Twenty Things To Know To Get Your Dog On TV

TWENTY THINGS TO KNOW

TO GET YOUR DOG ON TV

  (or movies, or commercials, or...)  

Do you think your dog has star potential? Are you interested in the possibility of doing commercial work with your pup but aren’t sure whether it’s right for you? Do you need some pointers about how to start?

This is an article that describes some of the basics of commercial work and how to make the most out of the opportunities that might be granted to you. It will touch on how to get started in the industry, what sort of training might be required, things to remember and the nitty-gritty aspects of working in it.

Commercial work takes many forms: still images for print or online, digital media, television, theatre, movies and more. For some projects, dogs or other animals may feature prominently; for others, they may exist in the background to add depth to a scene.  The end products can vary widely, but there are some common themes that run throughout the work.

This article is based predominantly on my own experiences; I welcome those who have their own to share as well in the comments below.

Dog training tip o' the day: No-reward markers

Today I want to talk about no-reward makers (aka NRMs).

In some circles, mentioning NRMs can elicit boos and hisses. This is because a NRM is technically a positive punisher. That is, it is actively applied in order to reduce the likelihood of a behaviour happening again. Many people are leery of punishment in dog training, and with good reason. So the use of NRMs is often discouraged.

But, I kind of like NRMs in certain situations.

A no-reward marker is intended to be a way to communicate to the dog that the thing they are doing at the moment is not going to earn them a reward. It's sort of the opposite of a clicker. Using NRMs comes naturally to people -- most of us say no, nope, or try again if our dogs make a mistake during a training session. It is a way to offer a bit more information to a dog if they begin to go down an undesired path during a training session.

In a perfect world, NRMs shouldn't be necessary. A dog should be set up to offer the desired behaviour during training from the very beginning through management and a conscientious approach to the session. In a perfect world, dogs should be crystal clear in what it is you are asking of them. However, I am not a perfect trainer.

I occasionally rush progression, or stall too long on a step, or just get lazy and let my criteria slide. My dog might begin to offer undesired behaviours that run the risk of being reinforced by subsequent steps within a behaviour chain before I've had a chance to address them. When that happens, mistakes can become entrenched within a chain and can be difficult to remove once there. If I remain silent and withhold a click, my dog may grow frustrated at not being offered a clear picture of what it is I'm looking for. She might grumble, stress up or grow frenzied in her responses if I remain silent. If I let her know that she is offering something that I am not looking for and that will not be rewarded, she can gain some clarity and try something else.

As the trainer, it's me who shoulders the responsibility for this lack of clarity. If I found myself having to rely a great deal on NRMs, it would be in my best interest to step back and assess where I'm going wrong in my approach. However, as the occasional stopgap measure, I find them useful.

In brief, NRMs:

... Should not intimidate or demotivate a dog. Some dogs will wilt if they are used. For these dogs, they are the wrong tool for the job.

... Should not be used to stop unwanted and/or nuisance behaviours.

... Should be cheerful & motivational or neutral. They should be free from disapproval.

... Should prompt the dog to stop what it is they are doing and check in with you.

... Should be used sparingly at best, and avoided if possible. Relying on them in every training session is unnecessary.

... Should be avoided when you are teaching a new behaviour. Errorless learning is the better choice. You want your dog to understand what is right well before you focus on what is wrong.

... Are best suited to polishing behaviour chains wherein a mistake earlier in the chain runs the risk of being reinforced by subsequent steps in the chain.

So, that's my spiel on NRMs. What do you think? When do you use them? Have you changed in your approach to NRMs over time? Have you ever put much thought into how you use them? Let me know in the comments.

Happy clicking!

Dog training tip o' the day: On the use of tools to facilitate your training

Dog training tip o' the day: Tools can make your dog training better. However, without a proper plan to fade the use of the tool, it can quickly become a crutch.

Tools can give you a leg up when it comes to controlling your dog around distractions. They can be things like collars, harnesses, leashes, targets, platforms and any other things you use to guide your dog to perform a desired behaviour. They allow for greater control and communication and can be used while you work on the requisite training to fill in the gaps. Then, most importantly to me, you need to fade the use of the tool.

We humans are excellent tool users. Sometimes, however, we get a little lazy. Applying a tool can often provide an immediate change in behaviour (sometimes for a honeymoon period, sometimes in perpetuity) so it can be tempting to continue to rely on it on an ongoing basis. To me, this is, well, lazy at best and unfair to the dog at worst.

Ideally, the goal when using a tool on a dog is to get the tool off the dog as fast as you can. Commit to harnessing the extra power the tool affords you and work with your dog whenever you're using it. Don't fall on your laurels and forget to actually train your dog. As with everything, the additional work you do with your dog in the short term pays off in the long term.

Happy clicking!

Dog training word 'o the day: Premack.

This post is ever so slightly verbose, so here's a nerd photo of Cohen to compensate. 

Dog training word 'o the day: Premack.

From Wikipedia: "Premack's principle suggests that if a person wants to perform a given activity, the person will perform a less desirable activity to get at the more desirable activity; that is, activities may themselves be reinforcers. An individual will be more motivated to perform a particular activity if they know that they will be able to partake of a more desirable activity as a consequence. Stated objectively, if high-probability behaviors (more desirable behaviors) are made contingent upon lower-probability behaviors (less desirable behaviors), then the lower-probability behaviors are more likely to occur. More desirable behaviors are those that individuals spend more time doing if permitted; less desirable behaviors are those that individuals spend less time doing when free to act."

In dog training terms: It's no secret that performing certain actions can be rewarding to dogs. Chasing squirrels, jumping up, sniffing a tree can all be intrinsically rewarding for certain dogs. If you ask your dog to perform an "unfun" behaviour prior to being released to perform a fun behaviour, the unfun behaviour can be reinforced by what follows. Often the environment has a stronger ability to reward our dogs than we ever could hope to offer with the cookies or toys we may have in our pockets. So use it to your advantage! Ask for eye contact and a bit of self control before releasing your dog to (safely) run amok!

The beauty of Premack is that it also benefits from classical conditioning, conditioned emotional reactions and the transfer of value. For instance, eye contact can be reinforced by being released to chase squirrels. If the eye contact is routinely rewarded by extremely valuable reinforcers, offered eye contact becomes considerably stronger and, at times, innately reinforcing itself due to it now being associated with huge rewards and excitement. The "unfun" behaviour is now fun. Nice!

Like all classical conditioning, there is a degree of regular maintenance that is required to keep associations strong between action and reward. But once you learn to use it to your advantage, maintenance becomes second nature.

Sorry for the possibly obtuse, overly-sciencey sounding post today. Hopefully this nerdy photo of Cohen will make up for it. Premack has been on my mind a lot these days. I use it a great deal to build off-leash reliability and control, which to me is the pinnacle of dog ownership.

Dog training tip o' the day: Good advice on good training takes a while to take effect.

Dog training tip o' the day: Good advice on good training takes a while to take effect. Don't dismiss a method or methodology after failure to prompt change in the short term. 

