How do I get dog to do what I want without him growling?

[Buddy2go]

We have the loveliest show cocker 13 month dog. He's pretty well trained and normally really a joy to be with however...
Though he's not aggressive with his own food should he find anything while out he becomes aggressive and will snap when the food is removed. If he is comfortable / decides he wants to be somewhere we don't want him to be he'll growl when we try to move him. I can get round it by encouraging and enticing away but it feels like I'm rewarding the growling. I'd just like him to be more accepting of " it's time to move" .

I know I'm not in the best mood when asked to do something I don't want to do and understand his annoyance but the growling is not acceptable and I'd like to be able to say "no" without fuss .
Any ideas ?

Do you have to do the ah ah in an Alan partridge manner? :o

(I just clap...

Still waiting for any answers to my questions, having gone through lilcampers most excellent links and discovering that I do what is recommended there.

Yes, on occasions my dogs have been subject to 'positive punishment'. On many other occasions they are subject to praise and reinforcement of good behaviour. Boundaries are clear and consistent and their environment is managed to make it as easy as possible for them to stick with boundaries.

I will try from now on to say 'ah ha!' In my best Alan Partridge instead of 'no' as these seems to be a word that no dog can ever comprehend and it's use indicates that your relationship with your dog is based on 'violence and intimidation'.

I will just have to disagree and politely point out that you may get more people willing to engage with your arguments if you make them a little less florid.

I will now have to leave to violently intimidate both dogs against begging for bits of my breakfast muffin.

Spero it comes down to this:

You don't need to use positive punishment to train your dog, so why would you? Instead of arguing that you're doing nothing wrong, look at it from another perspective. If there's a better way, why wouldn't you choose it?

And before you respond that you don't need a better way because this one works, I'll remind you that this is about a relationship with trust as a central tenet. The more your dog trusts you, the less stress it experiences. This is healthier for dogs emotionally and physically, and reduces bite risk.

So again, if you don't need to use positive punishment, why do you?

I'm also intrigued that you have read and agree with all Lilcamper's links, yet still don't see any problem with using aversive techniques. That's quite a unique perspective you have there. Anyone I've ever met who understands learning theory can see why positive punishment is detrimental.

Spero it is very simple would you rather be told off or rewarded?

It is clear from your posts that you do not like people disagreeing with you and you take this as being negative. If we agree with you you feel happier. Same with your dog. Iif your dog feels that he is doing right rather than wrong he will be happier and willing to work more for you.

It does work saying no but your dog is less happy and relaxed. If you give a positive interrupter and the dog hears the noise , they will happily stop what they are doing and want to be with you. This then leads onto excellent recall, and a desire to be with you and a motivation to want to do what they are asked.

On the other hand if you say No the dog knows he has to stop but may not want to, so is either feeling uneasy of the punishment, (raised voice, grumpy owner) so has to stop or will stop while you are around and then come back to the same behaviour when you are not there. Either way the dog will not be relaxed and enjoying your company. The dog will want to be away from the grumpy voice raised owner. You do sometime see appeasement reaction where the dog tries his hardest to cheer you up, may jump around, wag his tail a lot of lick the owner.

Saying No will work but dogs can react negatively to this be slower to act on commands and not enjoy the training process.

I will just have to disagree and politely point out that you may get more people willing to engage with your arguments if you make them a little less florid. It is not a matter of people agreeing with the argument it is just a proved theoretical scientific method of training that will work 100% of the time on 100% of all dogs. Why make life harder

We are not arguing for positive methods rather than punitive, any more than we need to argue that the earth is round, not flat. Or that a dropped object will fall down, not up. It isn't a matter of opinion.

I don't mind people disagreeing with me.

All I ask is that they disagree with what I am actually saying, not what they wish I would say.

I use the techniques in Lilcampers links. I do not bellow 'no' ineffectually. I set boundaries, reward and praise BUT some behaviour merits a firm 'no'. On three occasions I have picked up the little dog and out him outside saying firmly 'no'.

On two other occasions I have shouted at him but I would not do that again as he was clearly frightened.

