# Food and behavioural change



## Maab (Nov 9, 2009)

This is a post only indirectly related to food. I am asking because many of you have more experience that i do. 

There is no doubt in my mind that the dog loves raw food, and she is healthy. that makes me happy. 
What makes me unhappy and nervous is that recently she developed a new behaviour: if I pet the dog while she is eating a raw meaty bone, like a big chicken quarter, she will growl at me, nevermind if I try to take it away. She has never done that before. She never showed any aggressive behaviour other that this in her 11 months life. 
Is the raw food that good that she feels that she has to guard it from me? I know it's a stupid question, but she never did that with other foods and i always was able to take it out from her mouth. 
Any thouths?


----------



## Maab (Nov 9, 2009)

I forgot to mention that the she has been in heat for the last two weeks. 
I am thinking to not give her raw until she is done with it.


----------



## rannmiller (Jun 27, 2008)

No, stick with the raw while she's on it, just don't bug her while she's eating it and try petting her while she's eating when she's not in heat anymore and see if she does the same thing. If she does, I'm sure RFD will have really good suggestions for you. I've worked with my dogs on not being food aggressive since I've had them so I've never had this problem, but a lab I used to take care of did. He was the sweetest dog in the world, but as soon as he got a raw knuckle bone to chew on, he would growl and bare his teeth at you if you came too close while he was eating it. Not even petting him, just being too close to him!


----------



## whiteleo (Sep 7, 2008)

Are you planning on breeding your dog? If not, I would get her fixed ASAP. I've seen toooooo many dogs change behavior from being able to go into heat too many times before being fixed. I don't think it has anything to do with the raw food, its probably because shes in heat. Good Luck!


----------



## Maab (Nov 9, 2009)

I am certainly planning to spay her when she reaches 13 to 14 months age. 
I don't blame the raw food. I just thought that maybe indirectly, because she loves it so much... But, frankly I don't know what to think now. Today she doesn't want to play, she doesn't want to walk and refused her treats.


----------



## JayJayisme (Aug 2, 2009)

One of the most effective ways to establish dominance in your pack is to control the food. Whether she's in heat or not, this is unacceptable behavior and if you don't put an end to it, you won't be able to control anything else.

I've been through this to one degree or another with almost every dog I've ever had so in the beginning the food is the first thing I take control of. If I get a growl, they get their food taken away, a stern "NO!", and if necessary to get their attention and break their fixation, a sharp whack on the side of their neck with my fingertips as I scold them. It only takes a few times before they get it. Food is a great motivator for most dogs.

I showed this technique to my neighbor who has a totally out of control, 160 lb. food-aggressive Rottweiler and after only a few times, he submitted to me (the dog, not the neighbor :biggrin. He has no respect for her and will practically knock her over and take food right out of her hand. But when I give him food, he sits, I drop it on the ground in front of him, and he waits until I tell him to "eat". He knows who the boss is. It's essential to maintain order in the pack, even if the pack is only you and your animal.


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

You could get the same results as Jay mentioned without using any kind of negative physical interaction with the dog. Being the pack leader doesn't mean being the bully. The only thing that you are gaining by "whacking" the dog on the neck, is fear from the dog. Respect does not equal fear when being the pack leader. A dog should respect you, but not fear you. The dog does not gain respect without fear by being physically punished for their actions.

I would simply take the food away without saying anything and walk away. If you feel its necessary, you can say "No" in a steady, but non aggressive voice. The dog will get the same picture by doing this as giving a stern "No!" and a whack on the neck, except the dog wont fear you. 

What does the dog want? His food right? So if you take it away when he/she growls...they will soon get the picture that food is not coming if they show aggression. 

I would also like to say that it very well might be that she is growling because she is in heat. But like Jay said, that is still no excuse. The behavior should be modified, but in a positive way without any negative physical reinforcement. Dogs learn faster this way, and gain respect without fear.

Also, try holding her food while she is eating it. If you are giving her a chicken quarter, hold it and don't let go until there is not enough to hold on to. This will also show her that you have control of her food, and has to get used to you being around her when eating.

ETA: Why are you waiting to spay her? There is zero benefits from waiting. The risk of cancer sky rockets after their first heat...


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

Natalie is right. There are much better techniques to get a desired behavior from a dog than using intimidation. My belief is that if you have to intimidate your dog to get the behavior you desire, you are not a leader. A leader knows how to motivate the dog to get what he wants.

Raw food is a MUCH more valuable resource than artificial foods. Dogs are more likely to guard it but it's not difficult to teach them not to. Get the book Mine! by Patridia McConnel (I think). It will help you with resource guarding.

I also agree with Natalie about spaying. It is useful to wait to neuter a male dog but there is no advantage to waiting to spay a female.


----------



## JayJayisme (Aug 2, 2009)

I did clearly state that I only use physical touch "to get their attention and break their fixation" and only when they are so fixated on something that their obsession is preventing them from paying attention to my instruction. This physical touch is not hard or painful, just a quick, sharp stab with my fingertips to get their attention. It is not intimidating or painful to them and I am not bullying them. Some dogs have advanced OCD and this technique has helped me rehabilitate the worst offenders. That's all.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

JayJayisme said:


> I did clearly state that I only use physical touch "to get their attention and break their fixation" and only when they are so fixated on something that their obsession is preventing them from paying attention to my instruction. This physical touch is not hard or painful, just a quick, sharp stab with my fingertips to get their attention. It is not intimidating or painful to them and I am not bullying them. Some dogs have advanced OCD and this technique has helped me rehabilitate the worst offenders. That's all.


Don't think thats quite the way you wrote it. Here is what you said:
_"If I get a growl, they get their food taken away, a stern "NO!", and if necessary to get their attention and break their fixation, *a sharp whack on the side of their neck with my fingertips as I scold them.* It only takes a few times before they get it. Food is a great motivator for most dogs."_

That is not by any stretch of the imagination anything other than intimidating. It is NOT positive reinforcement. There are many good books on postive reinforcement in dog training. I suggest you get one and educate yourself. One good book is The Power of Positive Dog Training by Pat Miller.

People are amazed at the control I have over my dogs and I never speak to them in a harsh tone of voice. Nor have I ever threatened them nor physically hurt them in the slightest. I have not hit, slapped, jabbed, punched, or kicked them. It is possible and creates a MUCH stronger bond between you and your dog.


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

JayJayisme said:


> I did clearly state that I only use physical touch "to get their attention and break their fixation" and only when they are so fixated on something that their obsession is preventing them from paying attention to my instruction. This physical touch is not hard or painful, just a quick, sharp stab with my fingertips to get their attention. It is not intimidating or painful to them and I am not bullying them. Some dogs have advanced OCD and this technique has helped me rehabilitate the worst offenders. That's all.


Simply taking the food and walking away is enough to break any dogs attention to it. If you remove the food, they have nothing to concentrate on anymore. So their concentration is put on "Where is she going with my food?" Soon enough the dog will put two and two together, that if they growl/snarl their food is taken away.

And this "jab" you are talking about doesn't have to be painful for it to have a negative impact on your dog. They will still see it as intimidating and fear you because of it. I would suggest removing this step 100% considering it does more harm than good. 

I will add in that growling is a way for a dog to communicate that they do not like something. Granted I believe wholeheartedly that people should be the pack leader and require respect from their dogs. But I also believe that you should respect your dog. If they do not like to be bothered while eating, leave them alone. Simple as that. 

I can imagine that some people might get scared that their dog might attack someone else that doesn't know any better, but I believe that it is the responsibility of the owner to inform any guests/kids/etc how to behave around the dog. If you know that your dog doesn't like to be bothered while eating, inform people of this and better yet, don't feed the dog when you have guests.

