​
The use of aversive equipment and methods are unnecessary and often detrimental to the welfare of animals including our pet companions. There really is no need to use force or pain when teaching a non verbal individual. This overlaps my personal and professional opinion following years of working with companion animals and, is predicated on and supported by peer reviewed modern scientific literature, American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA), as well as medical and psychiatric community. We know from a litany of evidence (human and animal literature) when applying a fear and force free training/teaching protocol with dogs and humans there is improved compliance, less distress, improved learning and reduction in long term conflicts between human and non human animals. Understanding another's internal emotional state is difficult however over and over we see evidence of rewarding (R+ ) engagements lowering stress hormones where as the opposite use of pain and punishment or the threat of such use increase stress hormones (Blackwell et al,, 2008, Hiby et al., 2004).

When rehabilitating dogs who have suffered fear, anxiety or stress (FAS)  due to either missing the young socialization /critical period or due to poor training methods, my preferred method is to use only use training that is free of fear, pain and intimidation. When rehabilitating dogs with moderate to severe cases of stress and anxiety, medication is often necessary as a temporarily adjunct along with behavior modification training because of the need to quiet the underlying distress allowing the individual to learn. We know reward based training is not only humane but longer lasting. Studies have been conducted to evaluate the use of collars that illicit pain including shock collars (electronic or e collars) by trained professionals and untrained owners. Such studies are designed so that scientists may collect saliva and urine samples from the dogs to determine their subjective emotions from the experience. Both dogs trained using e-collars and a matched sample of those not using e collars are tested. Comparing both allow scientists to check for physiological signs of stress at various points in data collection. In a study evaluating cortisol leaves of e-collar-trained dogs, salivary cortisol increased significantly when they were wearing an e- collar, compared to dogs trained only using reward based methods R+ “suggesting a negative association with anticipation of stimulus application.” (Companion Animal Welfare Council, 2012 The use of electronic pulse training aids (EPTAs) in companion animals. See the study at www.cawc.org.uk. In this particular study it showed e-collar-trained dogs also had a significant increase in tense behavior, compared to other dogs. There are many more studies showing the same conclusions.

The issue with using pain and punishment as a method of teaching an individual is that we end up instilling more distress and confusion. Psychologically the learner makes a negative association with a host of environmental stimulus and more often then not either generalizes the negative association or develops phobias. Phobia is different than fear in that it is the anticipation of a threat toward the stimulus (Overall, 2013).   The non human animals (dogs) trained using pain or averse methods (e collar, shock) even when thought to be trained correctly using low pain threshold by a professional not only learn that being trained is a stressful experience and receiving shocks is painful, they also learn the presence of their owner or the cues their owner/guardian commands predicts the reception of a shock even outside of training context. This means the learner is constantly feeling distressed, the anticipation that something painful will happen (Schilder and Van Dee Borg, 2004). I'm certain we can all agree no individual should be in a chronic state of uncertainty and distress as this is not a way to live life. 

We lag behind in the U.S. when it comes to animal welfare and shock collars as their use are banned in many countries including Canada, the U.K., and Australia.  Certainly world wide we are free to acquire pet companions and live with them and, in this country we are also free to choose whatever teaching method we think is in our, and our pets best interest regardless of what science currently says. And while it is not my place to judge anyone who decides one way or another, it is my place to tug at public conscious. To help us consider the animals perspective and interest and consider current peer reviewed literature so that we may make a choice. And isn't this the rub? What is in the animals best interest? Are we capable of separating our own interests?  Considering our pet companion dogs (cats, rabbits, horses) are a different species then we, with unique sensory perceptions used to experience the world does not negate their ability to experience similar emotions. We know from the pioneering work being done by Dr.Gregory Berns and colleagues at Emory University on mapping dogs and other animals brains using fMRI, they do experience similar emotions.  While non human animals may experience life very differently, we cannot argue their ability to cognitively learn and feel the same emotions including love, joy, fear, pain, jealousy and anger. And we cannot deny the science proving positive reinforcement and kindness is improved welfare for our animals.  I choose to use teaching methods free of fear, force and intimidation because it works, maintains mutual trust and helps me feel like a better human being. 

--
Vivian Zottola, CBCC, CPDT, MSc
Human-Canine Relationship Specialist

References 

Arhant, C.,Bubna-Littitz, H., Bartels, A., Futschik, A., & Troxler, J. (2010). Behaviour of smaller and larger dogs: Effects of training methods, inconsistency of owner behaviour and level of engagement in activities with the dog Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 123 (3-4), 131-142

Blackwell, E., Twells, C., Seawright, A., & Casey, R. (2008). The relationship between training methods and the occurrence of behavior problems, as reported by owners, in a population of domestic dogs Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 3 (5), 207-217

Cooper, J., Cracknell, N., Hardiman, J., Wright, H., & Mills, D. (2014). The Welfare Consequences and Efficacy of Training Pet Dogs with Remote Electronic Training Collars in Comparison to Reward Based Training PLoS ONE, 9 (9)
Gaunet, F. (2009). How do guide dogs and pet dogs (Canis familiaris) ask their owners for their toy and for playing? Animal Cognition, 13 (2), 311-323

Herron, M., Shofer, F., & Reisner, I. (2009). Survey of the use and outcome of confrontational and non-confrontational training methods in client-owned dogs showing undesired behaviors Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 117 (1-2), 47-54

Hiby, E.F., Rooney, N.J., & Bradshaw, J.W.S. (2004). Dog training methods: Their use, effectiveness and interaction with behaviour and welfare Animal Welfare, 13, 63-69

McGowan, R., Rehn, T., Norling, Y., & Keeling, L. (2013). Positive affect and learning: exploring the “Eureka Effect” in dogs Animal Cognition, 17 (3), 577-587

Overall, K. L. (1997). Clinical behavioral medicine for small animals. Mosby-Year Book, Inc..
Chicago

Rooney, N., & Cowan, S. (2011). Training methods and owner–dog interactions: Links with dog behaviour and learning ability Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 132 (3-4), 169-177

Blackwell, E., Bolster, C., Richards, G., Loftus, B., & Casey, R. (2012). The use of electronic collars for training domestic dogs: estimated prevalence, reasons and risk factors for use, and owner perceived success as compared to other training methods BMC Veterinary Research, 8 (1)

Defra AW1402 (2013) Studies to assess the effect of pet training aids, specifically remote static pulse systems, on the welfare of domestic dogs. University of Lincoln / University of Bristol / Food and Environment Research Agency.  Final report prepared by Prof. Jonathan Cooper, Dr. Hannah Wright, Prof. Daniel Mills (University of Lincoln); Dr. Rachel Casey, Dr. Emily Blackwell (University of Bristol); Katja van Driel (Food and Environment Research Agency); Dr. Jeff Lines (Silsoe Livestock System). 

Defra AW1402a (2013) Studies to assess the effect of pet training aids, specifically remote static pulse systems, on the welfare of domestic dogs; field study of dogs in training. Final report prepared by Prof. Jonathan Cooper, Dr. Nina Cracknell, Jessica Hardiman and Prof. Daniel Mills (University of Lincoln).

Herron, M., Shofer, F., & Reisner, I. (2009). Survey of the use and outcome of confrontational and non-confrontational training methods in client-owned dogs showing undesired behaviors Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 117 (1-2), 47-54 

Schalke, E., Stichnoth, J., Ott, S., & Jones-Baade, R. (2007). Clinical signs caused by the use of electric training collars on dogs in everyday life situations Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 105 (4), 369-380 

Schilder, M., & van der Borg, J. (2004). Training dogs with help of the shock collar: short and long term behavioural effects Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 85 (3-4), 319-334

Social Distancing and the Human Animal Bond
By Vivian Zottola, MSc, CBCC, CPDT, CSAT

Check your smartphone, turn on the radio or television and we are bombarded with forewarnings to "socially distance" ourselves from one another. Yet it is not social distancing we ought to practice but rather, physical distancing to slow the spread of the serious Coronavirus. Physical distancing and hygiene are imperative to slowing this all down and getting our lives back to a normal pace.

Social connections are imperative to our personal well being and the same holds true for pet animals. Dogs and cats are like us, social and cooperative species and like us, require social interactions as without individuals would experience much suffering.  According to Dr. Lieberman in his book, Social, the mammalian brain (and that would include humans and non human animals including our pet animals), "have evolved to experience threats to social connections the same way they experience physical pain". The capacity to feel "social pains and pleasures" is built right into the mammalian neural circuitry. We cannot get around this nor can our pet animals. As he explains its nature's way of ensuring we spend our lives motivated by maintaining a social connection. Our well being and those of the animals we live with is contingent on our social connectedness which at this time is being threatened. 
 
Ways to maintain safe social connections 
 
There are actions we can take to ease our very rational fears of this unknown virus. Learning all we can about this invisible “boogie man” helps us separate fact from fiction. According to the NIH and World Small Animal Veterinary Association (wsava.org) there is NO evidence our pets can get infected and sickened by COVID19 virus. It is absolutely vital to maintain social interactions with them and the people in our small inter-species social groups while we remain homebound. 
 
Designing a simple weekly plan for our family and pets helps us focus on maintaining a positive and productive outlook while we ride this out. It provides us a sense of control and something to do to fill up our days. Write down a simple plan to stick on the refrigerator and task the whole family (or roommates) with an item. Keep everyone busy and responsible for something. It might be to shop for ingredients in store or online, food prep for yourself and your pets (stuffing those Kong's and toys can be fun), bake some dog safe cookies, and include physical and mental training interactions with your pets. 

Mental and physical exercises ought to be included in your weekly plan.  Physical exercises might include going outdoors for a hike in the woods or along the beach, walking your dog in and around the neighborhood, and practicing “training walks” while on a leash outdoors. Other suggestions, work on teaching skills while you play with your dog in the living room, backyard or the park. Bring a few tennis balls outdoors with you to a field and play catch or take it/drop it games. You could also find a bench or stoop to sit on with your dog and be just be still. Just sitting and taking in deep breaths while the sun (if it's out) warms your face can help reduce distress. Take a few minutes to take in the promise of spring and good things to come. 
 
Indoors can be just as fun as outdoors! Plan engagements that are soothing for both you and your dog including some husbandry. Station your dog on a blanket, towel or mat and with a soft brush, work on brushing their coat to provide a natural massage or clean and rub their feet and ears. Husbandry is necessary to their well being and the contact also provides us with a sense of well being.  

Mental exercise is stimulating for us and our dogs helping to "grow" those brain cells, reduce arousal, heart rate and  "taxes" the individual. Thinking requires energy which is tiring. Consider how you feel after for example solving a mathematical problem (calculus anyone?). Anything that requires mental focus is tiring which stands true for both human and animal. Proactively engaging our dogs by using reward based training skills as a means to manage their expectations (communicate) will exercise their brain since doing so relies on problem solving through the process of making right and wrong choices. Again this takes focus and energy.  Behavior training is fun, engaging and will tire you both out! Suggestions to practice include working on stationary dog training skills such as sit, down, name game, check in, wait or if you have a little more time work on some fun tricks and shaping behavior games like stationing (go-to place).  Keep in mind you and your dog are learning and bonding regardless if you make mistakes. And if you do, not a problem. Video taping yourself as you train then going back and watching a playback helps to evaluate and improve upon mistakes. Life is all about making mistakes, evaluating, learning and improving the next time around.


Stick to your usual routine as much as possible

A difficult but important issue to consider is remaining indoors with your dog 24/7 may potentially set them back. In order to understand the world from their unique sensory perception, dogs are masters at mapping out patterns and routines in their environment. Some of us work outside the home and our dogs have become accustomed to “not seeing us as much” during the day but rather in the evenings and weekends. Maintaining a routine where you leave the home for a few hours without them or work in another part of the home may be something to consider. When doing so make certain to give your dog a puzzle, engagement toy or a chew. If you can afford to maintain a dog walking service this would be ideal as it could give you a break, set our dogs up for success for when things do go back to a normal routine and keep local small businesses and services actively employed. Sticking to a routine as much as possible helps for when we are back to our normal lives and routines.


Improving separation anxiety and isolation distress

Each individual is different as is their learning experience. If your dog suffers from “separation anxiety” and your dogs' veterinarian, veterinary behaviorist or certified applied animal behaviorist has concluded it is a clinical condition, take advantage of your time home to improve this debilitating behavior. What a great opportunity to work on this since practicing departures helps those who have trouble being left alone. A behavior modification program aimed at improving their response to your departure from home is something you can work on from home. 

Separation anxiety in dogs like humans, is considered by many specialists a "panic attack". A phobia or irrational fear. For many it is a condition physically affecting dogs and the people who live with them. We are working hard to understand and provide remedies. This condition is still being heavily investigated by scientists and to date there is no conclusive evidence on the best treatment. That said, there is help and some evidence from scientists and veterinary behaviorists including professor emeritus Tufts University and co-founder Center for Canine Behavior Studies, Inc Dr Nicolas Dodman,
https://www.centerforcaninebehaviorstudies.org/  that medicine combined with behavior modification training helps support changes in behaviors.  For some individuals, we can “tease out” feelings of isolation distress when left alone for a short time by appealing to their unique sensory perceptions. In some, providing simple olfactory games, soothing music and extra dog walks is stimulation that helps take their minds off of isolation from others. With the more extreme cases, the most effective solution is behavior medication combined with a behavior modification program. According to Dr. Dodman this has been shown to markedly improve behaviors by 85% in some dogs. Each individual’s experience is different and so should be their solution. A large body of evidence shows using reward based methods is best. Speak with a qualified veterinarian, veterinary behaviorist, or certified applied animal behaviorist for guidance. If your veterinary or veterinary specialist has suggest your dog falls into this category reach out to them for some suggestions. Other highly informative online training information includes Mission Possible, an online course for dog guardians packed with clinical medical professional interviews, tools you can download and training specialists you can speak with.

Another suggestion to work on as you spend time at home is just chilling out – setting up a daily "zen zone" with your dog by practicing some mediation to improve their ability to be calm. For our dogs, this looks like a systematic desensitization behavior relaxation protocol provided by veterinary behaviorist Dr. Karen Overall where we reward our dogs for remaining calm and increase the time they remain calm while introducing movement, noise, and other stimuli systematically. Read more about creating a "zen zone" with your dog and the step by step tasks or missions you can follow on this link here.  Sometimes what we think is separation anxiety or isolation distress is simply boredom from being left alone for too long with nothing to do. Our dogs, like us are living, breathing, thinking, feeling beings. Improving their welfare requires enriching their lives. If your dog does not have a choice in whether or not they can actively “do” something it may have a detrimental effect. They may be “destructive” chewing on things in the house or sleep and lay about. Providing your dog with strategic enrichment games will help improve their welfare by stimulating their senses and making life a little more interesting for them. Read more about dog welfare here. 
 
Discover your dogs unique personality while playing a game 

As you spend more time with your dog at home, how about learning more about your dogs personality and what motivates them most! A fun online game designed by Dr. Brian Hare is Dognition.com.  It is a fun low cost way to engage the whole family. Include the game in the weekly/daily “Dog Training activity plan”.  Once you’ve completed the Dognition.com test they send you suggestions and demos for future games to play specific to your dog. Through very simple games (test) you will learn more about your dogs' personality and what works for them. They send weekly suggestions to help you improve your habits and your dogs behaviors. These are skills that will last a lifetime. Find out if your dog is an ACE, Charmer, Socialite, Expert, Renaissance Dog, Protodog, Einstein, Maverick, Stargazer! See Dognition here.  
 
When active supervision is not an option

Now if you do not have time, interest or simply cannot actively supervise your pet dog while spending time at home that’s okay however at a minimum it is your responsibility to give them something to do!  So often we misinterpret our dogs body language and activity, including sleeping and laying as okay. We may think our dog is fine when in fact they are not. They may be bored and in some cases even experiencing learned helplessness (depression). There are actions you can take to improve their boredom. Bare in mind dogs don't have opposable thumbs and cannot simply turn on their favorite channel, (www.Dogtv.com ); music station (www.icalm.com ) or flip through a Dog magazine (www.thebark.com). While auditory and visual stimulation games including play and body mechanics training is fantastic for our dogs, the number one stimulation is olfaction, the sense of smell. It is THE most important faculty or rather, sensory perception for dogs. We know from the wonderful work conducted by ethologists Dr. Ray Coppinger and Dr. Kathryn Lord about the differences between wolf and domestic dog pups, olfaction is one of the first sensory systems to develop in dogs (day 3 after birth).  It is an important evolutionary adaptation to their survival and gives us an understanding as to how they may perceive the world. We will never really know how a dog “experiences” the world since their umwelt is very different than ours however we can appreciate what is important to their ability to understand their surroundings. 

