Today our 8 yr old border collie bitch Brigan was spayed.
Not a big event for most dogs, pretty routine surgery, done every day around the country. For this girl though, it is a big event, the end of an era so to speak.
Brigan has whelped 3 outstanding litters of border collie puppies for us over the years. Brigan has been bred to my male Pete three times. Each litter producing outstanding puppies. Pete has his share of genetics to claim fame to for the pups, but Brigan was the perfect compliment for him. What he lacked in build, (straight front legs) she made up for with her stocky perfectly square build. Pete comes from a hard working line, Brigan tempered that hardness. Pete has great drive, Brigan has greater. Had I known back when I got her what I know now, I would have stopped training my GSD Allie immediately and focused on the wee border collie bitch I got off an email list.
Thats right folks. She was a cast off. Someone had gotten her as a gift that did not want her, put her in a kennel run for the first 7 mos of her life, and when she got out and started chasing their horses, was going to plug her with a .22. A neighbor who worked at the Vet School I then worked at, stopped them, rescued her, papers and all, and then sought someone at the Vet school to finish the rescue. I was the first to respond and went to look at her. When I walked into her office, there she was in the back of the room cowed under a desk. I sat down on the floor and she immediately came and got into my lap. Somehow dogs know dog people. I said I would take her and find a home for her.
Brigan did not even know a name when I got her, she was used to her food being thrown over a chain link fence onto the ground. She was so sweet, so agile, and so afraid of people. She came out of her shell with time and kindness and the touch of my fiance' Tiffanies hand. She went on to be a wildlife scat detection dog and a therapy dog. She plays with the "redball" (a story for another day) as if it were a rowdy and unruly sheep that needs to be kept in it's place. Her agility is astounding. She is the Houdini of dogs, escaping anything and every enclosure she has ever been placed in. Her agility on any object is uncanny and beautiful.....The kind that takes your breath away and at the same time makes you want to yell at the top of your lungs after you watch her scale a 6 ft chain link kennel flat footed, or wiggle her way through a cattle panel on the roof of a kennel, pressing her back in the corner so she does not fall, as she slides one shoulder at a time through a square in the panel you SWEAR is too little for her to squeeze through. Then stands on top of the run, balancing on the slim bars and jumps onto the ground like floating from a cloud....Watching her sail over the back of your couch as if it were inches off the ground.....never missing a step and going on to retrieve a toy thrown for the other dogs..........NO, ..Placing her never became an option, and as time wore on, having been raised with a family that bred GSD's, my eyes would run over her short stocky lines, her drive, her temperament, her pedigree and ponder...........I wonder what she and Pete would produce?
I did my research. I found out that she was descended from one of the greatest cattle herding border collies of all time. Her sire was a son of Keith Gileon's Rockin G Spurs. Spurs is one of the winningest cattle herding border collies of all times. His pictures revealed a dog with immense drive and courage and yet gentleness, pictured with Keith's young son. I researched and called and found that many of the other dogs in her pedigree were actually working ranch dogs, assisting cutting horses and ranch horses in their daily duties, eventually tracing back to imports from Scotland by some of the founding herding people of Texas. Not bad for a free throw away dog.
Physically she is one of the most sound dogs I have ever seen. Good hips, good elbows, good eyes, nice square body, good proportions, not too big, not too small.........just right she was. When Pete and she hit around four years of age we decided to give it a try. I wanted a pup from Pete and really felt like this cross would produce something great. I think maybe that was one of the best decisions of my life.
The first litter of six everyone thought was a fluke. You cannot have all six pups in a litter make it as successful working dogs. Doesn't happen...........well folks, I'm here to tell ya, it can! All six have gone on to become outstanding search dogs in their respective disciplines. All are certified in HRD land with a national agency, once is also certified in area search and one in trailing with national agencies as well. Four of the six have had finds. Two are also therapy dogs. This litter just turned 4 years old and I continue to marvel at them, they are amazing. I have been lucky, getting to watch them all grow up as myself and my teammates kept all the pups and trained them together. It has been an incredible journey and a topic for another day.