Our dogs growl at each other if they get too close while eating or chewing on a bone/toy. But I don't get upset about it. They are communicating to each other what is appropriate. If you train your dog that it is not ok to communicate in this way, what will your dog do instead? Bite or snap? Because that is the next step in communication with most dogs. Growl, then bite/snap. If you remove their ability to give a warning, I think they will feel more inclinded to bite/snap right off the cuff without a warning.

I would say that a combination of doing the taking of the food to establish leadership, but also giving your dog their space while eating is a good place to start.


----------



## Maab (Nov 9, 2009)

Ok. Last night while i tried to take the food away, i couldn't because she was holing tight on the chicken. 
But, at the end I was able to take the chicken away. I was using a tough Tone with her. at that point She did exactly what I was telling her to do, sit, stay. She did wait a few minutes and I gave her back the food. 
As I said, iwas acting with impulse and I decided to check ger out again. Go back in the kitchen and pet her. Soon as I touched her she growled again and she showed me her theeth. 
There I lost it a bit. I slapped her nose lightly, not to the point of hurting her. I did notice thou, that she was scared of me. And I regretted slapping her. In the same time I don't want to put up with such a behaviour. Normally she is very sociable and likes everybody. I just hope that this is not a sign of changing. 
Took the food away once more. 
Making the story short, I gave it to her back after five minutes.

I did my research about spaying. I evaluated the situation and I opted as i did. 
I also asked opinions at the giant schnauzers club and apparently spaying too early creates more problems in the future.


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

RawFedDogs said:


> I also agree with Natalie about spaying. It is useful to wait to neuter a male dog but there is no advantage to waiting to spay a female.


I would like to clarify that there is also no benefit to waiting to neuter a male. But we can start another thread about that if you would like :biggrin:


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

Maab said:


> Ok. Last night while i tried to take the food away but i couldn't because she was holing tight on the chicken.
> But, at the end I was able to take the chicken away. I was using a tough Tone with her. at that point She did exactly what I was telling her to do, sit, stay. She did wait a few minutes and I gave her back the food.
> As I said, iwas acting with impulse and I decided to check ger out again. Go back in the kitchen and pet her. Soon as I touched her she growled again and she showed me her theeth.
> There I lost it a bit. I slapped her nose lightly, not to the point of hurting her. I did notice thou, that she was scared of me. And I regretted slapping her. In the same time I don't want to put up with such a behaviour.
> ...


I would not try and take the food away in the middle of a meal in this case, considering she has shown aggression. You need to start on square one:

Don't give it to her unless she takes it without any signs of aggression. 

Keep ahold of it, while she eats, so she knows that you are in control of her food.

If she growls while eating it, have something of "higher quality" to focus on instead, and take her meal away. Higher quality just means something that she may want more than say a chicken quarter. That could be a treat, toy, different kind of meat, etc. Just something to get her to stop paying attention to her food. But don't give her a different whole meal all together, just something that will distract her momentarily from her food.

Like RFD and I have said, you want to be the leader and gain respect from your dog without intimidating her. I would refrain from using physical punishment in any way, shape or form, even though it is so first nature to do. 

And also keep in mind that she is communicating with you, that she does not like to be bothered while eating....and maybe that this is not a battle you want to choose with her.


----------



## Maab (Nov 9, 2009)

```
[QUOTE="danemama08, post: 16665, member: 69"]I would not try and take the food away in the middle of a meal in this case, considering she has shown aggression. You need to start on square one:
```


```
Don't give it to her unless she takes it without any signs of aggression.
```
will do... after the challenge she was acting submissive, actually. i take that as a good sign


```
Keep ahold of it, while she eats, so she knows that you are in control of her food.
```
i did that too a couple of nights ago. at first she would come close, then, little by little she approached the meal. i did hold it until i could-half piece.


```
If she growls while eating it, have something of "higher quality" to focus on instead, and take her meal away. Higher quality just means something that she may want more than say a chicken quarter. That could be a treat, toy, different kind of meat, etc. Just something to get her to stop paying attention to her food. But don't give her a different whole meal all together, just something that will distract her momentarily from her food.

Like RFD and I have said, you want to be the leader and gain respect from your dog without intimidating her. I would refrain from using physical punishment in any way, shape or form, even though it is so first nature to do. 

And also keep in mind that she is communicating with you, that she does not like to be bothered while eating....and maybe that this is not a battle you want to choose with her.[/QUOTE]
```
I thought that by taking the food away for a second would show her leadership she can trust.


----------



## Maab (Nov 9, 2009)

sorry, i still don't know how to multi-quote.


----------



## Maab (Nov 9, 2009)

danemama08 said:


> I would like to clarify that there is also no benefit to waiting to neuter a male. But we can start another thread about that if you would like :biggrin:


we could start another thread if you like. meanwhile here is a link that caught my attention. HERE 

thanks a lot to all for your help


----------



## JayJayisme (Aug 2, 2009)

Well I don't know what you are visualizing while reading my words but under some circumstances I think this is completely appropriate. You seem to be associating my use of physical touch with pain or punishment. It is neither, it is just to get their attention kind of like, "Hey, (tap, tap) I'm talking to you". The bigger and more obsessed the dog, the stronger the tap. But it does not hurt them in any way.

When I feed my neighbor's Rottie when she is on vacation, it will have usually been awhile since I last saw him and he will be back to his old bad habits (she has no leadership role in his eyes whatsoever so it's her fault, not the dogs fault). When I walk into the house with anything he thinks might be food, he will immediately try to knock me down and take it. I am not his owner nor full-time trainer and I only have a few seconds to make an impression on him. I don't have the luxury of time with him to train him using positive reinforcement. His owner won't do it either so it is what it is. Nobody else in the neighborhood will even get near him. I'm his only option when she leaves but I don't have time to "train" him. That is her job so, basically, it ain't gonna' happen.

If he starts to charge me and doesn't immediately respond to my assertive posture, and a vocal "No!" and back off, and if he is just obsessing over whatever he thinks I have for him and not paying attention to my direction (it may only be a set of keys in my hand and not even food), I give him a little stab on the side of the neck. It's just enough to get his attention and make him look at me. It's more for shock value than anything, it doesn't hurt him. When he does something right you'd better believe I praise him. But when he gets obsessive, I will use touch to bring him back to center. FWIW, I'm the only person in the whole neighborhood who he listens to, including his owner, and the only person who can play with him and walk him without things getting out of hand. But I don't see him very often and it usually takes me two days or so to get him to understand that I don't play the game his owner plays and to remember how to behave with me. Two or three days is usually all I have at the most and those may come months apart.

I'm glad you have time to devote to your dogs using nothing more than positive reinforcement. Obviously that is the best option whenever it is practicable and it is the main technique I use on my own dogs because I have the time to devote to them. But it is not always an option when you are dealing with a dog you are not around all the time or one that is aggressive. I can't change my neighbor's relationship with her dog or convince her to train him properly. She's an idiot. She gives him LOTS of positive reinforcement, but always at the wrong time so he walks all over her and he's totally confused. I won't let him dominate me but I don't have time to work with him properly. He has to understand me immediately and if I don't get the response I want from him because he is distracted, I will use physical touch to get his attention. Granted, it should be a last resort, and I'm not implying to the OP that is should be used casually or without thought. It should only used on very troublesome dogs but I see nothing wrong with it in some of the situations I've faced. I don't think there is anything wrong with using different techniques for different circumstances and different dogs. Physical touch is just another tool to use in certain, difficult circumstances when you don't have the luxury of time, or the kind of relationship with a dog that permits a more gentle approach. As long as you aren't hurting them or intimidating them, I see no problem with it.


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

Seems to me like she needs to reconsider owning this dog! 

