1 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 
My boy is good at everything except the rock solid ... hardest thing to achieve with a dog, I really do.

Heh. Get a herding breed! Honestly, I'm too lazy to teach a good recall, so I'll stick with BCs and Aussies.

My daughter had a good trick for teaching a rock solid recall. When she was little, she always had food on her face and hands. She still has a tendency to get food on her face when she eats, but she is more likely to wipe it off. But back when she didn't think to clean herself up, every time the dog came to her, she would get to clean her up. Pretty soon, Mimi didn't even have to call the dogs to get them to come running. She'd appear and they'd appear. Just like magic.

Paula
"Anyway, other people are weird, but sometimes they have candy, so it's best to try to get along with them." Joe Bay
However, I am also thinking along lines that are counter to Sarah's. I would not teach him that the shock is a correction from you. I would want him to think it is a jolt from the blue for two reasons.

I didn't express myself very clearly - what happens when you write in a hurry!
First, understanding that the tap is a correction doesn't automatically equal knowing that the owner originated the correction. Second, with the "bolt out of the blue" comment, I was referring to the fact that some dogs don't get that the collar signal is a correction at all, but freak out at it, or think that something's attacking them.

The way I've used an e-collar, I teach the dog to give a specific response to the collar tap - turning towards me and/or stopping forward motion - and praise and reward for responding to it. It works in the same way as using a verbal correction, then praising the instant the dog responds. The dog doesn't necessarily know that I corrected, but DOES understand what to do when s/he feels the correction.

I'm still not convinced that an e-collar, regardless of whether Tara teaches a response to it first or just goes straight to correcting when JJ starts to lift his leg, is going to accomplish anything at all different from her previous verbal corrections - at least as far as Joe is concerned. However, one very good result I think she may get is changing Fancy's reaction, since with the verbal corrections it sounds like she thinks she's being yelled at, too.
I'm still concerned, though, that Joe may think the correction is coming from Fancy - it's very easy for a dog to mistake a collar tap for a neck-nip from another dog when it happens in close proximity. Anecdotal evidence: A hiking buddy of mine accidentally instilled a lifelong respect for Brenin in her dog by giving him a collar correction at the exact moment that Bren happened to give him a "back off" snap from about
3 feet away.Barley's been convinced that Bren has some sort of superpower ever since... and very fortunately, since he can be seriously same-sex aggressive, he didn't react to it by going on the attack.
>
I knew what was coming but couldn't believe he was just going to
flat-out intentionally mark her...no overmarking, no accidental marking,no excuses. Sure enough the damned dog hiked his leg on her while she *just stood there!*

Argh indeed!! I'd be feeling like strangling him too, no matter how much I loved him otherwise.
Fancy did the same. Its like she's some sort of little submissive robot, willing to take anything and then >accept blame for it.

As I said in another post, this is at least one place where I can 100% agree that the e-collar might be useful - since it very much sounds like Fancy isn't clear that she isn't the one being corrected. :-( NOT a criticism, btw - an observation based in personal experience dealing with multiple dogs!
At this point, why would you not at least give ... doesn't help, maybe - just MAYBE - that praising would?

Convince me that praising a dog (a dog who is conditioned to view praise as a good thing) for doing, ... any other connection than "marking this dog makes mom happy and I get praise for it"? It doesn't make sense.

This is the most difficult obstacle to overcome: the idea that you should never praise a dog for bad behavior! But if you could go against your own instinct and do it anyway, you'd be surprised by the effect.

It's perhaps the fact that praise means something else for the dog than it means for us. I think that Jerry is right that praise helps the dog relax, not that the dog wants to make us happy. He just feels good when we praise and doesn't NEED anymore to do whatever he was doing before, because being praised by us feels better to HIM.
As about your concern that praising would reinforce Joe Joe's bad behavior, do you think it can get worse than it already is? You said he did it under your eyes, while looking at you. On the other hand, you said that, when you called him, he briefly stopped; that's when I'd have praised him, continuously, for as long as he was thinking about going back to pee on Fancy. I'd have praised until he changed his mind and moved to an acceptable behavior. Or, if he went back to pee on Fancy, I'd have used sound distraction coming from a different direction and praised again. I'd have repeated, alternating the sound direction and always praising, until he finally gave up the thought of peeing on Fancy.
That's what I did about Clyde's digging, which was an obsessive thing with him: when he started to dig, he would go into a frenzy and no amount of yelling at him would have had any effect. It was as if he was deaf, completely absorbed into his digging thing. But a different sound would always make him stop for a moment. And the praising that accompanied the sound was, at first, perplexing to him, as if he wondered "What on earth she thinks she's doing?" He used to look at me while I was praising him (and believe me, at times I didn't feel at all like praising him!) and after two or three attempts to resume digging and me distracting him and praising, he would finally give up and go to sleep, or start chewing on his toy.
If you're approaching this from a distraction standpoint then I fail to see how that will help.

