Teaching "Stay" at the Front Door

By: Eileen Koval, CDBC, CBCC-KA, CPDT-KA, MSc

It is imperative that companion dogs living in homes in the United States are taught to remain inside their property boundaries due to high rates of failure with physical boundaries such as fences, doors, and gates.  Roaming outside the home or property boundaries is unfortunately common, with 26.5% of dogs in Starinsky et al.’s (2017) study reportedly escaping the boundaries of the owners’ properties.  In modern Westernized societies, roaming is generally considered undesirable, or even illegal in many jurisdictions, due to the threats dogs face from vehicular traffic and from other dogs (Harris et al., 2018).  Dog owners may face fines or even the possibility of relinquishment if their animal if their pet frequently escapes their property boundaries (Wisch, 2015).  Loose dogs also pose a serious bite risk to the public.  In Patronek et al.’s (2013) study, 11.7% of human-directed dog bites reported to law enforcement agencies occurred when dogs were roaming outside their property boundaries.  The risks to both dogs and the public are significant and physical boundaries (especially single layers) are insufficiently effective, resulting in an automatic “stay” at entry/exit points being a necessity for dogs.  This can be taught diverse ways depending on whether the property is fenced or if there are specific stimuli, such as human passersby or prey animals outside the boundaries that are enticing dogs to leave the boundaries. 

View The "Stay" Video Step-by-Step Instructions HERE

If your dog is aggressive toward people or dogs, consider creating two layers of safety by installing an airlock gate inside your front door and/or the door from your backyard to the street.  Even if your dog is not aggressive, this is still an important consideration.  Pool guys and landscapers frequently forget to latch gates, resulting in loose dogs.  Don’t take the risk!! Double up with both training AND a second layer of safety and entry/exit points.  I like using pet-yard set-ups (that would normally create a round pen) and attaching them to the wall to create a gated enclosure.  You can buy these in varying heights, depending on your needs.

Airlock gating at the Front Door

But let’s get back to teaching a “stay”!

At a most basic level, teaching dogs to remain inside the property boundaries can be achieved through teaching an automatic “stay” at doorways and gates, and attaching immense value to this behavior.  Humans can attach immense value to the physical location of property boundaries through heavy presentation of food and play reinforcement – more or less, an overwhelm of positive experiences.  In doing so, humans can address any emotions of frustration that dogs may experience with having to give up the possibilities of accessing new smells, new friends, mates, foraging, hunting, guarding, and other novel opportunities.  Many dogs living as companion animals have been selectively-bred by humans to possess certain physiological and behavioral traits.  Like all mammals, dogs possess a natural drive to explore their surrounding environment in search of food, social connections, and to learn more about their surroundings (Panksepp, 1998).  Many dog breeds have also been bred to roam their surroundings to perform hunt prey, guard livestock, or perform territorial guarding behaviors that assisted humans in their original setting.  These very behaviors they were bred to perform can result in them exiting their home or straying off property (Spady & Ostrander, 2008).  

Implementation of Training

To optimize the environment for learning, choose a quiet space that is free of distractions, such as other dogs, children, movement of people, or views of outside windows.  Careful choice of setting is crucial in the early stages since animals may develop unwanted behavior patterns if they are working in a setting that is too distracting for their level of training.  An example of this would be a distracted dog repeatedly breaking their “stay” when another household dog or child enters the space and then engaging in fun play with them.  This could result in the occurrence of unintended learning that the presence of friendly social contacts is a cue to release the “stay”. As the behavior is successfully acquired, increase the level of difficulty by working with a few distractions present, and later when there are usual distractions present.  This will proof the behavior to simulate real life scenarios.  If increasing the level of distraction then also increase the rate of food reinforcement during the first training session.  Social distractors are more difficult for many dogs to overcome and maintain focus, so these should be introduced gradually over several training sessions.  Additionally, dogs will likely have more difficulty ignoring novel distractors than their usual distractors, so novel distractors must be introduced individually after dogs are already able to ignore their usual distractors (Sheldon et al., 2023; Galambos et al., 2021). 

View The "Stay" Video Step-by-Step Instructions HERE

Initial phase of Teaching “Stay”

1.      First, teach the “stay” behavior inside the dog’s home to reduce the possibility of distractions.  From the beginning until the later phases of training, utilize a fixed ratio of reinforcement – rewarding heavily for every positive behavior requested of the dog. 

2.      Divide the behavior into small successful approximations.  Repetitions of the behavior will create several opportunities for reward interspersed at different points through each complete repetition of performing the behavior.   This will heavily counter-condition the behavior itself and inside the home property where the behavior is occurring.  High rates of reinforcement during training are shown to help build resistance to other influences, including extinction, that may threaten future successful performances of the behavior.  This high rate of reinforcement will help later when the alternative to staying (e.g. breaking outside the property boundaries) would likely yield significant rewarding opportunities for the dog (Shull & Grimes, 2006). 

