Chocked, Shocked and Gently Lead

The sad story of Boss, a dog who died while in the care of a boarding kennel, made the news recently. You can read details at http://www.southshorenow.ca/archives/2010/030910/news/index034.php but what apparently happened was that Boss had a choke collar on, another dog caught his paw in it and Boss suffocated.

The chain that loops around a dog’s neck is often called a “training collar”, but above sad event makes it clear that it is what it is: a tool that can cause a dog to choke to death. And many trainers and owners use it, or a variation of it, like the Illusion collar or Wade collar (www.johnwade.ca).

Despite its popularity, it is not even a good training tool, evidenced by the fact that most dogs still pull with it on, or pull when it’s not on, and that includes titled obedience dogs.

That the choke chain is only meant for corrections and training, and not for controlling pulling or depriving a dog of oxygen to soften him up to be pinned next, is irrelevant. What matters to the dog is not what the tool is designed to do by the manufacturer, but how his lay owner actually uses it – or rather misuses it.

Another tool that is regularly misused is the Halti and Gentle Leader; the device that goes around the dog’s nose and irritates the heck out of most of them. I find the name Gentle Leader quite ironic – what I see are dogs whose necks are twisted, who are constantly rubbing and pawing to get the thing off, and who are, by some trainers, hung and corrected with it.

Reactive behaviors almost always worsen with any type of nose-harness. The dog’s stress is increased by the uncomfortable and irritable sensation, and he is prevented from communicating freely because his, typically tense, owner at the other end of the leash manipulates his head.

The stress and conflict a dog feels often begins before the walk, because the appearance of the head halter is an associated cue that elicits both excitement and anxiety.

The worst of all tools, used for both corrections and basic training, is the shock collar. I don’t care under how many nicer sounding euphemisms (anti-bark collar, e-collar, remote training collar, precision training…) they are sold, the purpose of it is either to apply a painful shock to punish a “bad” behavior, or to elicit the wanted behavior. In either case, it is abuse, plain and simple, and in my ideal world its use would be illegal.

That an owner, or trainer, puts the device on himself before putting it on the dog means nothing. Dogs’ red blood cells have a higher sodium content than humans’ and sodium is a great electrical conductor. So just because a shock doesn’t hurt your arm, don’t conclude it won’t hurt your dog’s neck.

Worse than that, it is not just the pain that drives dogs to insanity and neuroticism, but the unpredictability of it. I challenge every person who uses a shock collar on a dog to put it on himself first, but have someone else control it. Whenever an order given in a language he doesn’t understand isn’t obeyed quickly enough: Zap. Whenever he does something the trigger person doesn’t like: Zap. I bet my best leather leash that by the end of the day the e-collar stimulated person is a basket case and won’t like the “trainer” very much; will want to get away from him as fast and far as possible.

And that’s the sad life sentence for many dogs, and it sometimes begins when they are puppies.

The Departments of Ethology and Clinical Sciences of Companion Animals in Utrecht, Netherlands did a study on shock collar training. The dogs were driven German shepherds with a high pain threshold. One group was trained with shock collars; the control group with “normal” punitive methods regularly applied in traditional dog training. The study showed that:

Shocked dogs are more stressed, and not only on the training grounds, but in general.

The shocked dogs connected the shock with the handler, even though 75% of the handlers believed that the dog did not understand who’s responsible for the zap.

So don’t kid yourself. Your dog knows that you’re the abuser.

The use of harsh, cruel or distressing equipment is justified by labeling the dog dominant, defiant and aggressive. They leave a lot of room for misapplication and abuse and dogs that have no choice, no escape, no way out, are suffering at the hands of their owner and “professional".

My advice is to be leery of anybody who guarantees a quick fix solution for complex and deep-seated problems. The use of a certain collar that suppresses the symptoms of fear, stress and occasionally yes, dominance, is not the same as rehabilitation. Even when the symptoms disappear, which is not a given, it comes at a price. A punishment, for it to be effective, has to impress the dog, and the fallout of that is that the dog will want to avoid you in the future, and that shuts the possibility for true companionship.

The only devices dogs should be trained and walked with are a flat collar, a body harness or, if one needs more physical control, the Sense-Ation harness. There is no room for misuse and misapplication even with the rookiest of dog owners. I’ve been using and recommending the Sense-Ation harness since 1997 or ’98 and it is still my favorite. You can find info at www.softouchconcepts.com and locally in Nova Scotia at www.sublimecanine.ca.

