# Warranting level of corrections ..??



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

I know for me things like when the dog is not in heel position, I'll give guidance with small leash pops on the dead ring on a fur savor. Not really a correction but "hello I'm here, get in line follow the leader" to leaving to engage the decoy without being released warrants a high level zing with the prong on the live ring. 

Yesterday, I asked for a heel and then an automatic sit after picking her up from the decoy. She heeled ok but when I asked for the sit she still had decoy on the brain and tried to go around me to watch the decoy. (not engage) But sit means sit so I lifted her front paws off the ground and swung her butt around to heel position with a shake on the dead ring on the fursavor with a reaffirmed "SIT". I felt kind of bad or conflicted that I had to shake her, but she wasn't miffed by it. She had done excellent work up to that point. I know on the field when I ask a command she needs to do it, she can't get away with it. But sometimes I wonder if I am doing the right thing being not very experienced. 

How do you come to a conclusion what level and or what type of correction your dog warrants depending on the exercise? I know every dog and handler team is different. Though I'm wondering what goes through other handlers minds when the dog is not doing what it is supposed to do.


----------



## Guest (May 15, 2008)

Good question. 

Motivational only is the ideal to which I aspire, but.....

I would also like to hear the responses.

So far I can say I've selectively chosen only two things to correct for so far (in terms of performance obedience). So far, I've achieved what I wanted, namely, only having to do it ONCE (essentially) to make my point. 

The rub is that they worked so well, I can see how someone would start getting prong happy instead of effectively and selectively punishing. =;


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

Yeah "positive motivational".Tell your dog before training, " Look dog if you don't sit I will positively kick you a$$." Another approach is to read the dog. Geoff, I think you and I might be on similar pages...I use 3 levels of do.
1. Ask- a reasonable requirement of the dog, an easy voice or signal.
2. Command- a louder voice, projected from a standing position.
3. Demand- step towards the dog, possible neck scruffing, a more in your face directive!
Some dogs are in such deep drive, like a high school wrestler sooo focused on the other guy, that they don't hear the coach.

You can't punish what you have not taught. If she can take a firm correction and LEARN, I see no issue. Any time a dog tries to bite me or shows teeth, a coming to Jesus meeting always comes full steam!!!=D>


----------



## tracey schneider (May 7, 2008)

I don’t know how anyone can answer this question, its such a personal thing between you and your dog and the variables are so many. 
Im not an expert, but here is what I TRY to do, I say try as sometimes I too lose my mind and need a correction from my husband of what I am doing wrong lol.
I try to balance the correction with the dog , the misbehavior, the drive state the dog is in, the experience and knowledge of the command etc. 
What happens after the correction is also important esp. in the beginning. I try to use a positive response when it does what I ask correctly and match that to the effect the correction had on the dog and the type of dog (how easily does the dog load). Could be as simple as a pat, a verbal ‘good’, a release, or a bite. 
I will say most dogs can handle a stronger correction in protection work and a good dog will put the pressure of such a correction back into the decoy. 
t


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

tracey delin said:


> I try to balance the correction with the dog , the misbehavior, the drive state the dog is in, the experience and knowledge of the command etc.
> What happens after the correction is also important esp. in the beginning. I try to use a positive response when it does what I ask correctly and match that to the effect the correction had on the dog and the type of dog (how easily does the dog load). Could be as simple as a pat, a verbal ‘good’, a release, or a bite.


YES .. That is what I aspire to as well. Me like Steven aspire to be totally positive but in some protection exercises or the beginning stages of working with sheep my dog is in such an elevated level of drive. That she needed a real hard zing on the prong to clear the cobwebs. Thing is as Steven said


Steven Lepic said:


> So far I can say I've selectively chosen only two things to correct for so far (in terms of performance obedience). So far, I've achieved what I wanted, namely, only having to do it ONCE (essentially) to make my point.
> 
> The rub is that they worked so well, I can see how someone would start getting prong happy instead of effectively and selectively punishing.


The correction for one has to be at a level that it is effective enough to stop/correct the unwanted behaviour. Why do a 100 nagging corrections where one level 10 correction will stop the behaviour and make the dog think twice about ever doing that again. People do become prong happy or e-collar happy that is what creates a dog that is collar wise and is in danger of not performing when push comes to shove IMO. 



Howard Gaines said:


> You can't punish what you have not taught. If she can take a firm correction and LEARN, I see no issue.


