Teaching NO !

Someone once told me that to correct a behaviour in a dog you smack them on the nose with a roll up of newspaper whilst repeating NO...never liked that idea...it is their nose that is so important:D

I don't see a problem with No meaning I do not want you to that and Stop meaning Stop traveling stop moving and wait til I say go or come here or go over there No also does tell him if hes going to get something that its not that way He. will listen and change direction on that and start scenting in another direction.The more commands available that you both understand and work with the better. Just consistency I reckon ???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EeeBees

Someone once told me that to correct a behaviour in a dog you smack them on the nose with a roll up of newspaper whilst repeating NO...never liked that idea...it is their nose that is so important:D

---

I agree to get Murphs full attention just touch his nose or tap very lightly not hard !

Observed something today whilst in town...a blind man was making his way along the street with his lovely labrador guide when a guy walked pass with a mutty combo type dog...which hackled up as they passed the guide dog...his handler said no no no and moved his dog on...with a few yards, his dog put himself in the sit position and waited as the man dug out from a pocket a treat for him...

There's been the odd person I ve worked with that could use the newspaper roll up on their nose. Some just to check that they're still alive ! Ha

:D:D:D

Im teaching my 10 week old pup "UT" (because his name is Beau, too close to no) with a firm voice and HE gets it. When he chews on power cords "UT". When he chews on the coffee table "UT". When he chews on the couch "UT". When he bites my hand "UT" then he stops biting me. That proves there is no confusion he realises he cant do that and stops. I haven't had him a week and he gets the jist. Don't over analyse it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EeeBees

Observed something today whilst in town...a blind man was making his way along the street with his lovely labrador guide when a guy walked pass with a mutty combo type dog...which hackled up as they passed the guide dog...his handler said no no no and moved his dog on...with a few yards, his dog put himself in the sit position and waited as the man dug out from a pocket a treat for him...

---

My bro in law is blind EB His guide dog retired a year or so ago but still lives with them just doesn't work. They were some team he d lead bro in law to town (3kms ?) through Town down to the sports shop bak door for a beer on a Friday night Watching him go sideways to make sure the trees never hit his owner Awesome . I think he ll try to get another but just not yet.

The relationship must be extraordinary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wirehunt

Or to really spell it out. No and stop are one and the same when it come to dogs.

---

No No No,
your bloody wrong.

NO-
means, cease and desist, your not to eat your food till i say so, do not chase the cat, do not fetch the duck until i say so, stc etc.

Stop means
STOP.

EeBee....

J'aime un coeur tendre......?

I like tender hearts???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jakewire

No No No,
your bloody wrong.

NO-
means, cease and desist, your not to eat your food till i say so, do not chase the cat, do not fetch the duck until i say so, stc etc.

Stop means
STOP.

---

So when you say no what is the dog meant to do?

:super::super:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wirehunt

So when you say no what is the dog meant to do?

---

God I hope no one is dumb enough to say stop or there'll be 50 more posts on it ! Talk about yre loaded question !:super::chop::pacman::pacman:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tussock

Ut!

---

Exactly that ! Well done ..:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twoshotkill

EeBee....

J'aime un coeur tendre......?

I like tender hearts???

---

Yes! Twoshotkill, I abhor meanness.

Whoa up!!! We use short two letter words because phonetically and physically they are the easier for us and the easiest for the dog...but it is not about the word you are using, it is about the corrective action and the modification of the unwanted behaviour that is important here...so the word is used to gain the dogs attention by mostly it tonal quality which imitates the gruffness of the growl...the bitch remonstrating her puppies isnt growling in a trill like fashion!!

Wirehunt, doing something anti-social, really...!!! If he wants to clean his finger nails with the butterknife....well, who are we to question...UT UT UT!!!

I guess it would be determined by what the behaviour is doing to you...if you sought advice, was given it and used it and it worked, well, it is a proven solution for that behaviour. One thing our dogs are and that is they are haphazard and pretty hopeless mind readers...:D If the solution was not proven, then your advisor is incorrect and you have tried to use an invalid or purposeless solution...in which case the only member of the triage which is going to be more confused is the poor dog.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EeeBees

Whoa up!!! We use short two letter words because phonetically and physically they are the easier for us and the easiest for the dog...but it is not about the word you are using, it is about the corrective action and the modification of the unwanted behaviour that is important here...so the word is used to gain the dogs attention by mostly it tonal quality which imitates the gruffness of the growl...the bitch remonstrating her puppies isnt growling in a trill like fashion!!