It takes time for behaviour to change, especially when first the behaviour of the handler needs to change to create change in the dog. I know from personal experience that it's easy to grow discouraged and possibly suspect that the advice received is incorrect for your personal set of circumstances. However, before deciding to move on from a strategy, make sure to give it a fair try first.

I remember years ago when still very much a novice trainer and Cohen still a young dog that I was having trouble with reduction in the quality of attention and leash behaviour immediately after rewarding Cohen for good behaviour. I turned to some acquaintances to help troubleshoot the issue and one of the pieces of advice offered was to offer a series of rewards in quick succession at random intervals to encourage sustained attention. I tried it for a week or two, didn't see much improvement and shelved working on it for a while after growing discouraged and demotivated. Now, well, I have great sustained attention, and I owe it largely to that advice. It just took a while for the picture to become clear. If anyone would ask me for advice on the issue the words I would offer would mirror those that I received years ago with the added caveat of "don't give up!".

The memory of demotivation and "well maybe it's just not going to work for us" is still clear in my mind. For those of you who ever feel similarly, time and consistency are often the two missing ingredients to creating change. Keep at it, and try not to be discouraged.

#dttotd

Dog training tip o' the day: Train smarter, not harder.

Dog training tip o' the day: Train smarter, not harder.

The best dog trainers in the world are able to get phenominal performances out of their dogs. Their dedication to their craft is commendable and awe-inspiring. Perhaps surprisingly, they do not spend all day training their dogs.

Great trainers' training sessions are often no longer than five minutes.

Great trainers normally enter their training sessions a plan as to how they will work to improve a selection of behaviours.

Great trainers do not drill behaviours repeatedly, ad nauseam.

Great trainers keep written and/or visual records of their work to track progress and help better prepare subsequent training sessions.

Great trainers ensure that their dogs have a solid understanding of foundation behaviours before moving on to something advanced.

Great trainers do not reward substandard behaviours because if they do, behaviours will remain substandard.

Great trainers know when to end a session and to ignore the allure of "just one more...".

Great training is as much art as it is science, and very few people are able to reach the upper echelons in a given sport. We may never get there. However, we can learn from those who have. We can take these lessons and apply them to our own training and move just a little closer to becoming great ourselves.

Dog training tip o' the day: "How long should I use treats for reinforcement?"

Dog training tip o' the day: "How long should I use treats for reinforcement?"

This is a question that gets asked a lot when training dogs. Obviously you don't want to ever have to be reliant on treats whenever you need to ask your dog to do something. Many a trainer has weighed in on how best to ensure your dog's behaviour be reliable regardless of whether you have a pocketful of chicken or not. I feel like there's another question underneath the first, which is,

"How long should I be reinforcing to my dog?"

People use treats for dog training because they are a primary reinforcer, that is, they are intrinsically valuable to a dog. They all need to eat, and most enjoy eating a great deal. But food is not the only reinforcer available to you -- there's play, praise, access to the environment and more. I almost always start training with food due to its intrinsic strength, but if food was the only reinforcer available in a trainer's arsenal then the trainer would find themselves very limited indeed.

The way I look at training is that you use a high degree of reinforcement to lay the groundwork for behaviours, ideally so much so that they become ingrained in a dog's behaviour patterns. For instance, when I ask Cohen to sit she complies almost instantly, and almost subconsciously -- we have done so many drills that compliance is almost guaranteed. Once that initial groundwork is laid then I'm granted more variety in the way which I choose to approach reinforcement, but I will Always. Reinforce. My Dog.

There is a constant mathematical formula running in my head evaluating where my dog is being reinforced and by how much. (Remember, behaviour that is reinforced is more likely to be repeated.) Is going after that scrap of garbage more rewarding than listening to me? What about running after that squirrel? What about that small child smeared with ice cream? The jogger? The puppy? These mental calculations may sound like a lot of work, but they're easier than they seem, especially with practice. Then I choose the appropriate type of reward for the situation.

This is where training and having a good relationship with your dog really shines. Training is the ultimate bonding experience. It teaches both you and your dog to communicate with one another and strengthens that special relationship that exists between a person and their four-legged best friend.

As you spend more quality time with your dog you become intrinsically rewarding to them. Your dog will look to you for guidance and feedback because that is the pattern you've created over the months and years of hard work. If your pup is anything like Cohen, she will enjoy spending time with you and earning your attention because listening to you is both entertaining and fun. And if your pup is not like mine yet you can certainly create this type of relationship if you're dedicated to building it.

This to me is the true payoff for training. All that time spent running drills for off-leash recalls and heeling eventually pay off by teaching both you and your dog how to listen to each other, and more importantly enjoy doing so. My presence is rewarding to my dog just the same way her presence is rewarding to me.

So, let's again look at the question, "How long should I be reinforcing for my dog?" By now I'm sure it's obvious what my answer is. You should plan to always be reinforcing to your dog.

When you first get your unruly puppy it might be tough to win out over all the distractions of the world without waving a piece of tripe in front of your dog's nose. You'll find yourself frustrated and wondering if you'll have to rely on these methods forever. But through being consistent and building up a relationship with your dog (ideally one free of intimidation and physical punishment) you'll find that less and less you'll have to struggle to keep your dog's attention. It's a beautiful day when you realize that your dog is voluntarily giving you her attention because she wants to and enjoys doing so. Building this reaction is a lifelong process and is probably the most worthwhile pursuit in building a relationship with your dog.

Of course, everyone enjoys the occasionally cookie too.

Dog training tip o' the day: Punishment will shut down behaviour but it may not address the underlying cause.

Dog training tip o' the day: Punishment will shut down behaviour but it may not address the underlying cause. 

Imagine you have a pot of water on the stove. The heat is turned on beneath it and gradually the water begins to boil. Then the water begins to boil over. "No problem," you say, "I'll solve the problem of the overflowing water by putting a lid on the pot!" The lid solves the immediate problem of water spilling out of the pot. However the heat underneath is still on and the water continues to boil. You just can't see it. Eventually the water boils over again, more strongly this time. The lid rattles, hot water pours out and you have a mess on your hands from a problem that you thought you'd previously fixed. Turns out you only masked your problem temporarily.

Now, to apply this to dogs, imagine you're walking your pup down the street and she sees another dog approaching. She barks, growls and lunges. You're displeased with this behaviour and don't want it to happen again (so embarrassing!) so you punish your dog by jerking the leash and telling her to knock it off to stop the behaviour. This may get her to snap out of her threat display, but it doesn't address the underlying issue. It doesn't turn the heat off under the pot, it just puts a lid on it. Your dog is likely still anxious (and may in fact be more anxious now since the leash correction and reprimand was pretty unpleasant too). That anxiety is the heat below the pot which is causing the explosive behaviour. 

I was reading up on a few people's impressions of a recent Denise Fenzi seminar, and one thing has struck me. From what I gather from various posts, one of her take-home messages is:

silence = good

What I gather she means is that if you have a dog with whom you wish to compete in obedience you want to not have to rely on a string of reinforcement to keep the dog confident and motivated. I know I'm very prone to useless chatter when I'm pleased with my dog's performance. I've also been educated to believe that a correct behaviour should be marked and an incorrect one ignored - the dog should be able to figure out their response was incorrect from the lack of reinforcement.

