[oldNgray]

Lately, I've watched a TON of YouTube dog training videos. The most popular trainers seem to be Caesar Millan and Zak George.

Millan's techniques seem to work quite well but I find his methods a bit harsh (ie: what he calls "a bite," which is using his hand to jab a dog in the side).

George's methods are much gentler--more to my liking--but I wonder if his techniques really work. Unfortunately, he appears somewhat inept in many of his YouTube videos.

I've read about "balanced" training and "positive" training. This seems to be a really hot topic. Some "positive" trainers view "balanced" as physically abusive (Millan style or worse?) Some "balanced" trainers view "positive" training as rewarding the good, ignoring the bad (George style?). I watched some Victoria Stillwell "positive" training videos where she turns her back or leaves a room when a dog is misbehaving. Sounds good in theory, but have you ever been around parents who ignore their children's bad behavior? Personally, I find it to be horrible parenting, though not as bad as beating a child into submission. Seems to be that there has to be an in-between style of dog training but if there is, I have not yet found a name for it.

In another thread, someone mentioned Dr. Ian Dunbar. From what little I've read in his free PDF, "BEFORE You Get Your Puppy," his Sirius training style is positive. https://www.dogstardaily.com/node/646

Several years ago, I had the chance to watch a local trainer. He used a forceful, leash-jerking method. On his website, he says he uses a "praise-oriented "balanced" style of training derived from Koehler and Woodhouse methods. (I am not familiar with Koehler or Woodhouse.)

So, if I don't want to ignore my dog's misbehavior and I do not want to use physical punishment, what type of training or trainer should I be looking for?

Maybe I should learn from a positive trainer and use my own style of gentle punishments: As puppies, I used a squirt water bottle and a firm "ehh" sound -- kind of like a human buzzer. Later, when they were a little older, all I needed was a quick "ehh" sound to make them stop and think about what they were doing.

 

[Crantastic]

Of your choices, go with Dunbar. He's a veterinarian and an animal behaviorist. Cesar Millan is a TV personality with very little understanding of dog behavior (the "alpha" thing he pushes has been disproved by wolf researchers) and no actual qualifications. All legit behaviorists find his methods ridiculous. Koehler's methods are outdated and cruel.

A good trainer on YouTube is kikopup. A couple more good behaviorists/trainers (with great books) are Patricia McConnell and Jean Donaldson.

Also, keep in mind that zoos successfully train huge, dangerous animals like bears, tigers, and rhinos using positive reinforcement. Believe me, it'll work on your dog.

 

[Shell]

Cesar is a TV personality with very white teeth and a good editing team. A limited amount of his advice is good but you have you enough to piece it out so overall its a strong thumbs down as a resource.

Stillwell is also a TV personality but at least her methods have generally less risk of fallout or failing in a dangerous or negative way.

Koehler is flat out abusive.

I'd add to Cran's list also Karon Pryor and Sophia Yin as good resources.

Regardless, remember that dogs are not childre in a behavioral/learning sense nor in a social expectation sense. Look to animal trainers and behaviorists of domestic animals like horses or wild animals like primates and dolphins before looking to human kid behavior if you're looking for parallels or examples for what works well and works safely.

Quick results are not always or even often the best results.

 

[Lillith]

Most definitely avoid Milan and Koehler. The positive reinforcement trainers are going to get you the best results without making your dog fearful of you, but get you a dog that wants to work for you because working for you is fun and rewarding!

Management has a lot to do with dog training. You PREVENT the behavior so you never have to correct. You take puppy out frequently to avoid an accident. If/when puppy has an accident, that's when you ignore it and make a note to watch puppy better or take out more frequently. You make sure puppy does not have access to your shoes so she can't chew on them, but does have access to appropriate chew toys and gets praised for using them. You want to go with a training method that sets the puppy up for success rather than waits for your puppy to fail so that you can punish them.

If they do end up doing something you don't like, it's you who failed, and you need to work harder to prevent that behavior in the future and reward more heavily for the behaviors you do like. That's what they mean by "ignore the bad behavior," not that you shouldn't do something about it. When a dog makes a mistake, they really don't know any better. It's your job as their owner to teach them how to be a good dog, and not punish them for something that they're doing because they don't know an alternative behavior.