I know it is sematics but I still like to call it a correction not a punishment. To me I'm not of the mindset that if I do a prong zing, a firm "no", withhold reward, I am not punishing the dog just correcting and hopefully teaching the dog that what it is doing is not correct. I just want to present the correction to the dog so she learns from it. 

The key is the dog needs to know why it came in the first place. 

I am a 95% positive reinforcement handler but that other 5% has always been the stickler for me. I am a big softy and really need to think myself before using that other 5% to make sure that it is both effective, but yet fair. 

Does that make sense?


----------



## Mari Steward (Mar 3, 2008)

When I want my dog to heal up to the decoy and sit and watch me, he only wants that decoy. All the positive motivation in the world does not work. I either have with hold the bite until he does what I want or do the old crank and yank so that he understands that no bite until you perform according to my expectations. 

I have tried hot dogs, tug, ball etc; these all work during normal obedience without the presence of a decoy (he loves them). However, when the decoy is present all he wants is that chomp...

I have a rule for corrections, one no command and if there is no immediat action I follow with an immediate correction. Sometimes, I do not wait for the dog to to adjust because I want him to learn the power and importance of my vocal command.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

The key to purely positive is using whatever drive is a high value to the dog. In obedience that may be food or a treat. In protection that's obviously the bite. If the dog does as you tell it, it gets the reward. If it refuses it doesn't.
All the "My dog is to tough", My dog is to stubborn", etc doesn't make sense to me anymore. 
To tough for what? If you want the dog in foose position before it gets a bite why wouldn't it go to foose position if it really understands that? 
Dogs aren't stubborn. That's nothing more then a dog not fully understanding what your telling it. 
Why would a dog NOT obey if it knows it will get what it wants, compaired to a dog that gets punished for NOT doing what you want in order to get that reward? 
Now I'm gonna really step on some toes!
Positive is compliance by USING the dog's drive. Correction is compliance through physical control of the dog's drive.


----------



## marcy bukkit (Oct 4, 2007)

Bob Scott said:


> The key to purely positive is using whatever drive is a high value to the dog. In obedience that may be food or a treat. In protection that's obviously the bite. If the dog does as you tell it, it gets the reward. If it refuses it doesn't.
> All the "My dog is to tough", My dog is to stubborn", etc doesn't make sense to me anymore.
> To tough for what? If you want the dog in foose position before it gets a bite why wouldn't it go to foose position if it really understands that?
> Dogs aren't stubborn. That's nothing more then a dog not fully understanding what your telling it.


I agree.

The helper or the sheep are the ultimate in distractions and proofing. If the dog _can't_ do obedience under that level of distraction, then the distraction needs to be toned down. If he can do obedience under those conditions but doesn't, he doesn't get to play. If that means driving 100 miles just for the dog to sit in a crate, so be it...I just hope someone brought really good coffee to justify the gas.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

marcy bukkit said:


> I agree.
> 
> The helper or the sheep are the ultimate in distractions and proofing. If the dog _can't_ do obedience under that level of distraction, then the distraction needs to be toned down. If he can do obedience under those conditions but doesn't, he doesn't get to play. If that means driving 100 miles just for the dog to sit in a crate, so be it...I just hope someone brought really good coffee to justify the gas.


Sitting in the crate can also be another loss of reward. If the dog doesn't comply it goes back to the crate. Most high drive dogs figure this out quickly.


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Bob Scott said:


> The key to purely positive is using whatever drive is a high value to the dog. In obedience that may be food or a treat. In protection that's obviously the bite. If the dog does as you tell it, it gets the reward. If it refuses it doesn't.
> All the "My dog is to tough", My dog is to stubborn", etc doesn't make sense to me anymore.
> To tough for what? If you want the dog in foose position before it gets a bite why wouldn't it go to foose position if it really understands that?
> Dogs aren't stubborn. That's nothing more then a dog not fully understanding what your telling it.
> ...


Interesting .. 

I've done some of the same things, from ideas and advice from other conversations we have had in the past about positive training.


> If you want the dog in foose position before it gets a bite why wouldn't it go to foose position if it really understands that?


 I've sat there with the decoy 10m away shaking the baton agitating and had my dog jumping, barking and lunging on the end of her lead for which seemed like an eternity and then put her away. Or keep restarting the exercise over and over, until she understands the steps that lead her to the reward. 