Maybe offer to take him off her hands LOL

And you are correct in saying that the "jabbing" method works with him in limited time. Because those methods usually do work faster, but leave an impression with the dog that lasts a lifetime. And as long as the owner is ok with you using negative reinforcement on her dog (which to me it sounds like she doesn't care one way or the other), then continue if that is what works in the short amount of time you have. I'm glad that you recognize that there is a better way that you can do things with this dog. Because positive reinforcement and time is all you need for training a dog.

I commented because I don't like using negative reinforcement with dogs, and therefore didn't think it was correct to suggest those ideas to the OP since it is her dog that is the problem.


----------



## Maab (Nov 9, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> Don't think thats quite the way you wrote it. Here is what you said:
> _"If I get a growl, they get their food taken away, a stern "NO!", and if necessary to get their attention and break their fixation, *a sharp whack on the side of their neck with my fingertips as I scold them.* It only takes a few times before they get it. Food is a great motivator for most dogs."_
> 
> That is not by any stretch of the imagination anything other than intimidating. It is NOT positive reinforcement. There are many good books on postive reinforcement in dog training. I suggest you get one and educate yourself. One good book is The Power of Positive Dog Training by Pat Miller.
> ...


thank you. 
I just placed an order on the two books that you suggested.


----------



## JoeCo (Jul 21, 2009)

Maab said:


> Ok. Last night while i tried to take the food away, i couldn't because she was holing tight on the chicken.
> But, at the end I was able to take the chicken away. I was using a tough Tone with her. at that point She did exactly what I was telling her to do, sit, stay. She did wait a few minutes and I gave her back the food.


In my opinion it is not productive to give the dog food and then take it away. The dog will never respect you for that kind of treatment, he will just think of you as a bully. In the wild the alpha dog will eat his fill then leave the rest for the others, he will not play games with the food.

What works for me is as follows. I eat first, when I am done the dog must voluntarily and calmly go to his crate. I close the crate door, the dog must give me a down/stay in a calm and submissive manner. I then put the food in his crate. After he finishes eating or 30 minutes, I take the almost always empty food bowl away. He must then again give me a down/stay then I let him out of his crate.

Doing this the dog must work for his food. There is never any confrontation with the food. He remains calm at all times, is not taunted with food. And he definitely knows who is in charge of his food.

Makes life a lot easier.


----------



## JayJayisme (Aug 2, 2009)

danemama08 said:


> Seems to me like she needs to reconsider owning this dog!
> 
> Maybe offer to take him off her hands LOL
> 
> ...


Well thank you for the civilized reply and for seeing another side to this. Yes, she has no business owning a dog. As far as I'm concerned nobody who lives here, which is a townhome complex, should have a dog that big. They have no space and it's kind of cruel to keep them in a place like this as far as I'm concerned. As far as I know, he has never actually run. And yes, he is morbidly obese. But she loves him even though her idea of love, structure and discipline is totally misguided. There is a difference between a dog owner and a dog person and I'd say she is just a dog owner.

All that being said, I agree that this "tool" is not always appropriate to use and it may not be for the OP. But I still don't think a jab on the neck is "negative reinforcement" and I would have to disagree that it leaves some sort of lasting negative impression with a dog. Hypothetically, if you have a little boy, maybe 6 or 7 years old, and you visit a friend and the kid is going nuts running around, screaming his head off, or engaging in any inappropriate, anti-social behavior, and you keep telling him to stop but he just keeps going, at what point do you grab his arm and spin him around so he is facing you and say, "Hey mister, I'm talking to you and you'd better listen."? Is this negative reinforcement under the circumstance just because you physically stopped him? 

Okay, granted, good parents would probably never let their kid's behavior escalate to this point in the first place, but it happens to even the best little kids from time to time. I call it the "Chuck E Cheese Syndrome" because perfectly good kids can go to this place and the hyper-stimulation they are assaulted with, and the general lack of parenting in these places, provokes them to basically join in and go nuts. They are just being kids and sometimes you need to do something , like physically stopping them, to get them to pay attention. I seriously doubt if this leaves a lasting impression on a kid or a dog.

Dogs will use a bite on the neck to communicate with each other when a growl or bark doesn't register. The bite isn't necessarily painful, just a physical version of saying "I don't like the way you are behaving". When I growl (say "no") and get no response, I bite (tap the neck) to reinforce it. It really isn't painful or negative, it's perfectly natural to a dog.

Believe me, my dogs follow me everywhere and would follow me off a cliff if I asked them to. They do not fear me and we are all very affectionate with each other. My wife is jealous of my relationship with them because they always prefer to hang with me than her. I use positive reinforcement 99% of the time but every now and then, one of them will fixate on something and not pay attention and that is when I use touch. A smack on the nose? Never. But a jab on the neck, most definitely when warranted.

I know not all will agree but I guess this probably isn't the right thread to beat this into the ground any further.


----------



## Ania's Mommy (Feb 8, 2009)

What we have always done with Ania is similar to what JoeCo said. We hold her food, make her do a series of tricks, and set the food right in front of her. She must then wait until we say "OK" before she is allowed to eat. This basically establishes that the food is "mine" and she GETS to eat it. 

Also, when Ania was a puppy we would put our hands in her food dish while she was eating. Again, establishing our ownership of the food. When we started feeding raw, I would go over to her and touch her food, pet her, and take food away briefly. 

This is also very helpful when I'm in the kitchen. If I ever accidently drop something on the floor, she knows that she is not allowed to eat it unless I tell her she can. This prevents her from eating something she shouldn't.

I fully recognize that this process will take some doing to perfect, as there are multiple things to teach here (tricks, release words such as "OK", etc.). But I have found this practice invaluable.

I don't have near the experience required to say whether feeding as we have since we brought our little bundle of joy home will work with ALL dogs. I'm just puttin' my two cents in and giving another POSITVE option. :biggrin:


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

Jay, we are all welcome to our own opinions and I certainly wouldn't attack you for having yours....but I will try and change the way think, of course in a civilized manner :biggrin:

Certainly dogs communicate by nipping at eachother, but you are not a dog and your dog is not going to think you are dog. While your dog may not show outward signs of being "harmed" by your techniques, I am sure that they are there. There really isn't a way to tell.

Negative reinforcement is not synonymous with pain. There are negative reinforcements that do not cause pain at all...like yelling. Yelling scares dogs, but is not painful. Same thing with the jab. It may not cause pain, but does intimidate dogs and therefore it is not needed for training. The jab definitely will effect different dogs differently...like I'm sure the rottie doesn't show much reaction to it, but to other dogs it could be devastating and that is why I don't think that it should be a suggested practice to other people. I can relate not having the time to work with the rottie, and resorting to using this method in the short term.


----------



## Maab (Nov 9, 2009)

Ania's Mommy said:


> Also, when Ania was a puppy we would put our hands in her food dish while she was eating. Again, establishing our ownership of the food. When we started feeding raw, I would go over to her and touch her food, pet her, and take food away briefly.


Well, thats what i did successfully until i introduced her to raw food. Maybe a coincidence, i dont know.

However, I still don't know what is the answer. Take or not to take the food away from her while eating, pet or not to pet her while eating, etc... I see here mixed signals.

My previous dog had not problem at all in this matter... i could put my head in her mouth while eating.


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

Maab said:


> Well, thats what i did successfully until i introduced her to raw food. Maybe a coincidence, i dont know.
> 
> However, I still don't know what is the answer. Take or not to take the food away from her while eating, pet or not to pet her while eating, etc... I see here mixed signals.
> 
> My previous dog had not problem at all in this matter... i could put my head in her mouth while eating.


This situation is kind of a catch 22. I guess it ultimately depends on what you want from your dog.

Do you not want your dog to growl at all when it comes to anything with their food?

Or do you not mind if your dog communicates with you what is appropriate to her out of respect?

