend and kids can't play with him at home, but out in public he's allowed to visit with strangers who may have food and drink? If he's so well behaved in the cafe, then I don't see why you need to have him crated or leashed so much at home. I would do it the other way around, personally - leashed while out in public and off leash at home.


----------



## doodler (Sep 18, 2015)

Yes, because we have an infant child and he keeps jumping on the child, nipping the baby, chewing on the baby toys, etc. I don't have time to deal with that repeatedly all throughout the house.

In the cafe, he's generally well behaved and there's no food/drinks lying around on the floor so he can't get to that anyways.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Um. 

Unless you intend to do this forever, you're still going to have to actually keep the toys and food drinks out of reach of him and make the house dog proof. Like, I don't care what protocol you use, but preventing bad behaviors doesn't mean you put them on leash and they become immune to jumping on the baby, trying to play with the baby, and stealing food out of the kids' hands. That is going to take: 
a-) Actual training and b-) actual making those things inaccessible to the dog.

Unless you plan on him leashed or crated at home forever, you're achieving NOTHING with this.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

I mean yea.. if you want those behaviours to get better you're going to have to find the time to actually train them, and/or (ideally and) keep things out of reach the dog can't have. Or deal with the consequences. I know when I was a kid our dog as a puppy chewed up several of my toys. I was mildly upset about it at the time. I got over it and started to be more vigilant about where I left my toys.

But anyway, just preventing the dog from practicing the behaviour isn't the complete solution.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

CptJack said:


> Um.
> 
> Unless you intend to do this forever, you're still going to have to actually keep the toys and food drinks out of reach of him and make the house dog proof. Like, I don't care what protocol you use, but preventing bad behaviors doesn't mean you put them on leash and they become immune to jumping on the baby, trying to play with the baby, and stealing food out of the kids' hands. That is going to take:
> a-) Actual training and b-) actual making those things inaccessible to the dog.
> ...


Agreed. I mean, kids don't really stop leaving food and toys around for years. Its actually harder IMO with a toddler or pre-schooler than with an infant so better to take as much time now to train before the kid becomes very mobile (I'm assuming by "infant" you mean not yet walking). Even with good training, it means management and supervision for years and constant crating isn't good management. Training a down-stay is great, but he'll need to practice it a lot at home also for it to stick (and down-stay near toddler who is flinging food at him is much harder than down-stay around adult who is ignoring him)

BTW, in pretty much all of the US and I presume most of Canada, it is against health department regulations to have a non-service dog inside an establishment selling food or open drinks. Your dog could potentially lead to a large fine for those nice cafe owners. If you aren't in the US, check your local regulations. (Stores that do not sell food or open drink generally have a lot more leeway which is why dogs are sometimes welcome in places bookstores or home improvement stores)


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

I disagree a bit with some of the posters - simply preventing bad behavior will work for some things. I looked through your previous posts and it seems like your pup is about 5 months? Puppies that age are very jumpy and bitey and typically can not be around babies or toddlers without accidentally knocking them over or scratching them or whatever. If you prevent that behavior now the pup will mature and mellow and a lot of that will fix itself. 

Chewing on baby toys and stealing the baby's food probably won't be fixed by tethering. Sure, an older dog is going to be less likely to chew on everything, but most dogs who enjoy toys will not understand the difference between their own toys and the baby's toys. They need to be supervised, trained, and managed by picking up the toys. Food requires even more training.

So I'm totally on board with you tethering the pup to you in order to practice good behavior around the baby. But you can also just use baby gates to keep the puppy in his area and also allow him some freedom to move around and be a dog. He shouldn't be tethered to you all the time.

Also, you say that your dog is around people 4-5 hours a day, but in your original post you mentioned not getting enough socialization with people because you didn't have enough time. So you can see where there is some confusion from us?