---

I have to disagree... Tonal training gives more importance to one tone over another. If every command is given the same importance it gets the same response. I, likewise, have no place for meanness in training... my father always taught me "Give an animal a lesson in meanness and you have to be careful it did not learn a lesson in meanness".

People using "no" teach a dog that the current behavior is unacceptable... without offering up another behavior. Dogs are not that lateral. the same effect is gained (the sound No, Ut, whatever is irrelevant) buy using the same command it already knows "Stop" (Whatever sound you use) stops the current behavior... the smart handler then gives a command to offer up another behavior which is acceptable. This keeps the lines of communication open, the dog keeps respect for the handler because it understands and everyone can play happy, non-confused families. The dog remains relaxed in taking a command without a confusing tirade from the handler.

I knew you would disagree, goes without saying:D. I thought the question was what corrective action should be taken with the command NO, how to teach what NO means...this has been a cool thread...tangled and messy but interesting. It is, as you say, confusing when there are a whole wodge of negative tones and commands...thats when the dogs ears turn off...which brings us to that mystical self-hunting problem...too many commands, too much whistle blowing...the recall, it doesnt work, then the stop, it doesnt work...dog sticks middle claw in air and cranks the gears up...the respect factor wasnt taught first because so many of us want a dog fully trained and mechanical by six months old.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EeeBees

I knew you would disagree, goes without saying:D. I thought the question was what corrective action should be taken with the command NO, how to teach what NO means...this has been a cool thread...tangled and messy but interesting. It is, as you say, confusing when there are a whole wodge of negative tones and commands...thats when the dogs ears turn off...which brings us to that mystical self-hunting problem...too many commands, too much whistle blowing...the recall, it doesnt work, then the stop, it doesnt work...dog sticks middle claw in air and cranks the gears up...the respect factor wasnt taught first because so many of us want a dog fully trained and mechanical by six months old.

---

Instead of preparing the preposition... read what was said.... You can;t teach what NO means... it's a dog. You are still crediting a dog with more thinking power than the universe endowed it with. Vicci. Let's make it simple... we can battle bullshit on a forum day in and day out.... what say we actually front up... you bring a dog, I'll bring a dog, we can invite forum members to attend, I know several who will... let's just front up with some dogs and run them together, see who has serious hounds, correct control without inhibition and just put this to sleep. I find the online argument to be tedious to be frank... i reckon if we just run some dogs, the point of it all, in front of people who can give considered opinion, we could have much more fruitful discussion in future, discussion that will benefit others trying to train dogs, all it takes is for us to run a couple of hounds together... we're not putting man on the moon, just running dogs. If you're right it'll show, if I'm right it'll show, let's stop pissing each other off and just run some dogs, one of us might have an edge... it is what the spectators want to see.

Yes!!!!! What Ruff said!!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ruff

Instead of preparing the preposition... read what was said.... You can;t teach what NO means... it's a dog. You are still crediting a dog with more thinking power than the universe endowed it with. Vicci. Let's make it simple... we can battle bullshit on a forum day in and day out.... what say we actually front up... you bring a dog, I'll bring a dog, we can invite forum members to attend, I know several who will... let's just front up with some dogs and run them together, see who has serious hounds, correct control without inhibition and just put this to sleep. I find the online argument to be tedious to be frank... i reckon if we just run some dogs, the point of it all, in front of people who can give considered opinion, we could have much more fruitful discussion in future, discussion that will benefit others trying to train dogs, all it takes is for us to run a couple of hounds together... we're not putting man on the moon, just running dogs. If you're right it'll show, if I'm right it'll show, let's stop pissing each other off and just run some dogs, one of us might have an edge... it is what the spectators want to see.

---

Cool, lets do this!! When and how??!!

I dunno, yu sort it out, you seem to have the biggest issue. :)

I teach my dog very little,, turn ,stop, fetch and come. I use a tonal arghh arggh if I dont like an action theyre doing - basic and effective . the only thing i have failed on is with my dog in blind cover at trials willfully hunting for himself . I dont know that is a battle I can ever win with many years of absent training

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ruff

I dunno, yu sort it out, you seem to have the biggest issue. :)

---

:D:D:D:D:D you so crack me up, Man!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tussock

Me and Wirehunt have already done it today. With 11 dogs

---

:o

Here's the issue with tonal training, and why some will naively believe it gets them a result. Dogs respond to an elevated tone because it is always followed by action from the handler. Inherent in this lesson is the lack of action with the quieter command which preceded it.

Over a short period of time the handler will find only the gruff/growled command is obeyed.