I am not saying that one is right or one is wrong, or telling you what you should do. It just depends on how you want your dog to behave...


----------



## JayJayisme (Aug 2, 2009)

Natalie,

You are right, aside from the jokes about all men being dogs, and contrary to popular belief, I am not a dog. :biggrin: But does that mean you can't use a little dog psychology to your advantage when dealing with them? In my experience, dogs really respond well to direction that is presented to them in an instinctual way.

What puzzles me is that you say, "While your dog may not show outward signs of being "harmed" by your techniques, I am sure that they are there." Then you follow that with. "There really isn't a way to tell." So are you sure or aren't you?

Well, you're right, there isn't really a clinical way to tell so I am relying on my experience and you are relying on yours and that is as close as any of us are going to get to "knowing" anything. From my experience, going back to when I was a kid and owning and taking care of many, many dogs, I just don't personally think a dog takes a tap on the neck as seriously as you think they do. We will just have to agree to disagree.

I fear that maybe some of you reading this thread may come away with a couple of erroneous impressions from my posts. I get that feeling that my using a neck jab is being interpreted as my using physical touch *in place of* positive reinforcement as though they are mutually exclusive. As I've stated, nothing could be farther from the truth. I use both, almost always positive reinforcement, but touch when I deem it appropriate.

It also seems that my use of touch is being interpreted as using touch as discipline. Again, not correct at all. I use touch in some circumstances to *get the dog to pay attention* in order to discipline it, not use it as the discipline itself. If I touch a dog to break a fixation, and then it properly pays attention and responds to my direction, then I immediately give it praise and affection. Done in the proper succession, the dog associates all of this with, "Hey, I need to pay attention and if I do, I get affection". I do not simply use touch as discipline and I'd hate to think that anyone takes that from any of my posts so let me be clear on that.

You are right that different dogs will react differently to being jabbed and for that reason, I wouldn't use this technique in all cases of fixation. There are cases where it will just undermine what you are trying to accomplish, especially with really shy, fearful, or nervous dogs. Hell, snapping your fingers can make some dogs melt down. But for strong-willed dogs who tend to fixate, I stand by this technique as long as it is used properly. Nobody here knows for sure IF there are long term effects from using touch but I would think that if there were, my dogs and all the dogs I've ever dealt with would simply be afraid of my hands whenever I reach out for them. But they aren't. My dogs love being petted and scratched and one of my dogs loves to playfully wrestle with my hand. If they associated my use of the hand with something negative, I would think they would shy away from them when I reach for one of them. It would break my heart if they did, but they don't.

Jay


----------



## Maab (Nov 9, 2009)

danemama08 said:


> This situation is kind of a catch 22. I guess it ultimately depends on what you want from your dog.
> 
> Do you not want your dog to growl at all when it comes to anything with their food?
> 
> ...


Natalie, My goal is that the dog would not growl to anyone when it comes to food. How do I do that if I don't approach the dog for training-correction?


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

You are 100% right about using dog-like behavior to your advantage, but I wouldn't use a dog-like quality like a neck jab to emulate a dog nipping to get my point across. Many of the world's best animal behaviorists will use species appropriate ways of communication, which is easily done with a dog.

I say that you wont see outward signs of pain or fear in some cases, but there are signs that most people overlook that will tell you if a dog is fearful of you. Answer these couple of questions for me if you will in terms of when you do your stern "No!" followed by a neck jab technique:

Does the dog ever lick its lips?

Squint its eyes?

Yawn?

Turn its head away from you?

Turn around completely?

Lift its paw?

Sit or lay down?

Or any combination of any of these at once?

There are more I just can't think of any off the top of my head...LOL

These are "calming signals" that can tell you if your dog is stressed out or intimidated by your actions. He is doing these things to tell you "Calm down, I don't mean any harm!!!" If so, I would say that there is definitely a negative impact on him. Like I said earlier, every dog is different, and a hard headed rottie might not show any of these signs. Then again, if this dog has no interaction with other dogs, he may be completely inept when it comes to canine behavior and communication. This is not a skill they are born with...dogs learn how to communicate from other dogs. Which might be why you might not see any of these signals, he just doesn't know dog communication, which therefore means he cannot make the connection of you using dog-like communication on him. He just sees you yelling and jabbing, and doesn't show much reaction at all other than him being momentarily distracted.

Have you tried to ignore him when he does these unwanted behaviors? Because it really is just as much of a distration to him if you take away what he wants altogether, and that way you are not having to rely on negative reinforcement....


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

Maab said:


> Natalie, My goal is that the dog would not growl to anyone when it comes to food. How do I do that if I don't approach the dog for training-correction?



If you do not want your dog to growl at anyone when she is eating, you need to be in charge of her food 100%.

Take a chicken quarter. Hold it firmly in your hands. Do NOT let it go, make her chew it while you are holding it. Make her endure you being there throughout the entire meal, until you have nothing left to hold. This is important. Don't set her food in front of her and let her have it, because she will become aggressive if you try and take it back. Keep it in your hand.

If you don't have a chicken quarter, feed her small pieces of some other kind of meat out of your hand one at a time. 

If she growls, take away her food immediately since its in your hand and walk away. Don't yell, you don't need to reprimand her verbally in anyway. The act of you taking her food away is enough communication to her in the first place. Bring her food back after a few minutes have passed. If she growls again, repeat until she doesn't growl at all when you are holding her food.


----------



## JayJayisme (Aug 2, 2009)

danemama08 said:


> Does the dog ever lick its lips?


Only when I present a snack or its meal.



danemama08 said:


> Squint its eyes?


Only when it looks into the sun.



danemama08 said:


> Yawn?


Only when we get up in the morning.



danemama08 said:


> Turn its head away from you?


Only when we are playing and he or she has a ball in its mouth it doesn't want me to have.



danemama08 said:


> Turn around completely?


No.



danemama08 said:


> Lift its paw?


No.



danemama08 said:


> Sit or lay down?


My dogs sit automatically whenever I want to leash them, unleash them, or feed them a meal. I've never had a dog sit or lay down in response to discipline or me getting their attention when they are ignoring me or are out of control.



danemama08 said:


> Or any combination of any of these at once?


Never.



danemama08 said:


> Then again, if this dog has no interaction with other dogs, he may be completely inept when it comes to canine behavior and communication.


The rottie lives with an older, lower energy dog so it has some minimal social skills. It just has too much energy for the environment it lives in and it has little in the way of outlets for this energy.



danemama08 said:


> Have you tried to ignore him when he does these unwanted behaviors?


In some cases but if you have a big dog charging at you because it THINKS you have food, or a dog getting aggressive and ignoring you when you tell it "no", I don't negotiate with it or ignore it. I put a stop to the behavior right away. 

I think you are overthinking the whole poke in the neck thing and you aren't going to change my mind about it. There is a time and a place for it and it is not appropriate for all dogs and all OCD circumstances, but in my opinion it is a valuable tool in some situations. Just my opinion, your mileage may vary. :wink:


----------



## ruckusluvr (Oct 28, 2009)

WHAT?!

no one told you.....
feeding dogs raw meat makes them mean! they get the taste of blood in their mouth and it really changes a dog!













j/k of course! but thats what people told me when i fed raw.
Good luck with your pup. I have never had to deal with resource guarding myself.


----------



## Maab (Nov 9, 2009)

danemama08 said:


> If you do not want your dog to growl at anyone when she is eating, you need to be in charge of her food 100%.
> 
> Take a chicken quarter. Hold it firmly in your hands. Do NOT let it go, make her chew it while you are holding it. Make her endure you being there throughout the entire meal, until you have nothing left to hold. This is important. Don't set her food in front of her and let her have it, because she will become aggressive if you try and take it back. Keep it in your hand.
> 
> ...


