11 week old puppy running and jumping on sofa even when people sitting on them!

My older lab older lab did this very briefly when she needed to burn off energy. She got put in a brief time out to calm down and behavior stopped quickly. With her and my now 13 week old pup they are not allowed to put their paws on the furniture in any way or on people sitting on them. They are told "off" and I put their paws back on the floor and give them a petting.

 

Well this one does

It's a generally nice place for him to be. Many times a day I ask him to jump on his raised bed, and he always gets a couple of kibbles.
He gets brushed on his raised bed (with a kibble every few brush strokes).
He has his nails trimmed on his raised bed (one kibble per nail).
And whenever we give him a new toy or chew, he's asked to jump on his raised bed and sit smartly, before we give it to him. When we eat at the table, he takes himself to his raised bed and lays down.
And whenever he sleeps on there, we never disturb him.

Speaking only for myself, and in no way preaching to anyone else (hopefully an adequate disclaimer ), I'm sure we could have achieved a similar result without kibbles, and instead used firm words and a little more perseverance, but I'm not sure why we would have wanted to. After all, he needs to eat his daily kibble ration anyway and, maybe more importantly, I really feel like I connect better with my dog when slipping kibbles in to his greedy mouth, rather than standing over him whilst using stern words. I want us to have a "good mates" relationship rather than one of "teacher and naughty schoolboy".

 

Thanks for all the advice. Today I took the ladders off the sofa, so now we have somewhere to sit - which is more relaxing anyway! And I have tried to engage more positively with her whilst I'm sat on the sofa and she is on the floor. This afternoon she slept by my feet (great!). Although she needs a kibble treat to jump off once she is up there, but maybe that's no big deal if she gets more of my time and better treats for being on the floor. I see the difference, I need to train her behaviour rather than react to her behaviours. Also, a raised bed does sound nice, are they chew proof? Does anyone have any recommendations? She has a plastic tub with vet bed, not that comfy but she chews it a lot. Thank you everyone.

 

Give the choice, I would buy a Hi-K9 one. They're a bit pricey but will last for ages. I bought Coolaroo ones for my dogs, because that's what I could buy here in Spain and they're OK, but definitely won't last as long. Nothing is entirely chew-proof to the determined chewer, but my puppy (who does like to destroy things, given the chance) only gives is a bit of a mouth on occasion and is easily distracted. If you have a more determined puppy, then it's just a matter of training laying on it without chewing it

As for getting her off the sofa, I would train an "on" and "off" cue. Practice on something a bit lower, because repeated jumping on and off something as high as a sofa is bad for puppy joints. Or you could put a step against the sofa when you're training. That way, if she gets on the sofa when you don't want her there, you don't have to bribe her to get off, it will be a trained response (with an appropriate reward for responding to the cue).

 

I have not taken anything "personally", this is after all the internet. Hopefully you are not taking it personally either. When it comes to behavioral science, experts, and facts I always remind myself that scientists, experts and facts are not always correct. Studies are just that, studies, they are not conclusive evidence of anything. One "studies" something, then draws some conclusions, and those conclusions can be right, wrong or somewhere in between. Behavioral science is not a physical or exact science. It is made up of nothing more than opinions.

I would never state my method was "better". That is the problems with experts, they have something to prove so they insist their method is the best one. Hogwash. There are people who feel that Cesar Milan is the worlds greatest authority on dogs and those who disagree with him vehemently. Cesar is an example of someone studying dog behavior, reaching conclusions and then trying to convince the rest of the world that he is correct. Like most "experts" he is at least partially correct and partially wrong.

Or, let's put it this way! If either one of us were to write a book, devote lots of time to the subject we would certainly not announce that all sorts of different methods may work and we only have a method that works for us and our particular dogs. No one would be interested in buying the book. What would we call it? "This might work for you."?

Dogs are complex creatures, just as humans are complex. They are partially a product of their environment and that environment has an effect on how they respond. For some expert to state "this is the way you do it" as if they have discovered the ultimate secret is ridiculous. But then, that would not stroke their ego or sell their book.

BTW, one of the reasons that I am not real keen about using treats to produce wanted behavior is that it seems to me that a lot of labs are really, really FAT! I am no expert, nor have I studied this matter to any great degree but I do wonder if all this "treating" eventually leads to a food driven dog. I could share more experiences with you on this matter and how Murphy does not seem to have that EAT gene everyone likes to talk about.

 

Well just to clarify, we aren't talking about "experts" here, we are talking about behavioural studies which are powered to test a hypothesis, which can be "for" or "against" the hypothesis or statement being tested. Scientists either behavioural or medical, don't call themselves experts (just for the record) Conclusions therefore aren't anecdotal, ie an "opinion". An opinion is not necessarily borne out of facts or evidence base.

I do, like yourself, have a deep skepticism of so called experts, who have an evidence based which seems entirely based on anecdotal experience, strongly biased towards their opinion, combined with a significant financial investment..hmmmm...alarm bells ringing!