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

When you say the dog looks submissive and you can see it in his eyes, what do you mean by that? That's the most worrying part of your post, to me. Many people think their dogs are amazingly well-behaved when really the dogs are shut down and miserable. The following links are great because they have a lot of visual examples of what you don't want:

http://eileenanddogs.com/2013/08/23/shut-down-dogs/
http://eileenanddogs.com/2013/11/21/shut-down-dogs-part-2/

Also, this is the version of NILIF I prefer; it worked great to teach my dogs patience and manners:

http://shibashake.com/dog/nothing-in-life-is-free-dog-training

And here's an important point from that page:



> The spirit of NILIF, as it is widely used today, is to build a strong bond with our dog that is based on trust and respect rather than on confrontation and physical force. We would hardly be doing this by keeping our dog locked up all day, with short bursts of freedom to hero-worship us. Such a strategy focuses purely on the human, and leaves nothing for the dog.
> 
> I train my dogs and use NILIF, not to boast about my dog training prowess, or to follow random rules for no reason. My ultimate goal is to provide my dogs with a good quality of life. Constantly depriving them of freedom and activity would hardly achieve this goal. Common sense dictates that this extreme interpretation of NILIF is not only untenable, but also unproductive.
> 
> When I implement NILIF, I reward my dogs for good behavior. It does not matter whether I asked for a behavior or not; if they behave well, they get rewarded. They are still working for their resources by behaving well, therefore they are not getting resources for free. However, I see absolutely no need to explicitly control every single action by my dog.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

elrohwen said:


> I disagree a bit with some of the posters - simply preventing bad behavior will work for some things. I looked through your previous posts and it seems like your pup is about 5 months? Puppies that age are very jumpy and bitey and typically can not be around babies or toddlers without accidentally knocking them over or scratching them or whatever. If you prevent that behavior now the pup will mature and mellow and a lot of that will fix itself.
> 
> Chewing on baby toys and stealing the baby's food probably won't be fixed by tethering. Sure, an older dog is going to be less likely to chew on everything, but most dogs who enjoy toys will not understand the difference between their own toys and the baby's toys. They need to be supervised, trained, and managed by picking up the toys. Food requires even more training.
> 
> ...


I dunno if I came across as dismissing prevention of bad behaviors as not helpful or not. But I didn't mean to at least. Basically, I think management (aka prevention of bad behaviors) is great for many things. I leave the garbage out of reach, I leave the toilet lid down etc, so I believe in management. I don't want the OP to think though that good behavior in a cafe (which is amazing for a <6 month old labradoodle, the dog must be better behaved than many humans I have met...) translates to good behavior at home without working on it and that crating or tethering 100% of the time for years isn't really working on it either. 

When I visit my "niece" (best friend's child), we make liberal use of baby gates even though the adult dogs are okay loose around toddler with good supervision and restrictions when food is out and such. But for a puppy, I would want that puppy interacting with all adult members of the household in training, play and free time plus supervised interaction with any older children. Give the puppy a chance loose in some rooms of the house (supervised, gated in if needed) to learn the house rules. A coffee shop /= home for most behaviors.


----------



## Mirzam (Jan 17, 2011)

NILIF sounds like some kind of neo-dominance thing, instead of social dominance (pack hierarchy), it is dominance over resources, ie I (owner) control the resources if you do as I say then you get things. For me I like to think as dog and owner as a team.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Not really. I guess it is if you do it hardcore where the dog literally never gets _anything_ for free, but I think of it the same way as giving a kid an allowance for doing chores -- if the dog does something I want, the dog gets something he wants, and we both benefit. I still play with and praise and treat my dog for "free," but I'll ask for a behavior before handing out rewards the dog really wants. I think of it as a way to practice and reward good manners at random times all throughout the day without having to commit to an actual training session; it has nothing to do with having total control over my pet.


----------



## Mirzam (Jan 17, 2011)

Crantastic said:


> Not really. I guess it is if you do it hardcore where the dog literally never gets _anything_ for free, but I think of it the same way as giving a kid an allowance for doing chores -- if the dog does something I want, the dog gets something he wants, and we both benefit. I still play with and praise and treat my dog for "free," but I'll ask for a behavior before handing out rewards the dog really wants. I think of it as a way to practice and reward good manners at random times all throughout the day without having to commit to an actual training session; it has nothing to do with having total control over my pet.