The way I've interpreted what I've read is that silence, simply enough, means that the dog is doing well, and to continue. If a dog should make a mistake, it is then that a timely correction is offered.

Now, this makes sense to me on some level, but on another level it kind of throws a wrench into the whole positive reinforcement mantra that I hear repeated time and time again by my favourite trainers. It also makes me stop to ponder that:

if silence = good does voice = bad? 

With everything in life, I'm sure it's not such a black and white issue. However I'm curious where in the grey zone Denise Fenzi and other successful R+ish obedience competitors lay.

I think it's pertinent to be mindful of the discipline you're currently competing in. I feel strongly that agility should always be a positive experience where the dog is never wrong. I also feel strongly that a good family pet can be more than adequately trained through positive* means. Though when it comes to top tier competitive obedience I wonder when and where corrections might be necessary.** 

As always I suspect the answer is:

 it depends

I'm squeamish to think that any degree of negativity should be intentionally injected into a dog and handler's relationship.I know that even now I'm still paying for some foolish knee-jerk reactions I had when Cohen was being a no-good puppy. I don't feel comfortable thinking it justified to place undue stress on a dog in a situation that is innately stressful (stress is intrinsic to the learning process). But on the flip side, I do correct a forge during LLW with a happy-sounding "whoops" to great effect.

As of now I'm positively delighted at Cohen's behaviour. She and I are really meshing into a cohesive team, and I don't particularly plan on changing my approach. However, these types of refreshing variations in approach always make for some interesting food for thought.


* Positive means, in this context, refers to positive reinforcement.
** Necessary corrections might be things like a non-reward marker or a playful tap - not anything unnecessarily stressful or harsh.

Chronological list of cues - count: 62

New cues:

Weave, high five, target w/ back legs, around, tug, "through" (reverse weaving through legs), blow bubbles, handstand (still needs refined), go behind, focus forward "watch it".

Previous cues:

Touch, sit, down, speak, come, stand, paw, stay, bang, roll "over", back up, go pee, go to bed, go outside, heel, front, heel in reverse, bow, jump "up", jump "over", jump into "arms", circle, circle in reverse "beep beep", pivot, spin, twist, weave, find a toy, figure "eight", get it, drop it, leave it, table, tunnel, head up, head down, nose bridge "push", pop, beg, balance on back legs "be people", crawl, "cross" paws, "open" door, "close" door, scoot, teeter, walk (obstacle), mark, formal retrieve, out, quiet, limp.

List of learned cues starting at 9 weeks old to present. Quotation marks indicate word used for each behaviour.

One week in...

Today marks the completion of the first week of the Recall e-course I'm participating in, and already I'm noticing some nice improvements, and general frustration outside has diminished greatly.

Some highlights of general improvement:

• Yesterday in agility class I had Cohen sitting in her crate with the door open while I went across the room to listen to my instructor. Cohen sat there calmly without breaking the barrier while another dog was played with right in front of her and I was over 40 feet away.
• One of the dogs in last night's class was reactive and generally a handful. She was barking, chasing, and got away from her handler once to chase after another dog on the course. All the while Cohen sat quietly in her crate looking to me for reinforcement.
• Cohen recalled away from a half-eaten banana in the park.
• Cohen recalled away from a game of chase after it had died down a bit when I was over 100ft away.
• Cohen stopped her stalking of a nearby squirrel with a "leave it" from me.

On top of all that, there's just a general sense of ease and enthusiasm when we're out together. I've been making more effort to play with her and work the games into our walks. I've been mindful of where Cohen's reinforcement is coming from and I think I'm getting better at managing it.

I walk Cohen off-leash constantly (as long as we're away from roads). I think I'm probably not following the rules in this situation. I think the idea is for her to be leashed so as not to allow for any opportunities to inappropriately reinforce herself while we're out, but at this point I don't think that that's a realistic expectation. Instead I've been working on being more preemptive and rewarding like crazy when Cohen makes a good decision without any cue from me.

I look forward to where we'll be when the course reaches its end.

Agility class round up.

So my agility class finished up last night. To celebrate we were able to run a mock course a few times. Adrian was kind enough to come along and was able to record some of our work. I'm really happy to have a recording of Cohen's and my runs since I lose track of things pretty quickly when I'm out there on the course.

I'm quite happy with the progress that I've been able to make (Cohen's making progress too... but it's my two left feet that are the biggest problem). Of course there are huge opportunities for improvement, so in the spirit of constructive criticism, here I go. If you're reading this, feel free to offer some advice too.

First, holy crap I need to stop using the names of the next obstacle as a release from a contact. What a rookie mistake. I will say break I will say break I will say break...

Lately Cohen has been having trouble with good tunnels if the entry is in the least bit confusing, so I've made a mental note to reward them more thoroughly (which you see a bit here... while I drop a treat and everything). I think tunnels, being so simple, are easy for a handler to overlook for rewards.

Holy moly we're slow! I think I'm going to have to start running flat out to encourage a bit more speed. But I'm also going to have to get in better shape. The excitement paired with the mild exertion have a bigger effect on my body than I care to admit.

I will stand up straighter, I will stand up straighter, I will stand up straighter.

I won't cue a "back up" to re-get a broken contact. I'll focus more on getting a nose touch on the contact -- right now she's 50/50.

I want to see if I can get Cohen's teeter and walk speeds higher. She has a pretty good a-frame performance -- I'm told she just sails over the peak. I think it's a matter of revving her up more and moving faster myself.

With all that said, these are things I like:

I like Cohen's focus forward at the start line. She's doing it when cued. I've not yet gotten into the habit of pairing the verbal with a gesture, but I'll work on that soon.

I'm feeling more confident in my ability to control her on a course. I'm starting to learn more handling techniques through the class. Hopefully I'll be able to increase Cohen's already-pretty-good impulse control via the e-course I'm taking. Previously I'd thought that competition wouldn't be in the cards for another year or so, but I might revise that and say we'll be ready in a few months.

I'm re-taking this course (ahh, the benefits of working at the place you're schooling...) and next time I hope to use more tug rewards to build that drive and energy. Cohen's tugging has come along really nicely recently, so I'm hoping she'll respond to it as a reward in Agility from time to time.

With all that said, I'm really having a blast. It's been a lot of fun for me to learn, and I'm really enjoying the challenge. I just need to work on my flatwork more often at home.

Common recall mistakes

This is a list of common recall mistakes. In an attempt to begin diagnosing my problems with recall I've marked some that I seem to have particular problem with.

Cohen is a good dog, and I would say 80% reliable off-leash. My standards for behaviour are very high and I try as hard as I can to strive for perfection. The issues I run into time and time again are a) getting too pushy during play, intimidating other dogs and not recalling, and b) finding something vaguely edible on the ground and, again, not recalling.

So without further ado, the list.