When i started to learn from Paul Hutton it amazed me how his quiet commands were always complied with and there was never a growl or tonal warning of impending action... when queried he offered that he placed the same importance on the quiet command and so the dog knew if not complied with the handler would take action... most dogs learned quickly the handler would give a command which could be ignored, next would a stronger tonal command which would be followed by action... this was complied with. By giving a quiet command and following it with action resulted in the quiet command being complied with... always.

The other fault, obvious in light of this, is that tonal commands required repeated commands a no no in any book on dog training, even the bad ones... it's just a poor way to handle.

Like many things in dog handling it can appear to give a result, when in actuality it represents more confusing handling, a breakdown in dog handler relationships and people still believing that because the dog, eventually, did as asked it is effective.

Primarily this is because to 90% of handlers out there, any compliance is a victory... it can be so much better than that with less effort.

A secondary point, which cannot be ignored at all, is that it is subservient dogs that growl at other dogs.. not dominant ones. This is often a behavior misinterpreted... it's the subservient dog with a bone that growls... a dominant dog with a bone glares and then bites, rarely growls... the growl in subservient behavior... doing that to your dog is not going to help anyone aye?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EeeBees

:D:D:D:D:D you so crack me up, Man!!!!!

---

Good, I like making people laugh. You believe, wrongly, i will counter anything you say... that is not the case, and I can prove it... just say one thing regarding dog behavior and training that I agree with and you will see me say so. :D

Branleur!!!!!

ne pas être un mauvais perdant

You two be french kissing soon... :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ruff

ne pas être un mauvais perdant

---

I havent been a poor loser, Ruff. I havent lost a thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EeeBees

I havent been a poor loser, Ruff. I havent lost a thing.

---

quelqu'un qui parle en français parce qu'ils ont une race française de chien a perdu avant de commencer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tussock

Define "take action".

---

Taking action is the physical action that is appropriate to the dog.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tussock

I sat most nights last year, drank a coke and watched four dogs eat from one bowl.

They ate in order, the same order every night.

The dog that ate first would growl, just a low rumble, if any of the other dogs came closer than was acceptable. If they really pushed their luck it would turn around a bit and snarl that was as far as it ever got. When it did fight one of the dogs it was a no contest, that dog that ate first came out on top, with the other scuttling off with its tail between its legs (this happened once, the loser was a younger, larger male, the winner a female).

The next dog would come in to eat and would growl in turn at the others, but would vacate if the first dog returned and would not growl at it.

The last two fought most nights unless I intervened.

So, if your statement is correct, the subservient dog ate first, followed by the dominant ones? I do not buy that.

---

I wasn;t selling anything. :yaeh am not durnk:

several points... No tonal training I have seen begins with a low grumbling.

Any handler that sits back and watches this sort of interaction is a spectator, not a trainer.

I don;t see anything in your experiment, if that's what it was, that has any relevance to dog training.

Ultimately no one has to "buy" anything I say. I will take solace in comparing the dog work I get compared to what I see others get... while I am often told how wrong I am, I see few with evidence to substantiate it. If you have no issues to resolve there is no reason to care what they hell I advocate. :cool:

what are you actually teaching "NO" for . I must admit IM a little with Ruff on this in that the stop command can cover all n sundry .
I think No is a waste of space in general .

Yes , I think the point is "stop "covers the lot sufficiently even if we have a couple of tonal growls as well .I mean I arrggh aarrgh at my dog but in reality it does bugger all .I just remove the dog from the unwanted behavior if need be .
What does always amaze me is how a dog can get into sync with the owner with hands and verbals

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ruff

quelqu'un qui parle en français parce qu'ils ont une race française de chien a perdu avant de commencer

---

If you think I am a loser from the onset because I wish to speak French because I have a French breed then I am proud to be such a loser. And I see no reason for this comment from you considering that one of my dogs knew NO Anglaise before he came to this country, but then you would not know that of course.

I am not going to pursue this with you Ruff...although I must say how disappointed I am that you lay down a challenge for us to meet with our dogs then when I accept the challenge you withdraw but continue to lamblast me.

No more of this...I am wearied by it...as I am sure other members would be as well...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by el borracho

What does always amaze me is how a dog can get into sync with the owner with hands and verbals

---

More than words, for sure. I have a six-months young pup here at the mo who didn't have a single word applied to him as a bit of an experiment. Turns, recall etc all done by body language. So far putting a command to body language has been far easier than vice versa, I think I'll stick with it!

I don't use no, and more importantly, I don't use any kind of stop without chaining something to it as stopping a dog without giving it another option is drive diminishing. Stopping a dog on the stop whistle and not giving him another command is really good to knock the go out of them. Stop whistle, then send him out, back, throw a retrieve etc. Never just 'stop, and sit there all sorry for yourself'