3.      Teach that “stay” means he remains in place without moving.  Place the dog into a “sit” via luring, verbally mark with “good” and then rewarding the “sit” with 5 treats presented one after the other. 

4.      Pause and then reward every 2-3 seconds while continuing to mark with the word “good”.  “Good” is a continuous reward marker, meaning that this verbal marker is utilized to indicate that the dog is performing the correct behavior, but the behavior is one of duration.  The behavior is continuous, so the reward will come from the human’s hand to the dog wherever he is located, so the dog does not need to move to access the rewards. 

5.      Release the dog with the verbal release word (“Free!”) and present a food reward to convey when the “stay” is complete. 

6.      Repeat the “stay” behavior again, but begin to add the verbal and hand signal cues.  To do so, say the word “stay” and then present a hand signal of a flat palm facing the dog (presented 1-2 seconds separately) at the start of the behavior every time.  Practice this during several repetitions.

7.      Add longer duration (increasing by no more than 50% longer each time) between the food rewards while the dog remains in a “stay”. 

Adding Human Movement Away from the Dog

Once the dog can successfully “stay” for short periods until verbally released, teach the dog to remain in a “stay” despite the human moving around in the area.  Implement this by gradually and methodically adding physical movement away from the dog. 

1.      Place the dog in the “sit” and give the verbal and hand signal cues to “stay”.  Shift your weight between your feet, swaying slightly, while calmly marking the correct behavior by re-iterating “good” every 3-5 seconds in a monotone voice and administering a food reward.  Speaking the continuous reward marker intermittently helps to convey that the behavior is ongoing despite the human’s physical movement.  Dogs may naturally perceive movement of their human away from them (or the movements of others in the environment) as a physical cue that the behavior is complete and they must follow the human to another location. 

2.      Once the dog can complete this, initiate the “stay” behavior again.  Then, slowly pivot 90 degrees away from the dog, and then immediately pivot back toward him.  Reward him for remaining in the “stay”. 

3.      Repeat this pivoting in each direction. 

4.      Then, repeat the “stay”, but pivot slowly 90 degrees and take 1 step away from the dog.  Immediately return and reward with food.

5.      Add in additional steps away from the dog, no more than 1-2 steps at a time per repetition as he is able to successfully “stay”.  Always release the dog with “free!” and offer a reward when the “stay” is complete. 

6.      Reduce the number of rewards offered during the “stay” as the behavior becomes easier for the dog to consistently successfully execute.  Reductions in rewards should take place over several training sessions.

Applying the “stay” to a door or gate

First, apply the “stay” to a bedroom or bathroom door inside the home and/or an outside gate on the property that lacks interesting novelty on the other side.  Slowly open the door during the first session, breaking down the behavior into several steps. 

1.      Place the dog in a “stay” and reward for the “sit”.

2.      Turn away from the dog and approach the door.  Touch the door handle and then turn back around and verbally mark (“good”) and offer a food reward to the dog for not moving. 

3.      Approach the door again and open the door 2 inches.  Return to the dog.  Offer a jackpot reward to the dog for remaining.  Verbally release the dog (“free!”).

4.      Place the dog in a “stay”.  Turn away from the dog to approach the door.  Open the door completely.  Exit the door for 2-3 seconds and then return.  Jackpot reward the dog for having successfully continued to “stay”.   Verbally release the dog (“free!”).

5.      Repeat these steps until the “stay” behavior is easily offered by the dog (e.g. three successful repetitions in a row).

Once the “stay” is successful at a door inside the home, apply the “stay” to a gate or door that is outdoors but within the property (not a property exit point).  Repeat the same steps from above at to apply the “stay” to a door or gate outdoors that does not access the outside road.  Start with the small steps as detailed above (e.g. simply touching the door handle) since the level of distraction is increased by applying the “stay” to a gate outdoors.  The dog is considered successful when he is able to successfully “stay” three times in a row while the human exits the outside door/gate. 

Next, apply this to a door/gate that is a property exit point.  This door/gate exits the home OR the property and may also access the road.  It could easily be left open by a delivery driver or visitor.  This step of the training adds additional distractions from the roadway, smells, pedestrians, novelty.  This makes it more challenging for the dog, so it is important to reduce the distance and duration of the behavior initially since the level of distraction is increased.  Repeat the steps above to teach the “stay” behavior (with verbal and hand signal cues) in front of the gate during the first session at that gate.  Follow the safety steps outlined further above in case the dog breaks the “stay” and attempts to exit the gate.   Offer a very high rate of reinforcement to the “stay” behavior since the value of this reinforcement becomes inherently attached to the home property environment itself.  Subsequent sessions will involve gradually lengthening the time that the gate is open (increasing the time by no more than 50% per training session) for the dog to exit but jackpot rewarding the dog at the end of the behavior for staying inside the boundary.  Exit the gate (without the dog) once the behavior has been acquired, and then reward after the dog remains in the “stay”.    