 

[Crantastic]

I don't completely ignore "bad" behavior; I just ask for incompatible behavior. If the dog is jumping, I ask for a (previously-trained) sit, as a sitting dog can't jump. Then I can reward the dog for sitting, so I'm not ignoring bad behavior or punishing the dog or inadvertently rewarding bad behavior! This works for almost anything. Dog barking its head off at visitors? Teach the dog to run and grab a toy when it hears the doorbell, as a dog with a toy in its mouth can't bark (or at least it's quieter!). Dog trying to snatch your food while you cook? Train the dog to go to a mat and wait patiently while you're busy in the kitchen. It's so much better (and easier on everyone) if your dog understands what you want it to do instead of having to guess what your "NO" means in each particular situation. Dogs are smart, but they're not mind readers.

 

[LeoRose]

I agree with the previous assessments of Koehler and Milan. Koehler's methods can be downright cruel, and Milan isn't too far behind at times.

If you can find a good, positive based trainer in your area, that would be your best bet. Make sure you observe some classes before signing up.

 

[DaySleepers]

I agree with the others on the criticisms and recommendations. The only thing Milan has in his favor as a dog trainer is a good PR team, and if you read Koehler's books you'll see his idea of 'balance' is "when you do the right thing I don't beat you until you can't stand". Woodhouse is, as far as I know, not quite as bad, but still a decades old training philosophy that's based on a flawed understanding of dog behavior. Essentially, anyone touting 'dominance' based methods hasn't kept up with the current research on dog behavior (and animal behavior/learning theory in general) for at least a couple decades.

Now, a most force free trainers will use 'ignoring' as one tool in their toolbox. It's largely only useful in moderating attention-seeking behaviors (dog wants attention so continually barks), and interactions between dogs and humans (e.g. biting in play). This is because the main reward the dog is seeking in these scenarios is interaction with the human, so only giving it when they're being 'polite' in human terms does change their behavior. It's no help at all in self-rewarding behaviors like barking at another dog outside or getting into the garbage. Thankfully, most rewards-based/force-free/LIMA trainers have dozens or hundreds of other tools and tricks for these scenarios - if they're any good!

I'm not opposed to a decent balanced trainer either, even if I wouldn't use corrections on my personal dog. But just like with force-free trainers, I expect a good balanced trainer to be up to date on canine behavior research and learning theory, and to be able to evaluate the dog in front of them. Michael Ellis is a good example of a balanced trainer who does this - he uses corrections, but only on dogs who temperamentally can handle them, and only after the dog has shown that it clearly understands and can perform the behavior asked of it. There are trainers in both categories who have a very 'one size fits all' approach to dog training, and regardless of the methods that will mean you get much less out of training than if you/your trainer sees your dog as an individual, with individual needs that require personalized adjustments to training.

If you're interested in learning more about a specific trainer in more detail, there's a lot of great (if occasionally heated) threads, if you do a quick forum search.

 

[3GSD4IPO]

Learn what you can and then apply what you need to based on YOUR dog.

Milan and Stillwell are TV ppl making money that way.. they charge a lot and make a lot. Some dogs are trained.

Koehler is very old fashioned. Not everything is wrong (a lot is) and his methods would never work well on a weak dog. I find his methods all about the dog MUST do things instead of the formula of showing them how to, having the dog then want to and, if necessary teaching they HAVE to.

Positive EXCLUSIVELY works on weaker dogs. I have seen it used on a few strong, confident dogs and the dogs ended up "owning the house" and, in every case but one the dogs were returned to the breeder, had been made extremely dangerous and had to be euthanized. Every last one would have been a great dog if the dog had simply had constructive boundaries and clearly, appropriately delivered corrections at a young age (around 12-15 months).

I use clickers and positive markers and food to teach the dog a new behavior. When the dog knows the behavior I introduce working that behavior got a toy to build drive and speed and power. I want my dog to heel with animation, focus and power.. and the toy brings that out when used actively with the dog.