1. Weak history of reinforcement associated with you.
2. A strong history of reinforcement from the environment. (Very guilty of this!)
3. Reinforcement value of having an owner chase the dog that doesn't come.
4. History of recall equating to a loss. (Guilty of trying to call Cohen off when she gets too involved in rough play.)
5. History of being "tricked" into coming when he doesn't want to.
6. Dependency on confinement, tethering or a long line.
7. History of punishing the dog upon return.
8. Lack of opportunity for freedom to run and explore.
9. Lack of exercise.
10. The "poisoned" recall cue.
11. Too much freedom too early in life and a lack of awareness from you where the balance lies. (Again, this might be an issue for me. Cohen has always been allowed off leash since she first arrived home. It's a minor issue, if anything.)
12. A history of positive consequences when the dog chooses not to come when called. (This ties into my other issues.)

Poor strategic use of reinforcement -- lack of time or knowledge. For me, I fear it's lack of knowledge. Hopefully this will be rectified during the course. I fear I reward too often for mediocre behaviour, and use too low-value reinforcers. I use kibble often since Cohen will work for it 95% of the time.

Lately I've been wondering if I use food rewards too habitually, and the constant expectation for reward lessens their impact overall.

The most important thing to remember is to "be the cookie" as in, make yourself intrinsically valuable to your dog.

Sorry for the jumbled nature of this post -- it's more to serve as a reminder to myself than to educate those having trouble with their own recalls.

Being reinforcing to your dog

Someone recently asked me,

"How long should I use treats for reinforcement?"

This is a question that gets asked a lot when training dogs. Obviously you don't want to ever have to be reliant on treats whenever you need to ask your dog to do something. Many a positive trainer has weighed in on how best to ensure your dog's behaviour be reliable regardless of whether you have a pocketful of chicken or not. I feel like there's another question underneath the first, which is,

"How long should I be reinforcing to my dog?"

People use treats for dog training because they are a primary reinforcer, that is, they are intrinsically valuable to a dog. They all need to eat, and most enjoy eating a great deal. But food is not the only reinforcer available to you -- there's play, praise, access to the environment and more. I almost always start training with food due to its intrinsic strength, but if food was the only reinforcer available in a trainer's arsenal then the trainer would find themselves very limited indeed.

The way I look at training is that you use a high level of reinforcement to lay the groundwork for behaviours, ideally so much so that they become ingrained in a dog's behavioural patterns. For instance, when I ask my girl to sit she complies almost instantly, and almost subconsciously -- we have done so many drills that compliance is almost guaranteed. Once that initial groundwork is laid then I'm granted more variety in the way which I choose to approach reinforcement, but I will always. reinforce. my dog.

There is a constant mathematical formula running in my head evaluating where my dog is being reinforced and by how much. (Remember, behaviour that is reinforced is more likely to be repeated.) Is going after that scrap of garbage more rewarding than listening to me? What about running after that squirrel? What about that small child smeared with icecream? The jogger? The puppy? These mental calculations may sound like a lot of work, but they're easier than they seem, especially with practice.

This is where training and having a good relationship with your dog really shines. Training is the ultimate bonding experience. It teaches both you and your dog to communicate with one another and strengthens that special relationship that exists between a person and their four-legged best friend.

As you spend more quality time with your dog you become intrinsically rewarding to them. Your dog will look to you for guidance and feedback because that is the pattern you've created over the months and years of hard work. If your pup is anything like mine, it will enjoy spending time with you and earning your attention because listening to you is both entertaining and fun. And if your pup is not like mine yet you can certainly create this type of relationship if you're dedicated to building it.

This to me is the true payoff for training. All those long hours spent running drills for off-leash recalls and heeling eventually pay off by teaching both you and your dog how to listen to each other, and more importantly, enjoy doing so. My presence is rewarding to my dog, just the same way her presence is rewarding to me.

So, let's again look at the question, "How long should I be reinforcing for my dog?" By now I'm sure it's obvious what my answer is. You should plan to always be reinforcing to your dog.

When you first get your unruly puppy it might be tough to win out over all the distractions of the world without waving a piece of tripe in front of your dog's nose. You'll find yourself frustrated and wondering if you'll have to rely on these methods forever. But through being consistent and building up a positive relationship with your dog (one free of intimidation and physical punishment) you'll find that less and less you'll have to struggle to keep your dog's attention. It's a beautiful day when you realize that your dog is voluntarily giving you its attention because it wants to, and enjoys doing so. Building this reaction is a lifelong process, and is probably the most worthwhile pursuit in building a relationship with your dog.

Of course, everyone enjoys the occasionally cookie too.

Weave poles, celebrating our success. Day 6.

Here we are, 6 days into weave pole training.

It's pouring rain outside, the dog is stir crazy and I have a video camera. Time for a video of our weave pole progress this week.

Now, before you watch it I know it's RIFE with problems. I'm posting it because I feel it shows good progress on my two goals -- 1) training the behaviour with Cohen and 2) building some confidence and value.

So I'll link the video, and afterwards I'll try to go over everything I think could be improved.

Yes, I'm using food. I've opted to use food during the initial stages because it was key in getting Cohen to focus. She values food more than play at the moment so I opted to use it to build that initial value.

No, this isn't where we normally practice. I have a slightly wider but darker area in the house where I've set up shop that allows me to practice more challenging angles of approach. In my opinion Cohen is doing quite well finding her entries in the environment. I moved the poles here because there was better light for filming. We've not worked outside since it's March, and when it's not snowing it's raining, so working outside hasn't been an appealing option.

Yes, she's going through pretty slowly. This is partially because I'm using a food reward, partially because I'm working indoors on slippery floors and partially because Cohen is still building her confidence in the obstacle. Previously she'd been rather stressed when faced with the weave poles and never properly understood them.

Yes, I see her looking over her shoulder at me looking for her reward. My timing sucks. Hopefully it'll get better outside with more space to move.

Yes, I see the poles skidding around the floor. I swear she's capable of doing them straight, even if they don't always remain so.

So, with all that said, I'm quite pleased with myself. And my dog.

The next week will probably consist of further indoor work (ugh rain) while I try to improve her speed. I might try to transition her to a tug reward if possible. We'll see. My agility facility tends to only work with the 6 weaves since it's mostly focused on foundation work, so right now I'll work on having the best 6 weaves I can shape.

Weave poles, trials and tribulations. Day 5.

Progress is good. I added the 5th and 6th poles this morning. The first two set are positioned straight-on, and the last set are at 1 and 7 o'clock.

At first the last two were missed a few times so I went back and opened them up a few degrees (should I not have? I don't know.) and then tried again. Cohen succeeded without incident. The barking came back, but I think this was enthusiasm and not stress. It was also quieted down much more easily, as I don't want to encourage it any more.

Later today I will try to move at least 4 poles outside to test Cohen's understanding of the exercise. There's fresh snow on the ground covering ice which is in turn covering mud, so it's not the most ideal place to practice, but I need to switch up locales to help her generalization.

Class is tonight. I wonder if we're going to be working on weaves. I would be absolutely flabberghasted if Cohen manages to do a line of 6 tonight (gotta keep expectations appropriate -- new location, stressful environment, etc) but I hope...