Natalie, thank you so much. You couldn't have been more clear. Thanks exactly what I will do.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

JayJayisme said:


> But I still don't think a jab on the neck is "negative reinforcement" and I would have to disagree that it leaves some sort of lasting negative impression with a dog.


Either the dog enjoys the jab or he doesn't. If he doesn't, it's negative reinforcement. There is no other way to describe it.



> at what point do you grab his arm and spin him around so he is facing you and say, "Hey mister, I'm talking to you and you'd better listen."? Is this negative reinforcement under the circumstance just because you physically stopped him?


Yes. You physically grabbed him and you threatened him. No way that is positive by any definition. I was a professional dog trainer for 15 years. The first thing I would teach a dog is when he hears his name, he turns and looks at you. With enough repetition, that is all that is necessary.



> They are just being kids and sometimes you need to do something , like physically stopping them, to get them to pay attention. I seriously doubt if this leaves a lasting impression on a kid or a dog.


There are non-physical ways of getting a kid's attention and a dog's attention.



> Dogs will use a bite on the neck to communicate with each other when a growl or bark doesn't register. The bite isn't necessarily painful, just a physical version of saying "I don't like the way you are behaving".


OK, then bite the dog on the neck. That would be acceptable. It's something he can understand. A finger jab in the neck isn't in his vocabulary.



> When I growl (say "no") and get no response, I bite (tap the neck) to reinforce it. It really isn't painful or negative, it's perfectly natural to a dog.


"No" isn't a growl. A proper growl doesn't need reinforcement. You (nor I) can growl properly.



> Believe me, my dogs follow me everywhere and would follow me off a cliff if I asked them to. They do not fear me and we are all very affectionate with each other.


Dogs, or any animal, will behave in a way that makes life the most pleasant for them. If acting like they have affection for you makes their life pleasant, that is what they will do. Dogs WILL lie to you if it is to their advantage. My favorite dog of all time used to lie to me regularly. :smile:



> I know not all will agree but I guess this probably isn't the right thread to beat this into the ground any further.


You're right but I just can't resist. :smile:


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

Ania's Mommy said:


> Also, when Ania was a puppy we would put our hands in her food dish while she was eating. Again, establishing our ownership of the food. When we started feeding raw, I would go over to her and touch her food, pet her, and take food away briefly.


When I was a professional dog trainer, I can't tell you the number of dogs I had to re-teach after owners created very aggressive dog by using tactics like this trying to keep that very behavior from developing. They created the behavior they were trying to keep from happening. Sometimes these methods work, usually they don't.

Stop and think about it. What would your reaction be if you were sitting down to an enjoyable meal and someone kept running their hands over your head and back, putting their hands on your plate, and taking food and putting it back. I suspect you would want to handle that stiuation with a baseball bat. I would. Leave the dog alone and let him enjoy his meal.



> This is also very helpful when I'm in the kitchen. If I ever accidently drop something on the floor, she knows that she is not allowed to eat it unless I tell her she can. This prevents her from eating something she shouldn't.


OR if you had taught "leave it", you could just say that. :smile:

I fully recognize that this process will take some doing to perfect, as there are multiple things to teach here (tricks, release words such as "OK", etc.). But I have found this practice invaluable.



> I don't have near the experience required to say whether feeding as we have since we brought our little bundle of joy home will work with ALL dogs. I'm just puttin' my two cents in and giving another POSITVE option. :biggrin:


Cool. Your last statement is entirely correct. :smile:


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

Maab said:


> > However, I still don't know what is the answer. Take or not to take the food away from her while eating, pet or not to pet her while eating, etc... I see here mixed signals.
> 
> 
> Leave the dog alone and let him enjoy his meal. Otherwise all you are doing is creating frustration. Both in you and him. If you want to approach him do it by adding something to eat, not taking it away. Never try to take food away unless it is an emergency and you will probably never see that situation.
> ...


----------



## Maab (Nov 9, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> Maab said:
> 
> 
> > Leave the dog alone and let him enjoy his meal. Otherwise all you are doing is creating frustration. Both in you and him. If you want to approach him do it by adding something to eat, not taking it away. Never try to take food away unless it is an emergency and you will probably never see that situation.
> ...


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

JayJayisme said:


> But does that mean you can't use a little dog psychology to your advantage when dealing with them?


Problem is that you are not using dog psychology. You are using human psychology. The two are quite different.



> In my experience, dogs really respond well to direction that is presented to them in an instinctual way.


Jabbing in the neck is not instinctual. He has no clue why you are doing that and what you want him to do in response to it.



> What puzzles me is that you say, "While your dog may not show outward signs of being "harmed" by your techniques, I am sure that they are there." Then you follow that with. "There really isn't a way to tell." So are you sure or aren't you?


If you had someone who arbitrarily jabbed you in the neck for reasons you didn't understand, I can assure you that you would develop negative feelings about that person.



> I just don't personally think a dog takes a tap on the neck as seriously as you think they do. We will just have to agree to disagree.


Earlier in the discussion it was a "jab", now after being called on it and knowing you are boxed in a corner it has become a "tap". :smile:



> I fear that maybe some of you reading this thread may come away with a couple of erroneous impressions from my posts. I get that feeling that my using a neck jab is being interpreted as my using physical touch *in place of* positive reinforcement as though they are mutually exclusive.


They are mutually exclusive. You can not under any circumstances have a postiively trained dog in the presence of negative reinforcement. The negative cancels out the positive. You see? My dogs have never in their lives been negatively punished for improper behavior. They trust me completely to take care of them and not to harm them in any way. They don't have to do anything I ask them to. There is no negative consequence if they don't. However they follow my wishes every time without exception UNLESS they don't understand what I want. I can't tell if they don't understand because they look at me with a questioning look on their face. :smile:



> As I've stated, nothing could be farther from the truth. I use both, almost always positive reinforcement, but touch when I deem it appropriate.


And it cancels out all the positive you did. ONE negative response from you can cancel out weeks of postiive reinforcement. The dog learns, "Maybe I can't trust him not to harm me" and they become wary of you.



> It also seems that my use of touch is being interpreted as using touch as discipline. Again, not correct at all. I use touch in some circumstances to *get the dog to pay attention* in order to discipline it, not use it as the discipline itself.


One of the first things you learn as a postiive reinforcement trainer is how to get the dogs attention every single time. If it's been properly taught, calling his name is all thats necessary.



> If I touch a dog to break a fixation, and then it properly pays attention and responds to my direction, then I immediately give it praise and affection. Done in the proper succession, the dog associates all of this with, "Hey, I need to pay attention and if I do, I get affection".


OR he thinks, "What the hell does that SOB want this time. Why can't he leave me alone?"



> I do not simply use touch as discipline and I'd hate to think that anyone takes that from any of my posts so let me be clear on that.


Of course you do. It's the same as a jerk on the leash.



> Nobody here knows for sure IF there are long term effects from using touch but I would think that if there were, my dogs and all the dogs I've ever dealt with would simply be afraid of my hands whenever I reach out for them.


I know. Anytime you do anything negative to any animal, it sticks with them. They most definately will, in time, become hand shy.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

Maab said:


> Natalie, My goal is that the dog would not growl to anyone when it comes to food. How do I do that if I don't approach the dog for training-correction?


You don't want to take away a dog's ability to growl. It is the only way he has to signal that he doesn't like what is going on. Often it means he is afraid. To a dog, the growl doesn't sound as ominous as it does to humans. It's just a sound with a meaning.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

Maab said:


> Thanks RFD.
> I wish i new all this before. Do you think that by feeding her by hand for a while I would regain her trust in me, Or should I just leave her alone?