The sound provides the distraction; the PRAISE is the punishment - in the sense that it is used in order to stop the unwanted behavior. The common misunderstanding of how the method works is to use the SOUND as a punishment, which indeed doesn't work.
I can already distract him when I see what he's planning. I can also call him off easily enough when he makes it further than the planning stage. What I cannot do is drive home the point that he cannot ever re-engage in that behavior.

That's precisely what PRAISE could accomplish. He will not understand that he cannot reengage in that behavior, he will not reengage in that behavior because it will no longer be WORTH DOING SO, for HIM. He will stop it because the urge to do it will no longer exist, so you will not NEED to command him not to do it again.
Whether he doesn't get it or chooses to obey the edict is unknown. You explain the method, how the dog will interpret the method, and I'll give it my full attention if its something that has a chance of working.

Maybe he doesn't think to obey or to disobey. Maybe it's just his anxiety and he's found this way of relieving it. Maybe the fact that his behavior drives you mad makes him even more anxious and he doesn't know any better than relieve his anxiety the way he does, which only makes you more unhappy and him more anxious. It looks like a self-amplifying loop. Maybe if you could just signal to him that he is OK, a good dog, and he can feel safe and certain of your love he wouldn't feel the urge to "do" something, because his anxiety will go away on its own.
What I have seen in my dogs as a result of praising them (not only when they do something good, not only when I want them to stop what they were doing either, but also when - as Jerry says in his manual - their eyes momentarily meet mine, every time I see one of my dogs looking at me I tell him/her that he/she is a GOOD DOG, so the meaning of "GOOD DOG!" is clear to them) is the fact that both my dogs have become calmer, more certain of themselves, more relaxed. They do what I ask of them because they want to - and what better reason for the dog to obey could one hope for?
I implore you, before trying the e-collar on him, do ... at you, or just hesitating, unsure of what to do.

What do you think I've been doing until now? I certainly don't scold him when he calls off. I only scold when he's already engaging in th e urinating behavior.

Try to stop scolding altogether and do the distraction-and-praise instead.
Praise, until he starts to resume,

He doesn't resume afterward. He waits until another outing or until a good bit of time has passed after the interruption.

Yes, if the interruption is accompanied by admonishing.
and then distract again, with a sound coming from a ... the direction of the sound), PRAISING AS YOU DISTRACT HIM.

Unless I have several helpers here how do you recommend that I distract him with sound from different directions?

That's what a penny can was intended for: so that you can throw it - NOT AT the dog, as some people strangely interpreted it, but BEHIND the dog, so that the sound comes from a different direction than, say, your voice. I also use to clap my hands, once in front of the dog, next from behind the dog. You can also do the same by snapping your fingers.
Why do you think an e-collar nick or low-level continuous stimulation wouldn't serve as an equally effective, and less startling (considering this is a dog who startles at noises) than sound distraction? Just curious.

I have no experience with e-collars, but my own experience with electrical shocks whether accidentally or intentionally occurring (such as producing nice blue "lightning" sparks in the dark between your fingernails and a nylon scarf) was always unpleasant. I think it would be much more startling and frightening - even if not downright painful - when the electrical "stimulation" occurs at your neck. Much more unpleasant than any normal intensity sound could ever be.

You might also want to ask Handsome Jack Morisson (who IS experienced with the use of an e-collar) why he thinks that it's a bad idea to use it on Joe Joe and why, even when he thinks that the use of an e-collar IS warranted, you should start doing it under the supervision of an EXPERIENCED trainer only.
I bet that after a few repetitions he will give ... Don't scold him, don't punish him, just distract and praise.

Considering that I've been doing that when I distract and successfully interrupt before he's engaged yet he still continues to do re-engage in the behavior later on I'm unconvinced.

But you've never tried to accompany the distraction with PRAISE, have you? What do you have to lose if you just try THAT?
There seems to be a distinct possibility that he's now tried to mark her in the house as well.

Then one more reason to try something that might work, for a change, isn't it?
Lucy
()
You might also want to ask Handsome Jack Morisson (who IS experienced with the use of an e-collar) why he ... the use of an e-collar IS warranted, you should start doing it under the supervision of an EXPERIENCED trainer only.

Let's not go overboard here. I didn't say it was a bad idea to use it on Joe Joe.
Whatwould you do, for instance, about Tara O.'s dog Joe Joe, who pees

I replied:
1. I probably wouldn't do anything without seeing the dog in action, and knowing more about the dog's background, the other dog, and getting to see "what's going on in the pack," etc.

And the primary reason I said that is because I strongly believe in the old maxim, "First, do no harm." I'd want to know a lot more about this situation before I ever considered the use of an e-collar here.

