Exactly. No reasoning. And if anyone DOES try to reason, they're just labeled as an "AR fanatic".LOL!
All I could imagine is if the author of this article was talking to me in person, I would have that pasted on smirk-grin thing that you see in sitcoms when the characters don't want to be there, and I would be desperately searching for the nearest escape route...there's no reasoning with that.
Titles don't mean anything to fanatics like these because according to them, only 'easy' dogs get titles. And the basis of their argument is that positive reinforcement training doesn't work on HARD dogs - you know, dogs with reactivity or aggression issues who really need to be manhandled in order to be taught.And to be clear, I don't think titles are the end all, be all, of being a good trainer. I do, however, think you have to be a special kind of dumb to tell someone with a bunch of them that their methods don't/can't/won't work. Like that is some serious, intentional, deliberate, stubborn, ignorance.
*Aversive Free (AF) Training can be defined as training which involves only the R+ and P- quadrants of learning. When I refer to Aversive Free (AF) Trainers in this article, I am not referring to those who simply choose this approach for themselves, but I am referring to those who vehemently oppose the use of aversives for any dog in any situation.
Let me be clear, what I am referring to is not the idea that reward only techniques are good, and work in some cases. What I am referring to is the dogmatic belief that this is the ONLY way to train a dog, or deal with behavior problems. The aversive free philosophy is that any type of consequence other than simply removing the reward, is cruel, inhumane, and barbaric.
Not 'trashing', just contradicting...Err, the author is Tyler Muto a highly regarded balanced trainer and current president and director of the ICPA. I am sure no one would object to a link to from a prominent +R trashing balanced trainers though.
...I'd like a word with Molly. She seems not to have gotten the memo, and if she's meant to be easy because R+ works, I'd really like her to get with it.Your dogs are super easy, CptJack, and that's why R+ works for you
Saying that the author of this article is a well respected balanced trainer is like saying Cesar Millan is a well respected balanced trainer. Media presence does not equal respected. It just means that their (wrong) information is more prominent and more accessible to the public.Well, except to add: The author of this article is not a well respected balanced trainer. He's a balanced trainer with an internet presence. Michael Ellis is a well respected balanced trainer. Funnily enough he isn't an idiot about what positive training actually is.
I find it really interesting that when people are trying to support their belief that dogs MUST BE PUNISHED!!! people like Ellis aren't who they quote or link. This is, of course, largely because people like Ellis use punishment and pressure, yeah, but they also understand dogs, understand that there are dogs out there for whom *any* punishment is inappropriate, and use a lot of play and rewards.Saying that the author of this article is a well respected balanced trainer is like saying Cesar Millan is a well respected balanced trainer. Media presence does not equal respected. It just means that their (wrong) information is more prominent and more accessible to the public.
Plus, as we all know, people WANT a reason to believe that punishment is necessary. Because that means they don't have to face the guilt of having repeatedly used unnecessary punishments on their animals.
For me it's about actually being balanced (Ie: has a good understanding of when/how reward based training works and a willingness to use it along with some aversive methods) and about truly having the ability to adapt to the dog in front of them as well as understand dog training and dog theory. I trust no one - no one - who uses a cookie cutter approach, one size fits all one, or who believes punishment is necessary for every dog. And, just like positive trainers, I want to see success in their own dogs and in their clients, and the ability to work with a wide variety of people and dogs.Curious, in the realm of balanced trainers how do you find out who is well respected or reputable, and who is not? I feel like I posted a thread about that a while ago. I actually thought Tyler Muto WAS one who was reputable as far as balanced trainers go. Doesn't mean I agree with the original post and its misleading clickbait title, or with Mirzam, whose opinions I always take with a grain of salt because they follow Behan's training.