I'm not much of a believer in hand feeding except in special circumstances. What I suggest is that you SOMETIMES walk over to him and give him a little more food. Just drop it near his head. I would do this once or twice a week.

This teaches her something good is going to happen when you approach. It won't be, "Oh God, what is he going to do now? Steal some more of my food or just agravate me?"


----------



## Maab (Nov 9, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> I'm not much of a believer in hand feeding except in special circumstances. What I suggest is that you SOMETIMES walk over to him and give him a little more food. Just drop it near his head. I would do this once or twice a week.
> 
> This teaches her something good is going to happen when you approach. It won't be, "Oh God, what is he going to do now? Steal some more of my food or just agravate me?"


Understood. It makes sense and probably we'll both feel better. 
RDF, I see where you're coming from. 
Thank you very much. I know what I am going to do now. I learned a good deal today.


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

Maab said:


> Understood. It makes sense and probably we'll both feel better.
> RDF, I see where you're coming from.
> Thank you very much. I know what I am going to do now. I learned a good deal today.


I am glad that you went with the idea of leaving your dog alone while eating. It will ultimately be better for your relationship with your dog.


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

JayJayisme said:


> Only when I present a snack or its meal.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


We may think differently, but in this case there is a right way and a wrong way. And I certainly don't want to be a know-it-all, but behavior is one of my passions and when I see/read how people treat animals I put in my 0.02, especially if they are using outdated ideals and techniques.

It occurs to me that you either don't know how to read a dog's body language and overlook most things...or your dog displays no body signals which is highly unlikely. I'm putting money on the first reason. I would think that you overlook some of the signs your dog, or the other person's dog, gives you in response to your actions. Most people don't understand dog language and that is ok, its realizing that you don't and learning how to.

Buy and read this book: Amazon.com: On Talking Terms With Dogs : Calming Signals (9780967479606): Turid Rugaas, Terry Ryan: Books


And you will better understand reading your or any dog's body language. Trust me, they will tell you when you are being a bully.

Since I read this book I have increasingly noticed the "hidden" language of dogs that I work with everyday, and I mean everyday. I have yet to come across a dog that doesn't display at least some of these traits. And since, I have had a better relationship with all 4 of my dogs, and even made a trip to the vet for some of our clients no big deal. 

Our dogs will even "tell" us to calm down if Jon and I yell at eachother or the TV LOL :biggrin:


----------



## JayJayisme (Aug 2, 2009)

Bill,

I don't know if you are really as arrogant as you come across in your posts or not but I really wanted to drop this topic since it strayed so far from the OP's original inquiry. But now you've made some pretty provocative statements and accusations that I feel I have to respond to.

I will say my piece and leave it at that and I promise that I will never post another word related to dog behavior on this forum again. I will keep it focused on the topic of food from here on out.



RawFedDogs said:


> Problem is that you are not using dog psychology. You are using human psychology. The two are quite different.


That is your opinion, I have a different one. Humans primarily communicate verbally with each other. Dogs communicate using body language, energy, and touch. You don't see a bunch of dogs laying around barking at each other to communicate the way people talk to each other. They mostly use body language and touch. To use dog psychology mimics that behavior. 



RawFedDogs said:


> Jabbing in the neck is not instinctual. He has no clue why you are doing that and what you want him to do in response to it.


I get the distinct impression that you have never used this technique, or have seen it properly demonstrated. If you had, you would know that they damned well know what you want. All you want them to do is pay attention.

Dogs bite each other all the time to communicate. Sometimes it's so gentle you may not even notice it but they do it all the time. A poke/jab/tap (see below) on the neck is interpreted by them as "I need to pay attention". It doesn't matter if it comes from my fingers, my mouth, or a stick. They get it, you don't.



RawFedDogs said:


> If you had someone who arbitrarily jabbed you in the neck for reasons you didn't understand, I can assure you that you would develop negative feelings about that person.


You are assuming that this is "for reasons they don't understand", which I fundamentally disagree with. They get it...really! 

If I was suffering from A.D.D. and a *person* I know was trying to teach me something and to get my attention waved their hand in front of my face and said "Okay, you need to focus and pay attention now" I don't think I would develop negative feelings toward that *person*. A poke/jab/tap (see below) on the neck is the doggie equivalent to this.



RawFedDogs said:


> Earlier in the discussion it was a "jab", now after being called on it and knowing you are boxed in a corner it has become a "tap". :smile:


Are you freakin' kidding me? You think you are "calling me out"? Now I think you are just trying to piss me off. 

I didn't post my first reply to this thread with the intention of writing a "how-to" manual on using this technique and now you are obsessing over semantics. So let me put it in simple terms so you can understand it Oh Supreme Dog Training Guru.

Big dog and/or extreme fixation = jab
Small dog and/or light fixation = tap

You have to be able to evaluate the proper context relative to the size of the dog and the level of fixation on the fly to use this technique. If you think there is some black-and-white way to describe this technique, there isn't. It requires thinking and evaluation based on experience in order to execute it properly. 



RawFedDogs said:


> They are mutually exclusive. You can not under any circumstances have a postiively trained dog in the presence of negative reinforcement. The negative cancels out the positive. You see? My dogs have never in their lives been negatively punished for improper behavior. They trust me completely to take care of them and not to harm them in any way. They don't have to do anything I ask them to. There is no negative consequence if they don't. However they follow my wishes every time without exception UNLESS they don't understand what I want. I can't tell if they don't understand because they look at me with a questioning look on their face. :smile:


Again, YOU are under the assumption that the use of this technique causes a negative response. I fundamentally disagree. Why do you polarize things like this. If it isn't good, it's bad. If it isn't black, it's white. If it isn't flat. it's round. If it isn't positive, it's negative. 

From my experience, it's neither positive or negative. It's neutral as far as the dog is concerned. They don't dwell on it. They get it, come to attention, and it's over. Again, if you ever used this technique or have seen it demonstrated properly, you will clearly see that it has no negative effect if executed properly.



RawFedDogs said:


> And it cancels out all the positive you did. ONE negative response from you can cancel out weeks of postiive reinforcement. The dog learns, "Maybe I can't trust him not to harm me" and they become wary of you.


So now you know what dogs think? Wow, that's amazing. I don't know what they think, only how they react. Their reaction to this technique does not support your amazing knowledge of how they think.

Again, you are coming from the premise that there is a negative response from this and I say there isn't. I have stated that this is not a technique to use on all dogs, some that are extremely fearful, skittish, or nervous would not benefit from it and yes, it would undermine whatever positive reinforcement you are giving. But like I said, you have to THINK and understand the proper context before using this.



RawFedDogs said:


> One of the first things you learn as a postiive reinforcement trainer is how to get the dogs attention every single time. If it's been properly taught, calling his name is all thats necessary.


That's great if you know the dog, it knows its name and you have some kind of relationship with it. This is useless if the dog is unknown to you, or you have no idea how well it is trained or even if it is trained. 



RawFedDogs said:


> OR he thinks, "What the hell does that SOB want this time. Why can't he leave me alone?"


Yep, there's more from that amazing canine crystal ball of yours. Boy, I wish I knew what dogs are thinking! :wink:



RawFedDogs said:


> Of course you do. It's the same as a jerk on the leash.


Sure, because you watch me do this all the time, right? You know everything RFD. Man, how arrogant can you be?



RawFedDogs said:


> I know. Anytime you do anything negative to any animal, it sticks with them. They most definately will, in time, become hand shy.


Yet both of my current dogs came to me completely dysfunctional and hand-shy and now neither one of them are. Nor is any dog I have ever dealt with. Nice theory RFD, but it holds no water with me.

Look you do things your way and I'll do mine my way and we'll agree to not discuss it again. I will hold up my end of the bargain by not posting anything related to dog behavior here ever again. You're a mod, you can do what you want but I'm done with this topic.