Safety

When advancing to implementing the “stay” to a gate accessing areas outside the property, ensure that safety is effectively managed by attaching a leash to the dog’s harness.  Always ensure that a human is holding the leash.  Alternatively, attach a tie-out cable to the dog’s harness.  Fasten the tie-out cable to a dep stake driven into the ground or attach it around a large tree trunk.  Ensure that the length of the leash or cable does not allow the dog to reach the roadway.  Also check the outside of the property for hazards before opening the gate during training.  This could include off-leash dogs, children, or wildlife who might attempt to run onto the property to approach the dog.   

Stimulus Control

At this point, the cue to “stay” is the hand signal of a flat palm and the word “stay”.  The open gate is likely nearing completion with becoming an environmental cue to “stay” inside the property boundary.  The end of the behavior has been signaled with the word “free!” thus far.  However, dogs may see other environmental cues as potential releasers.  It is important to ensure that people and dogs walk by and/or are heard, and other normal environmental things occur so that the trainer can reward the dog for remaining in the “stay” (or remind them to “stay, if needed) to ensure the dog does not view these as potential releasers from the “stay”.

Fading cues for an automatic “stay”

Next, begin the process of gradually fading the verbal and hand signal cues for “stay” so that the “stay” becomes environmentally cued by the open gate itself.  Gradually reduce the hand signals (a flat palm facing the dog) and eventually reduce the verbal cue “stay”.  Once the dog is consistently staying at the gate without a verbal cue – performing it successfully three times in a row -- begin to eliminate the hand signal cue for an automatic, contextually cued “stay” behavior.  Simply begin walking toward the gate while the dog automatically stays inside the property boundary.   This will take place over several training sessions until the dog can also perform this successfully three times in a row.

Reduce the high rate of reinforcement

Initiate a variable ratio of food reinforcement for each automatic “stay” at the gate.  Reward only at the end of the behavior, but reward in a jackpot of 5 pieces of food sometimes and in a similar number of random instances reward with just 1-2 pieces of food.  Over numerous sessions, begin randomly, on occasion, offering no food reward for a successful repetition. Instead, offer heavy praise or the dog’s preferred type of play.  For other random successful repetitions, offer a jackpot of food rewards.  It is important to move slowly with this reduction.  If there is any regression in the dog’s consistency of successfully staying, then switch to a slightly increased rate of reinforcement to add value to the behavior.  Once consistent, successful stays are achieved then it will be possible to again – more slowly – reduce the frequency of reinforcement. 

Reminder: Enrichment

It is essential to structure the dog’s daily routine to address their need for access to novel sensory enrichment, access to social opportunities, appropriate exercise, and the need to learn about their environment.  These opportunities could be accessed by the dog by breaking the property boundary when a gate is left open.  It is important to ensure regular, predictable access to these necessary opportunities so the dog is not left to find ways to meet their own needs in a way that is dangerous by breaking property boundaries. 

References

• American College of Veterinary Behaviorists.  (n.d.).  Position Statements.  https://www.dacvb.org/page/PositionStatement

• American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior.  (2021).  AVSAB Position Statement on Humane Dog Training.  Position statements and handouts (for the public).   https://avsab.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/AVSAB-Humane-Dog-Training-Position-Statement-2021.pdf

• de Castro, A. C. V., Fuchs, D., Morella G. M., Pastur, S., de Sousa, L., Olsson, I. A. S.  (2020).  Does training method matter? Evidence for the negative impact of aversive-based methods on companion dog welfare.  PLOS One.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0225023

• Fernandez, E. J.  (2024).  The least inhibitive, functionally effective (LIFE) model: A new framework for ethical animal training practices.  Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 71, 63-68.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2023.12.001.

• Feuerbacher, E. N., & Wynne, C. D. L.  (2014).  Most domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) prefer food to petting: population, context, and schedule effects in concurrent choice.  Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 101.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.81

• Fukuzawa, M. & Hayashi, N.  (2013).  Comparison of 3 different reinforcements of learning in dogs (Canis familiaris).  Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 8(4).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2013.04.067.

• Galambos, Á., Petró, E., Nagy, B., Turcsán, B., & Topál, J.  (2021).  The effects of social and non-social distracting stimuli on dogs with different levels of social competence – Empirical evidence for a canine model of autism.  Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 244.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2021.105451

• Gazerani, P.  (2025).  The neuroplastic brain: current breakthroughs and emerging frontiers.  Brain Research,1858.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2025.149643.