Litter two is a work in progress, all six just having passed a year of age. One is a working herding dog, One is in training to be a disaster dog live, one a disaster dog HR, one an HR dog, and the last a wilderness area dog. I expect their first certifications to be coming this fall.
Litter three was not of my making. I always give people a hard time when they say they have had a "whoops" litter, so it is no surprise that it would happen to me. I'm grateful however, to Brigan and Pete on making the decision without us. Pete himself was from a Whoops litter, so it is fitting that I keep a son from this litter. With this litter though, brought the beginning of the end of the era. Three litters is enough good work for any bitch in my book and the decision was already made to spay her after this litter. I got the enjoyment of raising these guys over the winter through the holidays and have never enjoyed a litter so much! I ended up keeping two for myself as I knew this was the last lot, no more, end of publication. There would never be another chance to own one of these great dogs. How this litter turns out remains to be seen. One is in KS being trained to be a disaster dog, three are in TX being trained for various disciplines, and two went to MT, sadly one of them met a tragic ending. I have no less optimism for this litter than the previous ones. They are full of promise, they have drive, focus, nerve strength, sociability............all the things a good SAR dog needs to become a success.
To which we owe Brigan a lot. Yes, Pete is their daddy, and no one is prouder of that dog than me. He has been my buddy, my partner and my teacher over the years, but Brigan shares equally, maybe a little more in the success of the pups. She reared them with a gentle benevolence that has given them all a manner of ease I cannot quite describe. All I know is that there is not a task shown them that they have not been able to accomplish thus far. Their limitations lie within the handlers own, and the handlers likewise, realizing what little jewels they have been gifted with have rose up to meet the challenges of such a dog. I am ever grateful to my teammates for the way they have brought L1 and L2 pups along.
Am I bragging on my own dogs? Yes. and if you were unlucky enough to miss out on one of these pups.......well all I can say is I'm truly sorry...............it is really too bad there will be no more.
So thank you Brigan for what you have given us and the world. Your children have already brought closure to families and peace with their search work. They have brought smiles to the elderly, children, and patients of hospitals and nursing homes. You will never receive a ribbon, an award, a certificate but you have given more to the world in your short life than many dogs give in a lifetime. Enjoy your new status as the retired matriarch of Rothcala Kennel & Farm! Good girl Brigan, good girl.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Sunday, June 19, 2011
That dog wont hunt............seriously folks.
Despite having many years of dog training experience, I found quickly that SAR Dog training is a whole other world. For all endeavors I have ever trained for, my goal was to have my dog comply to my command. I did not want them to think for themselves or problem solve, just comply with my command. SAR dogs must go a step further. They MUST think for themselves. They must be so committed to their odor that they will go through hell and back to get to the source of their target odor. This takes the right dog. Any dog can be taught obedience. Any dog can learn to target agility objects. How good they become is a combination of the handlers skills, the dogs personality, and circumstances. So it is with SAR dogs, but the dogs personality, the innate lump of clay the handler is tasked with molding into a working partner is far more important. I can take a dog with a shy temperament and make them into a great obedience dog, teaching them to focus on me and only me in the ring, despite all the scarey sights and sounds going on around them. But I promise you when I retire from the ring, the dog will fall apart unless I continue to heel them all the way back to the car or their kennel. My SAR dog cannot do this. He must adjust and quickly to whatever situation I throw him in. The SAR dog must have a soundness of temperament that many other performance dogs do not, and especially more so than most pets.
Hence comes the problem of people joining a SAR team with their "pet". Pets are selected for our enjoyment. They are not selected for nerve strength, drive, focus.......in fact many a good SAR dog prospect comes from cast offs rescued from shelters across the nation because the family "Just could not DEAL with the dog". Many pet owners see news articles and become invigorated at the possiblity of using their dog to help people. That is great. What is not great is the efforts it takes to convince them that "rover" is not cut out to be a SAR dog.