Greeting Rules

For someone as hung up on dominance as Cesar Millan, I was quite surprised to read that he lets the dog initiate greeting and advices the person to allow groin sniffing till the dog is done. You’d think that someone who corrects a dog for a trivial infringement like stepping ahead would pay more attention to something as major as entering one’s private realm.

True enough, regardless of species, it is always the subordinate who approaches a superior, but only after an invitation. Never does an underling invade space of someone above on her own terms.

If I’m in a crowd to watch the arrival of a visiting VIP, it is up to the VIP to set the rules for a possible interaction. She can ignore me or shake hands and chat, pass me by or invite me to tea. The VIP signals if, or if not, I may approach closer. If yes, I do so observing the correct cultural rituals, and hang around until the VIP decides that the visit is over. No VIP has the right to disrespect me, beat me up or order me around, but can completely dismiss my existence, and I presume that’s what she’d probably do with insignificant old me. A VIP is superior and knows it.

In Millan’s world, dogs are allowed to dismiss all those rules and he calls it leadership.

In my world, and as a mindful leader, I observe those rules. I decide who my dogs can greet and for how long. If my dog wants to say hello to a stranger, she communicates that to me with eye contact. I then check with the stranger if interaction is wished, and if yes, I give my dog a release command and she can go and greet.

Greeting should always be under command control. Once permitted, groin sniffing should be allowed also, but in reality dogs that feel very comfortable meeting people often don’t sniff there because they don’t need the extra information to feel safe. The need to groin sniff indicates a bit of uncertainty.

With dogs that are conflicted about a stranger; switch between feeling curious and insecure, NOT greeting should be the default behavior. In fact, ideally strangers should be irrelevant, inconsequential for every dog.

As long as a stranger has a meaning, the dog is compelled to check him out. Especially if the owner doesn’t take action and offer clarity and guidance, she’ll approach and sniff, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that she is friendly or relaxed. Decreased distance to the person increases the conflict a fearful dog is already in, and that increases the potential for aggression.

It is like someone with a fear of heights who’s brave enough to climb a ladder but freezes halfway up. The stranger handing a treat out won’t make it any better. Quite the opposite: the food-motivated dog has even more conflict now, because she wants the treat, but not the hand that holds it.

But even if a dog is bombproof friendly, the same greeting-by-permission-only rule should apply. Unbelievable but true, there are humans that don’t like even the sweetest of dogs in their personal space and might act erratically or aggressively, and then the dog counter reacts, maybe just with anxious barking, but sadly in our society it doesn’t take much for a dog to get a “dangerous” or “attack” label. For her own protection, a dog should never greet a person, or dog, on her own terms.

We are a: lots of affection, a good amount of exercise and no discipline family, but that doesn’t mean that we tolerate being imposed upon. Our dogs communicate with a moment’s hesitation, lowered body and lowered wagging tail that they want to interact with us – and wait for the invitation we signal with a nod. And that has less to do with dominance and submission, but with being polite and respecting personal space. I don’t like to be bowled over by any other family member and expect nothing less from Davie and Will. Polite signaling that intimate cuddling or play is desired is a good habit to have, and good habits are best practiced at home.

The more of a behavioral issue, the more rules and rituals ought to be observed. They become less important if the dog is confident, obedient and well behaved.

The Dog Brindi

Brindi’s sentencing is coming up next week, and although I am not involved anymore, it is difficult to ignore. So, here is another post, in case you are not bored of it yet. What I don’t want to do is to rehash what has been said in the past numerous times. If you want to read Brindi’s story from two points of view check out http://dogkisser.blogspot.com, http://freebrindi.blogspot.com and http://novascotiatruth.blogspot.com.

I want to talk about Brindi from a professional and rational point of view.

I met her once, at the SPCA sometime last year, when I was asked to assess her.

Back then, and I haven't seen her since, I found that she was well cared for and not stressed, which surprised me cause many dogs cooped up for months are, but Brindi wasn't.

I also found her to be very responsive to my assistant and me. I was able to handle her, put a new harness on her, she offered lots of attention and eye contact and refused to play a rough housing game I initiated (for assessment purposes - I am against rough housing with dogs), so was not at all confrontational and competitive with people, even in a playful way.