I guess it's a philosophy thing then. I don't pay my children for doing chores, they do it because they are part of a family, a team. But I am not sure that your definition of NILIF is quite the same as the hardcore practitioners of this technique, what you do sounds more like positive reinforcement of behaviors. The Premack Principle?


----------



## BKaymuttleycrew (Feb 2, 2015)

Mirzam said:


> NILIF sounds like some kind of neo-dominance thing, instead of social dominance (pack hierarchy), it is dominance over resources, ie I (owner) control the resources if you do as I say then you get things. For me I like to think as dog and owner as a team.


For me, NILIF is more a way to get the owner to really *think* about their daily interactions with the dog. Training isn't just something that happens for an hour once a week at a class, or in scheduled 20 minute blocks of time penciled into the day. It's everything you do as you live with your dog - I like to remind people that **every single** interaction you have with your dog teaches him something - it's in your best interest to make sure it's something you WANT him to be learning.  

It's not a matter of wanting to "Lord" over your dog, but simply to be aware of all the little times during the course of an average day that you can reinforce the good manners & behavior you'd like to be seeing. This in turn helps the dog develop good manners as a habit very quickly, which will generally help the bond & relationship between owner & dog.


----------



## Mirzam (Jan 17, 2011)

BKaymuttleycrew said:


> For me, NILIF is more a way to get the owner to really *think* about their daily interactions with the dog. Training isn't just something that happens for an hour once a week at a class, or in scheduled 20 minute blocks of time penciled into the day. It's everything you do as you live with your dog - I like to remind people that **every single** interaction you have with your dog teaches him something - it's in your best interest to make sure it's something you WANT him to be learning.
> 
> It's not a matter of wanting to "Lord" over your dog, but simply to be aware of all the little times during the course of an average day that you can reinforce the good manners & behavior you'd like to be seeing. This in turn helps the dog develop good manners as a habit very quickly, which will generally help the bond & relationship between owner & dog.


I can get what you are saying, but in all honesty, it sounds like it has the potential to add a lot of unnecessary stress to a dog's life to turn **every single** interaction into a teaching moment requiring a dog perform some kind of action for a reward. I am all for creating a great bond with owner and dog, but I believe that a dog can be really stressed out by "over" training" (too much positive reinforcement*) and *excessive* owner affection, and the result is some kind of attachment disorder, like SA or addicted-to-owner syndrome. There are so many posts from owners who had their dog from a puppy, they did all the right things: socialized them, took them to puppy classes, took them to obedience classes, lots of training at home, but they still have major behavioral problems like DA, RG, SA and phobias etc and it does make me wonder what is going on here especially with the explosion in dog trainers and behaviorists. I can't believe it is all because of bad breeding, bad luck, or they just got a lemon; and in the case of a shelter/rescue dog past abuse, neglect etc, (after all, dogs live in the moment and are generally very resilient, and although they do have some kind of physical memory, they don't have a concept of self). If you look at our daily lives the positives tend to be taken for granted, it is the negatives we look out for and that shape our learning and allow us to master our confidence.

* With this I am not advocating any kind of dominance training just questioning this kind of hyper-motivational training.


----------



## Luxorien (Jun 11, 2014)

BKaymuttleycrew said:


> Mirzam said:
> 
> 
> > NILIF sounds like some kind of neo-dominance thing, instead of social dominance (pack hierarchy), it is dominance over resources, ie I (owner) control the resources if you do as I say then you get things. For me I like to think as dog and owner as a team.
> ...


This is a great description of the philosophy behind NILIF. So many times, we accidentally train our dogs to do things we would actually rather they didn't do! Thinking of it as a way of being more mindful around the dog is an excellent idea.