As one of the first sensory systems to develop in canines, the olfactory system is most important for canines (pet dogs).  Being one of the first systems to develop or “open up” is “nature's” way of conveying it is one of the most important faculty they rely on for survival. There is an abundance of evidence that dogs rely on smelling (and the whole olfactory system)  to "map out" and understand the world. Dogs communicate through olfaction and visual systems through the exchange of chemicals including pheromones and body posturing. They rely on these systems to understand how other species (including other dogs, cats and you), are "feeling" in a given situation. They assess whether or not another species or same species if a threat or not. Chemical and pheromone exchange helps dogs to understand if their environment is safe or unsafe, for some it helps reduce their anxiety of your departure (Shin and Shin, 2016).  

Taking a "smelling walk" is enriching for our dogs and providing them with "nose work" games indoors including setting up a "treasure hunt" is another suggestion you can include in your weekly plan. There are tons of engagement and dispensing toys that will keep your dog busy for hours and you can spend a lot of money or, hardly any by making some of your own DIY engagement toys at home. Dog's sensory perceptions are unique to their species just like our perception is unique to us being human. According to studies recently evidenced by Dr. Alexandra Horowitz, smelling improves a dogs mental well being. Dogs were “happier” when using their nose to navigate outdoors on walks and when training or working to actually find objects, and rescue work.  See here for a wonderful animated educational video explaining how dogs "see their world through smell" by Alexandra Horowitz.
 
Small Inter-Species Social Groups
 
As has been hammered over and over again, maintaining very simple yet effective measures including, for example, remaining at a minimum of six feet from others outdoors and washing hands often will ensure the spread of the virus and ultimately our safety. It is what you can do to help reduce the spread of the virus to others in your community and own small interspecies social network, your family including both two and four legged members. Including our pets in our small social group is imperative to their wellbeing. We are responsible for taking care of them and they rely on us to take care of them while going through this difficult time.  Our pet companions provide us with unconditional love, adoration and tons of silliness. We owe it to them to ensure they are safe and well cared for as we would anyone in our lives.  Pet cats, dogs, birds, reptiles, fish and other animals we choose to bring into our home become our responsibility. Let us ensure their basic needs at a minimum are met. 

General Common Sense Hygiene 

Some of our animals may require more attention than others. For our dogs and cats consider they don't have opposable thumbs and so, naturally rely on us to provide them access to water, food, relief walks, socialization with other dogs, people (if ours feel comfortable), veterinary care, and hygiene (dental cleaning, trimming nails, brushing and bathing). If your dog is vocalizing (barking) it may be they are asking for help. The water bowl may be empty, they may be hungry, need a relief walk, something to “do” or chew on or just need affection. According to researchers from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (part of the National Institute of Health),  CORVID-19 virus was found to remain active in the air for up to three hours, on copper surface for four hours, cardboard surface 24 hours; and on plastic, and stainless steel surfaces for three days. This is a time for common sense which tells us, it is always good practice to ensure we help our pets maintain good hygiene just as we do for ourselves.  During this time when we are forming new (and improved) habits let us also consider improving overall hygiene habits. 

Bathing requires consent

Because our pet dogs rely on us a little more than our pet cats to maintain their hygiene, let us help them along by providing them with a visit to the groomer, a full bath or a "bird bath". This ought to be provided ONLY if they are comfortable with water, sound of running faucet and the process of being washed. A "birdbath" might be cleaning their "private parts" with mild glycerine fragrance free soap and tepid water. You might use fragrance free and chemical-free human baby safe wipes if you prefer however, regardless take a minute to read the ingredients to make sure its safe. Like us our dogs are sensitive to detergents and odors.  But hang on, before you grab your dog or carry them to the bathtub, keep in mind your dog may not be fond of taking a bath. They may be noise sensitive to the sound of the water or nervous about the process. Keeping with the practice of seeing the world from their perspective, your dog may have been "sensitized", (a fancy word for becoming frightened of),  bathing because of a bad past experience. The experience could have occurred outside your active supervision with a groomer or another family member. 


There are ways to improve the bathing experience making it less frightening through the process of desensitizing them to washing. If you have children, a niece or nephew who didn’t like bath time you might be familiar with this technique. It requires patience and compassion and can be very rewarding to both you and your dog. Desensitization is the process of slowly exposing an individual to something that might be scary or uncomfortable to them in small increments of volume/time while pairing the experience with something good. in the bathing example, you would start by sitting outside the bathroom and when your dog looks inside the room you give them a treat, this might advance to throwing treats inside in the bathroom by the tub, then move to turning on the water softly then running it a little more while giving them treats and slowly over time you proceed to closer proximity to the water and then proceed to touching the water. The point is to keep in mind is it is broken down over many days and it's up to the individual to "consent" to participate. Allowing an individual (human and animal) the opportunity to make the choice means they are ready and able to deal with the situation at hand. Consider if you force your dog by picking them up and dropping them into a tub full of water they will freak out. You will have worsened the condition and set them back by “flooding” them. Careful not to "flood" your dog or any individual for that matter. Work on breaking the process down over days and weeks if necessary. 

Another consideration is water temperature and the type of soap used. As mentioned above a dog's skin is extremely sensitive to heat and tepid water temperature when bathing is best. Use only dog safe soap which will be effective in cleaning all germs and viruses. Sing "happy birthday song" a few times while washing your dog since listening to your voice may soothe them and improve their experience. Last it's a good idea to get in the habit now and in the future of washing all pet bedding, all equipment including leash and harness, bowls, toys, and any other products we use daily. Everything gets dirty and dusty over time and it's a good practice to maintain these habits long term for the whole social interspecies unit.
 
Maintain Human - Animal Social Connections Using Technology 
 
Maintaining a social connection is important for us and our dog's mental well being. While we may not be able to give our friends and family outside our homes a physical hug at this time, we can give them a “virtual hug” by reaching out to FaceTime with our smartphones and computers. There are other applications including Skype, Zoom and other systems including Furbo.  As a suggestion, use meeting applications including Zoom and Skype to set up a meet up with multiple friends or family members and chat in real-time. Include your dog or other pets on the visual call since they can see movement on the screen and hear using these tools. You could set up a group meet up and share tips on what you've been doing and ideas that work to combat loneliness or boredom.  
 
This is a time to think about people in our community who may be isolated. Contact local nursing homes and hospice to offer your voluntary services. These facilities may be open to setting up a Zoom, FaceTime or Meet up with your family member or form a small gathering where those who are isolated may be able to see your dog. You could offer to show off your training tricks or watch they could watch you play catch or simply hang out and talk with them for a short time.  Studies show our dogs can see what is on computers and television screens so it will be beneficial for your dog. Evidence also suggests just looking at our pets increases oxytocin a social bonding pheromone (also called "love" hormone). Looking at our pets reduces blood pressure and provides an overall sense of well being. Short of touching, we can use our eyes to visually soothe and reduce distress in others experiencing difficulty at this time. All mammals (including humans and our pet animals) are emotional beings relying on social connection - even at a distance to maintain well being. Our technology allows us to provide some level comfort. Let’s proactively use it to help others at this time. 
 
Living in a ”small inter-species social group” with an elderly mother aged 89 years young, husband, sister, three dogs, and a canary and needing to work with clients outside has reminded of how our individual interactions with the world and each other matters to our physical and mental health. Like you, I am responsible for my own actions and, in my case it is to ensure in my mom and family’s well being is protected. It is frustrating not to have a timeline on when this will all end, not knowing who has been contracted and not conducting the pace of life that we are accustomed.  Fortunately, this is moving along in the right direction and we will soon be okay.  What we can do for now for our family and pets is to be present and to take control of our actions. This requires we be creative and think "outside the box" of our conventional lives and habits.  


While the news is unpleasant and for some may seem inconvenient, we need to put others before us at this time. This experience is an opportunity to evaluate our lives and be reminded of how connected we really are with all humans and animals. More than any other time we are all responsible for other humans and nonhuman animals. Our actions matter and we must ensure all of our loved ones and community members are protected while we endure this trying time for humanity at large. This is a time when we will all be tested on some level and, I believe with my heart, we will do right by our human and animal friends. We will get through this terrible storm and be better human beings for having gone through this experience.  
 
******************************
Vivian Zottola is an Anthrozoologist specializing in the study and resolution of behavior challenges between humans and pet dogs. She is a certified Canine Behavior Consultant and Certified Professional Dog Trainer through the Council of Certified Professional Dog Trainers (ccpdt.org) and a volunteer research associate with the Center for Canine Behavior Studies, Inc. non profit 501 (c) (3). For more information see www.VivianZottola.com or www.DogBehaviorandConsulting.com . For more information on the Center for Canine Behavior Study, Inc and work see link here.  Send questions about this paper to vivian@vivianzottola.com  
 
References:
 
Beetz, A., Uvnäs-Moberg, K., Julius, H., & Kotrschal, K. (2012). Psychosocial and psychophysiological effects of human-animal interactions: the possible role of oxytocin. Frontiers in psychology, 3, 234.
 
Duranton, C., & Horowitz, A. (2019). Let me sniff! Nosework induces positive judgment bias in pet dogs. Applied animal behaviour science, 211, 61-66.
 
Lord, K. (2013). A comparison of the sensory development of wolves (Canis lupus lupus) and dogs (Canis lupus familiaris). Ethology, 119(2), 110-120.
 
Flannigan, G., & Dodman, N. H. (2001). Risk factors and behaviors associated with separation anxiety in dogs. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 219(4), 460-466.
 
Himsworth, C. G., & Rock, M. (2013). Pet ownership, other domestic relationships, and satisfaction with life among seniors: Results from a Canadian national survey. Anthrozoös, 26(2), 295-305.
 
Horowitz, A. (2017). Smelling themselves: Dogs investigate their own odours longer when modified in an "olfactory mirror" test. Behavioural processes, 143, 17-24.

Overall, K. L. (1997). Clinical behavioral medicine for small animals. Mosby-Year Book, Inc.
 
Shin, Y. J., & Shin, N. S. (2016). Evaluation of effects of olfactory and auditory stimulation on separation anxiety by salivary cortisol measurement in dogs. Journal of veterinary science, 17(2), 153-158. 

Thielke, L. E., & Udell, M. A. (2017). The role of oxytocin in relationships between dogs and humans and potential applications for the treatment of separation anxiety in dogs. Biological reviews, 92(1), 378-388.
 
Zottola, V.M (2015). Creating a Zen Zone State of Mind with your Dog. Retrieved from http://www.dogbehaviorandconsulting.com/Resources/AcadmeicPapers 
 
Zottola, V.M (2015). Welfare Challenges Rescue Dogs Face Post Adoption. Retrieved from; http://www.dogbehaviorandconsulting.com/Resources/AcadmeicPapers

-- 
Vivian Zottola, CBCC, CPDT, MSc
Human-Canine Relationship Specialist 
Research Associate, Center for Canine Behavior Studies, Inc.
Certified Behavior Consultant Canine and Professional Dog Trainer 
www.DogBehaviorandConsulting.com
Office: 202 K Street South Boston 02127
Office phone: 617-464-1005 
Animal Behavior Society Member
Research Associate, Center for Canine Behavior Studies 
Boston A LIst Winner Best Trainer 2017, 2016
Providing Insured, Kind Animal Behavior &Training Services Since 2010

Disclaimer: all materials and or documentation shared in this email are proprietary and cannot be shared without written permission. Referrals are the BEST compliment you can give me! Thank you for sharing my services to your friends and family

The term “rescue dog” is generally reserved for a dog of any breed or age that has been housed by a temporary boarding system and placed in a new home. These dogs are found a stray, abandoned, neglected or abused by previous human caretakers and relinquished to a non-profit rescue group or shelter organization and then matched with a new owner ("Rescue Dog," n.d.).  Research laboratories, commercial breeding establishments, puppy mill operations, and back yard hobby breeders also relinquish or sell dogs to rescue and shelter housing systems. The rescue dog is, therefore, either raised and then relinquished by human caretakers or directly enters temporary boarding systems from breeding production establishments (Miller, Staats, Partlo, & Rada, 1996; McMillan, Duffy, & Serpell, 2011; McMillan, 2017; Kavin, 2018).
 
In the urban environment, specifically cities in the north east, rescue dogs cohabitate in a home with their human caretakers. The home environment generally ranges from five hundred to a few thousand square feet and may include multi unit apartments, high rise condominiums or stand-alone dwellings. Adequate access to outdoor space for exploration and toileting is limited for these dogs as most homes do not accommodate a backyard. The growing demand for dogs to exercise in cities and towns has spurred the development of more public fenced in Dog Parks. Here dogs are let off leash to exercise and socialize with people and other dogs. Many human caretakers work long hours outside the home and hire daycare services or a dog walker to provide the rescue dog short-term relief. Other human caretakers work at dog-friendly environments, which enable them to bring dogs to work.  And if the rescue dog is left home while the human caretaker is at work, they are typically contained in a crate or restricted to a small area of the home. Some may not receive a relief walk during the day or access to stimulating enrichment.
 
This paper examines welfare challenges rescue dogs face post-adoption in the human caretaker’s home environment. Many have a preconceived notion that adopting a dog out from a temporary housing facility implies improved welfare for the dog. While moving them from unnatural environments such as kennels into natural home environments offers improved conditions, these physically and psychologically compromised individuals will require considerable attention and adequate guidance to ensure a successful bond with their new caretaker (owner). Educational information and proactive guidance provided pre adoption and maintained post adoption is ideal. The more educational information about canine behavior and training provided human caretakers earlier on in the relationship result in stronger bonds (McMillan, 2017; Gazzano et al., 2008).
 
Shifting human perception from ownership to relationship helps improve positive welfare
 
Animal shelters and rescues for companion animals adopted the “five freedoms”, a set of welfare criteria that originally developed from ethical considerations of how animals "ought" to be treated by humans in the farming industry.  The criteria include freedom from hunger or thirst, freedom from discomfort, freedom from pain, injury or disease, freedom to express normal behavior, freedom from fear and distress (Rollin, 2015, p.760;  FAWC, n.d).  Other welfare frameworks have been proposed, however, the “five freedoms” remain most popular and widely used by veterinary educators, veterinary practitioners, and shelter-rescue organizations (Mellor & Beausoleil, 2015; Webster, 2008).  While the framework is useful, it is broad and not a complete guideline for dog owners in the human home environment. Inviting a professional to work with the caretaker in the home and discover points of potential risk and welfare improvement would be ideal. When rehoming a rescue dog into a home environment most will display some level of unwanted behaviors. Problem behaviors human caretakers report range from poor manners, vocalization (barking) and pulling while walking outdoors, to abnormal conditions including tail chasing, flank sucking, paw licking, fearful behaviors, escaping and fear of being alone (Mondelli et al., 2004). The longer these unwanted behaviors go unresolved, the less likely it is the human and the dog will bond, resulting in relinquishment.  
 
What constitutes as good welfare for a rescue dog will, of course, be contingent on how the new human caretaker values the animal. Shaping human perspectives results in improved welfare for dogs when information is provided early on in the acquisition phase.  A research study showed knowledge of natural canine behavior combined with training provided to human caretakers within the first few weeks of the relationship prevented the onset of undesirable behaviors. While the study population was that of young dogs, it proves providing human caretakers information and guidance alters behaviors, which improves in home welfare for dogs longer term (Murphy et al., 2014; Gazzano et al., 2008). 
 
Natural physiological adaptations take time to develop
 
A review of our close and lengthy relationship with dogs, their natural behaviors and adaptations to living with us help human caretakers manage their own expectations. While our interest is to identify key potential welfare challenges dogs experience and prevent problems from developing, doing so requires that we first understand dogs’ natural adaptations. Humans and dogs are both cooperative and social species and our close relationship spans tens of thousands of years. While the issue of equity may be questioned, the relationship between humans and dogs considered by many is "mutualistic” that is; both species benefit from being in the relationship. (Serpell, 2017). Some suggest the process of domestication in dogs precipitated because they remained close to humans scavenging for food, altering their digestive abilities. The process of domestication occurs over much time altering the animals’ genetic makeup which passes on to offspring when breeding. Researchers investigating genomic sequences in dogs and wolves uncovered a gene mutation that occurred at the same timeframe as the agricultural revolution. This change suggests the adaptation to a change in diet was the driving force behind the domestication process and making a clear distinction from wolf relatives (Axelsson et al, 2013).  
 