Sure it takes a heck of a lot more time than physically moulding the dog into 'foose' then letting the dog get its bite anyways. In the end the dog still gets the message that being in correct position gets the reward. Right? 2 different ways to the same end. 

Again in my mind the dog knows how to 'foose' but decides because the decoy is a big distraction that it doesn't have to 'foose' the conflict is now in the handlers court. The dog is in a elevated level of drive and in laa laa land. Put the dog away? Or snap the dog back into position with your lead? 

I don't doubt positive methods, but not everyone has the patience of a saint.


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Bob Scott said:


> Sitting in the crate can also be another loss of reward. If the dog doesn't comply it goes back to the crate. Most high drive dogs figure this out quickly.


We did this past weekend working pivots with grips then out and guard. She is in the guard and goes for a dirty bite, wham pick her up by her harness and carry her back to the car (no obedience totally neutral) into the crate she goes ... She had 3 hours to think about her dirty bite on the drive home. Did she learn something? I'd say so. Though I still had no good coffee for the trip home, just a sunburnt nose from watching the others work! All I could think on the drive was the puzzled look on her face as she went into the crate and the sheet got thrown on it. Bye LOL! #-o


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

The beginning of "foose for a bite" is nothing more then the dog sitting at our side on command and the bite command is given. That leads to sitting with eye contact. When the dog is sitting it will soon get frustrated and look at you. Mark and send! 
The initial foosing is usually started by going AWAY from the decoy. The dog learns to trun the handler with correct position AND eye contact. As this get solid, then the eye contact from the dog will get the handler to turn towards the decoy. Step by step progression leads to solid performance. To many move to fast (in ANY method of training).
I see the younger/newer/inexpierienced members of our club moving along quickly because the don't have a lot of previous baggage/misconceptions about what we're asking them. 
It's mainly us old farts that take a lot of time to learn this method. :grin: 
Some folks learn to play the air guitar. I occasionally still play the air leash.   :grin:


----------



## marcy bukkit (Oct 4, 2007)

Geoff Empey said:


> Again in my mind the dog knows how to 'foose' but decides because the decoy is a big distraction that it doesn't have to 'foose' the conflict is now in the handlers court. The dog is in a elevated level of drive and in laa laa land. Put the dog away? Or snap the dog back into position with your lead?


But does the correction really take conflict away from the dog? Might...also might increase conflict, because now there's an additional element -- fuss vs. bite vs. correction.

I don't believe in a one size fits all answer. I'm not opposed to corrections, but I prefer to use the minimal correction necessary. For me and my dog, taking the dog off the field and putting him back in his crate in the car works. I had to do that once with my dog and he never again ignored a fuss command.

Assess your training level -- is the dog ready for that high a distraction level? If the dog absolutely has a foundation to handle that level of distraction, and if the dog isn't rattled by the use of the correction, and if the correction works...go with it.

Training the dog is fluid. Things are never the same from one moment to the next. Constantly reading the dog, the situation and adjusting my approach accordingly. A correction for something might work one minute and be detrimental the next. Watching others work helps with learning to read dogs.


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

marcy bukkit said:


> I agree.
> 
> The helper or the sheep are the ultimate in distractions and proofing. If the dog _can't_ do obedience under that level of distraction, then the distraction needs to be toned down. If he can do obedience under those conditions but doesn't, he doesn't get to play. If that means driving 100 miles just for the dog to sit in a crate, so be it...I just hope someone brought really good coffee to justify the gas.



I agree as well, but then how does anyone get a super driven dog to work with a high level distraction then? Then they spend more time in the crate than on the field. I agree that with holding reward or going back into the crate is a form of correction, so why wouldn't a physical correction any different? Going back to my other post, being 2 means to the same end? The dog still learns the same thing, no?


----------



## marcy bukkit (Oct 4, 2007)

Bob Scott said:


> The beginning of "foose for a bite" is nothing more then the dog sitting at our side on command and the bite command is given.


I would say the beginning of "fuss for a bite" is the handler and the dog at home with a tug toy.


----------



## marcy bukkit (Oct 4, 2007)

Geoff Empey said:


> The dog still learns the same thing, no?


The dog doesn't necessarily learn the same thing. With the collar correction, he learns that not heeling = discomfort. With the crate, he learns that not heeling = not playing. The end result might or might not be the same depending on how the dog handles either approach.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Quote Marcy:
"Assess your training level -- is the dog ready for that high a distraction level? If the dog absolutely has a foundation to handle that level of distraction, and if the dog isn't rattled by the use of the correction, and if the correction works...go with it."