I also understand your reticence in using treats, I am the same, having an older neutered lab, well I have to be careful. Verbal praise, body language, can be very reinforcing in a lot of dogs. We have to look at the dog in front of us and use everything available in our toolkit. What works for one dog, may not be quite as successful as another...and how do we know this? A well conducted study will help not tell us how to do it, but maybe share a little insight into options.

Finally, being proactive in dog training, is very different from being reactive.. the difference being the dog is on the sofa...now get off..vs...the dog has an alternative behaviour..mat/bed/crate. This is very much a shift in thinking. Some people find struggle with this concept, well that's OK ..just please don't knock those who are very happy with using it, and who are very happy with the results and sharing the benefits of positive reinforcement, after all that is the ethos of the forum.

 

Thank you, Kate. Said far more eloquently than I could probably have managed

I will add that, just because the science isn't perfect yet, that doesn't mean it should be dismissed out of hand. If we were to do that, nothing would ever get done in this world. The brilliant thing about science is that it's always evolving. This may make it sound weak and flimsy, but it's the opposite; it is a movement of people who are constantly pushing at the ideas they hold to see if they hold up to scrutiny and, where they fall short, strive to understand the implications of that. There is no sitting back on laurels and saying "this is it, it's finished" because it never will be. There are plenty of people who stick to outdated ideas in all walks of life, because they are comfortable. I often hear "well, the scientists have been wrong before". Whilst that may be true, when there is this progressive movement, why would anyone choose to stick with outdated theories that have already been shown to be incomplete or just wrong? I'll agree that we might be wrong now, but you know what? We're more right than we have ever been before.

 

Also, if you don't overfeed your dog, it won't be fat. Some dogs, such as some people, are more prone to weight gain than others, but the first law of thermodynamics (TL;DR energy - and therefore mass - cannot be created or destroyed) doesn't go away just because you choose to train with food. Not to mention (did I mention?), that the food is a temporary measure that is faded to environmental rewards. Build value in the bed with food at first, then cement that value with play and with other things the dog enjoys (having their collars put on to go for a walk). When you have the value in being on the bed, you can build value in being asked to leave the bed - then, magically, being asked to leave is the reward for staying on it ... all without a morsel of food passing the dog's lips.

I'm glad that the OP has taken some value from this conversation, and I hope it helps many more become more proactive in their training, whatever methods they choose.

 

Both your and Beanwoods ideas and kind words have encouraged me to change the way I treat my dogs and train them. Its nice to meet open minded people who want improve their dogs lives. It gave me hope and new training ideas to try.

 

It's all very interesting, different approaches to training. I've been thinking a lot about it lately, even before this thread.

I watched a gundog demonstration recently which was brilliant. Happy, bright eyed dogs, tails wagging totally attentive to their handlers. I think at one time there were 9 dogs in the ring, and not a collar or slip lead between them.
The demo started with a 12 week puppy, no lead, bringing a tennis ball and being praised for holding it, and ended with 4 dogs in the ring, a cocker spaniel was sent for a dummy, stopped by a whistle and another dog sent to retrieve the dummy instead.
The handler remarked at one point that they do use food rewards but not routinely as they want the dogs to have the love of working for them.
But of course these are kennelled dogs who spend their lives on the grouse moors == only the retired dogs get to go on the sofa's.

I've worried sometimes that Cassie will become food driven, but I think a lot lies in the skill of timing. And I can really see the difference in her focus on me with the work that I have put in with hand touch, LAT and the "leash off" games. But recently I have given verbal and physical praise for voluntary returns instead of food sometimes, she seems happy with that, but I do think that it means more to her as our bond strengthens. Also, really, she's not been problematic in the house beyond normal puppy playfulness, once the nipping stopped.

Additionally, I did a lot of exercises around working with food as per the Labrador Handbook and the main site. I would thoroughly recommend those regimes. If she does get a bit grabby I've only to close my hand and she backs off.

But yes, of course, beware commercialism.

 

I would definitely recommend the Kuranda raised dog beds. I have 2 determined chewers, if given the chance, & my girl is a 'digger' - these beds, albeit expensive, withstand all.

 

Oh yes, I've heard great things about these beds, too. I think they were top of my wish-list over the Hi-K9, come to think of it now. I think it was your post about them before that mad me look them up

 

I have both the pvc & aluminum versions (no I'm not going to confess how many beds I have for 2 dogs ) but they are fantastic & will last a lifetime...

 

I think having a dog that's food driven is a brilliant thing! It makes training new behaviours so much easier than without. Yes, you have to be careful that you're not bribing, but that's not difficult to achieve.