The process of “convergent cognitive evolution”, which is when two distinct species such as humans and dogs share similar environmental experiences and develop similar traits, is the reason for our continued close relationship with dogs. Cohabitating so closely over thousands of years with humans has allowed dogs to develop the ability to read human social and communicative behaviors including gestures and identifying visual attention (Hare & Tomasello, 2005).  How adept humans are however at reading and understanding dogs remains the bigger question concerning their welfare. Other physiological evidence suggests cross-species empathy has developed between humans and dogs.  A study showed that when dogs and humans listened to crying human babies, there was a physiological increase in cortisol levels.  Of the dogs tested, 70% had never before heard infant crying sounds (Savalli, Resende, & Gaunet, 2016).
 
Improving welfare starts with methodical and compassionate healthcare screening
 
When acquiring a rescue dog from a shelter or rescue organization, new owners are given adoption forms legitimizing the transaction. New human caretakers may receive some information about dogs’ basic and environmental needs; however, the previous history including pre-existing medical and environmental information is often limited or unknown.  Therefore it is essential to proceed with first meeting a knowledgeable veterinarian trained in species-typical behaviors. These trained professionals help determine a rescue dog’s age and screen for pre-existing medical and psychological conditions. Natural and abnormal behavior may be followed up by a trained certified canine behavior specialist working with the veterinarian. The evaluation may be conducted in the context of the clinic or better yet in the home environment. 
 
The American Animal Hospital Association (AAHA.org) has certified veterinarians and clinics across the states that practice “Fear Free” methods when engaging with patients.  Fear Free veterinary clinics are staffed with professionals trained in small animal behavior. They practice force free husbandry methods that allow rescue dogs to make clear choices in non-critical diagnostic care evaluations.  This type of service is particularly crucial for rescue dogs that have been abused and neglected ('Pet' out of Petrified, n.d.). During a clinical examination, rescue dogs may exhibit abnormal behaviors that some owners may overlook or pass off as whimsical and entertaining. The most frequent behavior overlooked is fearfulness. Dogs will display many behaviors at a veterinarian clinic varying from friendly behaviors such as approaching open mouth and wiggly, to fearful behaviors including cowering, shaking, baring teeth and growling (Stellato, Flint, Widowski, Serpell, & Niel, 2017).
 
Veterinarians provide new human caretakers with many important hands-on and diagnostic screening tests. Dental, ocular and arthritic examinations are performed to determine age and ensure no risk of physical pain or the spread of disease in the animal. The spread of Zoonotic diseases which are infections that are spread between animals and people are cause for concern if rescue dogs are not going through acquisition channels. Canine viruses including rabies, leptospirosis and distemper may be fatal to both dogs and humans if not treated (Riley & Wilkes, 2015). Hands-on evaluations and tests help to establish underlying pain, which, if  untreated, will manifest as aggressive or antagonistic behaviors in the home.
 
During an examination, a veterinarian will provide a dental examination to evaluate age and ensure there is no periodontal disease, which is a significant health concern that often goes unnoticed by most owners. Researchers interested in looking at the relationship between an owner's awareness of dental disease in their dog and proactive prevention found only 44% of the subjects examined was aware of the condition and only 17% proactively approved of care to prevent progression.  As with humans, when the dental disease goes untreated, it affects an individual's ability to chew, eat and maintain weight. Inflammation and sensitivity in dental gums cause painful emotions and without relief, the underlying negative affect influences the individual’s overall welfare (Fernandes, et al., 2012; Broom, 2014).  As suggested by some, what seems obvious from this study is whether or not the human accepts their companion animal suffers seems to be contingent on the strength of the bond and relationship (Weary, 2014, p.197).
 
Weight is another health concern that may indicate welfare problems for rescue dogs living in a new home. During examinations veterinarians will evaluate and discuss weight management with human caretakers. Like periodontal disease it too is a major medical health problem that can be managed by proactive intervention.  Healthcare risks related to weight gain include diabetes, hypothyroidism, orthopedic disorders, and hip dysplasia (German, 2006). Reasons for excessive food intake and weight gain in dogs may be as a result of the human caretaker compensating for their absence. It may also be due to poor physical exercise, age or predisposed genetic disorders. Some rescue dogs may be underweight when adopted which is often a sign of previously stressful conditions. It may also be associated with medication. A frank discussion exploring underlying reasons for weight gain or loss and nutritional management helps guide new human caretakers who can then establish healthy decisions for their rescue dogs which will impact welfare.
 
Artificial breeding influences "affects" and dog behaviors
 
Selectively breeding dogs has caused detrimental consequences to metnal/physical health and welfare. Artificial breed standards and selection practices for specific characteristics have resulted in abnormal anatomical and behavioral traits in some breeds. For example, German Shepherds are bred by some to have a sloping back and, as such, have become predisposed for hip dysplasia. This condition is a debilitating muscular disease, which causes atrophy and the inability to walk without feeling pain. Bull terriers are predisposed to develop abnormal behaviors such as tail chasing and auras, which are trance-like states. And many brachiocephalic breeds or, flat face dogs, have trouble breathing, eating and sleeping. Many rescue dogs exhibit behavior challenges that are a result of breeding and subsequently anatomical discomfort.  The quality of life for these individuals is impacted at times so severely their owners either surrender or request a veterinarian perform euthanasia (McGreevy, 2007; McMillan & Serpell, 2011).  A veterinarian or canine behavior specialist may identify complications early in the acquisition phase, which may help to manage the human caretakers’ expectations. Potential complications may be discussed including how best to manage improved welfare for the dog.
 
Honing human observational skills in the home environment improve welfare
 
Learning to distinguish the differences between emotions and moods or "affective states" may help human caretakers recognize welfare problems early on to avoid unforeseen conflicts and mental health concerns from further developing. Dogs, like humans, feel emotions and experience moods. They, like us, determine if an environment is safe or stressful based on their experience and perspective. They, like us, are motivated by good and bad things they perceive in the environment.  Dogs communicate distress about something in the environment by posturing and making subtle movements including turning and looking away lip licking and yawning. (Stellato, Flint, Widowski, Serpell, & Niel, 2017; Albuquerque, Guo, Wilkinson, Resende, & Mills, 2018). Informing human caretakers about subtle canine communication signals allows them to manage expectations, keep their rescue dog safe and better predict potential risks.
 
Fearful behaviors or emotions are  considered normal when they are brief.  If however, the individual is not able to recover from a stressful or fearful event long after it occurs, we might consider the behavior abnormal. Anxiety is defined as the anticipation of a threat, which may or may not be real. It too is an emotion that may be longer lasting and involves monitoring behaviors that largely prohibit withdrawal or avoidance.  Like fear, anxiety could be appropriate, e.g., assessing risk when accidents may occur or worsen, or it may be "maladaptive" to the point of preventing relaxation. (Veissier & Boissy, 2006; Oveall, 2013;  Stellato, et al. 2017).   When an individual experiences a traumatic event, or experiences chronic stress from their environment, it alters their physiology, and they cannot make appropriate or "normal" decisions and choices.  These dogs lose a sense of predictability which is cause for stress. They will quickly escalate potential conflict situations because they cannot avoid the situation or react inappropriately in the context.  Dogs who perceive something as threatening to them are not relaxed about their environment. They may display prolonged arousal type behaviors including pacing, panting, and scanning the environment. These dogs are experiencing chronic stress, which from a welfare perspective should be mediated as soon as possible with the use of behavior medication so not to continue mental suffering (Saplosky, 2004, p.259; Overall, 2013).
 
Proactively enriching the home environment prevents chronic stress from developing
 
Long term isolation in a home environment is cause for boredom, frustration, and stress in rescue dogs. Since dogs are a cooperative and social species that have evolved to coexist with humans and other dogs, isolating them creates negative affects (emotions and moods). Long term feelings of emotions such as boredom can develop into lingering moods such as depression and learned helplessness.  The influence of long term adverse affects (emotions and mood) from isolation has detrimental physiological and psychological welfare implications (Saplosky, 2004, p.255). 
When introducing a rescue dog to a new home, many human caretakers are advised to contain the dog in a crate if unsupervised for safety reasons. While there is some merit in doing so from a safety perspective, it may be a very stressful situation for the dog and cause for unintended frustration. Safety is indeed essential, and freedom of choice necessary to improve an individuals’ sense of control and thus welfare; however, when considering the tradeoff between security and liberty, it is best to find, or negotiate a balance with the dog whenever possible. Being restricted in a crate inhibits behavioral adaptations including foraging, scavenging, scenting, urine marking, social and tactile play. Most importantly, it restricts the individual from being able to make choices. If the human caretaker must leave the dog unsupervised for a short time, they could find a balance by keeping them in a restricted area of the home blocked off with gates (baby gates) which does not restrict olfactory, auditory and visual stimulation. They could also use a camera to keep watch on the dog. Enriching the environment with dispensing food toys and playing natural forest sounds or classical music provides mental stimulation reducing the risk of boredom.
 
The stress response in dogs as with humans is an adaptive, healthy and appropriate response for survival. It is a real-time hormonal reaction to a threatening situation. Moreover, no matter if the threat is real or perceived the body responds in like kind. This is something to consider. While we don’t know what exact time frame constitutes the jump from acceptable stress to chronic stress, we do know chronic stress compromises the individual’s immune system function making them susceptible to infections and diseases (Protopopova, 2016).  Sources of stress for dogs in a home environment may go unnoticed or be overlooked by a human caretaker. Subtle stressors may include indoor and outdoor noise, odors used from cleaning agents, inadequate access to natural light, poor thermal temperature, uncomfortable bedding, and restricted movement, no access to water or food, and insufficient mental and physical exercise.  Some rescue dogs will exhibit obvious distress by vocalizing or panting, others seek an outlet to distract from a stressor as for example chewing objects, while others still may shut down. An environment that does not provide enrichment, promote routines and predictability is cause for poor welfare concern. Once a rescue dog has been medically and psychologically evaluated, and it is determined no underlying medical pain or behavioral abnormalities exist, it is best for the human caretaker to design a stress free home environment including enrichment and exercise. Allowing the individual the opportunity to make free choices increases welfare and improves behaviors (Protopopova, 2016; Morgan & Tromborg, 2007; Sapolsky,2004, p.255).
 
Throughout thousands of years, dogs and humans have adapted to living together and as such, dogs rely heavily on humans for access to all resources and comfort. Basic resources include water, food, toileting, exercise, vet care, mental stimulation and socialization. Some may say the relationship is unfair to the dog since they are vulnerable to and reliant on humans for enrichment and survival. Is the tradeoff of living together an equitable balance for both individuals? This is an interesting question to explore. We know dogs suffer from frustration, boredom and some suggest depression when restricted to unnatural environments including social isolation. The reason for this may be they are not able to express and practice a balance of their naturally evolved behaviors or satisfy the fundamental need for socialization.  Monitoring and adjusting the individuals’ environment based on their unique preferences will help prevent detrimental consequences from developing (Fraser, 2008, p. 226).  Poor welfare for rescue dogs is precipitated and often develops when they are isolated and restricted to confined spaces for long periods. Providing an enriched environment and attending to their basic needs including a balance of mental and physical stimulation will provide rescue dogs improved welfare living in a home environment.
 
Exercise is better than Prozac but does not last as long: Managing abnormal behaviors
 
Some rescue dogs suffer unknowingly to human caretakers from pre-existing abnormal behaviors and psychopathologies.  These obsessive-compulsive disorders may include tail chasing, flank sucking, paw licking. Dogs also suffer from isolation distress and separation anxiety.  The recommended approach to alleviating a dogs' distress is by using behavioral medication and behavior modification training together (Overall 2013).  However, some human caretakers will also appeal to the dog’s olfactory and auditory senses to provide them relief.  In a study looking at separation anxiety by appealing to dogs olfactory and auditory senses, dogs diagnosed with condition were shown to exhibit reduced stress when they were left alone in a strange environment with their owner’s article clothing and recorded voices.  Salivary testing showed coritsol levels, a hormone related to stress in dogs and humans, were lowered (Shin & Shin, 2016).   
 
When rescue dogs move into a new home environment some exhibit abnormal behaviors such as pacing, panting, and cowering while others do not until many months later. Environmental triggers and unforeseen circumstances may trigger underlying stress to resurface causing the individual to act out. Triggering events include moving to a new location, being left at a strange home or pet care service provider for a day or overnight care, the addition or loss of a new family member or renovations made inside or outside the home. The dog’s perception of potential threats is most important in determining if the environment is suitable.  Observing the dogs’ behavior changes based on the context of the environment helps to proactively manage the environment. Some veterinarians recommend behavior medication as a management technique before a known triggering event occurs so to help the individual reduce stress. This is a strategy which may be beneficial for long term management and welfare considerations.  Rescue dogs diagnosed with psychopathological conditions by a veterinary professional require medical attention. Behavioral medication combined with qualified in home behavior modification training helps the individual and the human caretaker learn how best to cope and live successfully together with a dog’s abnormal condition (Overall, & Dunham, 2002; Ogata, & Dodman, 2011).
 
Some rescue dogs experience sound sensitivity which is a painful and fearful reaction to loud sounds. It is difficult to remedy and thought to be a condition closely associated with separation anxiety (Overall, 2013, p.249). Sounds generally distressing to rescue dogs include sirens, moving trucks, car horns, fire alarms. They will typically react to environment sounds by freezing, cowering or trying to escape.  Determining the underlying function of a behavior by a qualified and trained professional prior to taking a dog to a local dog park or walking out doors will alleviate the risk of the human caretaker making poor judgments and management choices to remedy the situation. Without a determination of the function of behavior, human caretakers may revert to verbal discipline or aversive management tools which have been shown to cause aggression, phobias and learned helplessness in dogs (Overall, pg 17). Management tools include prong collars, choke collars, and electronic shock collars. Force, intimidation, and painful methods cause rescue dogs more distress. Providing rescue human caretakers guidance on frequently observing and tracking behaviors and if necessary behavior medication and training where necessary will help to improve potential risk of harm and improved welfare in the home environment.
 
Conclusion
 
According to the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior (AVSAB), dogs are typically surrendered by human owners due to behavior problems, which may be avoided through early education, training, and socialization (AVSAB Puppy Socialization Position Statement, 2019).  Behavior problems typically range from poor impulse control to more severe abnormalities. It is reported on average 3.5 million cats, and dogs are euthanized each year in this country and 80% are healthy individuals (“Pets by the numbers”, n.d.).  Reasons for euthanasia vary and are complicated. They may be due to the quality of life issues, age, medical complications, overcrowding, and recidivism.  That said, it is safe to say many surrendered dogs go through a harrowing experience with some level of associated distress and compromised welfare (Miller, Staats, Partlo & Rada, 1996).
 
Establishing a detailed and comprehensive welfare framework especially developed for the rescue dogs and their human caretakers may help ensure long term success in new homes.  Early screening combined with behavior modification training prior to adoption and continued periodically throughout the first six months to one year is ideal for improved welfare and retention in the new home. Suggestions were provided throughout this paper and following is a list of a phased approach to improving welfare for rescue dogs and their owners in a home environment:

1. Identify stakeholders and motivations:  an intake form will identify personal goals, level of knowledge and history of the rescue dog if provided by the adoption agency
2. Prerequisite medical evaluation by AAHA approved Fear Free veterinary clinic or one comparable, to determine and rule out any underlying medical conditions. If behavior medication necessary behavioral evaluation by DVM Behaviorist Diplomat
3. Set up in home behavior evaluation and educational training provided in part online prior to meeting and, in person. Videos may be used to educate human caretakers on “soft skills” serving to allow human and dog to bond while maintaining safety. Education on canine behaviors, body language and stress signals; safety protocols; canine psychological, physiological and social development and critical timelines. Strategies about setting up a low-stress environment that considers olfaction, audition, restrictions.
4. Provide in-home meeting to provide canine and human behavior evaluation and educational training including body mechanics of operant conditioning, desensitization, counter conditioning techniques
5. Provide ongoing real time support to reduce potentially frustrating circumstances for rescue dogs over 45-60 days

As an anthrozoologist and canine behavior specialist I rely heavily on a phased approach when working with humans and their dogs. I use the “hierarchy of behavior change procedures” a methodology based on teaching styles used with human learners and developed by Dr. Susan Friedman. The framework includes least intrusive intervention strategies, applied behavior analysis, and antecedent management (Friedman, 2010). This system is used on both human and nonhuman animals to establish a mutually beneficial relationship based on negotiation. I have found when human caretakers embrace a reflective system that takes the dogs’ individual interest into consideration they provide the animal freedom of choice and the ability to make better choices which results in long term improved welfare.
 