Corrections are sparingly used and only when the dog clearly knows the exercise being asked for and, just as clearly, blows you off. I have a 17 month old dog right now. I have introduced negative markers (so he knows when he got if wrong) and only in the last month have I added corrections.

I do not follow any single trainer. I watch me dog and train him accordingly.

 

[Francl27]

I praise good behavior and correct the dog (nothing physical) for misbehavior.

 

[DaySleepers]

Positive EXCLUSIVELY works on weaker dogs. I have seen it used on a few strong, confident dogs and the dogs ended up "owning the house" and, in every case but one the dogs were returned to the breeder, had been made extremely dangerous and had to be euthanized. Every last one would have been a great dog if the dog had simply had constructive boundaries and clearly, appropriately delivered corrections at a young age (around 12-15 months).

Shade Whitesel would be surprised to learn that the dogs she's placing in IPO Nationals are 'weak', I'm sure...

Regardless of the fact that many trainers and behaviorists have great success using force-free methods with a wide variety of breeds and temperaments, it's rather disingenuous to call a dog that doesn't tolerate corrections 'weak'. Many, many dogs who are excellent examples of their breed and/or succeed in work or sports cannot tolerate correction. Being different than the ideal working line GSD does not make a dog weak or flawed.

I do agree that looking into multiple trainers, whether it's books, videos, or seminars, and forming your own opinions about what makes sense for you and your dog is best. Any training program, regardless of whether or not it uses physical corrections, that tries to fit all dogs into a 'cookie cutter' path of "do X then do Y and your dog is trained" is going to fail many dogs, so understanding multiple techniques and approaches as well as the reasoning behind them is important. Patricia McConnell's The Other End of the Leash and Jean Donaldson's Culture Clash are both great first books, because they focus not on specific training techniques, but general dog behavior and how it affects our interactions with them.

With a local trainer, what I would personally be looking for is someone who (as I said before) demonstrates a decent understanding of basic dog behavior and learning theory, and who cares more about figuring out what works for your dog than trying to drag them through a one-size-fits-all program, even if it isn't working for you. Respect is also important. I would, for example, walk away from a trainer who insists on us using a collar. My dog is small and gags easily, and if he gets overstimulated he will choke himself; that's not acceptable to me, so I use a harness. And any trainer who doesn't respect that I've made a deliberate and reasoned choice about that for the wellness of my dog isn't worth my time.

 

[CptJack]

I need help.

Is Kiran weak, or is he a confident dog who is ruined and will take over the world? I can't decide?

He's never been punished with more than a withheld treat or a cheerful interrupter, and he does everything I want him to like being off leash reliable in large crowds of people and children, with strange dogs (even GSD!) and beside roads, and he's super duper eager to please me. But he also does things like watch helicopters take off from 50 feet away wagging his tail, and seems to have a lot of drive for working and toys. Sometimes he even gets hurt and won't stop. He particularly likes to chase and bite the toys and jumps high and holds on hard when he gets them.

Two baseball games, a high way, a parking lot behind us, a side/residential street, and an actual news cameraman. That means he's weak, right?

Does this mean he doesn't exist?!?!?!

Even though I have pictures?

(Seriously, explain yourself, 3GSD, I am super laughing at you right now.)

 

[CptJack]

And also seriously, if you're training right to start with what in the world happens that you need corrections at 12-17 months? Surely, by then, you have figured out a-) how to train your freaking dog to do what you want without them and b-) ways of preventing what you don't want and c-) have other behaviors you can use to manage the dog/build toward what you want/prevent what you don't.

or are you just leaving them feral in a kennel until they're old enough to be corrected? And if so, *found your problem*.