I requested, for assessment purposes, to be able to take Brindi out of her run to the fenced back area (which was granted immediately) to see how Brindi reacts to the other dogs in their runs we had to pass by, and she did not react, but also did not look at them, which indicates that she was somewhat nervous but able to contain herself, likely because by then other dogs and situation were familiar to her.

I had my own dogs with me for further evaluation. At that point my assistant handled Brindi inside the fenced area, and I handled my dogs outside, so we played it safe but at the same time were able to get a fairly true account what the issues are. Brindi was alert when she first saw my dogs, but was easily redirected by my assistant and shifted her attention from my dogs to her, and willingly followed her, walking away from my dogs.

Then they came nose to nose, with only the fence in between, and had some polite and fluid-bodied sniffing. Brindi was also able to share treats, with her and my dogs all in a sit position, which indicates that she is also not competitive with other dogs.

She did react as soon as we walked away with lunging and barking, so there is clearly a problem with dogs in motion, and possibly also dogs that are unfamiliar to her, and it likely originated somewhere in the past when she was chained. Restraint frustration can lead to erratic lunging, barking and a possible attack when there is opportunity (dog gets out of a collar, leash or tie-out breaks, there's a hole in the fence or the gate open, or whatever). Many dogs that are/were chained or left unattended in a fenced yard or dog run are reactive, and that is why I am dead-set against it.

Based on all of the above, that is what I believe Brindi needs in the future:

To Live.

To belong to someone cause she is people oriented and willing to take her cues and guidance from a person.

To be managed properly. That does not mean a muzzle and fenced back yard. Although both can function as extra safety guards, as long as Brindi is able to fence run or chase a dog because she got away, the behaviors that got her into trouble will continue. In addition, even with a muzzle and fence she can still intimidate people and dogs, and potentially, inadvertently injure a person knocking her/him over.

Managing means being in the house with the owner and leash walks on a collar and harness for better control (so two leashes), and to not be off the leash or unsupervised in a fenced yard or dog run.

To desensitize her to the problem stimuli – other dogs in motion, and dogs that appear suddenly. That triggered the reaction in the past and during my assessment and that appears to be Brindi’s only issue. That, in many cases, is doable but can take time and effort. That is why managing her conscientiously until suddenly appearing and moving dogs are irrelevant in Brindi’s mind is paramount.

To shape a default stress coping behavior - I'd choose walking away.

Brindi lived in how many places already? Provided Brindi is released, I wish for her to find a stable and permanent place to put her food bowl down and hang her leash up. Not one who'll kennel her a few months into the relationship to go on vacation or something. That is tough - Mike and I haven't had a vacation without the dogs since 1999 when we got Davie.

The million-dollar question is if Francesca Rogier is able to do all that? That’s what the judge has to decide next Tuesday and I concur with Joan Sinden – a difficult task and I am glad I don’t have to do it.

I will say that much though. If Brindi were my dog, and there would be someone who could give her all she needs, I’d choose that to euthanasia. And trust me, I love my dogs. Ask hubby Mike. You could offer to pay my mortgage and you wouldn’t have a chance at them.

But if you love them, and if there is no other way for them to be happy, set them free.

Extinction Burst

Is an operant conditioning term and happens when a reinforcement that followed a behavior routinely in the past doesn’t manifest any longer. That is frustrating, and frustration needs a release; the organism is forced to do something and either tries the known behavior harder, frantically or furiously even, or tries another, new behavior to elicit the consequence it expects.

If you’re stopped behind a car at a red traffic light, and then the light turns green, you expect the car ahead of you to start driving because that is what you learned normally happens. If the car doesn’t move, likely you will do something: Honk the horn, yell, swear, snap at your partner sitting beside you, try to back up and drive around the car, or get out of yours to check if the person not moving needs help if you are a nice person, or to stab him if you have extreme road rage. Which one it is depends on your personality, what kind of a day you’re having, and how important it is that you get to your destination fast.

Dogs also learn that a certain event leads to a predictable outcome, and once learned anticipate and expect it. They learn it when we purposely reward a “good boy”, or clicking sound with a treat, and when we accidentally always play ball at the same park or grab the leash to go for a walk at a certain time.