• Gilchrist, R. J., Gunter, L. M., Anderson, S. F., & Wynne, C. D. L.  (2021).  The click is not the trick: the efficacy of clickers and other reinforcement methods in training naïve dogs to perform new tasks.  PeerJ., 9.  https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.10881

• Harris, G. L., Brodbelt, D., Church, D., Humm, K., McGreevy, P. D., Thomson, P. C., & O’Neill, D.  (2018).  Epidemiology, clinical management, and outcomes of dogs involved in road traffic accidents in the United Kingdom (2009–2014).  Journal of Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care, 2(2); 140-148.   https://doi.org/10.1111/vec.12704

• Kincaid, S. L.  (2022).  Gradual Change Procedures in Behavior Analysis. Behav Anal Pract., 16(1),117-126.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-022-00689-6

• Lazaro, X. A., Winter, J. M., Fernand, J. K., Cox, D. J., & Dorey, N. R.  (2023).  Efficacy of Edible and Leisure Reinforcers with Domestic Dogs. Animals (Basel), 13(19).  https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13193073

• Palmer, A., Greenhough, B., Hobson-West, P., Davies, G., Message, R.  (2023).  What Do Scientists Mean When They Talk About Research Animals "Volunteering"?  Soc Anim., 32(7-8), 744-765.  https://doi.org/10.1163/15685306-bja10139

• Panksepp, J.  (1998).  Affective neuroscience: The foundations of human and animal emotions. Oxford University Press.

• Patel, T.  (2019, Mar 8).  Pawsome! Stray Rescued by Cop Outperforms Pure-Breds, to Join Elite Dog-Squad!.  The Better India.  https://thebetterindia.com/174481/kolkata-stray-dog-rescue-asha-police-squad-heart-warming-india/

• Patronek, G. J., Sacks, J. J., & Delise K. M.  (2013).  Co-occurrence of potentially preventable factors in 256 dog bite-related fatalities in the United States (2000–2009).  J Am Vet Med Assoc, 243, 1726–1736.

• Sheldon, E. L., Hart, C. J., Mills, D. S., Soulsbury, C. D., Sumner, R., & Wilkinson, A.  (2023).  The impact of auditory distraction on learning and task performance in working dogs.  Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 265.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2023.105977.

• Shull, R. L., & Grimes, J. A.  (2006).  Resistance to extinction following variable-interval reinforcement: reinforcer rate and amount.  J Exp Anal Behav., 85(1), 23-39. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2006.119-04

• Spady, T. C., & Ostrander, E. A.  (2008).  Canine behavioral genetics: pointing out the phenotypes and herding up the genes.  Am J Hum Genet., 82(1), 10-18.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2007.12.001

• Stahler, D. R., Smith, D. W., & Guernsey, D. S.  (2006).  Foraging and Feeding Ecology of the Gray Wolf (Canis lupus): Lessons from Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, USA.  The Journal of Nutrition, 136(7).  https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/136.7.1923S.

• Starinsky, N. S., Lord, L. K., & Herron, M. E.  (2017).  Escape rates and biting histories of dogs confined to their owner’s property through the use of various containment methods.  JAVMA, 250(3).   

• Veissier, I., Lesimple, C., Brunet, V., Aubé, L., & Botreau, R.  (2024).  Review: Rethinking environmental enrichment as providing opportunities to acquire information.  animal, 18 (9).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2024.101251

• Wisch, R.  (2015).  Table of State Dog Leash Laws.  Animal Legal & Historical Center.  https://www.animallaw.info/topic/table-state-dog-leash-laws

----------------------------------------------

Interested in receiving notifications of educational information, new classes, and new articles/posts? Click here to go to our homepage and add your email to our subscriber's list!

----------------------------------------------

Eileen Koval, CDBC, CBCC-KA, CPDT-KA, MSc (in Operations Management) is a fully certified dog behavior consultant with the International Association of Animal Behavior Consultants (IAABC). She is currently working toward an M.S. in Applied Animal Behavior and Welfare at Husson University. Eileen believes that the foundation of a good cross-species relationship is understanding the needs and normal behavior patterns of each dog as an individual. She enjoys helping humans and dogs communicate more effectively to create brilliant relationships filled with joy, purpose, and fulfillment for all species involved. Eileen offers private consulting for serious dog behavior issues, obedience/manners, and agility training. She developed a unique online course to help pet parents and trainers develop reliable snake avoidance behavior off-leash through positive reinforcement techniques. These techniques have been applied by trainers worldwide to teach dogs reliable avoidance of dangerous environmental hazards and off-leash property boundaries. Eileen lives on a small ranch in Las Vegas, Nevada, with her husband and their Nederlandse Kooikerhondjes.