 

[hanksimon]

Zak George is a follower of Dr. Ian Dunbar, and Dunbar does use 'instructive corrections' as you suggested. From one perspective, Dunbar does use correction, although it is not violent or even very aversive, because he recommends making a puppy Sit in a timeout (rather than play) or ignoring a puppy for a few moments (when learning Bite inhibition). His Pitbull and Malamute were legendary. Although they were not perfect, they were ideal examples of pet dogs in a time when large dogs were out of control and being euthanized. If you're training for a pet companion, look through Dunbar's videos and books. Watching a Sirius video or session is educational, and Dunbar is based in California, so you may be able to find sessions nearby that you could watch before you 'buy'. In addition, people in Sirius training are usually having lots of fun, because it is a learn through play approach.

Karen Pryor was one of the trainers who started using clicker training with marine mammals. People read her book in the 1980s and it became an huge success, especially in the dog community. You can probably find the original in the library, because she has a very strong dog training following, and is very respected. Clicker training can be compatible with Dunbar's philosophy and lure training. You should be able to locate a variety of people who do clicker training.

 

[Canyx]

I am a fan of Karen Pryor, Patricia McConnell, Chirag Patel, Pat Miller, Jean Donaldson, Sophia Yin, Denise Fenzi, Shade Whitesel, and many others. Generally, I believe:
-Set your dog up for success
-Reinforce desirable behaviors
-If you punish (through removal of resources or application of a punisher), revisit the first two points and you will likely not have to reach the 3rd.

3GSD is, unsurprisingly, being condescending and about as sensitive as a rock. She competes in bite sports and her dogs do not live 'normal dog' lives. A lot of kenneling and rotating, and the dogs serve a specific purpose - to earn titles in a sport. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. But her perspectives and sympathies do not usually cover pet dogs and their people. oldNgray, everyone else here is a more normal dog owner. Not better or worse, just more what you imagine when you think "pet dog owner". Some compete, some just have well behaved dogs living awesome lives as companions. I would count myself as a pet owner as well, though my dog's pretty active. My dog lives in the house, gets people food and tons of cuddles, hikes, is expected to be well mannered in public situations, comes when called, does not steal things or destroy the house. Reasonable expectations, all achieved through positive reinforcement based training. I am not using the word "exclusive", because training is not exclusively anything. But heavily, ALMOST exclusively, positive reinforcement.

Also, I find it extremely rude, unnecessary, and illogical to characterize dogs as "weak" and "strong", but my dog is the same 'type' of dog as 3GSD's (intense, bitey, little room for error, working line bred, shepherd). I have had no issues training my dog with the philosophy listed. In fact, I kept waiting for things to get hard because everyone makes it seem like I would NEED corrections with my kind of dog... Quite the opposite. He has been a joy to train and we've never hit a point where physical corrections were needed.

Lastly, 3GSD, I have not really shared all of my stories on this forum. But let's say I've worked with/am working with a working police K9 (malinois) who has seen multiple nationally renown police dog trainers. And as a result, the dog has bitten multiple police officers. Like, top rated trainers flown in from around the country, all attempting to correct the dog in one way or another, zero improvement. Meanwhile, 5'2" 130# me, has no issues working with this dog the our R+ training is the only thing that is helping the dog at all (example, after the first training session he stopped attacking fire for the first time in years). This is a crazy, horrific, messed up story that I probably can't really get into here. But if you want to go off again about how 'R+ ruins "strong" dogs', boy do I have stories for you.

 

[Canyx]

Also, re: Shade, who is self described as "a trainer who could remain competitive in Schutzhund at the National level, while not using correction based tools."...

http://shadesdogtraining.net/shades-dogs

3GSD4IPO... weak dogs? How do you explain those scores?

"We started our Schutzhund career with a bang and in September 2016, he won the IPO 1 level at the WDSA Nationals with scores of 90/96/96 and in December he obtained his IPO 2 with 99/95/96 and HIT."

Also, another one of her dogs,
"Reik’s highest scores in IPO were 100 in tracking (At Regionals), 97 in obedience and 98 in protection (at Nationals). He also obtained 199 out of 200 while earning the last leg of his CDX in AKC obedience. Reik won the IPO 1 competition at the AWMA Championship in September 2008, the IPO 2 competition at the DVG Nationals in June 2009, and placed 2nd at the IPO 3 WDDA Nationals in 2012, 5th at the 2010 AWDF and 7th at the 2012 AWDF.

