Minnesota Animal Welfare Conference: Suzanne Hetts on The Differences Between Cats and Dogs

I swear I didn't stage this.

I don't write about him much, but I have a kitty. Nicky is a 13-year-old boy I've had since he was a kitten. Although I consider myself more of a dog person, I also can't imagine my life without at least one cat. This is probably why the last segment on of this conference was probably the most interesting and most useful for me: promoting successful relationships between dogs and cats.

Suzanne pointed out that about half of the pet owning households have both a cat and a dog, but unfortunately, very few are concerned about the quality of their cats' lives, and even fewer do anything to prevent problems and improve things after the fact. She believes this is because owners are too accepting of the cat feeling unsafe or scared, possibly because they don't recognize hiding behavior as abnormal.

Although cats and dogs can get along, they are very different species. This starts with domestication. Where dogs were likely domesticated around 14,000 years ago, domestication only happened in cats about 4,000 years ago. That 10,000 years of co-evolution means that dogs are more predisposed to social living with each other and with humans. Cats can and do exist without social groups. They don't really have friends, instead having what Suzanne called “preferred associates”- others that they spend time with. They don't really have packs and they don't have hierarchical social structures.

Body language is another huge difference, especially it comes to ritualized behaviors like greetings. While cats greet one another nose-to-nose, dogs... don't. They might be okay with it, but we all know their go-to place is at the other end. Cats also indicate that they are friendly and approachable by holding their tail up with a curve at the tip. In dogs, this is a threatening gesture. Cats also don't have a ritualized invitation to play. While dogs will play bow first, cats often just pounce. This can be misunderstood by dogs and lead to an unfortunate altercation.

Chemical communication, while poorly understood by researchers, is another area of believed difference. Not only does it seem to be more important to cats, but they use it as a distance increasing behavior, while dogs use it more of a “I was here!” thing. Rubbing and scent marking (which, to be honest, I'm not sure how to distinguish from chemical communication) plays a huge role in social attachment in cats, and dogs... don't seem to do this.

Finally, dogs have active and passive submission behaviors, and cats don't. When a dog rolls over on his back, it's a reconciliation gesture. When a cat does it, it's a defensive behavior that will likely culminate in an attack. What's more, cats do not “make up” with each other.

To have a harmonious home, you need to have good early socialization, complementary personalities, and good experiences as adults. Let's look at each of these.

First, he best bet lies in socialization, when an animal learns his species identity, who to hang out with, and who he should eat. Unfortunately, cats have a short socialization window which starts at about 2 weeks and has already ended by the time they come home at 8 weeks. What's more, kittens have an earlier fear period that happens right at that time. Fear periods mean that bad experiences during that time have a bigger impact.

Next, you need to have complementary personalities. Unfortunately, there aren't really temperament tests for cats... not that they're perfect in dogs. Beyond that, though, Suzanne doesn't think that meet-and-greets really give you any useful info.

Finally, you need to make sure that the animals have more good experiences than bad. You also need to be prepared to accept mutual tolerance over genuine affection. Keep in mind that individuals vary in their desire for social contact, and that minor conflicts are normal and can be ignored. Serious threats or frequent conflicts, no matter how minor, will erode quality of life for everyone.

Conflicts with cats are almost always about space. They rarely fight over social status or resources, so cats that are on the receiving end of resource guarding by a dog finds this unexpected and stressful. Cats who live with other living beings really thrive when there are plenty of spaces- especially vertical spaces- that they can retreat to. Conflicts between dogs and cats usually result from excessive curiosity from the dog, which can lead to predation. Dogs can also just start with a predatory response to the cat. Either way, the result is fear and a reduced quality of life for the cat.

Finally, forcing experiences for any animal never works. “Showing” the animal that the other won't hurt him does not work, and often backfires and makes things worse. Interactions need to be carefully managed until everyone is familiar with each other.