                                                                                             References
 
Agrawal, H. C., Fox, M. W., & Himwich, W. A. (1967). Neurochemical and behavioral effects of isolation-rearing in the dog. Life sciences, 6(1), 71-78.

Albuquerque, N., Guo, K., Wilkinson, A., Resende, B., & Mills, D. S. (2018). Mouth-licking by dogs as a response to emotional stimuli. Behavioural processes, 146, 42-45.
 
AVSAB Puppy Socialization Position Statement https://avsab.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Puppy-Socialization-Position-Statement-FINAL.pdf
 
Axelsson, E., Ratnakumar, A., Arendt, M. L., Maqbool, K., Webster, M. T., Perloski, M., ... & Lindblad-Toh, K. (2013). The genomic signature of dog domestication reveals adaptation to a starch-rich diet. Nature, 495(7441), 360.
 
Broom, D. M. (2014). Sentience and animal welfare. CABI.

Dawkins, M. S. (2012). Why animals matter: animal consciousness, animal welfare, and human well-being. Oxford University Press.

FAWC - Farm Animal Welfare Council. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20121010012427/http://www.fawc.org.uk/freedoms.htm
 
Fernandes, N. A., Borges, A. P. B., Reis, E. C. C., Sepúlveda, R. V., & Pontes, K. C. D. S. (2012). Prevalence of periodontal disease in dogs and owners' level of awareness-a prospective clinical trial. Revista Ceres, 59(4), 446-451.
 
Fraser, D. (2008). Understanding animal welfare. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, 50(1), S1.

Friedman, S. G., & Haug, L. I. (2010). From parrots to pigs to pythons: universal principles and procedures of learning. Behavior of Exotic Pets. Ames, IA: Wiley-Blackwell, 190-205.

Gazzano, A., Mariti, C., Alvares, S., Cozzi, A., Tognetti, R., & Sighieri, C. (2008). The prevention of undesirable behaviors in dogs: effectiveness of veterinary behaviorists' advice given to puppy owners. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 3(3), 125-133.

German, A. J. (2006). The growing problem of obesity in dogs and cats. The Journal of nutrition, 136(7), 1940S-1946S.
 
Hare, B., & Tomasello, M. (2005). Human-like social skills in dogs?. Trends in cognitive sciences, 9(9), 439-444.
 
Kavin, K. (2018, April 18). USDA says individuals and groups may need license if buying dogs for rescue at auction.  Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/usda-says-individuals-and-groups-may-need-license-if-buying-dogs-for-rescue-at-auction/2018/04/18/1ae671aa-427a-11e8-8569-26fda6b404c7_story.html?utm_term=.ee0542df42d5
McGreevy, P. D. (2007). Breeding for quality of life. Animal Welfare, 16(2), 125-128.

McMillan, F. D., Duffy, D. L., & Serpell, J. A. (2011). Mental health of dogs formerly used as ‘breeding stock’ in commercial breeding establishments. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 135(1-2), 86-94.

McMillan, F. D. (2017). Behavioral and psychological outcomes for dogs sold as puppies through pet stores and/or born in commercial breeding establishments: Current knowledge and putative causes. Journal of veterinary behavior, 19, 14-26.

Mellor, D. J., & Beausoleil, N. J. (2015). Extending the ‘Five Domains’ model for animal welfare assessment to incorporate positive welfare states. Animal Welfare, 24(3), 241-253.
 
Miller, D. D., Staats, S. R., Partlo, C., & Rada, K. (1996). Factors associated with the decision to surrender a pet to an animal shelter. Journal of the american veterinary medical association, 209(4), 738.

Mondelli, F., Prato Previde, E., Verga, M., Levi, D., Magistrelli, S., & Valsecchi, P. (2004). The bond that never developed: adoption and relinquishment of dogs in a rescue shelter. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 7(4), 253-266.

Morgan, K. N., & Tromborg, C. T. (2007). Sources of stress in captivity. Applied animal behaviour science, 102(3-4), 262-302.

Ogata, N., & Dodman, N. H. (2011). The use of clonidine in the treatment of fear-based behavior problems in dogs: an open trial. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 6(2), 130-137.

Overall, K. (2013). Manual of clinical behavioral medicine for dogs and cats. Elsevier Health Sciences.

Overall, K. L., & Dunham, A. E. (2002). Clinical features and outcome in dogs and cats with obsessive-compulsive disorder: 126 cases (1989–2000). Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 221(10), 1445-1452.

Pets by the numbers. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.humanesociety.org/resources/pets-numbers
 
Powell, L., Chia, D., McGreevy, P., Podberscek, A. L., Edwards, K. M., Neilly, B., ... & Stamatakis, E. (2018). Expectations for human caretakership: Perceived physical, mental and psychosocial health consequences among prospective adopters. PloS one, 13(7), e0200276.

Protopopova, A. (2016). Effects of sheltering on physiology, immune function, behavior, and the welfare of dogs. Physiology & behavior, 159, 95-103.

Protopopova, A., Gilmour, A. J., Weiss, R. H., Shen, J. Y., & Wynne, C. D. L. (2012). The effects of social training and other factors on adoption success of shelter dogs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 142(1-2), 61-68.

Rescue Dog (n.d.). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rescue_dog

Riley, M. C., & Wilkes, R. P. (2015). Sequencing of emerging canine distemper virus strain reveals new distinct genetic lineage in the United States associated with disease in wildlife and domestic canine populations. Virology journal, 12(1), 219.  
 
Rollin, B. E. (2015). The inseparability of science and ethics in animal welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 28(4), 759-765.

Serpell, J. (Ed.). (2016). The domestic dog. Cambridge University Press.
 
Sapolsky, R. M. (2004). Why zebras don't get ulcers: The acclaimed guide to stress, stress-related diseases, and coping-now revised and updated. Holt paperbacks.
 
Savalli, C., Resende, B., & Gaunet, F. (2016). Eye contact is crucial for referential communication in pet dogs. PloS one, 11(9), e0162161.

Shin, Y. J., & Shin, N. S. (2016). Evaluation of effects of olfactory and auditory stimulation on separation anxiety by salivary cortisol measurement in dogs. Journal of veterinary science, 17(2), 153-158.
 
Stellato, A. C., Flint, H. E., Widowski, T. M., Serpell, J. A., & Niel, L. (2017). Assessment of fear-related behaviours displayed by companion dogs (Canis familiaris) in response to social and non-social stimuli. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 188, 84-90.
 
Taking the 'Pet' out of Petrified. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://fearfreepets.com/
 
Tushaus, K. C. (2009). Don't Buy the Doggy in the Window: Ending the Cycle That Perpetuates Commercial Breeding With Regulation of the Retail Pet Industry. Drake J. Agric. L., 14, 501.

Weary, D. M. (2014). What is suffering in animals. Dilemmas in animal welfare (ed. MC Appleby, DM Weary and P Sandøe), 188-202.
 
Webster, J. (2008). Animal Welfare: limping towards eden: A practical approach to redressing the problem of our dominion over the animals. John Wiley & Sons.
 
Yong, M. H., & Ruffman, T. (2014). Emotional contagion: Dogs and humans show a similar physiological response to human infant crying. Behavioural processes, 108, 155-165.

When researchers say they're going to try to rehome dogs it has to be more than a "feel good" move because it takes a lot of hard work and resources.  

Recently, many people learned about a horrific experiment in which beagles were force-fed a pesticide to see how they would react to it. It was being conducted in a laboratory in Michigan for a company in Brazil. These sorts of studies were deemed unnecessary by the EPA, but they're still required in Brazil. (See "Why Are Beagles Being Poisoned and Killed?") Many people worldwide were offended and on March 18 the Michigan company terminated them and released a statement indicating that the dogs would be rehomed. Part of it read, "We've been working to refine, reduce, & replace animal tests for years. Today we’re pleased to announce our efforts resulted in a waiver & we can stop the study. We’ll make every effort to rehome the animals."

Immediately after I posted this information, Vivian Zottola, a Certified Professional Dog Trainer and Certified Behavior Consultant, contacted me because she was deeply concerned that many people might not be aware of how much dedication and money it can take to rehome a former research dog. While we both are extremely glad that this experiment has ended and that the company "will make every effort to rehome the animals," these dogs and other nonhuman animals (animals) who are subjected to horrifically cruel treatment are most likely going to need a lot of care when they finally find what we hope will be a "forever home." Vivian runs a private practice as a canine behavior consultant and training professional. She collaborates with DVMs and DVM Behaviorists in the Boston area working with reactive dogs due to fear, anxiety, and stress. Vivian also is a research assistant for the Center for Canine Behavior Studies and enrolled in the Anthrozoology graduate program at Canisius College.

I wanted to know more about the details of rehoming former research dogs, so I asked Vivian if she could answer a few questions about her concerns Gladly she said she could. Our interview went as follows.

In your first note to me you wrote, "While I am happy to learn this news, I’m hopeful they will pay for each dog to have a proper behavior evaluation and any behavior modification training including, if necessary, medication to help reduce the risk of future suffering." Can you please tell readers more about what these beagles are going to need based on your experience working with animals who have been previously abused?  

There is this preconceived notion the act of rehoming an abused nonhuman animal in and of itself equates to improved welfare when, in fact, it’s really only marginally improved, if at all, for these individuals. We need to consider the experience from their perspective and adhere to long term welfare considerations if we truly wish to help these dogs. Consider, for example, that these dogs have been psychologically and physically traumatized and will require mental health rehabilitation. Love, trust, and care are important, however, this is not enough. We don’t know the history of the dogs, for example, if they were born in captivity in a laboratory and living isolated lives, born in commercial breeding establishments, or if they are rescues. The first few months are critical for canine brain development and unnatural conditions do affect behavior. Regardless of where these dogs were sourced from, they endured physical and psychological abuse. Yes, dogs are resilient, however, some may have developed pathologies from the experience or been predisposed to develop them. I don’t know enough about how these dogs were bred or about how long they were tortured. However, the fact is they were abused, suffered, and most likely have cPTSD from this experience.

Certainly, getting these animals out of that horrific environment is an improvement, however, the message I’m trying to convey is while a loving, safe and patient human home are extremely essential, it is not nearly enough. I’ve worked with many rescue dogs over the years and while some are able to habituate, others don’t. Many people rehome these (and shelter) dogs without having them evaluated by the right professionals only to have them continue to suffer from fear/anxiety/stress all the while thinking they will get better over time. In reality, unknowingly the dogs' suffering is prolonged. We need to question animal welfare post-adoption. The act of rehoming is not enough.

Can you provide some specific details about what a person who rehomes dogs like this will have to do and endure? And, what should they be told when they make this wonderful decision? 

Sure, I’ll start with making the decision. Making the decision is the most important part of adopting one of these special dogs. And, while reasons vary for each new human caretaker, careful consideration of a few key points will impact long term improved welfare for both the dog and the human in the relationship. Acquiring a dog is an important responsibility and always a two-way street, so to speak. Often people jump in with good intentions only to find months later they are overwhelmed because of unforeseen and sometimes debilitating behavior challenges. So, while intentions to help one of these amazing individuals is good, it’s best to be realistic about expectations upfront so as to avoid potential emotional harm to either dogs or humans. It's important to understand the full scope of considerations starting with why it is that you wish to rehome one of these dogs (go beyond the obvious). It's also important to evaluate your schedule, lifestyle, and home environment. For example, will you have time, patience, and emotional and financial ability to care for the dog(s)?

Welfare considerations may include long term veterinary care and behavior modification training that may necessitate the use of medications. Many people have biases about using medications and this only serves to prolong the animals' suffering. I have seen it happen far too many times. Other considerations include grooming, feeding, providing a stimulating or calm environment depending on the individual dog, participating in mental and physical exercise, having the time to do these and other things a dog might need, and giving them a lot of focused attention. Asking yourself really tough questions upfront is especially important for any rescue dog, since it will reduce the risk of potential injury (psychological and physical), suffering, and most important recidivism, the risk of surrendering back to a shelter.

There is ample evidence the mental health of dogs formally used in commercial breeding establishments, laboratories, and shelters are compromised to some degree. No longitudinal observational studies have been conducted for dogs housed in laboratories, however, there are short term studies. Dogs rehomed from rescues, laboratories, and commercial breeding typically present fearfulness, hyper-vigilance, sound sensitivity, and separation anxiety. These dogs have also demonstrated trouble learning and present learned helplessness that is often interpreted by owners as boredom or laziness. (Learned helplessness is behavior that occurs when the subject endures repeatedly painful or otherwise aversive stimuli which it is unable to escape from or avoid. After such experiences, the organism often fails to learn or accept 'escape' or 'avoidance' in new situations where such behavior is likely to be effective. In other words, the organism learned that it is helpless.") Dogs, like us, experience emotions and moods and unfortunately moods are more difficult to detect in individuals such as dogs who don’t use words to communicate. Often times they are depressed and this is overlooked. So, expect some level of behavior challenges and reach out for help sooner rather than later. [This is another reason why it's essential for humans who choose to live with dogs become fluent in dog, or dog literate.]

If you decide to pursue acquisition of a former research dog, make sure to hire a kind and qualified professional who doesn't use pain, fear, or intimidation when engaging with your dog. This goes for veterinarians, trainers, groomers, dog walkers, and daycare facilities. Rescue dogs (and of course all dogs) need to engage with humans who will be kind and patient. Your job is to ensure excellent welfare for the animal now under your care, and this means all humans should engage in ways that are free of pain, force, and intimidation of any type, including verbal discipline and equipment (electronic shock, prong, choke collars). Ample studies show the use of aversive equipment and methods increases phobias and aggressive behaviors in dogs, and its best to stay clear of any type of aversive discipline when teaching.

It's also important to make an appointment for a physical and psychological evaluation when you first acquire the dog, and through your first year of living together, periodically meet with this professional to ensure you’re on track. Most dog owners are not versed in identifying potential behavior challenges early on and may not be aware of prevention strategies. The more you understand canine ethology (species typical behaviors) the better your relationship. Also, hire a qualified behavior consultant (advanced training certification) to evaluate your dog in your home and teach you how to hone your observational skills that will help manage expectations for both you and your dog. Meet with them early on in the relationship, surely during the first few months of acquisition. These specially trained individuals will teach you about the “world of the dog” including husbandry; canine ethology, canine stress signals and body language; canine psychological, physiological, and social development; antecedent management and desensitization/counter conditioning strategies. They will work with you outside your home and counsel you on walking equipment as well as environmental enrichment strategies. To find qualified professionals see the Certification Council For Professional Dog Trainers and the Internation Association of Animal Behavior Consultants. While these individuals have signed ethical statements, gone through vigorous testing, and approach training using least intrusive methods with nonhuman animal, remember that dog training is still an unregulated profession. Also, note that while Dr. Google is convenient, there is a lot of bad information out there. Stick with information from canine scientists, Certified Applied Animal Behaviorists (CAABs), and DVM behaviorists. 

On average, dog owners report unwanted behaviors and seek professional help anywhere between the first day and up to six months from acquisition. In addition to seeking a kind behavior modification trainer, you’ll want to meet with a veterinarian to ensure there are no health risks. The dog may experience underlying pain from the laboratory housing that may manifest into behavior challenges as well. If possible, seek out a veterinary practice in your area that is American Animal Hospital Association(AAHA) approved, or better yet, an AAHA approved Fear Free Clinic. These practices are staffed with specially trained veterinary technicians and veterinarians who can identify small behavior challenges. They will be able to flag potential problems and most importantly provide consent-based diagnostic testing instead of forcing procedures on the animals. If they identify potentially challenging behaviors, depending on the severity they will direct you to the right mental health professional for assistance including someone like myself, a Canine Behavior Consultant who helps with behavior modification training, or if medication is necessary, a DVM Behaviorist. The current trend is for canine behavior consultants to collaborate with DVM behaviorists. Also, more and more DVMs are taking courses in animal behavior and becoming versed in using behavior medication combined with behavior training for more expedient and successful results. Ask your veterinarian first if they can help because if they don’t have the experience they may be interested in learning and improving their practice. Be aware and prepared that in some cases medication is necessary to reduce stress and aid the individual in learning during behavior modification training.

Are you hopeful that more and more research facilities will stop conducting horrifically abusive studies and opt for more humane non-animal alternatives? 