If you are in a position on a team where you assist in the evaluation and assessment of new team members you are going to have to cross this bridge at some time. How you handle it will have a significant impact on everyone involved. Sometimes you will get great potential handlers with lousy dogs. Other times you will get great dogs with lousy handlers. It has to be a package deal. If the handler has potential but the dog does not, will they get another dog? Will they train themselves until they can? or is their ego tied to the dog at hand. This business is not about egos. It is about the mission. Handlers who cannot separate the two often unwittingly do damage to the SAR community through their interactions with law enforcement and other responsible entities. But I digress.........
What is even worse is when a team accepts a sub-standard dog who does not have the right stuff to start out with. It does a myriad of damage to the team, the handlers, and even to the dog itself. How many of you out there have stopped and asked yourself, does my dog have his hand raised for this? or is it me that has my hand raised?
I am not saying anything that has not been said before, by a myriad of experts and master trainers who have spent their life training detector dogs. I am simply repeating it in hopes that if their words did not reach the minds and hearts of handlers who need to hear this, mine will.
The old saying my Great Aunt has said always comes to mind. "You cant make a silk purse out of a sows ear". Dogs are born with innate qualities. They have a genetic predisposition for behaviors. While it is true we can guide, mentor, and even enhance their genetics through raising, we cannot create something that is not there. If a dog is scared of things in it's environment, no amount of exposure is going to make the dog good enough to be a SAR dog. Now, I am not talking about the quirky developmental stages puppies often go through. I have seen many a great SAR dog be a squirrel for a day at a given point in their development as a pup. However, a dog that is scared of people, scared of trees, poles, grass, etc is not going to make it. Continuing to pressure the dog in SAR dog training imho borders on abuse. The dog is stressed, the dog is not happy, why force these conditions down the dogs throat?
SAR dog candidates should have the the drive, focus, and nerve strength required for the job from the get go. Like nerve strength, drive cannot be created if it is not there. You can manipulate what is there to your advantage and do what appears to be "drive building", but what you are really doing is only channeling the drive to a purpose. You are pulling out all the innate drive that dog has and focusing it on a task. This requires that drive to already be present. You cannot create what does not exist. This is a huge mistake made by many novice handlers, myself included.
My first dog was a good dog and had fair drive. I made many mistakes with her which definitely undermined the drive she did have however, I had to stop and re-evaluate everything when I obtained Pete because he showed me the level of drive I would require of all my future SAR candidates. Mistakes were not as big an issue with him because his drive was so strong it could counter my screw ups. Now, my first dog had a find in her short career and she taught me many things however, once I had a "better" dog I immediately retired her.
I probably would reject her now as a candidate based on what I have learned and she is far above most dogs people bring to the team for evaluation. As a very wise woman has told me, if the answer is maybe, say no. (thank you TMac and ShirleyH)
Perhaps that seems harsh. It is. This is a serious job we are doing. Someone's life may one day depend on the dogs we train. Explain to a family member whose loved one has died in the woods because that "maybe" dog decided today it was too hot, too cold, too wet, too stickery...(etc ad nausuem), and missed their loved one. Because that "maybe" dog has always struggled to stay up with the rest of the dogs, but the handler is so good, we don't want to loose them. Explain that "maybe" dog to the family who has lost their loved one........died, gone, not ever coming back. Maybe doesn't look so good now does it?
If I just offended you then my words are lost on deaf ears. Don't bother to read on, it's only going to get worse. If you are offended then you are one of the ones who NEEDS to hear these words because if you are offended you are probably training or fielding a "maybe" or worse...........a "WTF are you thinking!"
So back to the dog that should never be admitted as a candidate to begin with. Yes, I call those "WTFAYT"
(what the F are you thinking?!). These dogs lack the drive, lack the nerve strength from the get go. Everyone says we can work on it. NO WE CAN'T. If it does not exist you cannot create it. See the definition again of what to do with Maybes.
How does taking on one of these dogs damage the team? Well, it causes splits. Those that are knowledgeable enough to say WTFAYT? are ostracized and accused of not being team players because they do not want to waste the team or the owners time, let alone, stress the dog all to hell over months and months of meaningless attempts to force the dog to be something it is not. Needless to say, this is not good for building team unity, morale, and dedication.