[Edited to add: Cohen did indeed do the 6 weaves in class!!! HURRAY!!! It took her one try to get them the first time, then did them successfully 3-4 times in a row. We took a break and reapproached them and had a few failed attempts before we had to move on. They're still a tiny bit complicated for her, but I'm totally psyched. By next week she'll have the 6 poles down no problem. Woot!]

Weave poles, trials and tribulations. Day 4.

I spent most of the weekend being lazy and feeling sorry for myself for having a cold. But I'll maintain that I had to let weave pole training ferment in Cohen's head before I could proceed.

We're up to 4 straight poles with very few mistakes from some pretty tough entries. Mostly I think I'm just patterning her right now however. I still don't think she really "gets" it. I'm hoping that that will come with time.

Cohen gets obviously frustrated after 2-3 failures in a row. I try my best to keep her motivated while not making the challenge any easier for her. I'm getting a bit better at this. I can see through Cohen's reactions to frustration that I've made a habit out of answering the tougher questions for her. From this point onwards I'm going to be trying to maintain criteria a bit better in all her shaping sessions.

Weave poles, trials and tribulations. Day 3.

Did some exercises this morning in the living room with a high rate of success. Cohen has difficulty (less than 50% success rate) in entries around the 9 o'clock mark. Will focus more seriously on that from here on out.

Moved the poles outside again to utilize more space, but neither Cohen nor I were really "feeling" it. I was using food rewards (lazily) with the ground being pretty sopping wet so I was passing them from my hand. Not a good tactic. Incidence of barking increased, but was still manageable. It's difficult to really find a line when stuck with using food, and it's frustrating to not have enough indoor area to utilize distance in any way.

Entries from the 9 o'clock mark resulted in her repeatedly skipping the 2nd pole. I think Garrett would say this is due to her not gathering her body before entry. Should spend more time working various angles of approach.

Cohen is slow through the poles and can easily get stuck and frustrated. I realize this is an effect from me not having clearer criteria when shaping behaviours with her in the past.

Weave poles, trials and tribulations. Days 1 & 2.

First, some background. I'm taking a 3rd-level agility class and Cohen and I are doing pretty well all things considered. (Things to consider: my unathleticism, my disinclination to flail, Cohen's disinterest in tugging in public...) However, we're falling behind in our weaving. Cohen and I never really "got" the weaves when we did them in our last level class, and this class is not set up to accommodate us slow folks still stuck on teaching via the 2x2s.

So, in an attempt to make up the gap I picked up some 2x2s (6 poles) and borrowed Susan Garrett's 2x2 training DVD from a friend. It's recommended that I keep a training journal, so that's what I'm doing.

It's recommended that you not do all your weave training days in a row, so, if there are gaps they're probably equal parts break-taking and laziness.

DAY 1, Wednesday 2 Mar 2011

Building and testing value, poles set to 2 and 8 o'clock.

Since Cohen had already done some 2x2 weave pole training previously there wasn't much time required to build the value. I started out using food as a reward with a marker word readily. Testing the value was successful as well, with a good rate of success.

I angled the poles to the standard 2 and 8 o'clock position and kept my rewards on the reward line. Problem: Cohen will sometimes look back to me after having gone through the gate, not at the reward line. Solution: I need to use the rewards more accurately.

DAY 2, Thursday 3 Mar 2011

Working the arc, adding two more poles.

I thought I might power through multiple steps today since Cohen had done these steps previously. As a result I feel as if today has been rife with frustration.

I attempted to move locations into my back room to have more area to work the angle of approach, but I still did not have sufficient room. Foolishly I also added a second set of poles, giving me even less room. Rate of success in difficult approaches was 50% at best.

For some reason I thought maybe having more room to work would help, so I moved the poles yet again (two sets), this time outside. Because the ground was wet, and because the DVD warned against using food in the grass I opted to attempt to use Cohen's soccer ball as reward.

She was incredibly aroused by the ball, so much so that she lost sight of what it was I was asking of her. I was pleased to find a toy to which she responds so well, but there was no progress to speak of.

The biggest problem is her arousal barking. I feel like this barking was initially developed as a response to the excitement and stress of learning the poles initially (in Agility Level Two) and now this emotional reaction is tied to the training. Sometimes I opt to ignore it, but sometimes it grates on my last nerve. I did not cope well with it today.

I think I'm going to reduce Cohen's arousal level despite Garrett speaking of how important it is. As soon as Cohen begins barking her ability to be receptive to commands and her capability to learn is diminished.

For our last session today I plan to move back indoors, remove the second set of poles, and use food as a reward while I work angles of approach. I feel like this step might be worth sticking with for additional time depending on how Cohen reacts. It is always my tendency to want to push past training the basics to more flashy behaviours, so I'll have to remember to slow down.

The snow, cold weather and wet ground also make it difficult. Weave training really seems best learned outside, but I make due with what I have.

Edit: Later in the day we revisited the process. I was indoors and was working with food. Cohen had a high rate of success with all entries (though being indoors and crowded we didn't have as much room to work as I would like). So I re-added the second set of poles and had greater success. There wasn't one instance of barking. I consider it a success. Tomorrow (or later tonight) will be more of the same. Obviously I'm getting a bit ahead of myself here, but I really need to pace myself.

Constructional Aggression Treatment

So, I found an interesting article about something called Constructional Aggression Treatment. It's long. Very long. But I'm going to post it below. It's written by Pat Miller.

It is an intense alternative method for treating aggressive dogs. Unfortunately it's really beyond the reach of the average dog owner (for whom it seems like counter conditioning will always be the preferable treatment method). But I know a few of you are dealing with aggressive dogs of your own so I thought I'd share. I'm not sure if you can successfully adopt this method in more casual environments -- my guess is that you can't.

I'm not sure I'm completely comfortable with this method due to the high stress that it puts on the dog, and it starts off sounding a lot like flooding. But I do find it fascinating that the trainers decided to approach it operantly as opposed to classically.

So, with that said, here ya go.

The Whole Dog Journal, vol 11 no 5, 5 May 2008 posted:

The Whole Dog Journal
Vol 11 Number 5
May 2008
By Pat Miller

“Constructional Aggression Treatment,” a promising new approach to modifying canine aggression.

What loud buzz you hear is the sound of the dog behavior and training community discussing a controversial new approach to modifying aggressive behavior in dogs. The developers of “Constructional Aggression Treatment” (CAT) claim that the shaping-based operant protocol produces stronger and much faster results than the classical counter-conditioning process widely used by training and behavior professionals today.

CAT was devised and tested by Dr. Jesús Rosales-Ruiz, a behavior analyst and associate professor of behavior analysis at the University of North Texas, and Kellie Snider, a board-certified associate behavior analyst. Snider completed her MS in Behavior Analysis at UNT in 2007 with Dr. Rosales-Ruiz as her graduate research advisor and the CAT procedure as the topic of her thesis research.

Canine behavior experts frequently use classical conditioning techniques (including counter-conditioning) to help change how dogs feel about and respond to the stimuli that triggers their aggressive behavior. In other words, classical counter-conditioning changes the dog’s emotions in order to change his behavior. In contrast, CAT utilizes “operant conditioning,” where the goal is changing the dog’s behavior in a way that will likely produce a subsequent emotional change.