Sequences of routine events that are important to the dog lead to a dog who anticipates and expects what comes next as soon as the first cue in that sequence presents itself. And if what should come next is not forthcoming, the dog becomes frustrated just like we would at the green light, or when the chocolate bar doesn’t come out after we put the coin in the vending machine, or when our employer doesn’t pay us.

And as it is with humans, the intensity of a dog’s frustration outburst depends on her personality, pre-existing stress level and how important the expected event, the reward is for her. Most dogs paw, jump, whine or bark – behaviors often described as nuisance and bratty ones, and some dogs can be quite persistent in turning it up a few notches. Some aggress, hard-stare, growl and warn, and once I was bitten in the hand when I did not release a treat right away.

We humans have a bigger and better cerebral cortex than other animals, which means that our rational brain can overrule the frustrations we feel. We know that we can complain to the manager and get the coin back, know that we’ll eventually get to our destination even if the car in front doesn’t move right away, and know that we can sue the employer for the money that is due to us.

The dog just reacts. Not because he is bad or dominant, but because he has no rational options. That doesn’t change the fact that dogs’ frustration behaviors annoy people, which leaves us with the question what to do.

How can we avoid the barking and whining when we begin an extinction procedure to challenge our dog for better behaviors? How can we still play ball in the park without having the dog bug us for one more toss?

One way is to change the consequence; change what happens next. That lowers the expectation for that specific reward and raises attention to you at the same time. You can still reward mark with a clicking sound or “good-boy”, still shape for an automated behavior, but you wouldn’t always follow up with a cookie, but vary the rewards and interact, play a game, use any life reward your dog likes.

Another is to teach your dog an off-switch command. Mine is a verbal “all-done” combined with a hand signal that looks something like slicing the air in front of my chest. An off-switch command gives the dog needed information that nothing further will happen, and information always lowers frustration. That’s how I got to stop Davie from insisting, with high-pitched, super annoying barks, for yet another ball throw.

How Can We Get A Dog To Respect Us?

By respecting and facilitating his natural rights!

Natural rights are what “The Imperial Animal” calls behavioral needs rooted in the biogrammar of an animal. For example: birds have the right to fly, cats to stalk and pounce, and humans to think, and read, and express themselves in art.

For dogs those rights are:

To participate in group activities if they belong to a group, which is ALWAYS the case with owned dogs;

To contribute to the group and feel worthy and important;

To move around in the space where he lives without constraints;

To be nourished and sheltered;

To feel safe;

To communicate freely;

To be taught to, and receive information how his world works and how he fits in;

To utilize his inherent aptitudes - and for many it is to use the schnoz;

To observe, investigate and seek what he finds interesting;

To be taught and given opportunities to earn access to what is important to him.

I doubt we will see that legislated any time soon, which means we’ll continue to have dog behavioral problems for a long time to come.

With or without laws, each one of us can aim to provide what our dog needs beyond food and water. Maybe we’ll reach a crucial threshold and generate a social shift away from neglect, abuse, dominance and over-control.

Hierarchies and Stress

I am much more interested in dogs than primates, but primates are great for researching hierarchies. The more I studied the works of scientists like DeWaal, Sapolsky and Tiger/Fox, the more I am convinced that hierarchical rules are such a primate thing. We humans have quite an obsession with it. I mean, we even invented gods so that the top honchos have someone to heed to.

That the hierarchical social system is the natural one for dogs is the foundation of the alpha-dominance ideology. Its proponents state that our companion dogs are by nature status seeking predators, out to topple us and others, and thereby must be kept in check with corrections, pinning, alpha roles and mock knuckle bites. Even if that were the case, which I question and I’ll pick that topic up again in a future post, here is some food for thought.

Robert Sapolsky is a Harvard graduate, Stanford University professor, author and world-renowned neuroendocrinologist who specializes in stress.

An easy way to determine stress levels is to measure glucocorticoid hormone output in urine, and that was part of what Sapolski did during his research over several decades and a number of baboon colonies. Baboons are very strictly hierarchical.

What he found was that stress hormones are much higher in lower ranking members than in alpha males. Baboon alpha males can be nasty buggers, poke and correct their underlings for small infractions, are the controllers and stress the controllees with all that physical micromanaging. Not only that. Sapolski also noticed that all that control does not lead to a better-behaved baboon, but one who aggressively passes those corrections on, down the ranking line, until it hits the lowliest monkey.