And for this I am told that my relationship with my dog is based on 'violence and intimidation' that people would 'hate to be my dogs' that their dogs have a vocabulary of 50 words but 'no' isn't one of them.

Absolute bobbins.

Going back to the op, if a dog growled at me in my home, and the dog was not in pain, that would merit immediate intervention from me.

I still wait, with interest but the growing realisation that no answer will ever come, as to why this approach merits so much ire as abusive and unworkable. It is clearly neither and I have now 3 years of living with dogs as proof.

Growling is good, growling is communication, if you take away a dog's ability to vocalise that they are not happy, unsure or uncomfortable with something, how else will they let you know? Straight to a snap or bite without a warning growl, that's how.

Growling is good.

We have a part english springer rescue dog.

When we got him he couldn't distinguish between standing on the table/kitchen counter (acceptable) and standing on the floor (not acceptable).

Initially I tried to entice him off the table with food. This did lead to some growly stand offs, I think because I was giving him the impression that there was this great game where he jumped on the table, got a bit excited and then I gave him food.

What worked was confidently removing him from the table as soon as he got on the table. I think this was more about repetition than dominance. He learnt that every time he got on the table he was removed and then eventually I think he forgot that there was a point to going on the table.

Spero no answer will ever come to you because you do not listen and understand or have an open mind. This post has given you answers and explanations and so have previous threads where you have posted the same argument.

Maybe the intervention that you give to your dog when he growls at you will be a very clear indication that there is a better way to train dogs. BY the way it is best to get a medical professional to check dogs bites and I would have a up to date tetanus jab if you wish to continue with your training methods

I am chuckling at your 3 years of dog experience, I have over 35 years of professional dog handling and training experience.......and still learning!

.

I should explain why I posted that graphic.

Most dogs have had a heck of a lot of non verbal communication ignored before they feel stressed enough to resort to growling.

My dog has NEVER growled at any of us. Because I do not use any punitive training methods with him and know how to read when he isn't happy, I can do something about it before he gets stressed enough to need to growl.

His stress levels stay low, my stress levels stay low. He trusts me totally and our relationship is good.

Spero, re your three years of proof, Cesar Millan has loads of video proof that his methods work. Find me an educated, accredited behaviourist or trainer who would advise you to apply them.

DH was bottle fed formula milk. Didn't do him any harm. Loads of babies have formula milk. Doesn't do them any harm. But find me the science to prove that formula is better and healthier than breastmilk.

3 years of getting away with a poor understanding of canine learning is not proof of anything. If it was, it would only be proof of how forgiving and non-confrontational a species dogs are.

And if you want to play experience top trumps, i'm a vet with over fifteen years' experience of working with dogs and a lifetime of dog ownership. I've been bitten twice, both times before i understood learning theory and dog behaviour. I frequently work with families whose children have been bitten by their pet dog, and I frequently encounter people like you who don't understand dog behaviour. I've never met anyone who insisted they had read all the literature and still stuck to their certainty that they were doing it right though! Most people, when directed to the evidence we have now and our modern understanding of canine motivation, begin to view things through their dog's eyes. One of the fundamentals is that you cannot reach a dog

Posted too soon

... you cannot teach a dog what not to do, you can only teach alternative behaviours. Which is why I cannot understand that you insist you know all about how dogs learn but then also have total confidence that your dog knows what no means.

Also, I am what is known as a cross over trainer. I have used confrontational methods in the past.

Being growled at in a battle of wills with a puppy getting on a sofa and me dragging him off repeatedly by the collar was not much fun. All it led to was a dog that was hand shy and me on the phone in tears to my Mother. The pup didn't learn not to go in the sofa either.

There is a better way, I have found it. I have a bigger brain than my dog and choose to use it. It isn't a competition, or an argument or a battle of wills. We work together as a partnership and he does something I don't want him to do or isn't getting something I am trying to teach him I take a step back and ask myself 'what am I doing wrong'.

Three times in as many years my dog has growled at my children and yes I felt that that situation warranted immediate intervention, to reassure the dog and tell the child to be more bloody careful where they sit. He is a whippet who can expertly camouflage himself among cushions but is not at all keen on having his spindly legs sat on.