How does this damage the handler. In essence, you are lying to them (and yourselves) if you tell them "we can work on it". Somewhere deep in your heart, you KNOW the dog is not going to make it. Telling the handlers this only causes them to have false hope. And..........and it will happen................and when the time comes that the owner finally has to be told that the dog will not make it, ANGER. You have told them for months, maybe years, that the dog is going to make it. Now you say, ok, we were wrong, lets stop training. How much time and emotional investment have they made? This is where team splits often come from, to the detriment of the SAR community. This now ANGRY handler who is thinking they are being screwed, perhaps your jealous of their dog, instead of the truth, now takes half the team and goes and starts a new one, with even less knowledgeable leadership and even worse dogs.
Someone once told me a team achieves competence only as high as the team leader does. I believe this to be very true, especially with smaller teams. So, you have your new split off former teammate guiding a new team with their very bad SAR dog.........what do you think THEIR candidates are going to be like?
Now now, I'm not saying all teams are that way. I split off from a former team because I did not agree with the training methods and philosophies, nothing more. However, often split off teams are the case quoted above.
Now, what about the poor dog? The prisoner in all of this. This dog is forced to do something it does not want to do. These dogs show signs of stress, drawn back lips, grass eating, body carriage, you name it, get a DVM Behaviorist on the scene and they can point it all out to you, but the handlers never see this. Sad, because it is upon this poor dog our whole hopes rest. If the handlers manage to certify the dogs, the dogs will still never perform as well as a dog that wants to do the job, and will often shut down. Some handlers literally will continue to run through evaluators until they find someone who will pass them or the dog has a good day. This of course are for external certifications. Split off team from above will probably do their own standards and evaluate their own dogs. Need I say more?
The bottom line is the mission, the victim. They are who this is most unfair to. Those of us who train SAR dogs have a moral obligation to train and field the best. Someone said to me last year, "well, not everyone can have a super dog". Well I sure as hell hope they can! Please do not bring your sub optimal sar dog to look for me if I ever go missing. Bring the SUPASTAR! I want the dog that WANTS to find me. We owe the families of our victims no less, and if you are not going to go for that level of SAR dog, please.........go do flyball or something where someone's life is not on the line.
Cheers!
Hence comes the problem of people joining a SAR team with their "pet". Pets are selected for our enjoyment. They are not selected for nerve strength, drive, focus.......in fact many a good SAR dog prospect comes from cast offs rescued from shelters across the nation because the family "Just could not DEAL with the dog". Many pet owners see news articles and become invigorated at the possiblity of using their dog to help people. That is great. What is not great is the efforts it takes to convince them that "rover" is not cut out to be a SAR dog.
If you are in a position on a team where you assist in the evaluation and assessment of new team members you are going to have to cross this bridge at some time. How you handle it will have a significant impact on everyone involved. Sometimes you will get great potential handlers with lousy dogs. Other times you will get great dogs with lousy handlers. It has to be a package deal. If the handler has potential but the dog does not, will they get another dog? Will they train themselves until they can? or is their ego tied to the dog at hand. This business is not about egos. It is about the mission. Handlers who cannot separate the two often unwittingly do damage to the SAR community through their interactions with law enforcement and other responsible entities. But I digress.........
What is even worse is when a team accepts a sub-standard dog who does not have the right stuff to start out with. It does a myriad of damage to the team, the handlers, and even to the dog itself. How many of you out there have stopped and asked yourself, does my dog have his hand raised for this? or is it me that has my hand raised?
I am not saying anything that has not been said before, by a myriad of experts and master trainers who have spent their life training detector dogs. I am simply repeating it in hopes that if their words did not reach the minds and hearts of handlers who need to hear this, mine will.
The old saying my Great Aunt has said always comes to mind. "You cant make a silk purse out of a sows ear". Dogs are born with innate qualities. They have a genetic predisposition for behaviors. While it is true we can guide, mentor, and even enhance their genetics through raising, we cannot create something that is not there. If a dog is scared of things in it's environment, no amount of exposure is going to make the dog good enough to be a SAR dog. Now, I am not talking about the quirky developmental stages puppies often go through. I have seen many a great SAR dog be a squirrel for a day at a given point in their development as a pup. However, a dog that is scared of people, scared of trees, poles, grass, etc is not going to make it. Continuing to pressure the dog in SAR dog training imho borders on abuse. The dog is stressed, the dog is not happy, why force these conditions down the dogs throat?