Then, with one of the colonies, something equally gruesome and interesting happened. About half of the members died when they accidentally came in contact with contaminated meat. None of the alpha males survived, probably because they observed the me-alpha-eat-first rule and pigged out. Suddenly the baboon colony was without from-the-top-down bosses – and, wouldn’t you know, the aggression level dropped, whilst affiliative social behaviors rose. The whole colony thrived. Each member had some control, contributed, and worked cooperatively with the others, and with that the stress levels dropped as well.

The colony stayed that way; without alpha males. Its members still are, some 20 years later, non-aggressive and friendly with one another. That was the real surprise for the scientists, because till then they believed that social ranking was genetically hardwired in baboons, ingrained in the species’ biogrammar.

Yet, the fact that the baboon colony not only survived, but thrived in a non-autocratic society, implies that hierarchies are a cultural phenomenon, not a biological one - for primates.

What about dogs? I believe that it is more our obsession with dominant hierarchies than a dog’s inherent need for it that feeds the alpha ideology. There are other aspects as well, for example the question if dogs are pack animals, that hint that way. But as I said, I’ll discuss that in another post.

In any case, many dogs I meet professionally redirect aggression, act erratically and reactively, are hyper, compulsive, irritable and edgy. When I tell a client that his pooch is stressed, I often get a surprised look. I must say that most believe me once I explain it, but some don’t. And methinks that it would be great if our veterinarians could check the glucocorticoid levels with a routine checkup, and especially if the dog’s person complains of problem behaviors. Measured by a scientist would carry much more weight than the words of a trainer, or behavior consultant. And then the owner could take action and find ways to decrease stress, not add to it by applying various dominance training methods.

People, Questions and the Dog Expo

I absolutely love to go to people’s homes and work with their dogs. I always liked it more than instructing group classes and am lucky, and deeply grateful, that I get to do only what I love these days.

The primary reason why I love it so much is cause I get to study many dogs in their natural setting, and I get a chance to make a dog feel better where he lives.

The other reason is that I meet many fantastic, and interesting people. Almost every one of my clients I like on a personal level. I typically don’t meet the jerks that mistreat their dogs. I guess, someone who hires me is already non-aggressive by nature, even if he or she used punitive methods in the past because a “professional” advised to do so.

I don’t envy today’s lay-dog-owners, because there is so much conflicting information out there that leaves many utterly confused. Not surprising that I am asked many questions during a consultation, which I welcome, cause it gives me a chance to add clarity. No question is a stupid one is also true regarding dog behavior.

Yesterday, a mother of two young children asked about the best way to approach a strange dog, after asking the owner’s permission – with an open hand, or made into a fist.

Here is the answer I gave:

Although it is understandable that children want to pat a dog, I would rather discourage, than encourage it. Only if the dog gives clear signals that he wants nothing more than to say hello, and has enough self-control to remain calm, should the child be permitted to approach. In other words, don’t ask the owner; ask the dog. Many owners don’t read a dog’s subtle discomfort signals very well, and although the dog might not bite, he might also not like to be touched by strangers very much.

A dog who loves children will say so with a lowered body, open and neutral mouth, soft eyes, fluid body and swooshingly wagging tail – not fast wagging, and not still. And he will reliably stay soft and fluid when children touch and pet and investigate. With those dogs, it doesn’t matter if the child is approaching with an open or closed hand. A dog who loves kids won’t bite.

For all dogs who don’t fall into that category, who are a bit concerned or conflicted about little hands they don’t know touching, the answer is: no petting allowed. Mothers and fathers, don’t take it personally when a dog does not share your feelings for your little darling. He is not a bad dog, or necessarily aggressive. He just wants his space respected by strangers. Like you do. I mean, how would you feel if a stranger were to ask to hug your child because she is so cute!

So hands-off, unless the dog signals unambiguously that he really wants the attention and feels very comfortable with it.

If you have a question, see me at the upcoming Dog Expo at the Halifax Forum on Feb. 21 (info at www.gpac.ca/content/node/202). As long as it has to do with dogs, you’ll get an answer – or at least an expert opinion based on what I learned and experienced over the last 15 or so years.

I will also have a few Dump Dog copies for sale, which I’ll sign for you.

Hope to see you there.