Two years ago I was in the position to do a degree, I considered canine behaviour and training as it is a long held passion, however my dogs trainer and behaviourist, persuaded me otherwise saying that while I was good with dogs I was shit awful with people, which is where 90% of the job lies, restraining people, how right she was and I would never have had the patience shown by others on this thread.

I don't claim to know 'all about' how dogs behave. I know how my dogs behave and I reject any assertion that our relationship is based on 'violence and intimidation'.

Nor am I trying to play experience 'top trumps'. I rely on my experience. If my dogs were cowed by violence and intimidation, they would not have the happy and fulfilled lives they have now.

I know I have taught them what to do and what not to do by a mixture of praise, rewards and on rare occasions punishment. The overwhelming proportion of our interactions are positive - because I put the effort in in our early days and we know now where we stand.

I don't care if you want to categorise this a 'teaching alternative behaviours' as this seems to be a distinction without a difference. I didn't want the dog to take his bone upstairs or wee on the rug. And now he doesn't. It wasn't a ''battle of wills' it was showing him that one action made me cross, another action made me happy and got him a treat. It didn't take long. How is this 'violence and intimidation' ? How is is a battle of wills?

It is setting and enforcing boundaries.

I suppose I should be grateful that on this thread at least I haven't been insulted and threatened with quite the same level of vehemence as in previous threads. So maybe the message is getting through on some level.

Spero, you have repeatedly and insistently defended the use of aversive techniques, and punishment. Of course saying "no" isn't comparable to using a prong collar or hitting a dog in terms of severity, but it is not scientifically the best way to get results. You don't want to change and you see no need to change because your dogs pose you no problems and I can identify with that - fair enough. But your staunch insistence that it does no harm to say no saddens me. If you take the time to understand how dogs learn then you will see why there are much better ways which are less confusing for your dog.

It's pointless arguing with you when the fact that numerous behaviourists, very experienced owners and vets have all said the same thing and you refuse to accept it. However, if you are truly interested in how and why dogs do what they do, rather than simply demanding that they do what suits you for your convenience, then I would really urge you to read a book called "Don't Shoot the Dog", by Karen Pryor. That book was the turning point for me, when I realised that I could understand dogs more deeply. And it was truly uplifting to suddenly and easily be able to explain and understand all of the things I saw dogs doing in my practice. It all made so much more sense. And I think it has made me a better vet and a better owner. Surely everyone who owns a dog wants to strive to be better?

I think you are just not willing to listen to me.

I do not refuse to listen. I refuse to accept that what I do is either confusing or harmful to my dog.

I think the example given by merry mouse is very interesting - it chimes with what I do.

When little dog was a puppy he wanted to drag his bone upstairs and chew on it under my bed. I told him 'no' and bought him and bone downstairs. The second time I said 'no' and he dropped it on the stairs. The third time I said 'no' he dropped it at the kitchen threshold. There was no fourth time. He eats his bone outside and every time I pass I say 'what a good dog!'

What on earth is harmful or abusive about that?

I think it is wonderful that dog owners have such passion for dogs and such a fierce will to see them protected and happy - but the unfortunate downside to this can be a very unpleasant vehemence and even threatening attitude from some which I have certainly met in the past.

Of course I want to be the best person I can be and the best dog owner I can be - but I have many other responsibilities and commitments and sometimes the best response I can offer is a short, sharp 'no!'.

I reject utterly and absolutely that this is harmful to anyone who lives in my house, dog or human. And if that makes me closed minded, so be it. My opinions are formed from reading, thinking and watching what works for me.

affaf that is one of the first books I bought. 'Dog Secrets' by David Ryan is another good one.

Spero no one is saying that what you done hasn't worked. But surely if it has been pointed out that there is a better way, it's worth considering?

It's not the saying no that's irked folk on this thread, Spero, it's the fact that you have so little interest in understanding more. We've tried to help and explained why but you aren't bothered. Don't waste your money on the book.

You are entirely right Honeydragon. I shall bow out! :)

Ah ah, back of the net
Kiss my face! honeydragon

You missed my all time fav 'cashback'