In order to best explain how this novel technique works, allow me to back up and discuss some behavioral theories that explain both the development of canine aggression as well as the techniques that are conventionally used to change the dog’s response to stressful stimuli.

The genesis of aggression
Conventional thinking is that aggression is the behavioral result of an emotional response (fear, anger, frustration, etc.) that has been classically conditioned due to an association between two stimuli (events).
For example:

• A small child hugs a puppy too tightly, hurting the puppy. The puppy associates pain with small children, and becomes fearful and aggressive toward small children as a result.

• A large, aggressive dog attacks a smaller, unassertive dog, causing multiple injuries. The small dog associates large dogs with attack and pain and becomes fearful and aggressive toward large dogs.

• Teenagers tease a dog in a yard behind a fence. The dog becomes aroused, angry, and aggressive toward teens.

So, the thinking goes, the best approach to modifying a classically conditioned response is with counter-conditioning – a subset of classical conditioning in which you change the dog’s emotional response. You do this by pairing the fear- or anger-causing stimulus with something that creates a happier response, thus giving the stimulus a new, positive association.

Food is commonly used to counter-condition, because it’s hard to eat yummy treats and be significantly angry or afraid at the same time. Also, food is a “primary reinforcer”; our dogs are hardwired to like food; they don’t have to learn that it’s valuable to them.

You can use other things to change associations in place of, or in addition to, food. With humans, money, jewelry, and other conditioned reinforcers (items with learned value) can be used to create and change associations. Think of the enamored suitor, wooing the object of his affections, plying her with all sorts of goodies to create a positive association while she plays hard to get. Dogs aren’t much impressed with diamonds and Cadillacs, but a rousing game of tug or fetch-the-ball can give a worried dog a positive association with a previously aversive stimulus.

A counter-conditioning procedure goes like this:

• Present scary stimulus (say, a small child) at a distance great enough that the dog is worried (“Uh-oh, there’s a child!”) but not so worried that he goes into a barking, lunging frenzy. This is called the “sub-threshold” distance.

• The instant the dog sees the child, start feeding tiny bits of something very yummy, such as canned or boiled chicken.

• Keep feeding until the child is out of sight, then stop feeding.

• Repeat this process until the appearance of the child at this distance consistently causes the dog to look joyfully at you in anticipation of chicken. This is called the conditioned emotional response (CER), or the “Where’s my chicken?” look.

• Now increase the intensity of the stimulus and repeat the process. With a child, you might increase intensity by bringing the child a little closer, or by staying at the original distance and having two children appear, or one child running, skipping, or singing, or . . .

Eventually, due to the change in the dog’s emotional response to the presence of a child, then to the presence of children, the dog’s behavior changes. He comes to like children, so he’s no longer aggressive toward them.

How CAT is different
CAT’s founders acknowledge that aggression may be, initially, an emotional response, based in classical conditioning. However, they assert that operant conditioning quickly begins to play a much larger role than it’s often given credit for. They suggest the dog quickly learns that growling, barking, lunging, and snapping are highly successful strategies for making the threat leave, and so the behavior is negatively reinforced (the dog’s behavior makes a bad thing go away).

By definition, behavior that is reinforced continues or increases. Snider and Rosales-Ruiz posit that if you prevent the dog from receiving reinforcement for the unwanted behavior (aggression) and reinforce his desired behavior (friendly, affiliative actions), his behavior will change. When the behavior changes, the emotion that triggers the aggression will change as well.

Here is how the CAT procedure would be used to modify the behavior of a dog who shows aggression toward other dogs:

The subject dog (the one with the aggressive behavior) is set up in an area where the trigger stimulus can be presented at a distance that does not trigger a big response from the subject dog (this is called “sub-threshold”). In this case, the trigger stimulus is another dog; note that people or objects can be the triggering stimuli in other cases.

Ideally, the environment where the procedure is carried out is the same or similar to the one in which the undesirable behavior normally occurs. This reduces the amount of future generalization required. The owner – not a trainer – holds the dog’s leash, which also keeps the stimulus picture as close to reality as possible and reduces the amount of generalization needed.

Other than restraining the dog, the owner does nothing else in terms of training – no clicking, no treating. The behavior of the stimulus dog becomes the sole reinforcer for the subject dog’s behavior.

The stimulus dog (sometimes called decoy or trigger dog) and handler approach the subject dog until sub-threshold signs of stress are noted by observers. This is the “threshold.” The handler and decoy dog stop and wait for any decrease in the subject dog’s stress behavior, at which point the decoy and handler immediately turn and walk away, reinforcing the subject dog’s more appropriate (less stressed) behavior.

If the subject dog barks, lunges, or offers other aggressive behavior as the decoy dog leaves, the handler and decoy immediately return to baseline to again wait for decreased signs of stress. Then they again attempt to leave. This is repeated until the subject dog no longer offers escalated stress behavior when the stimulus dog and handler attempt to leave. When this happens, they retreat to a greater distance to give the subject dog an opportunity to relax.

An assistant marks the location where the threshold behavior occured, and the stimulus dog and handler return to this mark after a 15-second “cool-down” period. This return-and-leave process continues until the subject dog no longer shows signs of stress at baseline, at which point the handler brings the stimulus dog closer to the subject by a distance predetermined by the trainer – less if the dog is likely to be easily triggered, more if the dog is perceived as able to handle a larger increment of decreased distance.

Eventually it should be possible for the stimulus dog to approach with no aggressive reaction from the subject. In fact, in a successful procedure the subject dog begins to genuinely and happily invite the stimulus dog closer for more interaction. This point in the procedure is called switchover.

After switchover, the stimulus dog and handler continue to approach the subject dog in small increments until the two dogs can actually engage in friendly behavior with each other. The researchers labeled this part of the process interaction.

Why does it work?
Remember, many dogs who behave aggressively toward other dogs do so as a result of learning that their barking, growling fit results in the other dog going away. Because that behavior has been successful in the past, it’s been reinforced, and the behavior has continued or increased.

In contrast, in a CAT procedure, the subject dog is presented with a different reinforcement scenario. The behavior that worked so well before – barking and lunging – no longer works. Instead of making the other dog go away, it actually makes her stay close or come back! A new behavior – acting calm – now makes the “bad approaching dog” go away. So, in theory, the subject dog learns to offer calm, relaxed behaviors to make the other dog go away.

Eventually the subject dog becomes calm and relaxed because he no longer needs to act aggressively to make the other dog go away. Lo and behold, once the subject dog becomes calm and relaxed about the other dog approaching, he actually gets happy about having the other dog approach; the change in his emotional response follows the change in his behavioral response.

Rosales-Ruiz and Snider have worked with or received reports of almost 100 dogs using the CAT procedure, and the results, they say, are overwhelmingly encouraging. Dogs with a lifetime history of aggression toward other dogs have become completely canine-social-appropriate. Dogs with a long record of aggression toward humans have become safe and friendly. Not every single one, of course, but the majority of dogs have done mind-bogglingly well with the procedure.