Bottom line: It is not okay for any individual to be afraid of or harassed by the other. Having a peaceable kingdom is possible, and the best way to accomplish this is by proper introductions. This is such an important (and lengthy) process that I will spend the next entire post on it. 

Minnesota Animal Welfare Conference: Suzanne Hetts on Punishment, Part 2

Punishment should rarely, if ever, be a trainer’s first choice. But Suzanne argues that it’s something we shouldn’t completely dismiss, either. By applying critical thinking skills instead of emotions, we can make better training decisions. And, though it makes me a tad uncomfortable to say it, sometimes those decisions will include punishment.

So how do we decide if punishment should be used? This flow chart, included in our handouts, and available online at this link (on page 19) is very helpful.

Punishment can only be used to eliminate a behavior you don’t like. That said, it’s best to create a reinforcement-based program to create a behavior you do like instead. However, when behaviors are dangerous, they need to be addressed immediately, and the benefits outweigh the risks of using punishment (and make no mistake- there are risks), a punishment-based program may be needed.

If you’ve found yourself in such a situation, Suzanne provided some criteria to ensure that the punishment is effective. The more of these conditions you meet, the more humane the punishment will be. It will still be punishment, of course, but it will reduce the risks of fallout.

Start with Response Prevention

“Response prevention” is where you prevent the unwanted behavior from happening. This is an excellent first step: if you can completely prevent a behavior by changing something, you may not even need a punishment-based solution. However, if you do need to use punishment, response prevention is equally important because…

Punishment Must Be Consistent

When it’s not, the dog may decide that the behavior is worth the risk. For example, if I got a ticket every time I was speeding, I probably would stay within the speed limit. As it stands, though, I’ve had one speeding ticket in the past ten years. Considering the frequency of speeding to being ticketed ratio, it seems worth it. To be effective, the dog must believe that the behavior will automatically trigger the punishment. This is why Suzanne says that…

Remote Punishment is Better Than Interactive Punishment

Dogs are excellent at picking up on discriminative cues that predict events. If you are always the one that delivers punishment, the dog will begin to associate you with the feeling of being punished. For this reason, “booby traps” that appear unrelated to your proximity or presence are preferable to punishments that involve you directly.

It Must Be Immediate

Punishment also must be immediate, and definitely no more than three seconds after the behavior happens. If it’s not, punishment simply becomes aversive: an unpleasant thing that happens randomly with no effect on the behavior.

Dogs Must be Able to “Turn Off” the Punishment

If the punishment must start immediately upon the behavior happening, it must also cease as soon as the behavior stops happening. If the punisher continues to happen after the behavior stops, it will be affecting all those subsequent behaviors. This unnecessarily muddies the waters, making it much harder for the dog to understand what he should and shouldn’t do.

Choose the Correct Intensity

Finally, punishment must be severe enough that it will stop the behavior within 3 to 5 applications, but not so strong that it creates unwanted side effects of fear or aggression. This is probably the hardest criteria to implement, since it requires some guesswork.

If it’s not clear by now, using punishment effectively and humanely requires quite a bit of knowledge, skill, and prior planning. It’s not something to be undertaken in the heat of the moment. The vast majority of the time, there are solutions other than punishment that will be equally effective if you take the time to figure it out.

Minnesota Animal Welfare Conference: Suzanne Hetts on Punishment, Part 1

Punishment is not the problem. So says Suzanne Hetts, PhD, CAAB, CVJ, who elaborates that it is the mis-use of punishment that is a problem. Well, that, and the way we talk about it, which is the subject of today’s post.

Anyone who has been around the dog world for more than, oh, five minutes knows that discussing punishment is “politically sensitive.” Some people refuse to talk about it. Others refuse to listen to people talk about it. Some label anyone who talks about the topic as an animal abuser (or worse- comparing folks to Nazis or child molesters).