SAR dog candidates should have the the drive, focus, and nerve strength required for the job from the get go. Like nerve strength, drive cannot be created if it is not there. You can manipulate what is there to your advantage and do what appears to be "drive building", but what you are really doing is only channeling the drive to a purpose. You are pulling out all the innate drive that dog has and focusing it on a task. This requires that drive to already be present. You cannot create what does not exist. This is a huge mistake made by many novice handlers, myself included.
My first dog was a good dog and had fair drive. I made many mistakes with her which definitely undermined the drive she did have however, I had to stop and re-evaluate everything when I obtained Pete because he showed me the level of drive I would require of all my future SAR candidates. Mistakes were not as big an issue with him because his drive was so strong it could counter my screw ups. Now, my first dog had a find in her short career and she taught me many things however, once I had a "better" dog I immediately retired her.
I probably would reject her now as a candidate based on what I have learned and she is far above most dogs people bring to the team for evaluation. As a very wise woman has told me, if the answer is maybe, say no. (thank you TMac and ShirleyH)
Perhaps that seems harsh. It is. This is a serious job we are doing. Someone's life may one day depend on the dogs we train. Explain to a family member whose loved one has died in the woods because that "maybe" dog decided today it was too hot, too cold, too wet, too stickery...(etc ad nausuem), and missed their loved one. Because that "maybe" dog has always struggled to stay up with the rest of the dogs, but the handler is so good, we don't want to loose them. Explain that "maybe" dog to the family who has lost their loved one........died, gone, not ever coming back. Maybe doesn't look so good now does it?
If I just offended you then my words are lost on deaf ears. Don't bother to read on, it's only going to get worse. If you are offended then you are one of the ones who NEEDS to hear these words because if you are offended you are probably training or fielding a "maybe" or worse...........a "WTF are you thinking!"
So back to the dog that should never be admitted as a candidate to begin with. Yes, I call those "WTFAYT"
(what the F are you thinking?!). These dogs lack the drive, lack the nerve strength from the get go. Everyone says we can work on it. NO WE CAN'T. If it does not exist you cannot create it. See the definition again of what to do with Maybes.
How does taking on one of these dogs damage the team? Well, it causes splits. Those that are knowledgeable enough to say WTFAYT? are ostracized and accused of not being team players because they do not want to waste the team or the owners time, let alone, stress the dog all to hell over months and months of meaningless attempts to force the dog to be something it is not. Needless to say, this is not good for building team unity, morale, and dedication.
How does this damage the handler. In essence, you are lying to them (and yourselves) if you tell them "we can work on it". Somewhere deep in your heart, you KNOW the dog is not going to make it. Telling the handlers this only causes them to have false hope. And..........and it will happen................and when the time comes that the owner finally has to be told that the dog will not make it, ANGER. You have told them for months, maybe years, that the dog is going to make it. Now you say, ok, we were wrong, lets stop training. How much time and emotional investment have they made? This is where team splits often come from, to the detriment of the SAR community. This now ANGRY handler who is thinking they are being screwed, perhaps your jealous of their dog, instead of the truth, now takes half the team and goes and starts a new one, with even less knowledgeable leadership and even worse dogs.
Someone once told me a team achieves competence only as high as the team leader does. I believe this to be very true, especially with smaller teams. So, you have your new split off former teammate guiding a new team with their very bad SAR dog.........what do you think THEIR candidates are going to be like?
Now now, I'm not saying all teams are that way. I split off from a former team because I did not agree with the training methods and philosophies, nothing more. However, often split off teams are the case quoted above.