"If the dog absolutely has a foundation to handle that level of distraction" 
Then correction isn't necessary! 
If the correction is necessary it shows the dog isn't ready for that level of distarction. 
Loss of reward (the bite) is as big as any correction to a high drive dog. 
Again, why would a dog refuse to listen if it knows it will get the reward! Refusing (stubborn  ) is nothing more then a conflict of not being sure if the reward will come. Consistancy in any training is what works! :wink:


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

marcy bukkit said:


> I would say the beginning of "fuss for a bite" is the handler and the dog at home with a tug toy.


 
Yes! All the dogs required behaviours are based on solid obedience in the beginning. That's with any form of training.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Geoff Empey said:


> I agree as well, but then how does anyone get a super driven dog to work with a high level distraction then? Then they spend more time in the crate than on the field. I agree that with holding reward or going back into the crate is a form of correction, so why wouldn't a physical correction any different? Going back to my other post, being 2 means to the same end? The dog still learns the same thing, no?


This is what most people don't understand/believe.
That "super high driven dog" will work harder to comply once it understands to concept of reward for compliance.
I also don't feel the dog needs to loose a whole training sessino by being put back in it's crate. If possible, go back out after another dog or two had been on the field.


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Bob Scott said:


> This is what most people don't understand/believe.
> That "super high driven dog" will work harder to comply once it understands to concept of reward for compliance.


Is this is the same as restarting an exercise that the dog knows? Or is restarting something different than going back into the crate? Somewhat like a leash pop vs a level 10 with a prong?


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

Bob Scott said:


> That "super high driven dog" will work harder to comply once it understands to concept of reward for compliance.


This is assuming the dog can think when it's in that drive state. It's not always as black and white as it's being protrayed. Sometimes the dog isn't being stubborn, but just can't help itself, and you can stand there all day waiting for the dog to finally settle down to the point where it's thinking and giving the required behavior to get the reward, or you can administor a correction. Which may work because the correction lowers the dogs drive state to a point where it can think, and then give the required behavior to get the reward.


----------



## Jennifer Coulter (Sep 18, 2007)

Geoff Empey said:


> I don't doubt positive methods, but not everyone has the patience of a saint.


Did anyone else read this...then think of Bob...then laugh their heads off?   

Maybe it was just me.


----------



## Lyn Chen (Jun 19, 2006)

Kadi Thingvall said:


> This is assuming the dog can think when it's in that drive state. It's not always as black and white as it's being protrayed. Sometimes the dog isn't being stubborn, but just can't help itself, and you can stand there all day waiting for the dog to finally settle down to the point where it's thinking and giving the required behavior to get the reward, or you can administor a correction. Which may work because the correction lowers the dogs drive state to a point where it can think, and then give the required behavior to get the reward.


I find this true in my situation. Dog performed better when he knew 'right' from 'wrong', compared to when I was just sitting there waiting for him to do the right thing. He just wasn't the thinking kind of dog.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Geoff, a restart for me would be to stop everything and wiat 10 seconds and then begion again.

Kadi, I said "once the dog understands the concept of reward for compliance". With any method of training the dog has to be solid before you add such a powerful distraction as the helper. 
A preditor has to learn patience in order tomake a kill. That doesn't happen on the first hunt. Why can't we expect our dogs to learn patience for the bite? 

Jennife, in the past, being patient would have never been one of my better attibutes. Age does that to ya! :grin: :wink:
As for the saint thing...........well......if I go there I may get struck by lightening. :-o 8-[ 8-[ 8-[ 

My dog Thunder has an extream drive for his kong. 
When I was training him for cadaver work I told the person giving a seminar that he wouldn't indicate if the kong was present. I stood there for a good 10 mins the first time with the kong in full sight. The dog finally, accidentally tapped the container with his paw. !!BINGO!! Mark and reward!
Within half an hour the dog was doing strong downs with a bark indication on the box. 
Holding a dog back builds drive/frustration for the bite, obviously. Wait for that frustration to make the dog give you a WTF look. !!BINGO!! Mark and reward. It IS that simple. 
I'm not trying to talk anyone into giving up correctoin. It's not for everyone but give your dogs more credit for being able to "think".