Things to consider
The dog training and behavior community has not yet embraced the procedure with open paws. As striking as the reported results may seem, there are some significant potential obstacles to the widespread use of CAT. Trainers who might consider using this procedure professionally are struggling with some of the challenges:

• The sessions can be intensively time-consuming.
Individual CAT sessions may run from as little as one hour to as much as eight, and require a number of helpers. When possible, the founders recommend sticking with it at least until you see switch-over (the point at which the subject dog’s behavior changes to actually offering distance-decreasing behavior such as soft body wags, ears back, soft and/or squinty eyes) and preferably all the way through interaction. Snider suggests setting aside three full days to work with an individual dog and owner.

Snider points out, however, that classical conditioning and desensitization (CC&D) is also time-consuming. Many owners practice CC&D on their own for months or years with less effect.

• It’s costly. Good training and behavior professionals may charge anywhere from $50 to hundreds of dollars per hour for their time. Three full days, eight hours per day, at hundreds of dollars per hour equals a lot of money spent in a short period of time. Of course, if it works, it may be worth almost any amount to an owner, and, over time, it may not be significantly more costly than ongoing CC&D with a trainer.

• It’s staff-intensive. Done well, the procedure requires at least several humans – the owner, the trainer, the handlers of several stimulus dogs (or presenters of whatever the trigger stimulus may be), and perhaps a person to videotape the procedure for later review. This can also add to the cost, if assistants are paid.

• It can be stressful to the subject dog. In some cases where the procedure has failed, the subject dog has continued to practice the bark/lunge strategy that’s been successful for him in the past, rather than offering – and switching over to – calm, relaxed behavior. Some trainers trying the procedure have pulled the plug early in the process rather than continue to subject the dog to the level of stress apparent as the old strategy failed to work. Other trainers have persisted for long periods of time (hours) before either giving up or ultimately achieving success.

On these counts, in CAT’s defense, Snider says, “Even with those dogs that did not completely switch over because the trainers didn’t take it that far, we have almost universally seen dramatic improvement. Trainers who are new to this procedure may need more practice and guidance before they learn to how to keep the dog below threshold by adjusting the environment in some way. If you don’t work below threshold, it’s not really CAT . . . and it’s unlikely to work as well. It’s too difficult for dogs to produce desirable behaviors when they are over threshold, and this is no different from CC&D.”

• It can be stressful to the stimulus dog. The stimulus dog will be asked to repeatedly approach a dog who is sending very clear “Don’t approach!” signals and appears to be more than willing to back the signals up. This can take a toll on the good nature of the neutral/friendly dogs being asked to play decoy. In fairness, the same can be said of dogs used as decoys in conventional CC&D sessions.

• Even when all goes according to plan, trainers may be reluctant to complete the final piece of the process – interaction – and rightly so. Misjudgment on the part of the trainer can result in injury to the stimulus dog (or trigger person/s). Again, to be fair, this is a risk whenever working with aggressive dogs.

• It may not be positive. One definition of “positive training” holds the position that positive trainers use negative reinforcement only as a last resort, after positive reinforcement and negative punishment have failed. Negative reinforcement, by definition, requires the presentation of something at least mildly aversive to the dog, and sometimes the presenting stimulus is significantly aversive.

Snider and Rosales-Ruiz offer CAT as a first approach, not after exhausting what are traditionally considered more positive methods. In fact, they say the less the dog has been worked with using other methods, the easier and more successful CAT is likely to be. In response to these points, Snider says, that in her opinion, CAT can be more positive than desensitization. “With desensitization, often trainers move closer if the dog gets calm (which constitutes punishment of calm behaviors) and move away when the dog is stressed (reinforcement of stressed behaviors). That’s one reason it takes longer!

“Also, sometimes the presenting stimulus is significantly aversive in CC&D programs, too. You can’t train an animal to accept something that is not there, and prior to treatment, having it there is stressful. The best you can do is present it at low intensities, which is an integral part of CAT just as it is of CC&D.”

Snider also points out that even positive reinforcement can be used in ways that produce problematic behaviors. “As Dr. Rosales-Ruiz has said, it is not about the name of the procedure, it’s about the emotionality produced by the procedure. Properly done, CAT produces happy, friendly dogs while working hard to remain errorless – which means keeping the intensity of the stimulus low enough that it is not overwhelming to the learner.”

Pat’s CAT journal, day 1
My own mind is still not made up about CAT. I have done the procedure once (I’ll describe this in detail below) with a dog I know well, owned and handled by Certified Pet Dog Trainer Jolanta Benal, of Brooklyn, New York. Jolanta is a friend and trainer for whom I have much trust and respect.

Going in, we were both cautious and somewhat skeptical, albeit hopeful, and we were both ready to stop the procedure at any time if either of us was uncomfortable with what we were seeing. I was happier with the results than I had dared hope to be, and will offer it on a limited basis to clients who I think can make the necessary commitment and whose dogs I feel are appropriate candidates.

Jolanta and I spent three days trying out the CAT procedure. Our subject dog was Juniper, Benal’s six-year-old neutered Pit Bull-mix. Juni has been dog reactive/aggressive since puppyhood, and several of his littermates also have aggression problems. At least two have been euthanized for aggression.

Juni is extremely friendly with humans, in large part due to growing up in Brooklyn, where Jolanta made it a point to socialize him well with a wide variety of humans. Unfortunately, living in NYC, anywhere he goes, Juni encounters other dogs – and the socialization didn’t work with those, despite Jolanta’s best efforts. Juni does have a circle of canine friends he can play with, including 13-year-old Cattle Dog-mix Izzy, with whom he lives.

Jolanta has done a considerable amount of work with Juni. They attended our Reactive Rover Camp and did well, easily progressing to parallel walking with other dogs by the end of the third and final day of camp. Juni could control himself, but was not relaxed and friendly with the other dogs, and it didn’t carry over to the urban home environment.

Back in NYC, Jolanta found it pretty impossible to keep Juni sub-threshold – one of the challenges of ongoing counter-conditioning work with a reactive dog. Jolanta does a good job of keeping Juni focused on treats when necessary, and he has a very effective “run away” escape behavior. (As described by Patricia McConnell in her excellent booklet, Feisty Fido, a reactive dog is taught “Run away!” as a fun game, whereby the owner walks with the dog by her side, and suddenly says “Run away!” or some other cue in an excited tone of voice, then quickly turns and runs playfully in the other direction. Each time, at variable distances, the owner reinforces the fun aspect of the game with yummy treats or with a quick game of tug, until “Run away!” takes on a positive classical association. As a result, when the reactive dog and owner are out walking and a dog appears unexpectedly, the owner can use the “Run away!” cue to get her dog to happily turn and run with her, away from the other dog, rather than having a super-threshold eruption.)

We started the CAT process on Monday in early March, in the Peaceable Paws training center. Not ideal in terms of “recreating the actual environment,” (our farm is nothing like NYC!) but we wanted to maximize potential for some success, and it’s impossible to control intensity of stimulus in the Big Apple.