Reik is still going strong at 10.5 years old. We’re working our way through the rally titles, and currently have achieved our RN with scores of 99,100 and 97. "

I guess she just got lucky twice with two weak dogs?

Oops, forgot: "Ender received 100 out of 100 points in the tracking phase in his Sch 2, 100 out of 100 in the obedience phase in his Sch 3, 97 out of 100 in protection in his Sch 3, and 198.5 out of 200 in his CDX. "

Lucky thrice I suppose.


Let's face it... this is totally achievable. It just takes a good and devoted trainer to do it.

 

[oldNgray]

Thanks everyone! The local guy who uses the Kohler method is scratched off my list, as are two other local trainers for different reasons. I checked and there is a Sirius K9 training center about an hour's drive from my home and the prices, while higher than I was hoping, are still reasonable. As of today, they are at the top of my list. The website did mention negative consequences and required equipment included a "check choke collar," which is what many people refer to as a martingale style collar.

I watched several Michael Ellis videos and enjoyed the instruction he provided. He has more for sale on Leerburg.com plus a few free to watch as well. Ellis is also in California but way up north. And his classes are way out of my price range: $1,000 for one week of puppy training or, if you want the full shebang with all he has to offer, it's 18 weeks for $18,500. That's more expensive than tuition at some universities!

My son and I still have not been able to agree on a breed, so I may not even see a new pooch in 2018. But in the meantime, I'll continue watching YouTube videos and I'll give Zak George another try. But this time I'll avoid those of him working with dogs that have severe behavior issues. Those clips usually leave me feeling sorry for the guy. I will also do some reading up on Karen Pryor, Patricial McConnell and Jean Donaldson to see what I can learn.

 

[3GSD4IPO]

Also, I find it extremely rude, unnecessary, and illogical to characterize dogs as "weak" and "strong", but my dog is the same 'type' of dog as 3GSD's (intense, bitey, little room for error, working line bred, shepherd). I have had no issues training my dog with the philosophy listed. In fact, I kept waiting for things to get hard because everyone makes it seem like I would NEED corrections with my kind of dog... Quite the opposite. He has been a joy to train and we've never hit a point where physical corrections were needed.

Nothing against your dog (you love him and he is yours). Intesity, bitey and little room for error often describes nerve more than it describes strength. A confident dog is not necessarily bitey (the way I interpret that). I have yet to see a Dutch Shepherd that does not have a large dose of nerve. Nerve is good and useful. A little adds some flash and dash (especially in Obedience). Too much and you see hectic.. dogs that thrash the sleeve when it is slipped, grips that are not deep or are deep and slip back.. and hectic is hard to describe and it is not strength. It is too much nerve and too much nerve is typically weakness (a dog under real pressure.. not trial pressure.. will collapse or let go.. maybe regrip in a safer part of the helper's body. It took me quite a long time watching to see the difference.

Lastly, 3GSD, I have not really shared all of my stories on this forum. But let's say I've worked with/am working with a working police K9 (malinois) who has seen multiple nationally renown police dog trainers. And as a result, the dog has bitten multiple police officers. Like, top rated trainers flown in from around the country, all attempting to correct the dog in one way or another, zero improvement. Meanwhile, 5'2" 130# me, has no issues working with this dog the our R+ training is the only thing that is helping the dog at all (example, after the first training session he stopped attacking fire for the first time in years). This is a crazy, horrific, messed up story that I probably can't really get into here. But if you want to go off again about how 'R+ ruins "strong" dogs', boy do I have stories for you.

Dogs "climb the leash" for a variety of reasons. With K9 handlers it is OFTEN a combination of decoy work that is poor and poor K9 handling coupled with inappropriate corrections. Patrol dogs..good ones.. are not sport dogs and do not make good sport dogs. They usually have a lot of defense drive and they want to bite for real. Truly bite for real.

K9 police handlers come in various flavors and while I thank God for their service, they are often NOT the best dog handlers. Mike Diehl does both sport and heads up the Indianapolis K9 unit. He has been very successful with dogs on the UScA trial field including winning the nationals and going to worlds. That dog is NOT his patrol dog. The training and handling is different. The dogs are VERY different.