----------



## Maab (Nov 9, 2009)

danemama08 said:


> I am glad that you went with the idea of leaving your dog alone while eating. It will ultimately be better for your relationship with your dog.


natalie, thanks for all the help. You're right. I felt so bad after the straggling with the dog. All that 'fighting' at meal time can make things worse. After all, the dog is just fine all day around, why mess with it.


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

Maab said:


> natalie, thanks for all the help. You're right. I felt so bad after the straggling with the dog. All that 'fighting' at meal time can make things worse. After all, the dog is just fine all day around, why mess with it.


Don't feel bad. You were basing your original ideas around outdated and incorrect techniques and ways of thinking. The fact that you have understood what we are saying and doing what is best is commendable :biggrin:


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

JayJayisme said:


> I don't know if you are really as arrogant as you come across in your posts or not


People often confuse confidence with arrogance. I am very confident in what I say. I was a professional dog trainer for 15 years. I have worked with thousands of dogs of all breeds, sizes, and temperments.



> That is your opinion, I have a different one. Humans primarily communicate verbally with each other. Dogs communicate using body language, energy, and touch. You don't see a bunch of dogs laying around barking at each other to communicate the way people talk to each other. They mostly use body language and touch. To use dog psychology mimics that behavior.


No, Jay, It's not an opinion. Psychology goes much much deeper than mere simple communication. I have been communicating with dogs for many years. I know how it's done.



> I get the distinct impression that you have never used this technique, or have seen it properly demonstrated. If you had, you would know that they damned well know what you want. All you want them to do is pay attention.


In my 15 years, I've used most every technique that has ever been thought of. It is not difficult to get a dog to pay attention without jabbing him in the neck. I stopped using physical methods of getting a dogs attention years ago.



> Dogs bite each other all the time to communicate. Sometimes it's so gentle you may not even notice it but they do it all the time. A poke/jab/tap (see below) on the neck is interpreted by them as "I need to pay attention". It doesn't matter if it comes from my fingers, my mouth, or a stick. They get it, you don't.


Dogs don't either. Of course they will look at you after you jab them in the neck. Any animal would. What I'm saying is that there are better more humane ways to get that attention. Rather than argue with someone with many more years of experience than you and obviously more experience than you, you should try to learn.



> You are assuming that this is "for reasons they don't understand", which I fundamentally disagree with. They get it...really!


What makes you think so? Just because they look at you? What animal wouldn't?



> If I was suffering from A.D.D. and a *person* I know was trying to teach me something and to get my attention waved their hand in front of my face and said "Okay, you need to focus and pay attention now" I don't think I would develop negative feelings toward that *person*. A poke/jab/tap (see below) on the neck is the doggie equivalent to this.


No, its not. The doggy equivalent is waving your hand in front of his face and say "Okay, you need to focus and pay attention now." Jabbing in the neck is entirely a different act and a very negative one.



> Are you freakin' kidding me? You think you are "calling me out"? Now I think you are just trying to piss me off.


Hehe, It apears I succeeded. :smile:



> I didn't post my first reply to this thread with the intention of writing a "how-to" manual on using this technique and now you are obsessing over semantics. So let me put it in simple terms so you can understand it Oh Supreme Dog Training Guru.
> 
> Big dog and/or extreme fixation = jab
> Small dog and/or light fixation = tap


OR ... a knowledgable person calls the dog's name and/or snaps his fingers. Nothing else is needed, especially a negative act such as a jab in the neck.



> You have to be able to evaluate the proper context relative to the size of the dog and the level of fixation on the fly to use this technique.


Using a proper technique and size of dog has no bearing at all.



> If you think there is some black-and-white way to describe this technique, there isn't. It requires thinking and evaluation based on experience in order to execute it properly.


Jay, Jay, Jay ... Pay attention for a minute. There is no proper way to jab a dog in the neck. Period. It is never needed by someone with even rudemenatary knowledge of dog psychology. 15 years of working with thousands of dogs taught me that.



> Again, YOU are under the assumption that the use of this technique causes a negative response. I fundamentally disagree. Why do you polarize things like this. If it isn't good, it's bad. If it isn't black, it's white. If it isn't flat. it's round. If it isn't positive, it's negative.


Right. I'm not talking about response, I'm talking about emotions. You failed to answer my question about how you would react if someone jabbed you in the neck with their fingertips. I'm not talking abotu doggie equilavents about anything. I'm talking about you getting jabbed in the neck. Would you have a positive feeling about it? I don't think so.



> From my experience, it's neither positive or negative. It's neutral as far as the dog is concerned.


I don't see how you can describe a jab in the neck as anything other than negative. There is no way on the face of the earth that it has no meaning at all. If it's neutral, it doesn't get the dog to look at you.



> They don't dwell on it. They get it, come to attention, and it's over. Again, if you ever used this technique or have seen it demonstrated properly, you will clearly see that it has no negative effect if executed properly.


Again, there is no way to jab a dog in the neck and it not be a negative act. I don't care how properly you want to describe it.



> So now you know what dogs think? Wow, that's amazing.


Yes I do and it's not all that amazing. They are dogs. Their overall IQ is pretty low.



> I don't know what they think, only how they react. Their reaction to this technique does not support your amazing knowledge of how they think.


In that case, you are missing a lot. It is very important in dog training to know what the dog is thinking at all times.



> Again, you are coming from the premise that there is a negative response from this and I say there isn't. I have stated that this is not a technique to use on all dogs, some that are extremely fearful, skittish, or nervous would not benefit from it and yes, it would undermine whatever positive reinforcement you are giving. But like I said, you have to THINK and understand the proper context before using this.


You are expending a lot of energy trying to justify jabbing a dog in the neck when it is entirely unnecessary. It can't be a positive experience for the dog and there is no way he likes it. You don't have to be a genius to see that.



> That's great if you know the dog, it knows its name and you have some kind of relationship with it. This is useless if the dog is unknown to you, or you have no idea how well it is trained or even if it is trained.


I would wager that i've worked with a hundred times more strange dogs than you. I know I've worked with a hundred times more problem dogs than you. I don't need to jab them in the neck or jerk their leash to get their attention. I don't need physical contact with them to get their attention. 



> Yep, there's more from that amazing canine crystal ball of yours. Boy, I wish I knew what dogs are thinking! :wink:


There are some good books that could teach you if you are really interested.



> Sure, because you watch me do this all the time, right? You know everything RFD. Man, how arrogant can you be?


Not arrogant, confident. I have seen many people like you trying to control dogs. There is nothing unique in your methods. I have seen them all before and even used most of them until I learned better ways. You should always be on the lookout for better methods. Don't learn one method and think you know all you need to know.



> Yet both of my current dogs came to me completely dysfunctional and hand-shy and now neither one of them are. Nor is any dog I have ever dealt with. Nice theory RFD, but it holds no water with me.


Cool. I've dealt with 1,000 dysfunctional dogs. Experience has taught me that jabbing them in the neck is not necessary. There are better, more humane, just as effective ways to get their attention.



> Look you do things your way and I'll do mine my way and we'll agree to not discuss it again.


I'm not going to agree not to discuss it again. I discuss positive reinforcement dog training often and will many times in the future. :smile:



> You're a mod, you can do what you want but I'm done with this topic.


Me being a mod has nothing to do with any discussion I participate in.


----------



## claybuster (Dec 18, 2008)

My thoughts:
Jay makes the most sense in his posts. These folks who believe in coddling their pets 100% of the time end up with the spoiled rotten dogs who will ignore you 99% of the time...unless you come around with food or treats. See the commercial with the couple in the car squeezing the toys making the squeaky sounds...they find the dog and it runs away. That is what you end up with, a dog that won't listen.