Absolutely! Again, it's about working with the dog in front of you, and that dog may be the exact same dog you had yesterday or last week, who is just responding differently now. Luna adores being told how clever she is, and always has. She's really driven by praise - alongside food and games. If asked to make a choice between being given a piece of ham with no comment and being given loads of attention with no ham, she'd take the latter every time. W&S were very different to this as young dogs, and weren't interested in being fussed at all during training. Now, though, they love it. When teaching the leg weaving, Shadow very quickly moved away from needing any food rewards because me telling him how brilliant he was got him so excited he would squeak. Another reward for him is being asked to do another behaviour. So, I get him to do a "front" and his reward for that is to do a "heel", which is rewarded by a "middle" etc etc. Each one has such a history of reinforcement that they are now conditioned reinforcers in their own right and it becomes like a feedback loop. Heel reinforces front reinforces heel reinforces front But only after building a lot of value in those individual behaviours initially.

 

What an interesting discussion. And many thanks for some excellent posts and advice from @snowbunny and @Boogie @Beanwood

I just want to add my reply to this point to reassure the many people reading that this is absolutely not true.

Behavioral science is based on thousands upon thousands of excellently designed and properly controlled scientific studies. I have read a tiny proportion of them in my research for books and articles - it would take a lifetime to read them all - and I can confirm that the standards are just as high as they are in the other biological sciences that I have studied.


The purpose of using food in training is that it is a more powerful reward for most dogs than praise or petting. There are other powerful rewards of course, opportunities to hunt, retrieve or play for example. But these are difficult to utilize effectively indoors.


What you use in training is of course entirely up to you, but those who use powerful rewards find it easier and quicker to get results without resorting to aversives.

The problem with people stating that it is fine to avoid using treats and to focus on praise and petting is that when others try these techniques with their own dogs, the end result is often frustration, failure, or a return to aversives.

That is why so many on this forum bang on about food rewards, and are committed to investing their time correcting misinformation on this topic when it is posted up on the forum.

So thanks again to those who have taken their time to respond politely and comprehensively on this topic.

Here are some articles on this important topic

• Using and choosing rewards in dog training
• What to do when treats don't work
• How to keep your dog off the couch

I hope you find them helpful

 

I made a big mistake with Tatze, she was the first dog I have trained - all my other dogs were typical small, untrained but friendly dogs.

The I made mistake was showing her the reward before asking for the behaviour. This made her into a 'show me the money' kind of dog. I corrected this and never do it any more. But her 'checking' to see what the reward will be still happens sometimes.

Now I never let them know what the reward will be or where it will come from until they have given the behaviour and I have (quickly) marked it with my 'click'.

From the article "If all family members avoid bringing the puppy onto furniture even when small, he may never ever make an attempt to climb up there when he is bigger."

This is true with Keir (16 weeks). He was never held in arms on furniture and never allowed to even put his paws on it. He doesn't even think about it now. I had to be more pro-active with Mollie and keep furniture out of bounds. She's 11 months old now and never attempts to get on. She tried for longer with Tatze's chair but I used treats and the 'off command until she learned.

Here is a video of them all




.

 

It's more about getting in a muddle about what exercise we are doing and the realationship with my hands, she was such a bitey pup that I had to do work on not seeing my hands as items to be mauled, and now with handtouch and the magic hand came and boundary games will she get frustrated? Or confused? But I guess it's up to me to be clear myself somehow.

 

Ah, I see what you mean. Dogs are great at contextualising, so I don't think it's something to really worry about unless you find yourself with a problem. Hand touch has a very clear cue for me, with the hand held out in such a deliberate way that it's obvious what I'm after. If she's muddled with it, then I would develop it so that it always needed a verbal cue, and was never rewarded without that. For my dogs, it's not been necessary, but I can see how you might have to with dogs that are still a bit mouthy.

How far along are you with magic hand? Do you do it walking along yet? Remember the point is to work towards an upwards focus without the treats.

I love using food with the boundary games. It really strengthens the proofing, and the release. When I'm doing my dogs' nails, I'll have the one I'm working on on the sofa and the other two on their raised beds. Every now and then, I'll throw a treat at the settled dogs. Sometimes they will get it, but sometimes it will bounce off and land on the floor (sometimes I throw it so it purposely does this). They're not allowed it if it lands on the floor, unless they can reach it without moving from the bed. After a little wait, I generally pick it up and give it to them, but will sometimes release them to get it. It makes nail time more interesting for us all.
In this context, the boundary is the cue to not take the food if they can't reach it.

 

I appologise in advance for diverting this back to the original.

Lady is allowed on the big sofa but not on the small one. Yesterday I was pretending I hadn't seen her on the small sofa because she looked so comfortable. Anyway long story short I spotted my OH coming down the street and knowing she would not be pleased to find Lady on the small sofa, I said very quietly, "Lady, Rosemary's coming". Lady was up and off in a flash and transferred to the big sofa!

Lady and I have an understanding you know.

 

So what you're saying is that Rosemary has shaped you both

Did you get up and brush away the hairy evidence?