It's quite easy (e-collar or no e-collar) to cause a negative association with/towards her other dog here, and I'd want to spend some time trying to figure out why this behavior is occuring in the first place before I'd try to modify it. Is something out of whack in the pack's dynamics? If so, why. Does he feel insecure? If so, why. Does he feel a need to protect her? If so, why. Is he claiming turf? If so, why. Has it simply become a learned behavior? I'd also want to see how Tara interacts with the dog, the other dog, etc. Etc. etc. etc. There could be some much less dangerous ways to change this dog's behavior.
Do you think that an e-collar is the right thing for him?

2. No.

A reply that is based on what I know at this point, which isn't much. Again, "First, do no harm."
Do you think that it's a wise idea that someone without any experience with an e-collar to try it on an otherwise good and obedient dog?

3. Depending on what "it" is, not without getting some hands-on help from an experienced e-collar trainer.

IMO, it's never a good idea to attempt to use an e-collar without getting some hands-on help from an experienced e-collar trainer.
Considering that I've been doing that when I distract and ... to do re-engage in the behavior later on I'm unconvinced.

But you've never tried to accompany the distraction with PRAISE, have you? What do you have to lose if you just try THAT?

That's really a question that you are in a much better position to answer, for example, down at the shelter, with/on dogs facing a death sentence because of their aberrant behavior(s). Tara's dog isn't facing a death sentence, and she probably doesn't want to risk making matters worse by using a method that seems antithetical to common sense.

So, Lucy, WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO LOSE if you try Jerry's "method" down at your local shelter? I'm sure they'd welcome any help they can get, and you'd be walking the walk instead of talking the talk. You also might learn something. Yes, even you.
Sounds like a no-brainer to me.
Which means that even you can probably do it.
Really.
Let us know how that works out for you, 'kay?
A video of the event would be a nice touch, too!

Handsome Jack Morrison
*gently remove the detonator to send me e-mail
As about your concern that praising would reinforce Joe Joe's bad behavior, do you think it can get worse than ... when I'd have praised him, continuously, for as long as he was thinking about going back to pee on Fancy.

You are talking about something different from praising bad behavior. This is praising good behavior and is already what Tee does. Calling him was a distraction (that worked just fine, so no need to use a penny can for the distraction) and then he stopped. If you say that is when you would have praised him, then you would be praising him when he had stopped and was doing the good behavior, not praising the bad behavior of peeing on Fancy. This is not a new thing to Jerry. Distract and then praise after the interruption of the bad behavior is basic. The only difference is that the way Jerry puts it, as praising bad behavior, is misleading and unclear and can cause a lot of harm if people take it literally.

Paula
"Anyway, other people are weird, but sometimes they have candy, so it's best to try to get along with them." Joe Bay
As about your concern that praising would reinforce Joe Joe's ... he was thinking about going back to pee on Fancy.

You are talking about something different from praising bad behavior. This is praising good behavior and is already what Tee does.

Here's what Tee does, in her own words:
>
And:
>

DOES it look to you like she's doing what I said I'd do?
Calling him was a distraction (that worked just fine, so no need to use a penny can for the distraction) and then he stopped.

I'd have praised AS I MADE THE DISTRACTION, not only AFTER he stopped. I'd have continued to praise, without any yelling and other aversions when he doesn't stop, and I'd have distracted WITH SIMULTANEOUS PRAISE the moment he did it again.
If you say that is when you would have praised him, then you would be praising him when he had stopped and was doing the good behavior, not praising the bad behavior of peeing on Fancy.

I'd have praised as I produced the distraction (that's why it's better to make a sound with something else than your voice, to allow you to praise SIMULTANEOUSLY) and also during the time he hesitates, still thinking to resume his bad behavior.
This is not a new thing to Jerry. Distract and then praise after the interruption of the bad behavior is basic.

Not "after", Paula, but AS YOU DISTRACT and continue as the dog stopped, until he starts his bad behavior AGAIN. And THEN distract again (from a different direction) and PRAISE AS YOU DISTRACT, continue praising, until he resumes. Repeat the cycle, alternating the direction from which the distraction comes, until he stops completely. At NO point yell or use any aversive, no matter what the dog does.
The only difference is that the way Jerry puts it, as praising bad behavior, is misleading and unclear and can cause a lot of harm if people take it literally.

The way that Jerry puts it is the way to do it. I wouldn't call it "praising the bad behavior", but rather praising the DOG, even when engaged in bad behavior, because this is what makes the dog STOP the bad behavior. You praise the dog IN ORDER TO MAKE HIM STOP the bad behavior, not AFTER he stops it.
Lucy
in thread (Email Removed) (Melinda Shore) whittled the following words:
in thread diddy (Email Removed) whittled the following words: sorry, not sure why that posted. Certainly did not intend it to