Yup. Ever since he was old enough to have it done. And if this helps with advice, he is definitely the alpha dog over the other one. He is submissive and well trained with me.
It is punishment, though. You’re forcing his face into poop, that’s different than him voluntarily licking his own butt. And bonking him with a pop bottle is meant to scare or startle him, right? That’s why you said it makes a “lovely thumping sound”? That’s “positive punishment*”, even if you don’t consider it so. The point is, even if punishing your dog was the correct route to take when housetraining, in his eyes you’re punishing him for what he’s doing at the time you discover the poop, not for pooping in the house. He’s already forgotten that he’s pooped!
Let me give an example, because I always find that useful.
Dog jumps up on the counter and steals the sandwich I left there. Five minutes later, I come back into the room and find my food missing. The dog, having finished the sandwich 4 minutes and 30 seconds ago, is now lying on his bed thinking about chasing squirrels. I’m pissed that my sandwich is gone and call the dog into the kitchen to yell at him. Maybe I shake my finger in his face or whap him on the nose. What does the dog think he’s being punished for? Laying on his bed? Coming when he was called? Or eating the sandwich, which is 5 minutes in the past and gone from his head?
If I had come into the kitchen while he was jumping onto the counter and shouted “NO!”, that would be useful. He’s getting punished for what he’s doing right then.
The type of training I do involves teaching you to communicate with your dog and showing him that compliance earns him good things. Dogs, like all sentient beings, always have a choice. They can choose to disobey you, but if they’ve been taught that doing what you’re asking is more rewarding than refusing they’re more likely to do it. Being the leader of your pack doesn’t have to involve force. I think it’s more effective if it doesn’t.
*In training terms positive punishment is causing something undesirable to happen to the dog. Negative punishment is removing something desirable (your attention, his toy) from the dog. Positive reinforcement is giving the dog something he values as a reward for behavior, negative reinforcement is removing something undesirable (the pressure of a pinch collar) when the dog complies.
In some packs, the alpha provides leadership by showing what to do, not by punishing.
I understand what you’re saying I just disagree with it. Communication should involve as many senses as possible otherwise you consider the animal handicapped in some respect. Positive feedback is only half the message in the way that you describe. The dog is only learning that going outside is good. There is no direct association with indoor activity as a negative.
I don’t see the difference with making the dog smell urine indoors and dabbing the urine and making it smell it except the negative association of location and the subservial nature of it which is the whole point. What I subscribe is to make the dog aware that the indoor activity is bad by using sight, smell, location, and command sounds. To me, you’re leaving out half the learning process with only positive reinforcement of similar activity.
The all-positive method has worked really well and really quickly for me.
Eh, so far we haven’t applied physical punishment to you – do you feel treated as if you’re handicapped in some respect?
When you lead the dog and show him what you want, and he does it, what motivates you to want to add an additional negative stimulus to the process? Assuming the dog gets it already, which has been my experience, why add punishment?
Are you emotionally committed to negative reinforcement for some philosophical reason?
I don’t really get what you’re saying about making the dog be subservient – the dog is already subservient; he naturally seeks to learn from you. He wants to do what you want already. If you guide him clearly you shouldn’t have any problems with him messing in the house, once age and experience allows him full control of his bodily functions.
The dog in question is not responding to training. It doesn’t make sense to me to leave out training that is location related. Since you can’t praise the dog for peeing in the house then “NO” needs to be associated with the act. The only way for that to happen is to associated it with something and that is the the smell and sight of the act. Ultimately, you want the dog to respond to “NO” for other things and this is a good start.
In the OP’s case, I don’t think it’s a matter of not responding to training, it’s that the owner is expecting too much from a young dog and not managing the dog’s environment properly. When training any dog for any behavior, you have to set them up to succeed. The OP’s puppy is being given too much freedom (unrestriced access to the house while alone) and not enough mental and physical stimulation.
But the dog won’t associate the act with the location unless you catch them doing it, they just don’t have the mental capacity to make those connections. If you have an especially sensitive dog you run the risk of creating a negative association between eliminating and you (which means you might get a dog who sneaks away from you to pee in the house, won’t go when you take them outside, eats her own feces, or in the worst case I know of, pees in his own mouth :eek:). If you have an insensitive dog, the level of punishment you’d have to apply would have to be much higher than a verbal NO and even then it’s not going to make a dent if you punish after the fact. Dogs live in the moment.