“Nature is never wrong.”—Jean Jacques Rousseau“Genies don’t grant just two wishes. Nobody talks about the Two Musketeers. And you never hear anybody say, ‘Second time’s the charm!’“ —Jeff Bridges (Hyundai ad)
The message of the ad copy
above is that all good things come in threes. This is true even in chemistry,
where in order for most chemical reactions to take place there has to be a
third agent, a catalyst, facilitating the process.
This series of Unified Dog
Theory articles—which involves me trying to be such a catalyst—got its start
after I read a blog article written by Dr. Ian Dunbar, on how “unneccessarily
complicated” the thinks behavioral science techniques and terminology have
become. In another, more recent
article, Dr. Dunbar, who’s a tireless advocate for using positive
training techniques, writes, “It’s possible to teach a dog manners, obedience,
tricks and games at any time in his life. However, it’s just so easy ... to
teach four- to five-week old puppies to come, sit, lie down and roll over and
so, why not?”
Here’s a potential “why
not.” Evolutionary biologists Raymond and Lorna Coppinger write, “The neonate
is ... so perfectly adapted to its environment it doesn’t have to learn
anything.” They go on: “Adolescence
is a period of metamorphosis—anatomical remodeling. The neonatal organism is
taken apart and reconstructed into an adult ... Sucking feeding behaviors do
not grow, or develop, into predatory feeding behaviors any more than the 18
feet of a caterpillar grow into the six legs of a butterfly. Instead, the
animal is de-differentiated... New organs are created de novo while old ones
are discarded.”
And, most importantly,
“Skills do not grow from the neonatal skull (the sucking skull) into an adult
predatory skill. The neonatal skull is resorbed while the adult skull is being
laid down.”1
In essence the Coppingers
are saying that the period between birth and adolescence involves such a
humongous change in the structure of the pup’s brain as to be comparable to the
structural differences between a caterpillar and a butterfly (perhaps even a
liver and a lung). If this is true, shouldn’t we wait to train a puppy until
after his skull has totally morphed from the neonatal skull into the skull of
an adult dog?
And why would you want or
need to train a puppy at 4 - 5 weeks, especially since the pup is very unlikely
to retain what he’s learned (once his brain goes through its neural pruning and
metamorphosis, during adolescence)? And particularly if by doing so you run the
risk of creating learning deficits and stunting the pup’s social and emotional
flexibility?
When I first started out
as a dog trainer I knew lots and lots of dog owners who never took their dogs
to a puppy class, and who never did any formal obedience training of any kind
with their dogs. They just made it a point to play with their dogs every day.
And those dogs were far better behaved, and had fewer emotional or behavioral
issues than all the other dogs I knew, especially those who had been to puppy
class!
This need to train a puppy
right away—while ignoring the pup’s natural developmental phases—is all the
more puzzling when Dunbar says, “Successful socialization is possible
only during puppyhood. If you miss the socialization time-window, you’ve missed
it for good.”
Why place such importance
on only one development phase, while ignoring all the others, especially since
what Dr. Dunbar says isn’t true? There is no critical window, where if you miss
it “you’ve missed it for good.” Most scientists now call this period an
“important” phase, not a “time-window.” Plus the most critical aspect of this
period is social play.
Imagine, if you will, a
puppy, whose developmental urges are geared around social play. Then imagine
taking such a puppy to an obedience class. His developmental needs practically
compel him to do nothing but play with the other pups. And that’s usually in
alignment with the structure of most puppy classes. But then, in the middle of
playing or wanting to, the puppy is pulled away from what his developmental
urges are compelling him to do, and he’s asked to learn obedience behaviors,
which—except for the sit—are entirely unnatural at his age. Plus the owner will
only have to re-train the pup once he reaches adolescence anyway.
Some scientists are now
looking into a theory of how limiting structured learning in pre-schoolers, and
replacing it with more outdoor games and free play, might prevent ADHD in some
cases, and perhaps even reverse it in others. (Many +R dog trainers talk
jokingly about “puppy ADHD.”)
Jaak Panksepp is the
author of a number of such studies. He says that when we allow pre-schoolers to
engage in free play, where they make up their own games, using their own rules
(under adult supervision), natural processes of learning impulse control,
fairness, and how to control aggressive feelings take place naturally.
Panksepp writes: “Our
recent broad-scale brain gene expression analysis has indicated that activity
of about a third of the 1,200 brain genes in frontal and posterior cortical
regions are significantly modified by play within an hour of a 30 min play
session.” He adds, “If such dynamic brain changes evoked by play facilitate
brain growth and maturation, perhaps solidifying pro-social circuits of the
brain, we must worry about anything that diminishes the progression of such
developmental processes.”2
Yes, Panksepp is talking
about human children (although his studies were done on rats), but it
seems to me that getting a puppy to settle down, stop fooling around, and pay
attention at a puppy class qualifies as something that “diminishes the
pro-social circuits of the brain.”
So I would suggest that by
waiting until a puppy’s brain and emotions are more fully developed, and by
allowing his normal development processes to take their course, and by waiting
to train the older, adolescent dog through his prey drive, using biting games
like fetch and tug as the primary focal point for learning, we’ll have less
behavioral problems and fewer dogs that end up in shelters, while with Dunbar’s
prescription, we could have more behavioral problems and more doggies stuck
behind bars.
I see another problem,
which is that along with the huge proliferation of puppy obedience classes
(many people are now taking their dogs to the local mall for puppy classes)
there comes a very real disintegration of the quality and qualifications of
trainers or class moderators.
Jez Rose wrote in his blog
at DogStarDaily.com recently
about a lady with a 8-week old Rhodesian Ridgeback with fear
aggression. The owner was told to use an electric shock collar. And the person
who gave out this horrific advice was the trainer in that dog’s puppy class!
Doesn’t lowering the
“legal age” for dog training deeper and deeper into puppyhood (4 - 5 weeks!),
guarantee that more idiots like the one Jez Rose mentions will be giving out
horrific puppy training advice at the local mall? I don’t think Dunbar or
anybody else wants that to happen, particularly if it’s going to start
happening on a more regular basis. And the chances are, that by suggesting
puppies should be trained as early as 4 - 5 weeks, we may already be walking down that
road.
It seems to me that if
we’re to have a fully viable, Unified Dog Theory—one that ultimately benefits
all dogs, owners, and trainers—some of these questions need to be raised,
carefully looked at, and calmly debated.
So let’s open a dialogue.
Let’s look at all the science, particularly the most recent breakthroughs, from
all disciplines. And let’s remember that all good things come in threes: the
best and most productive amalgam of pack leader, behavioral science, and drive
training techniques may very well be what most, if not all of us, are looking
for.
And, as Rousseau says,
nature is never wrong, which means that every puppy is born perfect. We’re the
ones who screw things up.
“Life Is an Adventure—Where Will Your Dog Take You?”
Join Me on Facebook!
Follow Me on Twitter!
Join the Rescue Dog Owners Support Group!
Join Me on Facebook!
Follow Me on Twitter!
Join the Rescue Dog Owners Support Group!
Footnotes:
1) Coppinger, R and
Coppinger, L, “Biologic bases of behavior of domestic dogs,” Readings in
Companion Animal Behavior, Voith, VL and Borchelt, PL, eds., Veterinary
Learning Systems Co, Inc, New Jersey, 1996.
2) Kroes, Burgdorf
Panksepp and Moskal, 2006, “Unpublished observations from Falk Center for
Molecular Therapeutics,” Northwestern University.
No comments:
Post a Comment