----------



## BKaymuttleycrew (Feb 2, 2015)

Mirzam said:


> I can get what you are saying, but in all honesty, it sounds like it has the potential to add a lot of unnecessary stress to a dog's life to turn **every single** interaction into a teaching moment requiring a dog perform some kind of action for a reward. I am all for creating a great bond with owner and dog, but I believe that a dog can be really stressed out by "over" training" (too much positive reinforcement*) and *excessive* owner affection, and the result is some kind of attachment disorder, like SA or addicted-to-owner syndrome. There are so many posts from owners who had their dog from a puppy, they did all the right things: socialized them, took them to puppy classes, took them to obedience classes, lots of training at home, but they still have major behavioral problems like DA, RG, SA and phobias etc and it does make me wonder what is going on here especially with the explosion in dog trainers and behaviorists. I can't believe it is all because of bad breeding, bad luck, or they just got a lemon; and in the case of a shelter/rescue dog past abuse, neglect etc, (after all, dogs live in the moment and are generally very resilient, and although they do have some kind of physical memory, they don't have a concept of self). If you look at our daily lives the positives tend to be taken for granted, it is the negatives we look out for and that shape our learning and allow us to master our confidence.
> 
> * With this I am not advocating any kind of dominance training just questioning this kind of hyper-motivational training.


I'm not talking about putting the dog through a three-ring-circus routine for every single pat on the head - no 'stress' or 'over-training' here, I can guarantee you that. Simply being aware that (whether you like it or not) every single interaction IS a teaching moment & handling it properly by making certain the behaviors I'd like to reinforce are being reinforced not only in isolated training sessions, but in everyday life.


----------



## Mirzam (Jan 17, 2011)

BKaymuttleycrew said:


> I'm not talking about putting the dog through a three-ring-circus routine for every single pat on the head - no 'stress' or 'over-training' here, I can guarantee you that. Simply being aware that (whether you like it or not) every single interaction IS a teaching moment & handling it properly by making certain the behaviors I'd like to reinforce are being reinforced not only in isolated training sessions, but in everyday life.


Fair enough. I would prefer to think every moment is a chance to build on the emotional bond and greater trust between handler and dog, rather than a teaching moment per se, but I don't really use a whole lot of OC techniques in training myself. As I wrote above, I wonder if NILIF if taken to the extreme, has the *potential* to over stress a dog and can lead to the issues I stated (I'm not suggesting this is what you are doing at all, it seems obvious that you are not). I guess I look to my children as examples, I have not had to positively reinforce at every possible opportunity how to behave in a socially acceptable way, they learned it naturally as they matured. I don't think dogs are all that different.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

I think it kind of becomes automatic for the dog... it's just manners. For example, I'd ask for a sit before giving a treat or toy to the dogs. Now they automatically sit and look at me when they want something I have. It's not a teaching moment anymore; it's just how things work.


----------



## Kb294 (Aug 31, 2015)

Just a brief note to lighten things up.... Our lab is amazingly obedient, and has been from day one (classic gun dog) but she once ate nearly an entire pizza neopolitana from our table. She's never done it before, and hasn't done it since. But she ate that whole damn pizza like a ferral beast. Sometimes, dogs will be dogs, training be damned!


----------



## BKaymuttleycrew (Feb 2, 2015)

Mirzam said:


> Fair enough. I would prefer to think every moment is a chance to build on the emotional bond and greater trust between handler and dog, rather than a teaching moment per se, but I don't really use a whole lot of OC techniques in training myself. As I wrote above, I wonder if NILIF if taken to the extreme, has the *potential* to over stress a dog and can lead to the issues I stated (I'm not suggesting this is what you are doing at all, it seems obvious that you are not). I guess I look to my children as examples, I have not had to positively reinforce at every possible opportunity how to behave in a socially acceptable way, they learned it naturally as they matured. I don't think dogs are all that different.