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Doing OB during bitework really shows you what your efforts are reaping. In your case, I think that you may have overdone it a bit, and got her to the point where she was too distracted. If you think this is the case, then your corrections should have been to you, not the dog.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Bob, if I find a spare Mal laying around, I will send it too you so you can do something not super repetitive like dumbazz Sch. Then I think you will understand the difference from a "working Lines" GSD, and a Mal.

Wait till your dog figures out that they can go and do what they want, and then come back to work and get a reward anyway. By the time you have figured out that they are doing it, they are permanent self rewarders, and they figure this out 1000 times faster than the GSD.

Look forward to seeing you try this with Mondio. I am curious to see how you do.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

Bob Scott said:


> A preditor has to learn patience in order tomake a kill. That doesn't happen on the first hunt. Why can't we expect our dogs to learn patience for the bite?


Some of our dogs would starve to death LOL


----------



## Lyn Chen (Jun 19, 2006)

You can't really paint dogs in one broad stroke. Some of my dogs are perfectly happy just being asked to do something over and over again till they get it right, and they usually don't make the same mistakes again. Some of my dogs are okay for me to ignore their mistakes, as they're pretty easy dogs to handle. It doesn't make them bad dogs. In fact my newest pup, I gotta say is a pretty good dog...very driven, put a nick on me just this afternoon. 

But just because it works on some dogs, even really good dogs, doesn't mean it will work on others...in the case of my big stubborn guy, he was trained motivationally for about a year or so. No corrections, I just waited for him to do the right thing, mark, then okay! Well, guess what...it wasn't working! He was still super slow, and although he knew what the marker meant, he couldn't be bothered. With my other dogs an eager tone would be enough to get them go faster, well, he knew the reward was coming one way or another. *In* the presence of the reward, he got so amped up it was impossible to get him to do anything, and if he did, and I marked it, he didn't *hear* me...he would make the same mistakes over and over again. The more realized he didn't have to do anything, the worse he got. Withholding the reward wasn't working either if he wanted the reward...big, strong, tough dog almost weighs the same as I do...there was really a point when I thought this wasn't working out, he was just too much and he wasn't obeying reliably. When I put some compulsion and finally corrected him, his demeanor changed...still very driven, still intense, but he actually has the *most* reliable obedience out of the bunch. I could practically whisper under my breath *while* he's holding his reward and see him drop down from the end of the field and wait for my next command. 

You really have to find what works with your dogs.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Bob, if I find a spare Mal laying around, I will send it too you so you can do something not super repetitive like dumbazz Sch. Then I think you will understand the difference from a "working Lines" GSD, and a Mal.
> 
> Wait till your dog figures out that they can go and do what they want, and then come back to work and get a reward anyway. By the time you have figured out that they are doing it, they are permanent self rewarders, and they figure this out 1000 times faster than the GSD.
> 
> Look forward to seeing you try this with Mondio. I am curious to see how you do.


Jeff, ever since I've started this method of training (5+ yrs) I've wanted to work with what some consider a really serious dog. I just don't want it to be one of those crazy efn Mals! At least not unless it was solid to ALL environmental issues from the get go. That's a high priority to me. 
I do believe, IF I raise the dog from a young pup, it can be done with any high drive dog. I'm a fim believer in that first 7-16 wk period as being critical to the dog's foundation. 
Now all I need is a place where my wife wont kill me for having more then three dogs at a time. :wink:


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Empey 


> I don't doubt positive methods, but not everyone has the patience of a saint.





Jennifer Coulter said:


> Did anyone else read this...then think of Bob...then laugh their heads off?
> 
> Maybe it was just me.


Nope .. It wasn't just you. I can see Bob holding on to a terrier at the head of a gopher hole, then 4 hours later all covered in welts, bites and scratches. Saying


> hold on there killer just give me eye contact and I'll let you go!


  poking fun Bob..


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Kadi Thingvall said:


> Some of our dogs would starve to death LOL


Thank you for being on the same wavelength, finally someone who knows what some of us are up against.


----------



## marcy bukkit (Oct 4, 2007)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Wait till your dog figures out that they can go and do what they want, and then come back to work and get a reward anyway. By the time you have figured out that they are doing it, they are permanent self rewarders, and they figure this out 1000 times faster than the GSD.