Now, what about the poor dog? The prisoner in all of this. This dog is forced to do something it does not want to do. These dogs show signs of stress, drawn back lips, grass eating, body carriage, you name it, get a DVM Behaviorist on the scene and they can point it all out to you, but the handlers never see this. Sad, because it is upon this poor dog our whole hopes rest. If the handlers manage to certify the dogs, the dogs will still never perform as well as a dog that wants to do the job, and will often shut down. Some handlers literally will continue to run through evaluators until they find someone who will pass them or the dog has a good day. This of course are for external certifications. Split off team from above will probably do their own standards and evaluate their own dogs. Need I say more?
The bottom line is the mission, the victim. They are who this is most unfair to. Those of us who train SAR dogs have a moral obligation to train and field the best. Someone said to me last year, "well, not everyone can have a super dog". Well I sure as hell hope they can! Please do not bring your sub optimal sar dog to look for me if I ever go missing. Bring the SUPASTAR! I want the dog that WANTS to find me. We owe the families of our victims no less, and if you are not going to go for that level of SAR dog, please.........go do flyball or something where someone's life is not on the line.
Cheers!
Training perspectives
Everyone who trains a dog knows the old joke "The only thing two dog trainers can agree on is the third one is wrong". Stupid but true. Dog Trainers come in all flavors. Some are so sugary sweet you want to puke, while others are so bitter you want to puke as well. But every once in a while you get those that are just right. Those that do not train a specific "Method" but rather read the dog and the situation and use what is appropriate. These are the trainers I prefer to work with and learn from.
Everyone thinks I am against e-collars. I'm not. There are valuable uses for them when used correctly. The problem is that most handlers and even so-called E-collar experts do not know what they are doing. Some even propose that E-collars are simply a form of positive re-enforcement. WTF? Are you kidding me?
Obviously, there is a lack of understanding of scientific terminology of +R. So lets go over this to eliminate any confusion out there. "The Principles of Learning and Behavior" by Domjan is a text book used by Universities to instruct the principles by which animals (people and dog included) learn. Classical conditioning, operant conditioning, association is association whether it is intentionally manipulated or occurs spontaneously by chance. In dog training, both occur and sometimes those spontaneous learning moments are significant, both good as well as detrimental.
Positive Reinforcement occurs when a response produces an appetitive stimulus. An example of this in search dog training; the dog is exposed to a target odor, the dog exhibits scenting behavior to the odor such as smelling or nosing the target then the behavior is marked with a conditioned reinforcer and dog receives a primary reinforcer. This should increase the dog exhibiting scenting behavior again.
Negative reinforcement prevents or removes an aversive stimulus resulting in an increase in the behavior. An example of this in search dog training; an aversive stimulus can be applied to the dog until it performs a desired behavior, which ends the aversive stimuli. An example of this is when a dog fails to offer a passive final alert, such as a sit or down at target odor. The dog is then presented with target odor and jerked or shocked until a sit or down is offered. The dog increases the passive alert behavior to avoid or stop the application of the stimulus. However, one concern is whether the dog also now has an association via classical conditioning of target odor tied to the unpleasant event of being jerked or shocked. If so, this association may result in a decrease in the dog’s reliability to hunt and locate this target.
Positive punishment is the application of an aversive stimulus in conjunction with the target behavior which will decrease the likelihood of the behavior occurring again in the future. Relevant example to scent training: the dog engages in inappropriate pursuit of an undesired odor, such as that of another animal. The dog is given a verbal or physical correction which results in the dog being less likely to engage in the inappropriate behavior again.
Timing is essential. If the dog associates the punishment with any non-target behavior being performed at the time of the punishment, he is also less likely to perform that behavior. Therefore, if the dog was actually scenting a target odor and the handler misinterpreted the behavior or the target odor dissemination, it may decrease the dog’s likelihood to engage in the actual search behavior.