Honestly, I don't think you can realistically compare children learning socially acceptable behavior to dogs. Children are *humans* living in a *human* world. They learn by example (as well as by direct & deliberate teachings) from those adults around them. Dogs, on the other hand, are NOT humans, so the 'socially acceptable behavior' they would naturally learn is that which is acceptable to DOGS - not humans. We expect these dogs to live in a human centered world & to conform to behaviors that WE (as humans) consider 'acceptable'. (when was the last time you greeted a friend by sniffing their crotch? lol) Therefore, it is our **responsibility** as the 'humans in charge' to make certain that our canine companions learn to conduct themselves in a manner that will help them fit in & be accepted as a different species living in a human world. Unfortunately, there's not much that's 'natural' about that, and therefore we (as responsible owners) must think about, and train, what might not be 'natural' to the dog in question - and this is best acomplished in the context of constant living. IMO.


----------



## Sunak (Jul 3, 2014)

doodler said:


> I'm working off the Ruff Love dog training


It's very clear that no love whatsoever is actually involved. Not even respect for another living creature.

Just a catchy, euphemistic name to mask what amounts to highly systematic dog abuse.


----------



## Mirzam (Jan 17, 2011)

BKaymuttleycrew said:


> Honestly, I don't think you can realistically compare children learning socially acceptable behavior to dogs. Children are *humans* living in a *human* world. They learn by example (as well as by direct & deliberate teachings) from those adults around them. Dogs, on the other hand, are NOT humans, so the 'socially acceptable behavior' they would naturally learn is that which is acceptable to DOGS - not humans. We expect these dogs to live in a human centered world & to conform to behaviors that WE (as humans) consider 'acceptable'. (when was the last time you greeted a friend by sniffing their crotch? lol) Therefore, it is our **responsibility** as the 'humans in charge' to make certain that our canine companions learn to conduct themselves in a manner that will help them fit in & be accepted as a different species living in a human world. Unfortunately, there's not much that's 'natural' about that, and therefore we (as responsible owners) must think about, and train, what might not be 'natural' to the dog in question - and this is best accomplished in the context of constant living. IMO.


I know dogs are not like humans and they do not think as we do, in fact, they do not *think* at all, they *feel*. This is the problem that I see with the current science and "Theory of Mind" that OC trainers base their techniques on. I have not found OC to be an effective training methodology, at least not with my dog and I no longer use OC methods* with him and I have seen some dramatic results with his focus on me as handler which has improved his behavior is many areas, from reactivity (non-aggressive), door rushing, leash pulling etc. I actually prefer a more "natural" way of working with my dog which gets to the core of the issues and develops a strong emotional bond and deep trust. Dogs are different from every other species in that they have a greater emotional capacity which is why they fit so well in our world, and can live on our terms. An example of what I would do is not teach a puppy *NOT* to bite, a la Ian Dunbar, but teach him *WHAT* not to bite, this is how a puppy learns to be social. I am also not in favor of hyper-socialization of puppies, I think that can over stress them and lead to fear, and fearful behavior, but that is a different topic.

I am happy if NILIF (within reason) and similar methods work well for you, and don't want to bash it or other OC methods, NILIF just isn't something I would want to do, and as I have said a couple of times, I can see how it *could* result in stress in the dog. Incidentally, I am very against using OC in teaching humans also.


* Nor do I use any techniques from the dominance model for that matter. I guess you could say I use the drive model.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Too much positive reinforcement.

Too much... positive. Reinforcement.


BRB, trying to wrap my mind around that.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Dogs don't think? You have any sources I can read?


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I'm wondering how to avoid operant conditioning in dog training or even any interaction with any living being. OC is just basic cause and effect, right? Even dominance-type training is OC, just heavier on the negative reinforcement/positive punishment. 

I do think NILIF can be taken too far. Too controlling, too nit-picky, etc. But I suppose maybe if someone is naturally controlling or nit-picky it's a less harmful outlet for their inclinations .


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Crantastic said:


> Dogs don't think? You have any sources I can read?


...Yeah, I'm living here. I watch my dogs problem solve all the time. Pretty sure that's not an emotion based thing. I mean, sure, they're driven by the desire to have/get/avoid something, but that's also true of people.