Another reason for climbing the leash is genetics. Some lines carry this tendency.. and it is not desirable. There was a recent story of a k9 office having to shoot a Malinios K9 partner. Dog climbed the leash.. and I am willing to bet this was not the first time. I am also willing to bet that particular dog had a ton of fight drive and the handler was not clear or fair and the dog had enough. Once the fight started the dog will fight to the death if fight drive is there and kicks in.

I have seen a few of these dogs and fight is what they live for. It is these dogs that were ruined by P+ and pet home people (at 8 weeks old you can only tell so much about any puppy!).

A truly CLEAR handler that set REAL BOUNDARIES so the dog earned his place in the family would likely have been fine. This was explained to them by the breeder. The breeder went to their house and showed them. Hours spent.. giving first hand instruction and in the end the conclusion was not good. These people should have had a cat. Some people should not have dogs.. and certainly not a really good dog like these were.

Be careful with any handler aggressive dog. Some cannot be fixed. I know of 4.. that went back to three different experienced breeders.. from pet homes. All were euthanized. Two were euthanized after attacking and seriously hurting their breeders (day three back home.. and the dog was like, "No more structure because I am in charge and have been for a long time." One attack, if it had not been interrupted, could have ended in death of the handler/breeder (who, BTW was on the world team and on the podium at Nationals.. UScA). That last person had multiple hand surgeries.

We go back again to what is needed for a pet dog. I see the ideal PET dog as low drive, confident, and curious with good pack drive. Not a lot of nerve is good too.

A WEAK dog is one that is unconfident, fearful, overcomes both those things with defensive displays of aggression which comes out of too much nerve.

A STRONG dog is a higher drive dog with confidence and a bit of nerve, a need to keep moving and with plenty of fight drive (will fight until the death) coupled with prey drive balanced by some defense and good pack drive.

All these dogs are taught using R+ methods. That is how you teach them what you want them to do and the R+ method gets them WANTING to do the job. On the day (which may NEVER happen) the dog knows how to and clearly knows how to but decides that on this day he does not want to.. that is when a meaningful correction is used.

I am unfamiliar with Shade. She shows and trials in other aspects of the sport that I am not involved in at all (DVG, AWMA, WDSA.. two are breed specific and not my breed). In UScA Nationals it is only IPO 3. You have to score at least 270 in a trial. You also must compete in that years WDA (not breed specific) or a Regional competition to get a ticket for Nationals. I know of someone with Dobermans who goes to DVG trial and am a bit more knowledgeable about the AWMA but I don't have Malinois.

My dog went HIT IPO1 and IPO2 and High Tracking IPO 3 and High tracking FH.
Tracking I use NO compulsion whatsoever. I know trainers who do and do so successfully. I never have.. that dog is out there 33 feet in front of me and can do anything she or he wants to do including blowing off the track. I make tracking fun.. and if the dog has sufficient hunt drive that works for me. Great natural tracking dogs often do not have as much pack drive (they like working independently). I never got a score under 94 in tracking.

 

[+BlueMerle]

Good thread!

There is an eccentric Southern dog boarder/trainer guy from Tennessee on you tube named Stonnie Dennis (who doesn't have near enough views given how much content he produces) he would be what I would describe as balanced. He's mostly positive but understands all 4 quadrants and did years of leash & collar before getting into more reward based methods and still uses and english show lead. He also has a whole series of videos where he reads from Karon Pryor (mentioned above by Shell) and discusses it. He also does cool stuff like filming himself training a whole litter of Malinous (sp?) week after week so you can see how they all differ/progress.

Personally I go for the positive method first and I've had great results, I will occasionally dip into an old habit like a little leash/butt pressure to break through distraction but in general I have a very biddable puppy who will work all day for the same kibble she leaves sitting in her bowl. The disadvantage is you have to put a lot of time in and nothing can be done 'in the moment' until it's been done 100 times out of it.