There are two big problems with a categorical refusal to discuss punishment. First, Suzanne says that we undermine the profession when we do so. If we don’t talk about it, we lose credibility. Whether we like it or not, punishment exists, and the general public knows that. Refusing to acknowledge that makes us appear willfully ignorant. Worse yet, some trainers don’t talk about punishment accurately or scientifically. For example, some will state that punishment doesn’t work. That’s just a blatant lie. Punishment can and does suppress behavior (that’s sort of the definition of punishment in operant conditioning).

The second problem that Suzanne identifies is that when we refuse to discuss or consider punishment, we miss out on possibly useful options. While Suzanne would rarely use punishment as a first resort, she says there are times it can be helpful. And even if a trainer doesn’t use punishment, she does need to understand it.

A big reason for this is the fact that the general public often defaults to punishment-based solutions. I can’t imagine there are any dog trainers out there that haven’t had a client ask, “How can I get my dog to stop…” Scientifically, stopping behavior requires punishment. Of course, most of us know that the best solution is to reframe the question in terms of what the client wants the dog to do.

And anyway, even if we are opposed to punishment in theory, Suzanne argues that many of the solutions that positive trainers use or recommend are punishing or aversive. For example, the use of a head collars or body blocks are punishing to some dogs, while withholding reinforcement can cause frustration. Still, these are commonly used techniques.

In the end, what it seems to come down to is that humans (trainers and clients alike) have a negative reaction just to the word “punishment.” Think about it; the words “corrections” or “discipline” are far more pervasive, and pack a much smaller emotional punch. Semantics aside, Suzanne encouraged us to consider if we’re really opposed to punishment in and of itself, or if we are actually opposed to confrontational methods.

I find this distinction to be a useful one. I will not use pain or fear to train my dog, but I have no problem telling her she can’t do something, or enforcing a time-out if needed. I will not engage in power struggles, especially with larger, stronger dogs, but I sure will use tools like head halters that give me an advantage. While punishment can become confrontational, it doesn’t have to be. Punishment is not one-dimensional. It’s not all-or-nothing, and our conversations about it shouldn’t be, either.

So what should we discuss when talking about punishment? Ah, you’ll have to tune in next week to find out.

Minnesota Animal Welfare Conference: Aditi Terpstra on Canine Body Language

Aditi’s second presentation of the day was on canine body language. Most of this was review for me, but there were two things that I really liked about this presentation.

First, I really liked that Aditi put body language under the broader category of behavior, which she defines as “the way in which an animal or person acts in response to a particular situation or stimulus.” Body language falls very neatly under that. Aditi also emphasized that behavior is a pretty broad spectrum, dependent on the individual animal. Obviously, genetics, previous experiences, and the current environment will all influence a dog’s behavior- and in this case, body language.

Second, I appreciated her emphasis on describing behavior (and body language) in objective terms. This means describing something without allowing it to be influenced by your own thoughts, feelings, prejudices, or interpretations. In other words, describing it so that a person could create an accurate mental picture of what happened. So, an objective description of a dog might say that the dog’s eyes were soft, his mouth was open, his tail down and wagging slowly, and his ears back. A subjective description- one in which we allow our own perceptions or opinions influence the words we use- might say the dog is happy.

Of course, we all know this is harder than it sounds. Saying a dog is happy is quicker and easier than describing all his body parts. Often, the subjective interpretation is enough, but there are times where we need to be objective. I would argue that as an instructor, I need to be especially mindful of this. After all, my job is to educate, and shorthand doesn’t do that very well.

The great thing about Aditi’s presentation was that she broke everything down into individual body parts and then gave us words we could use to describe each one. 

Eyes can be described by shape: are they soft? round? almond shaped? hard? Is there white showing? Are the muscles around the eyes relaxed or tense? The pupils can be described as normal (for the light conditions) or dilated. The movement of the eye can also be described: are the eyes fixed, direct, or staring? Are they darting back and forth?