Yes, I have hope in humanity that our moral compass will point us in the right direction, however, nothing will change when incentives are skewed and unless we consumers demand change. The more we continue to turn a blind eye, not asking questions or looking under the covers, the more research facilities will continue to use dogs and other animals to test them. We are allowing the behavior to precipitate. Why should they change what they're doing if they're making money and no one complains? Many products (cosmetics, shampoos, and perfumes, for example) are still tested on nonhuman animals (for example, dogs, rats, and rabbits) using methods that are not only inhumane but also unnecessary. We have the technology to perform tests using alternative methods that do not involve harming living beings. Consumers are willing to pay more for a product they really don’t need if they know a nonhuman animal wasn’t used in its manufacture. It's important to recognize nonhuman animals are living and sentient individuals and, like us, they want to live their lives free of pain and suffering. They are not unfeeling objects without emotions, but rather sentient and feeling beings. Our objectification and commodification of nonhuman animals have got to change or nothing else will. 

I was recently reading a study conducted in Germany where funding was provided by a pharmaceutical company in which they were looking for evidence to essentially justify the use of dogs as test subjects. It was concluded that laboratory raised dogs fair better than commercially raised dogs during testing because they are trained to be handled by staff. They also concluded their laboratory dogs were successful candidates to be rehomed because they showed fewer behavioral challenges. They suggested this is a better and more humane alternative than killing the dogs after testing was concluded. However, evidence actually showed that the dogs were less trainable and suffered from fearfulness. 

Perhaps the decision for these conglomerates to release their test dogs is a sign of moral integrity? Or, perhaps, it is fear of consumer retribution? It isn’t just one person in a company acting cruelly to these living beings behind closed doors, it is a team of them from manger to staff worker. And, while their action is admirable, will the public trust them to be truthful going forward? Science and animal ethics/welfare are inseparable and certainly, when people become of aware of the horrific ways in which laboratory dogs and other animals are treated, many feel moral outrage. It most likely was public moral outrage that forced the Michigan company to end their experiments. Isn’t that saying something important? I am hopeful the decision to release the dogs will give scientists and others pause to listen to their heart and find what renowned philosopher, the late Mary Midgley, called the “yuck factor again." We need to find our humanity and respect for all life, human and nonhuman. 

Is there anything else you would like to tell readers? 

We need to take a 30,000 foot step back and really evaluate underlying systemic problems that result from our poor decisions and behaviors. An excellent case in point centers on the laboratory beagles who were force-fed poisonous pesticides. We overlook the fact that legally dogs are a commodity, basically objects or products we can legally buy and sell. Is buying and selling dogs the right thing to do? Of course not.

Thank you Vivian for a very important interview and explaining to readers what it really takes to rehome a dog who has been abused. We both hope that the company's decision to stop the project and to try to rehome the dogs will help give them pause and motivate researchers to listen to their hearts and find the “yuck factor" as Mary Midgley called it. And, we hope they will never do research like this again and other research facilities and researchers will follow suit. Science and animal ethics/welfare are inseparable, and seeing the horrific treatment that these beagles endured is what caused moral outrage that in turn most likely affected the company's decision. There's a lot at stake for research facilities in which dogs and other animals are abused when what they're doing goes public. 

As the late Gretchen Wyler aptly said, "Cruelty can't stand the spotlight."  In the United States there are approximately 90 million dogs living in 68% of all households. If even a small fraction of these people who are offended by dog (animal) abuse made their voices heard in one way or another, it would make a huge difference for other animals who are used in abusive research, including projects that don't generate useful information such as the one from which these beagles were rescued. Of course, the end goal is to stop abusive research using dogs and other animals altogether. There still is much work to be done. 

An important comment was sent to me Barbara Dwyer, a research associate at the Center for Canine Behavior Studies and Certified Behavior Counselor. "These kinds of cases just infuriate me, first for the poor dog who is still suffering from fear and anxiety and secondly because the adopter is traumatized. With experiences like this, many people would give up on rescue for fear of a repeat experience, and they'll tell their friends. We need to do a better job of working with serious cases before they go into a typical pet home. Placement does not assure that a dog will have a good life.  Unsuccessful placements increase stress to the dog, returns to shelters/rescues and even euthanasia.  Lastly, hearing about the bad experience of friends or family can result in fewer folks being willing to take the risk of adopting. Severely fearful, anxious and/or aggressive dogs need time and specialists who with slow, careful behavior modification and possibly medication can teach them to trust us.  Dogs deserve a chance at rehabilitation and should not be tossed into a new home to sink or swim.  We need to find effective ways to rehabilitate and give them a reasonable chance at a good quality of life.  If we can't, we fail to meet basic welfare needs like freedom from pain and fear." 

References
Döring, D., Nick, O., Bauer, A., Küchenhoff, H., & Erhard, M. H. (2017). How do rehomed laboratory beagles behave in everyday situations? Results from an observational test and a survey of new owners. PloS one, 12(7), e0181303.
​
McMillan, F. D. (2017). Behavioral and psychological outcomes for dogs sold as puppies through pet stores and/or born in commercial breeding establishments: Current knowledge and putative causes. Journal of veterinary behavior, 19, 14-26.
McMillan, F. D., Duffy, D. L., & Serpell, J. A. (2011). Mental health of dogs formerly used as ‘breeding stock’in commercial breeding establishments. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 135(1-2), 86-94. 

Mondelli, F., Prato Previde, E., Verga, M., Levi, D., Magistrelli, S., & Valsecchi, P. (2004). The bond that never developed: adoption and relinquishment of dogs in a rescue shelter. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 7(4), 253-266. 

Animal Ethics: How We Ought to Coexist with Non Human Animals
Vivian Zottola
Anthrozoology Graduate Program
Canisius College
 
It has taken over two thousand years for human animal’s moral and ethical compass to change from Aristotle’s “great chain of being” and Descartes notion that animals are machines, to accepted discussions from animal liberationist Singer, animal rights abolitionist Regan and many more progressively compassionate ethical views. Ironically, even in the face of growing empirical evidence supporting our similarities with non human animals, many still cling to human exceptionalism as reasons to rationalize abhorrent behavior toward non human animals. While I believe it would be wonderful to coexist with non human animals in a world where they are allowed, by human animals to live their lives free of suffrage, oppression, and consumption achieving this utopian vision seems somewhat illusory.

I am legal owner of non human animals and as such, perpetuate their oppression. While this is something I now reject, it has not always been so. How do I reconcile this moral paradox where I am today that is, owning pet dogs and believing otherwise? One might question, how hypocritical it might be to make claims, non human animals ought to be free from subjugation while I keep them as companion animals captive in my home. Virtue ethics thankfully takes into consideration the context of circumstances and while criticized as vague, it allows for motive and reason for ones action (Driver, 2007, p.151). What obligated me to keep these dogs? It certainly wasn’t legal constraints since as owner, while I am not permitted to directly kill my pet dogs I am allowed to surrender them to a shelter where there is a high probability of death. Alternatively, I could have also opted to request a veterinarian perform convenience euthanasia. Both perfectly legal options and morally wrong to me. 

I agree with Norcross (2004), ”what grounds moral agency is simply different from what grounds moral standing as a patient (p.243)”. What morally obligated me to care for my pets is as Regan suggest they are “subjects of a life”. As a moral agent capable of knowing right from wrong, and being morally accountable for my actions, I believe non human animals ought to be protected from human animal selfish mistakes and unfortunate life circumstances that are out of our control. Is it fair for non human animals to suffer the anguish of being separated from their human home environment, and even killed because of human animal circumstances? These are difficult questions to answer. However establishing laws to protect non human animal rights as Regan would suggest only seems just (Hursthouse, 2013, p.84). Based on empirical evidence we have today, young children like non human animals (dogs) are incapable of knowing right and wrong. Like children, they rely on adults (moral agents) to act as custodians who will protect them from harm and suffering.  Moral obligations are comprised of feelings of concern, attachment for one’s kind, and as Midgley suggests living with and experiencing non human animals may be the driving factor to help us cross the species barrier and include them in legal obligations (Hursthouse , 2013, p.126).

​“According to thinkers who embrace some form of human exceptionalism, when a non human animal is tortured, the harm to the animal is not what matters from an ethical point of view but rather the harm that reflects on the torturer and the society to which the torturer belongs” (Driver, 2013, p.4).  While I appreciate Kant’s claim, that human animals suffer when tortured and further, that humans should refrain from wonton cruelty to animals, I question how he accepts the premise non human animals suffer yet does not acknowledge or make accountable the very thing that causes the suffering? I agree with Regan, the indirect view is not rational and we cannot ignore or dismiss the moral relevance of pain to the animal subjected (Hursthouse,2013, p181).  I also have issue with Contractarian view that duties regarding non human animals are different from those regarding human animals.  It seems Rawls view of “social justice” presupposes the human animal social network only includes the human animal species. Historically, this may have been the case however, for many human animals times have changed and their social network has extended to include non human animals. Many non human animals including are not only part of our social network but an integral part of family.

The  more I work to help human animals and their pet non human animals resolve challenging problems in order to remain living together, the more convinced I am we should not live together. Considering the utilitarian view of maximizing pleasure, owning and living with pet dogs provide human animals joy, companionship and even improves mental illness and physical health. The relationship however, is often inequitable for the dog. They lose liberty and “practical autonomy”, relying on the moral compassion of human animals to provide food, water, relief, veterinary care, grooming, social and mental stimulation. What if the human animal possesses no moral compassion as is often the case? While non human animals are capable of living a full life, many are not granted that opportunity.  Nussbaum (2004) discusses autonomy as “one who can desire, intentionally try to fulfill desires and possess self sufficiency to understand” (p.32). These points are all true. However when in the custody of a human, if a dog doesn’t meet certain subjective or behavioral expectations, the owner has the legal right to return, surrender or request euthanasia. A client I once worked with used a shock collar on her crated puppy. She reasoned the shock collar was necessary to silence the dog during the day while she was at work so not to disturb neighbors and risk being evicted. It didn’t occur to her that the dog vocalized because of fear of being alone. It was my job to ensure she understood this distinction so to change her behaviors and use alternative, more humane management strategies thereby keeping the dog in her home.

Human animals are expected to be virtuous moral agents and yet many are not. Is it fair to maximize a dog owner’s pleasure to own a dog over the right of the dog to live a life free of pain and psychological torture? Does the selfish desire of dog ownership outweigh the individual dogs’ intrinsic value? I agree with Regan’s criticism that the utilitarian view cannot respect the distinct intrinsic value of an individual life since its premise is to “ maximize pleasure and minimize pain for all those affected by any given action.” (Gruen, 2011, p. 34) This framework doesn’t recognize all subjects of a life as individuals, that there is a relationship between individuals and each individual having their own desires. Rather, it is focused on considerations of the greater good, whom, just happen to make up all of the laws.

I rather like and see practical applications for Nussbaum’s use of entitlements and the Capabilities Approach with non human animals. My only objection is allowing punitive measures under “ Bodily Integrity”. Enforcing direct human obligation of justice in the form of non animal entitlements might just result in less abusive behavior by human animals. While contractual obligations are great, unfortunately as they stand today they are based on derivatives of duty which leaves the non human animal unprotected. If we allow non human animals entitlements and obligate people to be directly accountable for their actions via severe penalties for their actions to non human animals similar to those we grant for human animals, we may experience better human animal behaviors. Reading through her list makes me feel hopeful for a brighter future for non human animals. (Nussbaum, 2004, p.313)

Hursthouse’s (2013) Virtue ethics suggests as students we apply “principal of charity” that is, “try to find the best, the most reasonable or plausible rather than worst possible interpretation of what we read and hear” (p4).  Considering this statement I have remained open to learning from philosophical thinkers and people, even when I disagree. Many for example reason it is okay to train their pet dogs using punitive methods or, they may justify consumption of non human animals because they are dumb, were created for our use, or don’t have the same rich intellectual abilities as human animals. I reject these positions. The argument for moral permissibility used by people to justify the way they act toward non human animals whether consumption or abuse, tries to draw a moral distinction based on arbitrary lines between us and them. Norcross (2004) brilliantly discredits this line of thinking using the Argument for Marginal Cases (AMC) he states, if it is morally permissible to eat non human animals on the basis that they fall under an arbitrary line, as for example intelligence, then we must also include humans that fall under this line. As for example human babies, cognitively impaired humans, and the elderly suffering from cognitive ability or dementia would all be morally permissible to consume too based on intelligence in this case. (p.241). 

The AMC could be applied to people who own non human animals (companion animals) and think it morally permissible to use punitive training methods and or equipment. Interestingly, the use of corporal punishment on children (moral patients) was outlawed in the 1960’s and yet, its use remains permissible with non human animals. By way of the AMC non human animals ought to fall under the same protection as children by way of moral patients. It does not seem morally equitable or just that non human animals (companion animals) are not protected from this blatant abuse and suffrage.

I agree with Singer, Regan and others who have argued there is no intellectual or morally good reason to support that an individuals’ biological or genetic makeup has anything to do with how we ought to treat non human animals. Many practice “speciesism” and in fact, before developing moral awareness of our similarities with non human animals, I did as well.  Like most pet owners I too would never have dreamed of eating a pet dog but a chicken sandwich or my mothers’ meatballs? Of course I would and with pleasure. Yet when challenged about the similarities between pig, cow, chicken and dog the common denominator was relational. The pet dog for many was considered a family member. Breaking that species barrier will rely on having a relationship with and empathy for non human animals. Moral psychology and ethics scholar Aaltola (2018) writes on Midgley that she has reintroduced sentimentalism back into animal ethics a notion that earlier animal ethic philosophers namely Singer had pushed back on and instead focused purely on rationalism. Midgley instead suggests emotions and reason are fused “like shape and form forever locked into each other” (pg 12).  

Philosophical thinkers are now free to include compassion, care and relationships as narratives following Gilligan’s scientific findings which helped shift underlying male biases that formed our philosophical thinking as a culture and resulting in our present legal framework. Her work exposed “moral reality as relational”, and that we are dependent on one another rather than the false notion of being “fully autonomous agents” as was established by the Contractarian view.  The rules of the game have changed and philosophical thinking is now open to new moral and ethical interpretations for non human animals (Driver, 2013, p.4).  Perhaps new thinkers who encompass empathy and relationships will help move us closer to making changes to our legal framework where we may live in a world free of non human animal suffrage and enslavement.

While my desire is to live a life free from direct and indirect suffrage of non human animals I am learning at best, it may be a life closer, to as Gruen (2015) suggests, “veganism as an aspiration” (p.157).  Non human animal consumption in one form or another touches our lives in the food we eat, clothes we wear, car we drive and vitamins we take (Gruen & Jones, 2015, p.157). I fundamentally agree with Feminist, Caring and Virtue ethicist, there are systemic problems that have resulted because relationships and caring for others was missing in our moral community. And I agree with Singer and Regan who both suggest, “how our societies function and are organized ought to change” (Hursthouse, 2013,p.84).
 
 
References
 
Aaltola, E. (2018). Varieties of Empathy: Moral Psychology and Animal Ethics.
Driver, J. (2013). Ethics: the fundamentals. John Wiley & Sons.
Gruen, L. (2011). Ethics and animals: An introduction. Cambridge University Press.
Gruen, L., & Jones, R. C. (2015). Veganism as an Aspiration. The moral complexities of eating meat, 153-171.
Hursthouse, R. (2013). Ethics, humans and other animals: An introduction with readings. Routledge.
Midgley, M. (1998). Animals and Why They Matter. University of Georgia Press.
Norcross, A. (2004). Puppies, pigs, and people: Eating meat and marginal cases. Philosophical perspectives, 18(1), 229-245.
Sunstein, C. R., & Nussbaum, M. C. (Eds.). (2004). Animal rights: Current debates and new directions. Oxford University Press.
 
 

ANZ501 Introduction to Anthrozoology
Vivian Zottola-Gefke
​​Canisius College
Fall Semester 2018
​
Abstract

Clear communication between conspecifics is necessary to manage expectations, support cohabitation and of course for survival of the species.  Humans exchange information with one another through the use of verbal and written language, technology, visual gestures, facial expressions, and even pheromones. Dogs share information with one another using their own unique sensory perceptions of olfaction, audition, vocalization, visual posturing, and physical investigation (Siniscalchi, d’Ingeo, Minunno, Quaranta, 2018). When humans and dogs cohabitate each species in the relationship relies on their own umwelt, their unique perceptual abilities to make sense of their environment and the other creatures within it. When one species’ behavior is misunderstood by the other, a breakdown in expectations and communication ensues leading to feelings of frustration.  If not remedied, the relationship is strained and more often than not the dog is relinquished to a shelter, privately re-homed or euthanized.

