So Bandit got a hold of a cardboard box. She knows she can't take my things. She was just being playful. So I heard her ripping it apart so I came stomping in at her. She doesn't like that. She got so scared she couldn't even get traction on the hardwood floor and went for under the table. She was petrified. Is this a wrong way? I payed her no attention until she perked up. Didn't want to baby her thinking it was okay to feel bad. So should I of done that? Or maybe just calmy take it from her?

There really is no need to scare her , honestly. Ideally, if you just simply take whatever it is away and then immediately replace it with something appropriate, you get your message across and provide a calm, respectful example to boot.

If you make a big deal out of it it will continue to be a big deal. You don't want her to learn to fear you or hide from you or become protective or possessive with you.

Okay I didn't mean to scare her it was more to get her attention than anything. I see what you mean. Just replace the bad with the good

exactly anytime you tell them no follow with what yes is.  always end on a good positive note.  just casually take note of the ratios of the amount of time you tell them no and yes and then your goal should be to make sure there are more yes's than no's.

Yes, great advice. As she gets older, she will develop and mature mentally to be able to understand correction. For young puppies, correction is scary and confusing. Someone she normally sees as her caretaker suddenly became scary for a reason that she is incapable of understanding at this age, so she processes things like this as human = unpredictable. Imagine yelling at an infant for putting something in her mouth, it's the same thing. It may have startled her away from the cardboard, but you have to ask yourself what lesson she learned...

Tony, Jeff and I would be using a similar approach - but I don't reward improper behaviour, I tend to ignore it. Avalanche has gotten into the garbage twice and both times I brought him into the kitchen and said "No!" As l picked up the trash. it's been a couple of years now since he got into the trash last time. Without being overbearing, I let him know that I was unhappy and he learned from that.
I do similar with Sash, but since I know she'll bite, I tend to wait until she drops whatever (for one reason she like handkerchiefs ??) Then I pick it up and say no. Again, it's been a while since she's gotten one.

To give my answer to thje question you pose in the title ... If she's learning and you aren't hurting her, the you're doing it right. (Though I do agree with Jeff's suggestion that scaring her is harmful to her and tour relationship.)

I don't see trading as rewarding inappropriate behavior, to me trading is teaching an appropriate behavior. If you try to correct something you haven't taught, you just create confusion.

And, respectfully, I do see it as rewarding.
When Avalanche got into the trash - shortly after bringing him home - I took him into the kitchen and told him "No!" as I picked it up. He wasn't confused and he hasn't been in the trash again. According to modern training philosophy there was one major thing wrong with what I did, it was after the fact as I could tell, probably as much as a half hour later but without punishment (except my displeasure) what I did worked for me.
There are probably as many different ways to train an animal as there are people doing the training, some work better for some people and dogs than other ways. Tony asked a question that is going to provoke various opinions as answers, hopefully he'll read them all and apply whichever he feels will work best for him and Bandit.

Al, to be fair, if you simply say "No" and then you remove the inappropriate object, that is not ignoring.  That is taking their drive in that moment and ending it with a correction (negative) and a loss of the object (negative).    What is happening is a negative dismissal of that drive in that moment.

Continuing to think of this in terms of a drive in that moment, a drive to chew or pounce or play, etc, there is pervasive school of thought/theory that suggests a redirection or rechanneling of drive is more holistically healthy than negatively dismissing (ending) a drive.  

For this example in this thread, it can be broken down like so:

Object removal method:

-dog has drive to chew (normal, healthy, necessary)
-dog chews on box (inappropriate)
-human says or non-verbally implies "No" (disapproval) and removes box (dismisses drive to chew)
-human walks away
-dog remains unfulfilled and dissatisfied in terms of this drive to chew
-dog:human bond not strengthened and not progressed

Object trade method:

-dog has drive to chew (normal, healthy, necessary)
-dog chews on box (inappropriate)
-human says or non-verbally implies "No" (disapproval) and removes box (dismisses drive to chew)
-human trades inappropriate object for appropriate object
-human walks away
-dog left fulfilled with a necessary and healthy drive reinforced and properly channeled
-dog:human bond strengthened and progressed

This is of course not to say that the Object Removal Method doesn't work or doesn't get results, because for just one example you have said that it in fact does.  But, in honor of the dog's drives in the moment motivating the behavior, what the Object Trade Method provides you with is an opportunity to fulfill and support the dog's drive and to honor its needs as an (predatory) animal.  By rechanneling the drive, our, the human's, impact on the dog's overall holistic health is positive, not negative.