The dog’s mouth can likewise be described. It could be open with relaxed muscles. The lip may be “long” or curved up in a “smile.” Or, it may be drawn forward or curled back, possibly exposing teeth and gums. There may be tension or wrinkles around the mouth. A dog can yawn or lick his lips.

Ears change quickly and can be difficult to read because there are so many sizes and shapes of a dog’s ears. Because of that, Aditi advised that we look at the base of the ears to determine if the ears are forward, back, or off to the side. They may be tense or relaxed.

Tails are likewise difficult. Again, looking at the base can be helpful. Is the tail still or wagging? Is it held in a neutral position (at spine level), held high, or low and tucked? The wag could be slow and loose, or tight and fast.

Finally, you have to put all of this together and take in the full picture. Is the dog’s overall movement slow and “sleepy” looking? Is he moving quickly and appearing frantic? Is his posture upright? Forward? Back? Are his paws all on the ground? Are they sweating? Is the dog avoiding you? Is he sniffing the ground, shaking his full body, or rolling over to expose his belling? Is the hair flat on his back or the hackles up? Does he look away from other dogs or offer play bows?

Sometimes, body language can be conflicted. This makes things a bit more difficult to read, but keep in mind that body language is fluid and can change moment to moment, so keep watching and describing. It is likely that things will come together and make more sense as you do. 

Okay, gang... here's a (hilarious) action shot of Pyg and Napi. What do you see?

 

Minnesota Animal Welfare Conference: Aditi Terpstra on Food Guarding and Adoption Outcomes

In *cough*May*cough*, I attended the 12^th Annual Minnesota Animal Welfare Conference, which was focused on behavior. It was a great day of speakers and info, and I’m really glad I went. Today’s post is a summary of Aditi Terpstra’s presentation on food guarding. Aditi is a CPDT-KA who runs Urbane Animal. She is also the dog program director for the Winona Animal Humane Society, a back-up animal control officer for Winona, MN, and an independent contractor for the ASPCA. She’s also a really cool person.

Zombie Dog resource guards caffeine. That's okay, he's probably still adoptable.

Aditi introduced the ASPCA SAFER assessment in her presentation, which was geared towards shelter workers. The SAFER is not a temperament test; it’s not a pass/fail exam, but rather a snapshot of current behavior, focusing on aggression. Each dog is assessed and assigned a score ranging from 1 to 5, and these scores help shelter workers determine the resources needed in order to place the dog safely. Food guarding is just one area on the SAFER, but it’s an important area to single out as a survey of shelters showed that food guarding is one of the top reasons dogs were deemed not eligible for adoption. Only 34% of the shelters responding to the survey attempted behavior modification for this behavior problem.

What I found very interesting was that the Wisconsin Human Society (2004) did research that suggests that behavior mod in the shelter setting wasn’t even necessary in some cases! In this research, 96 dogs had scores of 3-5 (indicating stiffening, freezing, gulping, growling, or biting a fake hand) on the food aggression section of the SAFER assessment. These dogs were sent home on a “food program” for the new adopters to follow. This program includes advice to avoid conflict around the food bowl, to make mealtime a non-event, and to require a sit (or other simple behavior) before the bowl is put on the floor. They had adopters put small amounts in the bowl at first, and then adding more gradually. Dropping high value food treats was also recommended, in addition to providing a “foraging device” (ie, Kong or other food toy) to the dogs. Only six adopters (out of 96!) reported guarding behaviors in the first 3 weeks. The dogs were followed for three months, and in that time, only one dog was returned. This means that 95 “unadoptable” animals were successful placed!

I’ll admit, I have concerns about liability, but the researchers did not. They were very transparent about the dog’s issues, and provided pre-adoption education and follow-up support. Definitely an interesting presentation. If you’d like more information, you can visit the following links:

ASPCA on Behavior Mod 

ASPCA Videos of the Food Program 

APSCA Publication on Food Guarding