I had a dog that did that LOL. She also wasn't remotely impressed with corrections. She taught me to not bother training her. Fortunately, she was super sweet and very easy to live with.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Bob, talk to Lisa Maze, as she has a little one that is the one you are looking for. Small social issues, but I really think she would be a good match for you, as she has no environmental issues. The other day we were at petsmart and she was walking on the grating around the dog food bags. There is something about this bitch that I like, and I would never admit this out loud, but thought of asking for her myself.

Quote: *In* the presence of the reward, he got so amped up it was impossible to get him to do anything, and if he did, and I marked it, he didn't *hear* me...he would make the same mistakes over and over again.

So you have met Buko???????


----------



## Lyn Chen (Jun 19, 2006)

Well, Jeff, mine's a German Shepherd.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Honestly, they are my breed of choice. Until I find one that I can work in Mondio, I will continue to look, and make fun of GSD breeders that produce the "dead fish" GSD's that I am absolutely sick of.


----------



## Lyn Chen (Jun 19, 2006)

Honestly, I think the problem are a lot of the breeders who can't really judge a shepherd for real strength or anything. They think moving a ball and the dog going crazy over it is "high" drive and unique, or annoying the dog and having it snarl and bark at you is worth anything. Add that to the breeders who don't study the dog's bloodlines and think putting one good dog next to another will be enough...well, you see where I'm going with this.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

I was just talking this morning about the breeding thread, and just how easy it is to breed on the internet LOL.

I have had really nice dogs that were marginal (for me) producers, and dogs that were not so much produce like champs. I definately am sick of breeders talking this and that, and then you go watch what they produce hump along in the work.

Glad you have a nice one.......heard of my ring revolution??????


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

With a bit of looking it's not really hard to find a good dog. I commend the responsible breeders out there that make finding a good dog still possible. 
It's more responsibility then I want to take on.


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Kadi Thingvall said:


> This is assuming the dog can think when it's in that drive state. It's not always as black and white as it's being protrayed. Sometimes the dog isn't being stubborn, but just can't help itself, and you can stand there all day waiting for the dog to finally settle down to the point where it's thinking and giving the required behavior to get the reward, or you can administor a correction. Which may work because the correction lowers the dogs drive state to a point where it can think, and then give the required behavior to get the reward.


I've seen this over and over again with Mals even my own Mal. i.e. This past weekend at training a Male 70lb Mal in its guards so intent on the decoy that it is doing dirty bites and not staying in couche-guarde. The decoy grabs the lead and gives the dog a shake and bellows COUCHE!! Wham!!! The dog thinks ... oh yeah that is what I'm supposed to be doing. The correction doesn't hurt the dog and basically clears the cobwebs from the dog's head so that it can actually do the work instead of being in laa laa land. Basically a 3 second correction cleared the dogs head vs putting the dog back into the crate. Or bringing the dog out later or the next training session and risking the dog still carrying on like a fool the next session because it *still* gets in that elevated drive state where it isnt thinking clearly. A 3 sec correction fixed it quickly.


----------



## Kris Finison (Nov 26, 2007)

Geoff Empey said:


> How do you come to a conclusion what level and or what type of correction your dog warrants depending on the exercise? I know every dog and handler team is different. Though I'm wondering what goes through other handlers minds when the dog is not doing what it is supposed to do.


Indeed every relationship is different and really, that's how a good handler will (and IMO should) treat each dog - as an individual. Dogs of the same breed and even of the same litter can and do have a VAST range of personalities.
I think a handler needs to know what they want out of the dog but always be willing to change any and all methods. They should take the time to get to know their dog and how they think to the best of their ability. This is coming from handling a Caucasian Ovcharka and a Cane Corso - which I do not doubt will react towards the handler or crumble due to an unjust (in their mind) correction... very unlike many shepherds who can take an overly harsh correction in stride, comparatively.

That being said, I know my CO bitch can take a VERY harsh justified correction that literally turns her 180 degrees in the air. At the same time I can also make her adjust where she is placed in heel position by simply making the buckle hit an inch higher on her leg - no correction. It's all about knowing what she has the concept of and what she has learned but is testing. 
As far as reacting protectively to people, since she is naturally over protective, I find that socializing the crap out of her (almost to the point to spoiling her with attention) is the best way to go. Simply exposing her to and showing her people who aren't a threat then contrasting those who are make her accept a harsher correction when she reacts to something that she doesn't need to.

Hope that makes some sense... :razz:


----------