Negative punishment, also referred to as omission training by Domjan, is the removal an appetitive stimulus or the opportunity to acquire an appetitive stimulus resulting in a decreased likelihood of the behavior occurring again. Many dog trainers are now incorrectly replacing the term negative punishment with extinction. Extinction results from non-reinforcement of a behavior that has a history of receiving reinforcement (Domjan, 2003) therefore it is not an accurate replacement for negative punishment. Relevant to scent dog training: removing the dog’s opportunity to obtain the reward due to undesirable behavior such as failing to offer an alert or focusing on other scents beside the target odor. The handler simply removes the dog from the training situation into a kennel and does not allow the dog the opportunity to obtain any type of reward. Often, the dog is placed within view of the training area and allowed to watch subsequent teammates using that dog’s toy reward to reward their dogs at the target odor. Eventually the handler takes the dog out of the kennel and attempts the training scenario again. If the dog goes to the correct target and offers a final response, the previously withheld reward is given. The probability is decreased for the future occurrence of the incorrect behavior of ignoring the target scent by removing the chance to obtain the reward.
So, if we go by scientificly validated learning paradigms, e-collars are positive punishment. However, the bottom line, make no mistake, is that E-collars are NOT appetitive, meaning they are not pleasant. Shock is unpleasant. How many people out there enjoy getting a rug shock? Primates (chimps, apes, and us) are notorious for exploiting pleasant experiences, hence drug addicts. If Shock was pleasant, you would see thousands of people hiding in alleys, paying someone to shock them or ordering them online and carrying them around shocking themselves. I have not seen that, have you?
Now......sometimes unpleasant training experiences are needed. Dogs that chase animals, dogs that run away.......there are a variety of VALID uses for an E-collar.
Training a SAR dog IMHO is not one of those because of the principles of learning, Associative Learning to be exact.
Associative learning is used in scent dog training to establish associations between conditioned reinforcer and the discriminative stimulus, the specific target odor. This association results eventually in a trained final response paired with the target odor. With HRD dogs especially, final response issues is one of the major stumbling block for handlers. Perhaps final response reliability problems may be the result of commands which have been unintentionally paired with stimulus perceived by the dog as painful, fear inducing, or aversive. How does this occur? Training a sit or down with compulsion (jerk, pop, shock) and then pairing this aversily trained response with a target odor. The baggage of , "Oh I have to sit, or I am going to get shocked" is now paired with target odor. Or for those who use "compliance to command" with E-collars, they are directly shocking their dog AT the target odor. Sit (shock) Sit (shock)........How does this make any kind of rational sense? let alone, it flies in the face of everything we have learned scientifically about learning and performance, but what the hec, Science is useless right?
This will not change the way these trainers train or the way they think. Fine by me, just please do not bring those dogs to look for me if I am ever lost. I want a traditionally positively trained search dog, one who sees their target odor almost as an addiction because everything associated with that odor has always been fun, great, a blast. Please do not bring the dog who might figure out today that since his owner does not know where the odor is, he cannot be shocked, therefore, OMG I can do anything I want to, and I don't have to find that stupid target odor where I get "stimulated".
No, please bring the happy goofy search dog that thinks the "toy thief" is the greatest thing in the world.
Everyone thinks I am against e-collars. I'm not. There are valuable uses for them when used correctly. The problem is that most handlers and even so-called E-collar experts do not know what they are doing. Some even propose that E-collars are simply a form of positive re-enforcement. WTF? Are you kidding me?
Obviously, there is a lack of understanding of scientific terminology of +R. So lets go over this to eliminate any confusion out there. "The Principles of Learning and Behavior" by Domjan is a text book used by Universities to instruct the principles by which animals (people and dog included) learn. Classical conditioning, operant conditioning, association is association whether it is intentionally manipulated or occurs spontaneously by chance. In dog training, both occur and sometimes those spontaneous learning moments are significant, both good as well as detrimental.
Positive Reinforcement occurs when a response produces an appetitive stimulus. An example of this in search dog training; the dog is exposed to a target odor, the dog exhibits scenting behavior to the odor such as smelling or nosing the target then the behavior is marked with a conditioned reinforcer and dog receives a primary reinforcer. This should increase the dog exhibiting scenting behavior again.
Negative reinforcement prevents or removes an aversive stimulus resulting in an increase in the behavior. An example of this in search dog training; an aversive stimulus can be applied to the dog until it performs a desired behavior, which ends the aversive stimuli. An example of this is when a dog fails to offer a passive final alert, such as a sit or down at target odor. The dog is then presented with target odor and jerked or shocked until a sit or down is offered. The dog increases the passive alert behavior to avoid or stop the application of the stimulus. However, one concern is whether the dog also now has an association via classical conditioning of target odor tied to the unpleasant event of being jerked or shocked. If so, this association may result in a decrease in the dog’s reliability to hunt and locate this target.
