Plenty of dogs get trained perfectly well with harnesses, mine included. It's no different than training with a flat collar, really. Unless, of course, you don't understand how to train without corrections, which is all I'm getting from your little anti-harness diatribe.
Controversial ZG dog park video
Why is this dog even at the dog park ??? ... good grief.
Honestly I'm not a big fan of McCann's either, generally speaking. But I have to say in this instance I'm 99.9% in agreement with what they say.
Honestly I'm not a big fan of McCann's either, generally speaking. But I have to say in this instance I'm 99.9% in agreement with what they say.
1 - 6 of 37 Posts
Some of us neither want nor require a physical connection to the dog in order to communicate, beyond keeping them from doing something dangerous. And if you seriously think reaching the end of the leash is a correction ... lol.You and I have been down this road before. Even the McCann's (multiple titles in agility at high levels which is as nearly purely positive as one can get in dog sport) say "lose the harness."
You are welcome to train any way you wish (as is anyone). It does not mean it will work for others or as well.
Harnesses are unclear for communication in training. If you are training using a harness you might as well not have any physical connection to the dog (during training) including outside the home (NO leash, NO harness, NO collar). Every time the dog hits the end or pulls on the leash the dog is corrected no matter what the device or training method. If, in your training, your dog never ever ever hits the end of the leash then kudos to you. Most people are not capable of that.. and most dogs as well.. regardless of your teaching method.
Even in puppy class if you have a leash attached to your dog, it is HIGHLY likely your puppy is not going to keep that leash loose.. and every time he/she tightens the leash you have just given a correction. Might as well make it clear.
In classes around my area the first class is without the dog. Everyone to a person says "no harness; no head halters" Flat Martingale is preferred to start and to teach. Dogs cannot escape (they often do from harnesses) and the control, if needed, is far better. It does not mean you yank and crank. It simply is far more clear in communication.
Not every dog in a class is a brachiocephalic breed with a thick neck where a collar might be a device you move away from AFTER the dog is trained. Most dogs and handlers do better with collars, and most good trainers (including the McCann's) nix the harness until a dog is well trained (at which point the equipment used is superfluous.
Dang, I guess my trainer wasn't a good trainer then. Except HOW did a lousy trainer accomplish all of this? It's a mystery!most good trainers (including the McCann's) nix the harness until a dog is well trained (at which point the equipment used is superfluous.
| Nikki Sherwin has a degree in psychology and a College certificate in Child and Youth Worker. She always had a keen interest in behavior. She started off being professionally employed in 1994 teaching behavioral programs to children. She developed and taught anger management, self-esteem and friendship groups and participated in one to one counseling. Her experience in child psychology transitioned to dog behavior and she never stopped. Since 1997 Nikki has worked professionally with dogs. Nikki’s experience has included:
|
Nikki Sherwin's Professional Development
Sorry dear, a good trainer knows how to train and communicate with or without force. A great trainer never needs to use force. I know this is hard for you to understand, but true nonetheless.
That's because you are a smart trainer.From soup to nuts; from harnesses to ... tractor parts? This thread has it all. LMAO.
Yeah. I don't see ANY correlation between collar / harness, and ability to communicate clearly. Unless, of course, if you're using it as a communication tool.
I tend to let the rewards, or absence of rewards, do the heavy lifting.
Trying to use a collar/harness as a communication tool is literally the MOST inefficient way to communicate with a dog, lol.
Agreed. Especially when there are several non-physical methods that are far more effective.Ken Steepe, in the video: "I would repeat 'sit', and then SHOW them how to sit (slightly aggressive hand motion pulling up on leash and collar)". Communication I suppose, but not the kind of conversation I have with my dogs.
Suggesting the use of force, albeit relatively low-level force, is part of the .1% I'm not in agreement with.
Agree 100% with you, can't really think of anything I'd add to what you said.His dog is way over threshold. And as a teaching / learning moment, it's highly unlikely she'll absorb ANY of it, including Ken's proposed correction.
IMO what he needs to do is physically back away from the stimulus. From the look of things - far, FAR away from the stimulus. To begin with, get between his dog and the distraction to break her line of sight and her hyper-focus, and encourage her to follow. Whatever it takes ... food lure, presentation of a toy, walking backwards, kissy noises, whatever. Then at a much further point away, establish attention and try the cue again. Distance is your friend. THAT'S where learning has a chance to occur.
The dog is giving him soooo much information, and apparently Zak's not heeding even one little bit of it.
1 - 6 of 37 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Puppy Forum and Dog Forums
Come join a community dedicated to the discussion of grooming, food reviews, training tips, rescue groups, and dog pictures. All dog breeds and dog breeders welcome
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
DaySleepers
52 Replies
3GSD4IPO
44 Replies
Little Louie
23 Replies
Recommended Communities