Food bowl aggression stems from a few things, one being there was a serious problem in the past with nutrition, the dog maybe concerned about when his next meal is coming. When the dog gets something, now feels he has to guard it and protect, until it gets digested. The dog could be malnourished to begin with and has to make sure nothing happens to this meal, too important for the body to sacrifice if someone should happen to take it away. I would offer more food than what he normally gets for just a time being till this goes away. So, he's eating and you come in and he shows aggression. Let him know you would never be so cruel as to remove something the body is calling for, so have another piece of meat ready. Put it on the ground several feet away from where he is eating. He may drop the one piece he's working on to check out the new food. Now go over and move the first food further away. If he get aggressive and drops the new piece to rescue the first, bring in a 3rd piece of food and a 4th to scattered about the floor. Shuffle them around and might grow tired of trying to claim each piece at that moment, and concentrate on finishing his meal. Your dog needs to understand your are not there to take food away but rather offer all the food he need to maintain proper nutrition. I think when the dog realizes there really is an unlimited supply of food around, I will not go around hungry and getting all the nourishment required, the food aggression will become a thing of the past, understanding no need to be aggressive. Also, just let the dog enjoy whatever meal and when you enter the room just ignore him. Let him eat in peace after he realizes, we got plenty of food around here for me and it's not going away. When that realization becomes instilled in his head, I am not going to be hungry around here, the aggression should become a thing of the past and you can resume with regular feedings, one piece at a time.


----------



## claybuster (Dec 18, 2008)

RawFedDogs said:


> Cool. I've dealt with 1,000 dysfunctional dogs. Experience has taught me that jabbing them in the neck is not necessary. There are better, more humane, just as effective ways to get their attention.


OMG, you make it sound like this guy is ready to slice his dogs throat with the constant references to jabs in the neck. I never got that impressive from reading his posts. It is perfectly fine to touch dog in a manner to get some attention like a simple tap on the shoulder lightly. That is all he was talking about, not these sharp, hard, piercing jabs like he's in a boxing ring with his dog.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

He said, "jab" ... I took that to mean "jab". There is a difference between touch and jab. He didn't say "touch". You are putting meaning that wasn't there. Of course you are being your usual argumentative self with no basis.


----------



## Maab (Nov 9, 2009)

claybuster said:


> My thoughts:
> Jay makes the most sense in his posts. These folks who believe in coddling their pets 100% of the time end up with the spoiled rotten dogs who will ignore you 99% of the time...unless you come around with food or treats. See the commercial with the couple in the car squeezing the toys making the squeaky sounds...they find the dog and it runs away. That is what you end up with, a dog that won't listen.
> 
> Food bowl aggression stems from a few things, one being there was a serious problem in the past with nutrition, the dog maybe concerned about when his next meal is coming. When the dog gets something, now feels he has to guard it and protect, until it gets digested. The dog could be malnourished to begin with and has to make sure nothing happens to this meal, too important for the body to sacrifice if someone should happen to take it away. I would offer more food than what he normally gets for just a time being till this goes away. So, he's eating and you come in and he shows aggression. Let him know you would never be so cruel as to remove something the body is calling for, so have another piece of meat ready. Put it on the ground several feet away from where he is eating. He may drop the one piece he's working on to check out the new food. Now go over and move the first food further away. If he get aggressive and drops the new piece to rescue the first, bring in a 3rd piece of food and a 4th to scattered about the floor. Shuffle them around and might grow tired of trying to claim each piece at that moment, and concentrate on finishing his meal. Your dog needs to understand your are not there to take food away but rather offer all the food he need to maintain proper nutrition. I think when the dog realizes there really is an unlimited supply of food around, I will not go around hungry and getting all the nourishment required, the food aggression will become a thing of the past, understanding no need to be aggressive. Also, just let the dog enjoy whatever meal and when you enter the room just ignore him. Let him eat in peace after he realizes, we got plenty of food around here for me and it's not going away. When that realization becomes instilled in his head, I am not going to be hungry around here, the aggression should become a thing of the past and you can resume with regular feedings, one piece at a time.


from reading your post it seems to me that you are indeed on the same wavelenght with RFD. Dropping extra bites of food on the floor sounds to me as a positive training as RFD suggested. Isn't it?
Since I stopped trying to take the food away from her mouth she stopped growling when I get close by during a meal.


----------



## JayJayisme (Aug 2, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> He said, "jab" ... I took that to mean "jab". There is a difference between touch and jab. He didn't say "touch". You are putting meaning that wasn't there. Of course you are being your usual argumentative self with no basis.


Just gotta' beat a dead horse and dwell on semantics eh RFD? Actually, *you* are putting meaning into this that isn't there. I did say jab and it was because when I wrote that I was thinking about this technique in the context of my neighbor's big, fat, misbehaving Rottweiler. It's a jab to me but he barely notices it. When I do it to him he sometimes turns his head very slowly and looks at me like, "Oh good, you're going to scratch my neck now, right?". 

On the other hand, my dogs, which are a lot smaller, get a much lower intensity touch, so I said touch in the context of them. If I touched you the same way you'd barely notice it. Their necks are sensitive and it doesn't take much. 

Anyway, I already explained all of this but you insist on focusing on the words without context and dwell on them with no regard for what I was trying to portray through them. So whatever. 

Amazingly, of all people here, CB hit the nail on the head by equating my use of touch with tapping someone on the shoulder. I never even thought of the parallel but that is exactly the purpose. But you can keep dwelling on the horror of it all and polarizing my words. In the mean time, me and my dogs are going to go out and play. :biggrin:


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

This is a medium of words. Since we can't see what's going on and have no other way to judge it, words are all we have. Thats why it's important to choose your words carefuly when describing actions. There is a big difference between jab and touch. With small dogs a small jab is still a jab. Larger dogs probably wouldn't notice a jab that is very disconcerting to a small dog. Either way, I was merely going by your words. It's all I have.

Have fun playing with the dogs. I just got in from walking with mine. :biggrin:


----------



## JayJayisme (Aug 2, 2009)

Okay, fair enough but it's equally difficult to predict what someone is going to picture in their head no matter what words you choose. Plus, we don't always have the time to carefully consider every single word we use when we are trying to quickly give someone some information to help their situation. If I was writing copy for an advertisement for a client, of course I would choose each and every word very carefully. If you pop into some forum for a moment and think you can post something that can help someone, one might not have the luxury of time to consider every single word or their implications or mull it over before you hit the "Submit Reply" button.

Admittedly when I pictured myself using this technique as I was first trying to describe it, I pictured a few situations I've been in with a big Rotweiller (the worst case scenario). As we got deeper into the discussion, my recollection of instances that I've used it broadened to other dogs. In my mind, I presumed that anyone reading this would understand that I was focused on the technique in general, not the nuances of how much touch to use in each specific circumstance. Like I said, I wasn't writing a step-by-step instruction manual on how to use touch and I was assuming that anybody who knows dogs, which I think is most everyone here, should be able to figure that part out on a case-by-case basis should they choose to use this technique.

Nuff said. Happy holidays all.

Jay


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

JayJayisme said:


> Okay, fair enough but it's equally difficult to predict what someone is going to picture in their head no matter what words you choose.


Yeah, exactly. I always have a movie running in my mind as I read posts. Particularly training type posts. If the movie is inaccurate, everything I say in response is total BS. That has happened more than once. :smile:



> Plus, we don't always have the time to carefully consider every single word we use when we are trying to quickly give someone some information to help their situation.


After 15 years as a dog trainer, I'm used to talking to people and understanding what they are REALLY saying. For example, the people who used to call telling me how aggressive their new puppy is, I know he isn't. And the guy who said his pitbull puppy wouldn't "take ownership of the yard". I knew exactly what he was saying and I gave him an ear full. :smile:


----------