A dozen trainers attended one or more days of the three-day program to learn and assist. Our first stimulus dog was Amber, a small, mature female Rhodesian Ridgeback who belongs to Peaceable Paws apprentice Susan Sarubin.

Susan presented Amber at a distance of about 75 feet from Juni (one end of the training room). Juni immediately erupted, barking and lunging, hackles up. Jolanta had warned us that his threshold distance is “line of sight,” barring any efforts to divert his behavior. Juni confirmed the veracity of her warning. So “just inside the door” was our baseline.

It took several repetitions before Amber was able to enter the room without Juni erupting. Even then, Juni was still pretty tense. We did several more repetitions with Juni erupting when Amber and Susan turned to leave; they had to turn back toward Juni and return to the baseline mark. We looked for, and accepted, very small signs of relaxation from Juni as the trigger to make the stimulus dog (Amber) go away – the flick of an ear, blinking, a slight lowering of the head. When we got to the spot where no eruption took place, we began moving the marker closer, one foot at a time. It seemed like it took an eternity, but was actually no more than 10 minutes.

We worked with Amber as the only stimulus dog on the first day. At about 35 feet we began getting attention-soliciting affiliative behavior from Juni: soft tail wagging, relaxed body, ears back, squinty eyes. We continued to decrease the distance, and at about 10 feet (near the end of the session) we lost the soft behavior; Juni again began growling, barking, and even added a snarl (lips curled up) – a behavior we hadn’t seen before. We continued to repeat presentations at that distance until Juni relaxed again, although not to the point of the soft, waggy behavior we had seen previously.

We worked a total of three hours on that first day, with two breaks. In debriefing the session, Jolanta and I agreed that if we encountered a “stuck” spot again we would back up the stopping point to a place where Juni offered stress behavior but didn’t go over threshold, and work there until he again showed soft, friendly behaviors. Later conversation with Dr. Rosales-Ruiz confirmed that this would have been an appropriate step. As it turned out, we didn’t need it.

CAT, day 2
On the second day, we introduced Willow, a spayed Shepherd/Collie-mix owned by DC-area Certified Pet Dog Trainer Pen Brown. Juni immediately erupted upon presentation of Willow at 75 feet. This was disappointing; we were hoping to see more of a change in Juni’s behavior upon initial presentation. We were, however, able to progress more quickly this time; Juni’s barking stopped after just a few repetitions, and at the first-hour break we had moved the marker to about 35 feet and were getting soft, solicitous responses from Juni.

We switched dogs after the first break, introducing Bonnie, my three-year-old Scottie-mix. Snider and Rosales-Ruiz would probably have suggested proceeding to interaction with one dog before switching, but none of us were confident enough with the procedure to do this. In addition, Jolanta wanted to work on generalizing to as many different dogs as possible, knowing that she would face a constantly changing cast of canine characters back home in New York.

Juni had met Bonnie at a Reactive Rover Camp many months prior, parallel walking with her without incident on the last day of camp. Now, with CAT, there was some barking on the initial presentation of Bonnie at 75 feet, but it was less intense than with Willow, and we progressed forward rapidly. Between 40 feet and 10 feet we got very playful behavior from Juni: play bows, full body wags, and several “Don’t go away!” vocalizations on several occasions when Bonnie and I turned to leave. (This is a significantly different vocalization than Juni’s “Go away!” bark,)

At the end of that second day, we were parallel-walking Bonnie and Juni around the training center, about four feet apart. Juni was relaxed, and even made several play-bounce moves toward Bonnie – a behavior he had never shown toward her at Reactive Rover Camp. We chose not to let them play, as there is a significant disparity in size and we felt Juni would be too rough for Bonnie, even if he maintained his friendly demeanor.

CAT, day 3
On the third day we changed our location, transporting all of our dogs to a local, dog-friendly outlet mall – the closest approximation to a city environment we could come up with in rural Fairplay, Maryland. We started with Willow again, positioning Juni about 50 feet from the corner around which Willow would appear. There were no eruptions at all on day three. None! Not even when Pen invited Willow to leap in the air. (Historically, bouncy behavior was a guaranteed trigger for Juni to erupt.) We quickly progressed from 50 feet to about 10 feet, and then walked the two dogs together in the mall parking lot, sometimes as close as three to four feet apart. Juni was relaxed and unconcerned. We were not just pleasantly surprised; we were ecstatic.

We returned to the store front area, put Willow away and brought out Missy, my eight-year-old spayed Australian Shepherd. We were eager to see what would happen with a new dog. Juni had never seen Missy, and Missy is naturally bouncy – a potential double whammy. Again, no eruptions, rapid closure to about six feet, then walking together at close distance. We did get one small growl and a little tension when Missy was about 15 feet from Juni while we were doing the initial approaches, but he was immediately relaxed again on the next approach.

We brought Willow back, and worked with all three dogs together, then introduced Lucy, my Cardigan Corgi, and finally added Bonnie to the mix. We finished the morning after 90 minutes with all five dogs walking around one end of the mall, passing in close quarters, following Juni, approaching head-on, and appearing unexpectedly around corners. Juni was completely relaxed, as were the rest of the dogs. The humans, on the other hand, were all pretty excited. After close to eight hours of successful CAT work, the true test was yet to come. We headed back to our respective homes, waiting to hear from Jolanta on how Juni would do back home in his own ’hood.

Dog in CAT city
The first report was promising. Jolanta called it in from her cell phone before she even got home. Juni saw a dog through the car window and did nothing! Prior to all the CAT work, this would have elicited a full-scale aroused eruption.

Jolanta continues to send glowing reports about Juni. He’s not letter-perfect, but is behaving far better around other dogs than he ever did in his pre-CAT experience. According to Jolanta, they have encountered more than 100 dogs per week since their return to Brooklyn, and experienced only six full-scale “explosions.” In 30 of the encounters, Juni growled or barked or exhibited some degree of tension. In almost every “tense” episode, Juni calmed himself quickly without intervention from Jolanta. Most happily, Jolanta says, “More than 60 encounters with approximately 70 dogs were characterized by responses ranging from complete indifference/nonchalance to active interest, to mild alertness that didn’t shade into tension.”

When asked how many of these incidents she estimates would have previously resulted in escalation to eruption, she answered, “Most of the ‘tense’ encounters would likely be explosions of one degree or another. I would not have seen any nonchalance though I would have had a lot of success distracting him with food.”

I believe the CAT program has significant value for certain dogs; it could mean a much brighter future for a lot of dogs who are currently under house arrest and strict management programs. I’ll be looking for additional appropriate applications for CAT. I have another client who wants to try CAT on her dog, and I fully intend to use it with Dubhy, our dog-reactive Scottie, the next time my husband and I want to introduce a new dog to our pack, if not sooner.

Pat Miller, CPDT, is Whole Dog Journal’s Training Editor. Miller lives in Hagerstown, Maryland, site of her Peaceable Paws training center. Pat is also author of The Power of Positive Dog Training; Positive Perspectives: Love Your Dog, Train Your Dog; and Positive Perspectives II: Know Your Dog, Train Your Dog. See “Resources,” page 24.