This paper explores interspecies communication between humans and dogs in a western society and, in particular, it focuses on the role gender plays when people communicate with their dogs.  I review empirical evidence investigating differences in human communication styles with dogs, receptivity to dog emotions, underlying biological differences and early experience to animals. Understanding differences in gender-based communication styles may have useful applications to improve adoption matching, reduce the risk of recidivism in shelters, and provide successful strategies when designing behavior modification training plans to resolve human-pet dog challenges.

Literature Review

Engaging with Dogs

Dogs use posturing and vocalization to communicate their wants and needs to humans and the onus is on the dog owner/guardian to decipher and interpret presenting behaviors. Two recent studies demonstrate  women dog owners were more adept at evaluating distress in dogs regardless if the dog was theirs or not.  In order to understand dogs’ attachment styles with humans and differences in how women and  men dog owners engage with their dogs, researchers adapted the Ainsworth Strange Situation test substituting children with pet dogs (Prato-Previde, Custance, Spiezio,Sabatini, 2003). The Strange Situation test was designed by Mary Ainsworth in the 1970’s to determine attachment styles between caregivers and children. The child-care giver attachment occurs within the first year of a child’s life. Attachment styles include secure, insecure, and ambivalent avoidant attachment where the secure attachment is considered the most stable form of relationship (Bretherton, 1992).

When evaluating dogs for attachment styles, researchers staged a room with the dog, their owner and a stranger. Two out of eight events were analyzed where the dog was alone and then reunited with their owner. Researchers found no difference in how both women and men physically engaged with their dogs however, from a vocal perspective, women spent more time talking and uttering sounds then men while engaging with their dogs. “Gender differences in verbal behavior were confirmed by the analysis of utterances” (Prato-Previde, Fallani, Valsecchi, 2004, p. 69). Dog directed baby-talk also known as “motherese” (p.69) is thought to be communicating emotionally with children (Prato-Previde, et al. 2004).   

Determining emotions through facial gestures and body language is another important consideration when engaging with non verbal individuals such as our pet dogs.  Schiermer, Seow, Penney (2013) evaluated the ability of women and men dog owners to process and understand the meaning of emotions through facial gestures in human infants and dogs.  Half the subjects were experienced dog owners and half were not. Photos of common facial expressions in human infants and dogs were taken ranging from happy to sad.  While both men and women dog owners were capable of recognizing differences between positive and negative changes in the facial behaviors of human infants and dogs, the rate at which women dog owners were able to discern the differences was much faster than men dog owners. Another notable difference was the non-experienced dog owner detected emotions to the same degree as experienced dog owners suggesting there are evolutionary and biological differences at play between women and men with respect to longer vocal engagements and faster facial emotional recognition.

Biological Differences

Biological differences between men and women including functions of hormones and neuropeptides such as oxytocin and vasopression have been investigated and thought to promote pro social behaviors in females. These same pro social behaviors are directed to pet dogs (Prato-Previde et al. 2006, Shiemer et al. 2013). A study evaluating interactions between humans and their dogs after coming home from a long day at work measured changes in the oxytocin levels. Researchers found that when interacting with dogs women experienced an increase in plasma oxytocin levels while men did not (Beetz, Uvanas-Moberg, Julius, Kotrschal, 2012).  Another study compared maternal-child and human-pet relationships using fMRI tests to evaluate overlapping similarities in brain activity. While the research did not demonstrate a gender difference since only child bearing females were subjects of the study, it did demonstrate when caring for dogs human brain patterns are similar to when they are caring for their children. Brain regions thought to be involved in the maintenance of social bonding with humans were activated with dogs. This study demonstrated there are underlying biological underpinnings for social behaviors with dogs for child bearing women. The study did not extend to evaluating men. Regions of the brain that were activated include emotions, reward, affiliation, visual processing and social cognition (Stoeckel , Palley, Gollub, Niemi, Evins, 2014).               
 
Anthropomorphism, Identity, and Environmental Upbringing

Anthropomorphism is another consideration of differences between women and men and their dogs. When dog owner’s relations between perceived social support, anthropomorphism and stress were studied, researchers found “significantly more anthropomorphic behavior was reported by dog owners who were female, were neither married nor living in a common-law relationship” (Antonacopoulos and Pychyl, 2008, p.147).

Identity construction in humans seems to consciously or unconsciously play a part in what type of dog breed a person acquires and their attitudes toward the dog (Ramierez, 2006). Men and women may value their relationships with dogs differently. In a study based on interviews investigating gender ownership of dogs and the relationship with gender identity, men viewed their roles with dogs as confidents, “friends, exercise partners and coaches for their dogs” (p.385) while women were “emphasize the caretaker role” (p.385). 

How we communicate and engage with animals and in particular dogs is affected by upbringing and shaped by access and time spent with animals in nature. Access to nature and early childhood experience with animals is another consideration  in how we relate with animals (Beck and Katcher, 2003). Some young children may have been raised without ever having had exposure to a pet animal in their household.  Or, if a child was exposed to pet animals including a dog or cat, the child may not have been the primary caretaker since parents are often accountable for family pets.  Researchers studying the human-animal bond have suggested caring for animals offers children in particular boys the opportunity to practice and develop nurturing qualities with another individual (Beck and Katcher 2003). Early exposure to animals including pet dogs and cats allow children to observe a different species from a close distance, practice responsible caretaking and develop nurturing qualities that may transfer to adulthood.  As described by Melson (2003) close experiences with animals may be an “essential precondition to exploring their functions for socioemotional development.”
 
Conclusion

Successful human-dog relationships rely on clear communication. When humans make the choice to acquire and live with dogs as companions or pets, the onus is on them to fulfill their basic needs including the ability and freedom to make better choices.  Once thought a luxury dog training is in fact a necessity required to establish some type of continuity and understanding between two different species living together. As more dogs are embraced as family members the need for early and continued education about the world of the dog is a necessity for an enduring, successful and safe relationship.
Considering dog training a means of communication, the way we choose to train our dogs reflects our attitudes and view of our relationship with our dogs.  Some dog owners choose to formally train their dogs while others do not. Some use dominance theory and punitive methods while others choose kinder strategies.  Learning basic operant conditioning training using positive reinforcement is ideal because it helps humans manage their dogs in a force free manner.  This training offers clear communication and helps to manage expectations for both human and dog. However body mechanics is not enough.  Educating dog owners on softer skills would be helpful.  Understanding the differences between species through knowledge in canine ethology, psychological, physiological and social development will help dog owners improve their ability to tolerate differences.
​
Awareness of differences between men and women in how we communicate and engage with dogs allows us the opportunity to develop better questions and matching tools when re-homing shelter dogs.  It also allows for the development of sensitivity training and preventative safety training dog owners to reduce the likelihood of behavior challenges from developing. The average dog owner is not aware about fundamental differences in how canines and humans communicate.  Public awareness campaigns promoting fundamental differences and encouraging behavior assessment training may help provide clear communication about expectations, lower the risk of surrendered dogs to shelters and improve the likelihood of maintaining the human dog bond for life.

References
​
Antonacopoulos, N. M. D., & Pychyl, T. A. (2008). An examination of the relations between social support, anthropomorphism and stress among dog owners. Anthrozoös, 21(2), 139-152.

Association of Professional Dog Trainers, Retrieved from doi: https://apdt.com/

Beck, A.M. & Katcher, A.H. (2003), Future direction in human-animal bond research. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(1), 79-93

Beetz, A., Uvnäs-Moberg, K., Julius, H., & Kotrschal, K. (2012). Psychosocial and psychophysiological effects of human-animal interactions: the possible role of oxytocin. Frontiers in psychology, 3, 234.

Bretherton, I. (1992). The origins of attachment theory: John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth. Developmental Psychology, 28(5), 759-775.

Council of Certified Professional Dog Trainers, Retrieved December 2018 from doi: http://www.ccpdt.org/

Gabrielsen, A. M. (2017). Training technologies. Science, gender and dogs in the age of positive dog training. Nordic Journal of Science and Technology Studies, 5(1), 5-16.

Greenebaum, J. B. (2010). Training dogs and training humans: Symbolic interaction and dog training. Anthrozoös, 23(2), 129-141.

International Association of Animal Behavior Consultants, Retrieved 2018 from, doi: https://m.iaabc.org/

Jeannin, S., Gilbert, C., & Leboucher, G. (2017). Effect of interaction type on the characteristics of pet-directed speech in female dog owners. Animal Cognition, 20(3), 499-509.

Kertes, D. A., Hall, N., & Bhatt, S. S. (2018). Children’s relationship with their pet dogs and oxtr genotype predict child–pet interaction in an experimental setting. Frontiers in psychology, 9.

Melson, G.F. (2003). Child development and the human-companion animal bond. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(1), 31-39.

Merola, I., Prato-Previde, E., Lazzaroni, M., & Marshall-Pescini, S. (2014). Dogs’ comprehension of referential emotional expressions: familiar people and familiar emotions are easier. Animal cognition, 17(2), 373-385.

Prato-Previde, E., Custance, D. M., Spiezio, C., & Sabatini, F. (2003). Is the dog-human relationship an attachment bond? An observational study using Ainsworth's strange situation. Behaviour, 140(2), 225-254.

Prato‐Previde, E., Fallani, G., & Valsecchi, P. (2006). Gender differences in owners interacting with pet dogs: an observational study. Ethology, 112(1), 64-73.

Ramirez, M. (2006). “My dog's just like me”: dog ownership as a gender display. Symbolic Interaction, 29(3), 373-391.

Schirmer, A., Seow, C. S., & Penney, T. B. (2013). Humans process dog and human facial affect in similar ways. PLoS One, 8(9)

Siniscalchi, M., d’Ingeo, S., Minunno, M., & Quaranta, A. (2018). Communication in dogs. Animals, 8(8), 131.
​
Stoeckel, L. E., Palley, L. S., Gollub, R. L., Niemi, S. M., & Evins, A. E. (2014). Patterns of brain activation when mothers view their own child and dog: an fMRI study. PLoS One, 9(10)

Underlying Factors Influencing Dog Owner’s Choice of Training Methods
Vivian Zottola-Gefke
ANZ518 Psychology of the Human-Animal Relationship
​Canisius College
Fall Semester 2018

Abstract
 
Dog training is an unregulated profession in the United States and anyone can practice regardless of qualifications or lack thereof.  Dog trainers traditionally used punitive measures to train the dog owning public. They began to change their approach in the 1990’s following the success of animal trainers using positive reinforcement operant conditioning techniques with other non human animals (Pryor, 2009).  An abundance of scientific literature to support a direct link between aversive dog training methods and psychological stress including aggression, anxiety and excitability in dogs has been published over the past ten years (Schilder andVan der Borg 2004; Blackwell, Twells, Seawright, Casey, 2008).  And while there is consensus among canine professionals and scientists about detrimental effects of punitive dog training, including the development of phobias and increased aggression (Overall 2013, Schilder andVan der Borg 2004, Gal Ziv 2016), the practice remains unrestricted to the public. Short of legislative intervention to ban the practice of punitive training methods with dogs, the onus is on the public to learn about potential welfare effects and impending outcome. In this paper I explore current literature and empirical evidence underlying factors which may influence a dog owners’ decision to use reward based or punitive training/teaching methods when training. Environmental learning, parenting styles, attachment styles, personality, attitudes and cultural factors are examined. I will attempt to offer gaps in research and direction for future efforts.
 
Environmental Learning and Training
The development of behavior in any species is influenced by genetic and environmental factors and while some individuals are predisposed to develop more pronounced characteristics due to susceptibility of their genotype, environmental learning becomes that more crucial (Overall et al.,2006).  According to Dr. Susan Friedman PhD, Utah State University (n.d.) when considering environmental learning, humans and dogs learn from their emotions and how they feel about something (internal environment) and from antecedents including people, places and things around them (external environment).  Humans are part of a dogs’ environment thereby affecting learning. The first step toward improving challenging pet dog behaviors in a relationship is early recognition that the dog owner affects both environments for dogs directly or indirectly. In many cases antecedent management will result in improved pet dog behaviors.  For example, covering the waste basket to reduce unwanted scavenging behavior is a quick fix for the dog owner however, understanding foraging is a natural and normal behavior for dogs may help the dog owner change their behavior.  Providing dogs with alternative engagement such as a toy or food puzzle allows the dog owner to manage the environment while the dog is afforded an outlet to practice their species typical behavior. The dog owner manages the environment by providing enrichment and reducing frustration for both. Understanding differences between species through education and sensitivity training will help the dog owner learn productive strategies and improve tolerance for dog owners.  In other cases where there may be underlying pathologies or conditioned fear responses reinforced over time, a more advanced methodical training approach is required to remedy the situation.  Parsing out the function of the behavior(s) as it relates to the context of the environment is tied in to understanding what motivates the dog.  Behavior modification dog training is a complex process requiring highly skilled observation and in depth evaluation of past history and environmental conditions including training methods and equipment favored by the dog owner.

The notion of personhood and how a non human animal is viewed by a human as a subject or object influences their relationship (Sanders, 1999) and the dog owners decision on which dog training method will be employed. The relationship between structured training (formal training classes) and unstructured training (in home training or no training) and behavior problems was researched by Blackwell, Seawright, Casey,(2008) who found the highest number of undesirable behaviors were presented with dog trainers that used both positive and negative reinforcement methods (p.212).  Located in the United Kingdom, researchers who were interested in examining the relationship between training methods and behavior problems conducted a qualitative and quantitative study.  They solicited dog owners while outdoors walking their dogs or accompanying their dog to their veterinarian. Questions were provided on a questionnaire and structured in such a way as to allow the respondent to describe behaviors as objectively as possible (p.208).  Researchers categorized three training methods including positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement and positive punishment.  Of the 192 respondents 67% attended a formal training class (27% puppy socialization classes, 40% general obedience training class), 67% of respondents were females, 43% had no children, , 71% acquired their dogs from breeders within the first three months of the dogs life and 72% of the population surveyed used some form of positive punishment (p. 209).  In this survey researchers found an increase in dog aggression scores with dog owners that trained on their own in their home verses receiving formal training and lower reactivity to dogs outside the home for those dogs that attended a puppy socialization class (p.211).   The population of dogs acquired from breeders at a young age was high indicating the population was primed for learning from the environment. It would have been good to know if dog owners observed any behavior challenges to distinguish normal species typical behaviors or early pathologies.  While the questionnaire was self reporting, researchers did make a concerted effort to formulate questions so to increase objectivity.  However, the population sample wasn’t evenly distributed between female to males and we didn’t know who was primarily responsible for the dog. An interesting point made was researchers found a high percentage of respondents were female with no children. While the findings show an association between punitive training methods and aggression, it would have been useful to include inquiries about parenting styles and attachment to illuminate further, the reasons for choosing one training method over another.

In an effort to evaluate human and canine bonds as they related to reward based training and dominance training, Greenebaum (2010) employed an ethnographic study observing two training classes over an eight week period. There is no analysis of data but rather the study relies qualitative information in the form of note taking and coding behaviors of interactions between dog owners and their dogs. The researcher focused on body language and relations between dog owners (“guardian”). The operant training styles included dominance and punitive training where the collar, leash and verbal discipline was used to correct behaviors, and the other trainer used positive reinforcement methods giving the dog freedom to make choices. Unlike reward based training punitive method resulted in fearful body language in dogs.
While it would be unethical to design a study where punitive methods were used to measure differences in training styles,  today we can reference past studies that these techniques result in high rates of aggression in dogs. In looking at short and longer term effects of using punitive training methods researchers found employing pain using shock collars was not only stressful for the dog while training but longer term the dogs learned outside of the training event or environment the presence of the owner and or their commands were associated with a stressful event causing them to present stressful behaviors (Schilder and van der Borg, 2003). Use of aversive equipment including shock collars to train dogs, continues to be used on dogs by trainers and their owners. An underlying reason for continued use of punitive methods could be explained by the social psychology studies conducted by Milgram in 1960’s on obedience to authority figures and personal conscience. In the Milgram experiments people were shown to administer shocks to a stranger at the request of an authority figure regardless that the shock was lethal. Before the experiments it was thought only individuals with pathological or psychopathic conditions would comply however Milgram proved otherwise as seemingly stable people were able to inflict pain. (Blass, 1999). 