It's the exact same idea behind the thought that when our Huskies manage to get off leash in a dangerous area, we don't chase and yell "No" and then correct them , but rather, we run the opposite direction from them screaming and flailing like crazy people which, of course, makes you the most interesting thing around them and then they will rechannel their drive onto you and chase you and approach you.    It has only happened once in the city with my dog and it worked like a charm.

By rechanneling drives, we honor the animal parts of our dogs and strengthen our relationship with them by gaining their trust and respect.

Wow, Jeff, very, very well said. I also want to point out that there is a maturity difference between puppies and adults, but in either event teaching an appropriate behavior is much different than rewarding a bad behavior. Also, different approaches work different for different personality types of dogs. The approach of taking something and yelling is fine for some and effective. In this case, she ran and hid under the table, shows that she was afraid. This type fear in many cases WILL turn into resource guarding toward people and at worst create an unpredictable dog that has the potential to bite a human. Al, I do think as dogs get older correction is important and necessary, but scaring puppies may have unintended consequences.

wpskier222 wrote:

I do think as dogs get older correction is important and necessary, but scaring puppies may have unintended consequences.

Yuuuppp. It took me about 8 mo. to say "No" to Ami. Totally surprised that it actually works..."now why didn't I think of that sooner?"

Wow, Jeff, thanks for a very enlightening write-up!! Wonder if it's too late to teach an old dog ( er, me ) new tricks.

I come from a farming background where the most effective way to "teach" a dog was to slap it silly and if that didn't work, to beat the heck out of it. My "hands off" techniques were as different to most there as is the technique you describe.

I don't think that anyone has suggested that scaring the bejeesus out of a puppy is going to accomplish much of anything except make it scared of you - especially if that becomes the primary means of "correction."

Jen, different dog, different strokes - I quite agree. Avalanche is quite the more intelligent of my two. It seldom takes a second correction for him to understand what it is I expect. Sasha, oddly for a stray, has few things that I would correct, but it takes repetition with her to get the point across. Off topic, one I wish she'd understand: Avalanche, when out on his leash will wrap his lead around a pole and it's easy enough to tell him to "go unwind" and he'll look back along the lead and unwind it. Sasha wraps her lead around a weed and won't pull it free and most of the time she could. Silly dogs!!!

aljones wrote:

 Off topic, one I wish she'd understand:  Avalanche, when out on his leash will wrap his lead around a pole and it's easy enough to tell him to "go unwind" and he'll look back along the lead and unwind it.  Sasha wraps her lead around a weed and won't pull it free and most of the time she could. Silly dogs!!!

One of the benefits of tethering...when we first got Ami and put up the trolley he had 10 ft,15 ft and 30 ft leads that I interchanged. At first, he would get both leads tangled in the brush parallel to his trolley. I was forever untangling him. Gradually, he learned to manage his lead, first with the 10 ft and then with the longer ones. Now, when we walk, if he sees a street sign or a tree, he automatically goes to my side of the obstruction. If he's on long line and goes into the woods/brush, he has learned to back out instead of circling around.

Naw, she's just a silly dog. On walks she'll come toward me to circle a bush (and there'r a lot of bushes out here!) or if she isn't paying attention and goes the wrong way, a simple "come around" gets her to looking and she'll circle back to go around it. When she's on lead out back - that's a whole 'nuther story!

aljones wrote:

Wow, Jeff, thanks for a very enlightening write-up!!  Wonder if it's too late to teach an old dog ( er, me ) new tricks.

Never too late. And hopefully old dogs (er, us) can unlearn old tricks too just as well