Positive punishment is the application of an aversive stimulus in conjunction with the target behavior which will decrease the likelihood of the behavior occurring again in the future. Relevant example to scent training: the dog engages in inappropriate pursuit of an undesired odor, such as that of another animal. The dog is given a verbal or physical correction which results in the dog being less likely to engage in the inappropriate behavior again.
Timing is essential. If the dog associates the punishment with any non-target behavior being performed at the time of the punishment, he is also less likely to perform that behavior. Therefore, if the dog was actually scenting a target odor and the handler misinterpreted the behavior or the target odor dissemination, it may decrease the dog’s likelihood to engage in the actual search behavior.
Negative punishment, also referred to as omission training by Domjan, is the removal an appetitive stimulus or the opportunity to acquire an appetitive stimulus resulting in a decreased likelihood of the behavior occurring again. Many dog trainers are now incorrectly replacing the term negative punishment with extinction. Extinction results from non-reinforcement of a behavior that has a history of receiving reinforcement (Domjan, 2003) therefore it is not an accurate replacement for negative punishment. Relevant to scent dog training: removing the dog’s opportunity to obtain the reward due to undesirable behavior such as failing to offer an alert or focusing on other scents beside the target odor. The handler simply removes the dog from the training situation into a kennel and does not allow the dog the opportunity to obtain any type of reward. Often, the dog is placed within view of the training area and allowed to watch subsequent teammates using that dog’s toy reward to reward their dogs at the target odor. Eventually the handler takes the dog out of the kennel and attempts the training scenario again. If the dog goes to the correct target and offers a final response, the previously withheld reward is given. The probability is decreased for the future occurrence of the incorrect behavior of ignoring the target scent by removing the chance to obtain the reward.
So, if we go by scientificly validated learning paradigms, e-collars are positive punishment. However, the bottom line, make no mistake, is that E-collars are NOT appetitive, meaning they are not pleasant. Shock is unpleasant. How many people out there enjoy getting a rug shock? Primates (chimps, apes, and us) are notorious for exploiting pleasant experiences, hence drug addicts. If Shock was pleasant, you would see thousands of people hiding in alleys, paying someone to shock them or ordering them online and carrying them around shocking themselves. I have not seen that, have you?
Now......sometimes unpleasant training experiences are needed. Dogs that chase animals, dogs that run away.......there are a variety of VALID uses for an E-collar.
Training a SAR dog IMHO is not one of those because of the principles of learning, Associative Learning to be exact.
Associative learning is used in scent dog training to establish associations between conditioned reinforcer and the discriminative stimulus, the specific target odor. This association results eventually in a trained final response paired with the target odor. With HRD dogs especially, final response issues is one of the major stumbling block for handlers. Perhaps final response reliability problems may be the result of commands which have been unintentionally paired with stimulus perceived by the dog as painful, fear inducing, or aversive. How does this occur? Training a sit or down with compulsion (jerk, pop, shock) and then pairing this aversily trained response with a target odor. The baggage of , "Oh I have to sit, or I am going to get shocked" is now paired with target odor. Or for those who use "compliance to command" with E-collars, they are directly shocking their dog AT the target odor. Sit (shock) Sit (shock)........How does this make any kind of rational sense? let alone, it flies in the face of everything we have learned scientifically about learning and performance, but what the hec, Science is useless right?
This will not change the way these trainers train or the way they think. Fine by me, just please do not bring those dogs to look for me if I am ever lost. I want a traditionally positively trained search dog, one who sees their target odor almost as an addiction because everything associated with that odor has always been fun, great, a blast. Please do not bring the dog who might figure out today that since his owner does not know where the odor is, he cannot be shocked, therefore, OMG I can do anything I want to, and I don't have to find that stupid target odor where I get "stimulated".
No, please bring the happy goofy search dog that thinks the "toy thief" is the greatest thing in the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)