Parenting Styles
As our society considers more and more dogs as family members, we see the same human child caretaking trends emerge from child parenting literature. Diana Baurind (1966) reported on three human parenting styles including permissive, authoritatrian and authoritative used to influence child nurturing and education. Permissive parenting is one that does not use punitive methods and “allows the child to do as they please without overt power” (p.889). Authoritarian parenting is more constraining “valuing obedience as a virtue and favors punitive, forceful measures to curb self-will at points” where child and parent conflict (p.890). Authoritative parenting style directs a child’s activities in a rational, negotiating manner, “enforces her own perspective as an adult, but recognizes the child’s individual interests and special ways” (p.891).  Since her first report, fifty years of research has consistently supported the view that authoritative parenting style is most beneficial to a child’s individual and societal needs, “promoting emotional support, an appropriate level of autonomy and improved bidirectional communication” in children and adolescents (Darling and Steinberg, 1993, p. 487). Now legally banned, it is hard to imagine that only a few short decades ago corporal punishment was the norm in schools and homes as a means of teaching children. That said, behind closed doors away from peering eyes corporal punishment still remains a means of discipline preferred by some parents regardless that “ it is associated with decreased child-parent relations, poor mental health, delinquent behaviors and an increase in the victim abusing their own children and or spouse” (Kazdin and Benjet, 2003, p.100-102).

Parenting styles and their affect on children has been widely researched in human psychology, however, not as extensively in human dog relationships until recently.  Researchers in the Netherlands designed the first interspecies study to investigate similarities between human child parenting styles and dog owner relationships (Van Herwijnen, Van Der Borg, Naguib, Beerda,2018). Using an adapted version of a well established parenting questionnaire, 518 Dutch dog owning parents with at least one child were surveyed. Following analysis, researchers determined dog parenting and child parenting styles correlated to a high degree with the authoritative parenting style at 72.4% dog and 83.3% child respectively (p. 6,9).  The study demonstrates parenting styles across species is similar. The choice for authoritative style was preferred over others.  This study does not confirm or rule out the permissive (disinterested) parenting styles which may suggest the population surveyed had a pre existing bias toward dogs (p.10). Also notable, the population surveyed was predominantly women and homogeneous from the same geography with possibly a similar cultural history. It would be interesting to evaluate if this same study including a higher population of males and different geographic locations would change findings.
Another study investigated parenting styles of dog owners and collected an online survey from a population of 653 dog owners across the United States (Volsche and Gray 2016). Dog owners were solicited from a variety of locations including “veterinarian hospitals, pet businesses, grooming, retail shops, and rescue organizations” (p.3).  The online survey included two questionnaires, training philosophy statements and open ended questions. A greater percentage of respondents were female 90% (male 9.2%),  had no children 79% , and reported low to middle class income 88% (p.5).  Findings showed a greater number of respondents described their relationships using words including “parent” 39% and “guardian” 26% (65%) rather than owner 24% (p.5,6).   Again as in the previous study authoritative parenting style was preferred by this population.  Also similar as the last, women respondents were greater in number than men in this study.  Unlike the previous, respondents were represented from every state in the United States giving us a broader view of demographics (p.5). The authors provide a useful comparison between human parenting styles and dog training methods in this study. They list reward based training styles as compared to authoritative parenting styles (p.9).  
 
Attachment Styles and Personality
Social relationships for humans and canines have evolutionary origins important to survival and sound psychological development. Strong emotional and physical parental bonds allow individuals to explore the world with more confidence, trust in others and as a result become individually and socially successful in life. Insecure human attachments, due to poor parental relations at an early age, can have lasting detrimental consequences including insecurity and distrust (Bretherton,1992).  Researchers have found correlations between attachment styles including attachment anxiety associated with neurotic personality types, and attachment avoidance negatively correlated with extraversion and agreeableness (Shaver and Brennan 1992).

As with human infants needing to form attachments with their parents, dogs attach to humans at an early age. Between the ages of six and ten weeks when dogs are generally acquired, the human becomes the primary attachment figure (Scott, Fuller 1965).  Using a canine version of the Ainsworth Strange Situation Test, researchers showed as with human infants, dogs display a stress-response when separated by their human. They concluded like humans dogs seek close proximity, for exploring the environment and building confidence (Prato-Previde, Spiezio, Sabatini, Custance, 2003).

How owner personality is linked between dog owner personality and affects on presenting behaviors displayed by dogs has also been extensively reviewed. In one study owners who scored high in neurotic and emotionally unstable personality categories had dogs presenting high rates of destructiveness, aggression and attention seeking behaviors (Podberscek and Serpell,1997).   In a recent study Dodman, Brown, Serpell (2018) surveyed 1564 dog owners using an online qualitative survey that combined five questionnaires to evaluate the relationship between dog owner personalities and psychological status looking for a correlation to training preference (p.3 ).  While there was no direct correlation to “owner personality and dog behavior problems mediated or effected predominantly via training methods”(p.8), the study did find aversive training techniques were employed among men with moderate depression”(p.7).  The number and quality of the training questions may have limited findings and as discussed by authors the very nature of the questionnaire being self reporting makes it subjective to bias answers (p.9). Perhaps if this study had designed objective questions developed in conjunction with independent behavior specialists experienced in both dog training and behavior and had these same individuals conduct in person interviews to observe and document behaviors, subsequent findings may have evidenced more correlations between training preferences and personality.

Another study conducted in by researchers in Hungary and Germany used qualitative and quantitative methods to study owner characteristics focusing on attachment style and personality. This was an exploratory study to evaluate if certain owner attachment styles increased separation related disorders in dogs. Owners who scored higher on attachment avoidance (less responsive to the dog’s needs and did not provide a secure base for the dog when needed) were more likely to have dogs with separation related disorder. The questionnaire was completed by a large population of individuals including 1185 Germans and 323 Hungarians, different country populations close in cultural heritage. The questionnaire was online and self reported. Dogs were not screened by a behavior specialists and so the “direction and causality of the relationship was uncertain” (p.9).  This is another example where working with behavior consultant specialists could have provided support to the study. Separation Anxiety in dogs is still under investigation however there are potential pathological causes including negative imprinting early in life when sensitive brain development occurs typically between eleven and sixteen weeks. Traumatic changes in the environment or early separation from the mother before the age of seven weeks may negatively impact brain development (Konok, Kosztolanyi, Rainer, Mutschler, Halsband, Miklosi, 2015, Overall,2013)
 
Cultural Differences Attitude Toward Dogs
Dogs play many roles in the human animal relationship and depending on where one travels around the world they are loved by some, despised by others and even consumed for special events. Cultural values, social norms and religious views all play a part to influence how non human animals and dogs in particular are perceived and cared for by their owners. Unless a dog is feral and therefore considered autonomous, they provide a function for humans. Whether guiding the blind, protecting the vulnerable, entertaining training competition junkies, as a hunting assistance for gun sport fanatics, even as a companion for empty nesters they provide some kind of function.  

In some parts of this country and around the world dogs are perceived as pests, roaming free and scavenging for food posing a welfare problem because of potential infection from disease including rabies and distemper. And there are also some religions that consider dogs filthy while others consider dog a food delicacy eating them once a year, or more because they taste good (Podberscek, Paul, Serpell, 2005).  How a dog owner’s cultural background influences the decision to train is a bit more complex and not widely researched however there have been attempts. Blouin (2015) conducted a series of in person interviews with 34 dog owners residing in the United States Midwest. His objective was to determine differences in how people relate to dogs and if culture played a part to influence the human dog relationship. Recorded interviews were conducted in dog owner homes and answers were coded. Three categories of dog owning people were designed from the coded answers. Dog owners fell into one of three “orientations including dominionistic, humanistic, or protectionistic” (p.282). The researcher found cultural associations with categories of orientation.  The owner categorized as dominionistic orientation thinks “dogs as lesser in value and status than humans” (p.285) which is traced to “Judeo-Christian religious tradition which views animals as inferior creatures over which God gave humans domionon” (p.290). While these dog owners were fond of their dogs they referred to them as “fulfilling a certain role for the benefit of humans” ( p.290 ). They are detached from their dogs and likely to keep them outdoors regardless of the weather. Maintaining a physical distance “provides a symbolic social distance” for this dog owner (p.282) making it easier to relinquish the dog for behavior challenges.
The second orientation Humanistic, “ likely has roots in parts of Europe and North America with middleclass values” with “ a rejection of traditional worldviews and expansion in authority of scientific views” (p.290). This dog owner has an intense emotional attachment to their dog and considers their role as “pet parent” in the relationship (p.290). Because dogs satisfy personal emotional needs for this type of dog owning orientation, they are more likely to anthropomorphize the dog, allow them to sleep in their beds and will have more difficulty euthanizing the dog if they were terminal ill opting instead to invest whatever money necessary to save their dog (p.282,283).  Saving the dog from death because they fear the loss of being without the dog is stronger and more important to them then the dogs suffering.

The protectionistic orientation is a dog owner “characterized as one with a strong attachment to their dog and general concern for other animals” (p.287). This dog owner’s orientation is one that “is likely rooted in modern animal welfare movement which began in England and the United States in the late 1800s” (p.290), these individuals are actively involved in animal welfare and animal activist organizations. They allow their dogs independence believing “their relations are governed by their perceptions of their animals’ needs and desires, rather than their own” (p.290). Interestingly the first and only reference to training is associated with this orientation.  The author describes this dog owning orientation as one who is least likely to train their dogs since they believe doing so would “infringe on their autonomy” (p.288).   While the author provides some detail information about demographics no detailed information is provided about how the sample population breaks down. And while we know questions were open ended and later coded we do not know what questions were asked, how they were framed, or what physical behavioral observations about the relationship between dog and dog owner were made. We also do not know how many individuals fall in the different categories or the differences in cultural heritage and how these compare to the topology of orientations designed.  

A study conducted in Norway surveyed 1896 dog owners to determine correlations between animal directed empathy and attitudes.  An online survey was answered by dog owners using a questionnaire and including the review of photos of dogs at veterinary clinics in various conditions of distress. Researchers found females scored higher than males at identifying pain, empathy, and positive attitudes toward pet dogs. Those with childhood pet experience also scored significantly higher in empathy and attitudes about their pet dogs. While the study found positive correlations between dog owners and their dogs, the population was a homogenous group of predominantly Norwegian females and all members of the Norwegian Kennel Club. (Ellingsen et al 2010).

Conclusion
A dog owner’s perspective about their relationship with their dog is shaped over time by personal experiences, upbringing, education, socio economic factors and environment.  The relationship they form with their dog is complex and is influenced by social, cultural and religious beliefs.  While individuals acquire dogs for various reasons and differ in caretaking styles, their decision on whether or not to train and the method they use directly impacts the welfare of the dog and public at large. Clearly there is a cohabitation issue between humans and dogs and we see this largely in the numbers that are reported. A staggering 3.3 million dogs on average are surrendered to shelters and ultimately euthanized each year (ASPCA, 2018).  There are a myriad of reasons reported for relinquishment with the top reason being behavior (AVSAB, 2008).  In 2015 the Center for Disease Control reported 4.5 million dog bites occur each year with one in five becoming infected and in 2017, the claims paid out by homeowners liability insurance for dog  bites paid out a staggering $700 million dollars.

Evidence tells us reward based teaching methods can lead to psychologically balanced adult dogs and harmonious relationships between dog owners and their dogs. However, managing expectations between two species using different communication repertoires requires more than training body mechanics and operant conditioning based on positive reinforcement.  Incorporating a cross discipline approach to dog training including sensitivity training, honing observational skills, understanding canine ethology, psychological, physiological and social development will further help dog owners build tolerance and understanding.

Academic science is moving in the right direction. Over the past ten years canine related scientific research has influenced important societal changes. Most recently we see a trending shift in small animal veterinary care and within the training communities. The National Association of Veterinary Conference (NAVC) and other veterinary teaching institutions are adding applied clinical behavior courses, as well as behavior and mental health training to their curriculum. The American Animal Hospital Association (AAHA), a body that establishes standards of care in veterinary clinics is promoting the Fear Free Initiative ™ to ensure both emotional and physical wellbeing in their patients.  More veterinarians are taking a team approach adding veterinary behavior technicians and dog training professionals to their practices. Within the training community three well regarded establishments, International Association of Behavior Consultants (IAABC), Council of Certified Professional Dog Trainers (CCPDT) and Association of Professional Dog Trainers (APDT) have joined to publish a unified standard of practice. These changes and strategic alignments may be early signs of legislative changes to come in the dog training profession.   

Science is on the right track, however, more interdisciplinary research and connects are needed.  More study questionnaires designed by professional canine behavior specialists versed in understanding canine ethology would help avoid bias or misconstrued information related to dog behavior. More studies evidencing relationships between training methods, behavioral outcome and the welfare affect to the public could be designed to further support reward based training methods. Findings could further support the need to regulate the profession. Also public awareness about benefits of training is important to the welfare of dogs and the community. More demographic studies investigating associations with geographic location, income, and training methods might help illuminate areas that require training and education.
An abundance of literature exists to influence public opinion and adopt legislative changes that will help protect dogs, their people and the community. How these studies are being used could be reviewed. What’s the point of conducting studies if findings are not shared with the public or used for change?  It seems as with the use of corporal punishment and children fifty years ago, nothing changed human child parenting behavior, not even scientific evidence until regulation was adopted to restrict its use. Perhaps the same restriction on use of aversive training methods with dogs would fair similar outcome.

Citations
American Animal Hospital Association,  Retrieved December 2018 from doi:https://www.aaha.org/professional/membership/fearfreecertification.aspx

American Animal Hospital Association, Retrieved December 2018 from doi:https://www.aaha.org/professional/about_aaha/default.aspx

American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior, Retrieved December 2018 from doi: https://avsab.org/wp -content/uploads/2018/03/Puppy_Socialization_Position_Statement_Download_-_10-3-14.pdf

Association of Professional Dog Trainers, Retrieved from doi: https://apdt.com/

Baumrind, D. (1966). Effects of authoritative parental control on child behavior. Child Development, 37(4), 887-907.

Blackwell, E.J., Twells, C., Seawright, A., & Casey,R.A. (2008). The relationship between training methods and the occurrence of behavior problems, as reported by owners, in a population of domestic dogs. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 3(5). 207-217.

Blass, T. (Ed.). (1999). Obedience to authority: Current perspectives on the Milgram paradigm. Psychology Press.
Blouin, D. D. (2013). Are dogs children, companions, or just animals? Understanding variations in people's orientations toward animals. Anthrozoös, 26(2), 279-294.

Bretherton, I. (1992). The origins of attachment theory: John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth. Developmental Psychology, 28(5), 759–775

Center for Disease Control Dog Bite Statistics, Retrieved December 2018 from, doi:https://www.cdc.gov/features/dog-bite-prevention/

Council of Certified Professional Dog Trainers, Retrieved December 2018 from doi: http://www.ccpdt.org/

Darling, N., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting style as context: An integrative model. Psychological bulletin, 113(3), 487.

Dodman, N. H., Brown, D. C., & Serpell, J. A. (2018). Associations between owner personality and psychological status and the prevalence of canine behavior problems. PloS one, 13(2), e0192846.

Ellingsen, K., Zanella, A. J., Bjerkås, E., & Indrebø, A. (2010). The relationship between empathy, perception of pain and attitudes toward pets among Norwegian dog owners. Anthrozoös, 23(3), 231-243.

Greenebaum, J. B. (2010). Training dogs and training humans: Symbolic interaction and dog training. Anthrozoös, 23(2), 129-141.

Insurance Information Institute Statistics on costs of dog bites and associated claims, Retrieved December 2018 from, doi:https://www.iii.org/article/spotlight-on-dog-bite-liability

International Association of Animal Behavior Consultants, Retrieved 2018 from, doi: https://m.iaabc.org/

Kazdin, A. E., & Benjet, C. (2003). Spanking children: Evidence and issues. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(3), 99-103.

Konok, V., Kosztolányi, A., Rainer, W., Mutschler, B., Halsband, U., & Miklósi, Á. (2015). Influence of owners’ attachment style and personality on their dogs’(Canis familiaris) separation-related disorder. PLoS One, 10(2), e0118375.

Overall, K. (2013). Manual of Clinical Behavioral Medicine for Dogs and Cats-E-Book. Elsevier Health Sciences.

Overall, K.L., Hamilton, S.Pl, Chang, M.L., (2006). Understanding the genetic basis of canine anxiety: phenotyping dogs for behavioral, neuro-chemical and genetic assessment. Journal of Veterinary Beahvior: Clinical Applications and Research 1(3), 124-141.

Podberscek, A.L. (2009). Good to pet and eat: The keeping and consuming of dogs and cats in south korea. Journal of Social Issues, 65(3), 615-632.