For tricks and basic obedience positive is great, it doesn't do so well with some kinds of misbehavior though IMHO. A lot of time the positive solution amounts to management or distraction which only goes so far. I need corrections when the high drive, high energy dog is worked up and nipping on the toddler like a sheep, have to get in and claim my kid, pick up the dog and remove her, grab and restrain her, etc. Can't do that without a 'Hey! No!' and sometimes a grab by the scruff or the muzzle but sometimes an imposing glare/standing up and looming over the dog will do it. If I can anticipate the situation the dog will adhere to a stay command but if she's already chasing/biting, fat chance. I can't ignore these behaviors like a potty accident or someone will get hurt.

...Anyway I think that is the way to go, build communications and build up a good repertoire of behaviors w/ positive re-enforcement from a very young age and when they turn into rebellious butt-head teenage dogs you dole out appropriate corrections where necessary.

Also gotta remember the 3D's (Distance, Duration, Distraction). Does the dog know sit? how about from 10 feet away, 20, 30? how about when on the front lawn, with people milling around, other dogs milling around? Will she hold sit for minutes on end?...

Ps. I used Zack'ss method for fetch training which was slow compared to other food reward behaviors but worked great eventually. I also used his method for speak/quiet, sit, down, up, stand, stay, come, paw, focus (I say 'eyes'). I used his leave it command but also taught her leave it with no commands as per puppy class. I used Stonnie's 'good manners week' shaping techniques and his turn in a circle off leash heeling technique and his walks with small challenges ethos.

 

[CptJack]

I think it is highly important to remember the difference between handling a situation and *training*.

Training is teaching. That can mean teaching what you do and teaching what you don't. I have absolutely picked a dog up by the scruff of the neck and none-too-gently tossed them into a crate.

That's not a training style.

It didn't teach the dog how to behave and to be honest didn't teach the dog what not to do. It did make the dog think I was scary, in general, but they had no idea what in the world prompted that action from me. Dog got over it because really stable dog, but I still had to train/teach to avoid it being a continuing issue.

Likewise, I have flat out tackled a dog (not mine) to keep it dashing into the street.

I have used a prong collar as a management tool and to keep from dying with a giant, highly prey driven dog WHILE teaching loose leash walking with more positive methods.

Those aren't training. There is no considered plan to employ and use pain, discomfort, or social pressure to teach my dogs. And since 99.999% of my training is teaching my dogs what TO do, and therefore increase rather than reduce behavior, it's... with rewards.

Me using an e-collar to 'snake train' dogs was teaching using harsh methods/punishments to intentionally decrease behavior. The only place I do.

That other stuff? That's 'life happens, don't sit on your butt like an idiot while someone/your dog/a dog gets hurt because it might be mean'.

And believe it or not (not directed at you Merle), most positive people *don't* do that.

 

[+BlueMerle]

That other stuff? That's 'life happens, don't sit on your butt like an idiot while someone/your dog/a dog gets hurt because it might be mean'.

And believe it or not (not directed at you Merle), most positive people *don't* do that.

Yeah I get you, it's not so black and white where training ends and handling a situation begins though, especially around the house where it is hard to have a training vacuum 24/7. I believe you that most positive trainers must be disciplining/handling their dogs when they get out of control but they sure as heck do a poor job of communicating this to the public... and I feel like a good portion would disapprove of something like an invisible fence which in my mind is perfectly fair (just about done laying mine down in fact).

I agree in general with the positive ethos though, why train the dog with pain when she'll work for kibble eagerly? I do think there are some holes when dealing with negative behaviors... for instance if the dog keeps jumping up on the table and I keep telling her 'off, come, sit' she will comply quickly but instead of learning "I should just not jump and just sit here instead" she learns, "first I jump, then I listen, then I get a treat" and is in no way deterred from jumping (in fact she is encouraged). So I remove the treat and keep the 'off, come, sit" ... but then she learns there is no use in complying... so either she has be removed from the room (negative) or hit with a spray bottle (negative).... I mean I guess I can bypass the whole situation with a stronger 'stay' command but that takes weeks of prep and is not passive (I have to be around to issue the command).