----------



## BKaymuttleycrew (Feb 2, 2015)

Yes, dogs *feel* but they absolutely, positively do **think**. I'm not sure how you could live with a dog & come to the conclusion that they don't!? And how does this 'drive model' of training that doesn't utilize any sort of operant conditioning actually work? Consequences drive voluntary behavior. Period. Whether those consequences are intentionally provided by us, or simply the natural outcome of an action it's still OC. 

I'm thinking, Mirzam, that you & I are just going to have to agree to disagree.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Yea... dogs definitely think. Some are better at critical thinking than others, and some are more quick to turn to a human for help instead of trying to figure it out themselves, but they absolutely do think.


----------



## hanksimon (Mar 18, 2009)

Dogs Think - See Brian Hare & Dognition; Look up Chaser the Dog. Also compare Cognitive Psychology and Learning Theory vs. Behavioral Psychology
[Personally, I believe that initial training begins Behaviorally with external rewards and evolves to Cognitive with internal rewards. I don't believe there is any academic research to demonstrate this, yet.] 

As far as NILIF, I believe that what you do may be very similar to NILIF methods:
1. How do you manage Door Rushing? A NILIF approach might look at the specific instance of going outside. You go to the door. The dog rushes the door, ready to burst outside. You stop and wait. Nothing happens until the dog sits. The Dog sits, [there may be praise and treats] you begin to open the door, the dog rushes the door, and you close it, then wait until the dog sits. [Wash, rinse, repeat, until the dog gets it.]
2. Leash pulling - What is your method? Be a tree is one NILIF method - the dog pulls, you stop, until the dog Stops & [Sits & ] looks back. [repeat]
And so on. I imagine that your gentle methods are similar. Same method, different name?

To clarify : "I would do is not teach a puppy *NOT* to bite, a la Ian Dunbar" The Dunbar method of Bite Inhibition does Not teach a puppy Not to Bite. This is not possible to do. Teaching "NEVER Bite" can result in a binary approach - Don't Bite, OR possibly Bite to the Bone in an emergency. The important goal of Bite Inhibition is to teach the pup to control how hard he bites, until he learns to bite very softly, or not to play bite. When done correctly you can achieve a dog that mouths as a reprimand, rather than snarling and slashing, as well as an injured dog that may bite but doesn't break the skin when you palpate to feel a broken bone. These are not theoretical results, but real outcomes from many dogs that I've helped owners to train. 

But my point is that the OP might want to look up Bite Inhibition for her boyfriend, to say Ouch when 'attacked' then leave the area, putting the pup in a timeout.


----------



## Mirzam (Jan 17, 2011)

hanksimon said:


> Dogs Think - See Brian Hare & Dognition; Look up Chaser the Dog. Also compare Cognitive Psychology and Learning Theory vs. Behavioral Psychology
> [Personally, I believe that initial training begins Behaviorally with external rewards and evolves to Cognitive with internal rewards. I don't believe there is any academic research to demonstrate this, yet.] [?QUOTE]
> 
> I have heard about Brian Hare's work and I think he operating under the assumption that animals perceive the world exactly as we do. Interpreting the evidence as if the dog is thinking and that what happens outside causes what happens inside, requires dogs to have a concept of self, separate from his owner, other dogs, prey, etc, dogs do not possess this. Chaser is an exceptional dog, however looking at some recent, diverse research, it is likely that it is pattern recognition that is the factor at play in Chaser's amazing abilities, and likely ties into being a herding breed. Studies with infants have shown the area of the brain that controls this kind of pre-verbal recognition is the old brain, the cerebellum, which both humans and animals share and which also controls motor control and attention to changes in the environment, pattern recognition is a pre-cursor for language and a requisite for herding sheep. Notice the other dog known for his naming prowess, Ricoh, is also a Border Collie.
> ...


_Knowing what I know now, I would manage puppy biting slightly differently. I will be more conscious of feeling, a dog raised and trained with regard to what and how he feels, will be able to feel in a critical moment rather than go by instinct. I made tons of mistakes training my dog, or perhaps I was just inept :redface: however, with this change of methodology to drive and focus, I have been able correct much of my past training mistakes or deficiencies._


----------