Podberscek, A. L., Paul, E. S., & Serpell, J. A. (Eds.). (2005). Companion animals and us: Exploring the relationships between people and pets. Cambridge University Press.

Podberscek, A.L. & Serpell, J.A. (1997). Environmental influences on the expression of aggressive behavior in english cocker spaniels. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 52(3). 215-227.

Prato-Previde, E., Spiezio, C., Sabatini, F., & Custance, D.M. (2003). Is the dog-human relationship an attachment bond? an observational study using ainsworth’s strange situation. Behaviour, 140(2). 225-254. Doi:10.1163/156853903321671514

Pryor, K. (2009). Reaching the animal mind: clicker training and what it teaches us about all animals. Simon and Schuster.
Utah State University (n.d.) “Living and learning with animals for professionals” Spring 2013, Retrieved from http://behaviorworks.org/

Sanders, C.R. (1990). “The animal ‘other’: Self definition, social identity, and companion animals”. Advances in consumer research, 17,662.

Schilder, M. B., & Van der Borg, J. A. (2004). Training dogs with help of the shock collar: short and long term behavioural effects. Applied animal behaviour science, 85(3-4), 319-334.

Scott, J.P., & Fuller, J.L. (2012). Genetics and the social behavior of the dog. University of Chicago Press.

Shaver, P. R., & Brennan, K. A. (1992). Attachment styles and the" Big Five" personality traits: Their connections with each other and with romantic relationship outcomes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(5), 536-545.

Slater, M., Antley, A., Davison, A., Swapp, D., Guger, C., Barker, C., ... & Sanchez-Vives, M. V. (2006). A virtual reprise of the Stanley Milgram obedience experiments. PloS one, 1(1), e39.

Van Herwijnen, I. R., Van Der Borg, J. A., Naguib, M., & Beerda, B. (2018). The existence of parenting styles in the owner-dog relationship. PloS one, 13(2), e0193471

Volsche, S., & Gray, P. (2016). “Dog Moms” Use Authoritative Parenting Styles. Human–Animal Interaction Bulletin, 4, 1-16.

Ziv, G. (2017). The effects of using aversive training methods in dogs—A review. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 19, 50-60.

When life presents those WTF moments immediately my brain switches to first breathing and then assessing the environment thinking through "The ABCs of Behavior".   This has helped me triage situations and reduce risk. Because of my profession and business my l live dog training. Its a constant in my life.

Behavior analysis was introduced to me in the online course Living and Learning with Animals. The instructor,  Dr Susan Friedman PhD was fantastic at breaking concepts down and always providing examples that made sense. She is a wonderful individual and teacher. Taking Dr. Friedman's' online course LLA was one of the many courses that helped shape me into the trainer I am today.  Others I recommend,  Dr. Sophia Yin, Dr Ian Dunbar, Dr. Patricia McConnell, Dr. Michael Fox, Mark Beckoff, Dr. Karen Overall, Dr. Raymond Coppinger, Sue Sternberg to name a few. I highly recommend if you're interested in dog behavior, dog training or just learning and understanding our furry friends please look up any or all of these Canine Scientists and experts who have dedicated their lives to research and sharing about the world of the dog.

Dr. Friedman does an outstanding job teaching Applied Behavior Analysis in her online course Living And Learning with Animals.  She explains, and I’m paraphrasing here, “we can't stop behavior – any behavior we can’t stop it because the animal is getting something out of doing that behavior. The consequence is rewarding to the individual. What we can do is instead is to help the individual learn to change their behavior by changing the environment. And so, by changing the environment we essentially change the consequence of the behavior changes.  We will unknowingly reward unwanted behaviors i.e. jumping on us because our dogs are soooo cute, barking at us because its annoying and we’ll look at them, walking away from another dog because our dog wants to jump on them or bark at them and we are embarrassed, etc etc.  I’ve shared the “Attention Seeking Behavior Report Log” to use as a means to reduce and eliminate unwanted behaviors however you have to make sure you’re consistent.  Consider the next time your dog presents an unwanted behavior and think about how you want to handle it.  The way we approach ABC of Behavior is,

1. first evaluate what's the B (B=behavior) that we want to help the individual (dog) change?
2. Then consider what in the environment we should try changing A (A=environment) to help change the
3. C=Consequence or outcome.

 
Life can be crazy and sometimes things are thrown at us or present themselves.  However breaking behaviors down into manageable pieces and focusing one behavior at a time will help.  Sometimes there’s just too much going on and we are emotionally affected. In those times we are completely overwhelmed by the situation we are in remember to BREATH.  This will help us to focus and THINK rather than become REACTIVE (sound familiar people???).  We are verbal individuals unlike our canine friends however we are affected by our environment and emotions just the same.  

I'm sure you can all agree that life is not perfect. For a behavior trainer like myself teaching moments (to share with my students/clients) present often and sometimes I happen to be wearing pajamas! Say for example this morning while in my PJs my husband decides to spring on me that he's about to bring my brothers 80lb long haired shepherd over to meet our dogs for a future overnight. 

So after my coming down from my initial stress point (threshold) WHAT??! I'm not ready I do a quick check off.

• Gate up- check
  
• Dogs behind gate with ability to distance themselves safely in another room -check
  
• Hot dogs cooked and cut up - check
  
• Move furniture reduce grumbly growly zones - check
  
• I walk through criteria setting and behaviors I'm going to shape and reward. 
  

I hear the car and meet them outside.  She doesn't have a harness only a collar and so I work on introducing Clicker and pairing to food.  After elimination and some attention work with her name and looking at me we move inside.

EMOTIONAL SAFETY is as important as physical safety with any interaction and how an individual FEELS DOES AFFECT the BODY.  Think about times you are over worked or stressed and fearful about something.  Your heart and respiratory rate increases, short of breath...maybe you faint? Dogs go through the same emotions of fear and love. We unknowingly damage a dogs perspective to the environment by allowing them to physically get too close to something they don't feel comfortable about which leads to emotionally scarring. If you know what your dog fears (called their triggers or scary monsters) are you can help your dog by giving them distance from what ever it is they fear.  So think about the environment, their perspective and emotional state of mind.

So here I tried to set up a safe environment that allowed for as much distance as possible with no to low distractions for learning new behaviors. The other important piece is you and learning to get into your ZEN ZONE.  Learn to breath in and breath out under pressure.  Doing so a few times slowly to a count of 4 will help reduce your heart and respiratory rate causing more blood flow and oxygen to your brain so you can become calm and think.  

Use your “eyes” - your observational skills to listen to what your dog is saying, you’ll better understand your dog and be able to manage them more effectively.  How do you evaluate your dogs emotions? Through learning dog body language, communication and stress signals. Think about your dog based on body language (body language and other visuals by Lily Chin here.)  What is the dogs body language telling us?  (body stiff or wiggly?  mouth closed or open? ). Figure out what is your dogs emotional state at any given moment. What color zone is the dog in? 
( green=calm, yellow=hyper active aroused, red=over threshold and completely bonkers)? What is the threshold for any given trigger (their scary monster)? Is it 5 feet? 10? 100? 
 
Video Background and Full Disclosure:
 
You'll observe I am somewhat still anxious (not in green zone and calm) because I was surprised and dealing with a mother who was coming in to let me know my garbage can smelled and a videographer (aka my husband who was not jazzed to help me out last minute) I am clearly not prepared for the set up (note the pajamas and my disheveled self) nor for working with our new visitor Lola (a long haired shepherd) who has no skills. Hey but that's how life works right?  I do try to narrate behaviors for the video while multi tasking and managing my stress levels as you'll see.  

A couple of points to keep in mind.  

• Lola the Shepherd was never introduced to acoustic training (clicker(mark)/reward) or any formal training
• Response to cues is low to none so all she responds to is her name occasionally because its been overused and has now has no "meaning" (value) to her because it hasn't been paired with anything rewarding (food, praise, throwing a ball etc) 
• Has demonstrated and been reinforced for the early sequence of Prey Drive with small dogs and children in the past. Prey Drive is a Motor Pattern usually organized into functional sequence. A functional sequence is a string of motor patterns that result in the completion of a biological need. (1)
  

The Functional Sequence of this biological drive is

• Orient>Eye-stalk>Chase>Grab-Bite>Kill-Bite>Dissect Consume 
  
• We see this in cats who have not been domesticated as long as dogs have. Watch a cat next time there's a mouse in the house.

While the motor pattern is a natural inclination or biological response to chase after small moving things domestication has helped suppress this urge but not completely eliminate the sequence. This natural tendency to chase after things happens for all breeds and is more pronounced in some of the breeds. You'll see it be expressed when dogs are young during play which is a safe time for dogs to practice biting each other (to learn how to control the pressure of their jaws).  I want to stress the Prey Drive (motor sequence) is not an indication the dog or breed of dog is “a bad individual” or an "aggressive dog" Absolutely NOT! In fact aggression has NOTHING to do with Motor Patterns. It’s just a natural feeling that gone unchecked without interruption (can you say training attention exercises) over time may cause the individual to become highly aroused and circumvent any "thinking". By interrupting the dog who begins the sequence (at orient perhaps), and redirecting the dog to look at us and walk away using force free, fear free choice will help to further suppress these natural desires.  Always supervise your dog and set up baby gates and other safety measures.  

For some of us we may not want our dog to reinforce the chase with a small animal or child is my point here.  Sure we can throw a ball or toy however have rules when you play and always let the dog win (or think they've won).  Do not have your dog chase children or small things around as while this can start out as what looks like fun the dog could tip and become quickly aroused (enter the Red Zone of the Emotional Spectrum.)  

Knowing a dogs traits, or natural behavioral tendencies and temperament (personality) is helpful.  In this case below I want to interrupt even the beginning of the Motor Pattern so I'll look for and interrupt the Orienting (the focus behavior) at the same time because Lola is new to my home I want her to also pair good things with my dogs in my home (or association to my dogs - sounds, smell, sight). This must happen RIGHT AWAY AS SOON AS THEY MEET!

On the other end I also know my dogs are reactive to big dogs coming into thier/my home and so will become anxious quickly (trigger stack). So from the onset I’m going to think about my criteria setting.  What behavior(s) do I want to reward?  

• When Lola looks at my dogs (I'll have to interrupt this so any brief looks are good)
  
• When Lola responds to my cue (she's learning them)
  
• When Lola chooses to move away and create distance from my dogs
  
• When my dogs look at Lola
  
• When my dogs are quiet
  

I start right away to capture any of the behaviors I see by clicking (mark acoustically) and rewarding ASAP with high value treats.

I’ve done no real training with Lola who’s entered my home only introduced the secondary and primary reinforcers (the clicker and hot dogs respectively).   You will see there are multiple layers of behaviors being presented by all dogs and some that could become a problem if I don’t act quickly to desensitize (DS) by interrupting, pairing or redirecting.  In the clip, the proximity or distance of the dogs is a MAJOR factor for my dogs. My space is limited and for the shih tzus they are affected more than the shepherd. The shih tzus (Jimmy Choo and Stella) don’t know the new dog (Lola) that comes into the environment (their home).   Lola, is too close for them and so they do tip and wig out (go over threshold into Red zone  or the high arousal, with low to no ability to think). They respond by saying "bark bark bark grrrrhhh move away– I'm little but I will bite your nose!!"  Distance seeking vocalizations.  At the onset someone may laugh at a small dog behaving like this however its so stressful for the small regardless of their size we have to respect their need for space due to fear.

Lola on the other hand as you will be able to read from her body language has a loose body, wagging tail and at times an open mouth..she isn’t as bothered.  You'll see her go toward the gate where the shih tzus are but that's only because the treats I tried throwing over the gate fell short. Lola does focus on the dogs a little longer than I would want at times and I’m trying to work on a few behaviors with her but decide the more important is to pair good things with the dogs and interrupt the possible future urge to chase the small dogs by practicing looking at me to get rewarded. Since we know our dogs world is all about equal or better values of things, the cooked greezy smelly hot dogs win out in this video.  Calmer behaviors do prevail and we end after a short exchange. Always leave while the party is hopping right?
 
From the onset I'm also working on desensitizing (DS) both Lola and my shih tzus jimmy & stella to each other.  A greater distance and having someone throw food to the shih tzus when they looked at Lola would have helped but hey did I say I was perfect?  Lesson learned for next time.  

On the matter of physical risk it is reduced because A) I have Lola on a leash (prefer a freedom harness but she didn't come over wearing one), B) we have a gate up to safely separate the dogs while the dogs can still see and smell each other C) I have a high value reward (hot dogs and redbarn meat).  D) distance is a huge factor and I do fail here as you’ll see since I'm very close for the shih tzus.  I could have moved further back or out of site but ….they worked through their emotional response to Lola.  If the shih tzus continued to vocalize with barking I would have ended the session. 

When we live with another species and spend so much time with them we do a disservice not learning their language. Training for me becomes a bridge to help us communicate with our non verbal canine companions.  Do yourself and your family a favor and start to practice your observational skills. Look at your dogs body language and evaluate your dogs emotions. Determine where they are emotionally. We can not know what they are thinking but we can learn to understand how they feel.  Have their needs been met? What is their body language saying? Are they in the Red zone? Yellow Zone?  Will moving away from the trigger increase or decrease the behavior they are presenting?

As I'm hopeful I've explained using myself as an example, stress affects and interrupts our focus and thinking. Same for our dogs.  Practicing training exercises allows your dog to use a different part of their brain (neo cortex) and make connections with emotional part of the brain (Limbic system) which is very close to the thinking part. So our aim is to get our dogs to practice  thinking instead of reacting.  For example once at a safe distance ask your dog to look at you (prompted attention exercises) or sit, or paw shake, or twirl.  If your dog does a “shake off” on their own remember to MARK then REWARD every shake off.  Life's not easy and its not perfect BUT it will get incrementally easier if we are able to understand and meet their basic needs. They will become more reliable to what we ask of them IF WE CONTINUE TO PRACTICE our exercises with consistency.  

Okay, enjoy the clip and feel free to share your thoughts, comments or if you have any questions.
 
P.S ignore my morning attire pls
 
See video clip here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzNGZtekSzc

Reference:
Coppinger, Ray 2002. Dogs
Dr. Susan Friedman, Online course Living and learning with Animals 

Vivian Zottola, CBCC, CSAT, CPDT
Certified Behavior Canine Consultant
BostonK9Concierge LLC
617-464-1005

can you see a difference in the dogs behaviors from take 1 to take 2?

Technology is allowing us to remotely reinforce training behaviors. This is exciting news to me and for thousands of urban dogs living alone in condos. We want to reinforce the "right" behaviors as much as possible. We know Dogs are social and cooperative individuals, the reason why we live together, but unfortunately not all guardians can work from home. Canine Science tells us dogs don't do well in isolation for long periods of time, that they are not den animals, and need limited exposure to a group of dogs without structured interactions. We also know practicing too much stimulation without structure and adequate supervision can teach unwanted behavior problems. So what's a guardian living in the city to do? 

Technology is part of the answer! New products are allowing us to positively reinforce alone time, physical activity and mental engagement.  This all of course still requires your planning and being creative while always taking the animals perspective into account.  We know the best option and general rule is to provide both physical and mental stimulation in a safe environment daily.Technology now gives us the opportunity to extend our reach and train at home. 

There are a few remote training products I like and listed below with video. I use these in my behavior modification training to reinforce behaviors. These are not intended to take the place of a training plan or babysit your dog for hours on end.  Technology allows you to now call our dogs to check in talk to them and even give them a treat remotely or, we can use technology to reward a behavior.  You can now engage remotely in between social interactions and dog walks filling up that down time if needed.  This may  help with reducing any possibility of depression or learned helplessness.  

I use these when desensitizing to absences (Separation Anxiety) and counter conditioning behavior  (reduce barking).  Confinement combined with low stimulation may result in depression (or a condition called learned helplessness). Keeping pup engaged is important and having a mix of things to do is fantastic! We want to both physically and mentally stimulating those brain cells and pathways to keep growing and sticking between limbic area of the brain and the cognitive parts of the brain.  Your pup will grow up to be one who will pause to make decisions rather than be reactive.  Continue with scheduling multiple walks and asking your walker to give a prepared food/dispensing toy/stuffed kong after the walk. And consider the products below as an addition to your routine especially if you are reinforcing behaviors (or if you just want to check in to say hello). These products are even more salient when used in conjunction with a behavior mod training plan. If you have questions or you're interested in a demonstration please call me. Dog Blessings!  Vivian