"The Dog Whisperer"

[Blue_Sky]

I'd like to know why you'd whince as well, Eileen...

 

Podee was extremely aggressive. He isn't all show, he has gotten away from his owners and attacked dogs before. He has also pulled his owner over while going after a dog on a walk and she shattered her shoulder (now can no longer walk him, so her husband does it). All of the "hardware" (collar, gentle leader, and harness) are because of the owners. They feel safer (that Podee cannot get away from them) if he is wearing all three. They also have him wear a muzzle. Dogs we work with do not wear all of that (just the gentle leader).

 

When Podee stays with me, I do not have him wear all of that. It took me 5 minutes to get him from wanting to attack Blue to being friends with her, by rewarding him for being calm when he was around her. If I'd put a prong collar on him, he'd learn that he gets punished when around her. Then he may not attack her (too afraid of the punishment) but he certainly wouldn't have liked her, which would've made things stressful for Blue. This way, not only was Podee happy, but Blue had a new friend. And I didn't have to keep the dogs separate while Podee was staying with me.

 

What's wrong with having a dog focus on you? That way you can reward him for an alternate behavior. She isn't giving Podee corrections with the gentle leader, rather guiding his head so he is looking at her. When he looks away, she guides his head back, then rewards him when she releases the pressure and he stays focused on her. The dog does not need to focus on her for an entire walk, she just needs to be able to get his attention when another dog is around. He is getting rewarded while around the other dog, so is learning that good things happen to him when the other dog is around. You could use a different behavior instead. With my bulldog, who was extremely fear aggressive, I would have him "step". I taught him to step on things that I pointed to. So when he was fearful, I'd reward him for stepping on things. This way he was being rewarded around whatever he was afraid of and learning a good association.

 

I am an advocate for head halters (especially over prong collars or choke chains) because you have control of their head. This is a huge plus when working with dogs who are trying to lunge and bite. As far as prong collars giving "self-corrections", I don't want a dog to heel because it is afraid of what will happen to it if it leaves my side. I want a dog to heel because it wants to be next to me.

 

I've seen a lot of posts on this board of people who just want the behavior to go away and they don't care if the dog is happy about it or not, just as long as it is behaving. Blue wanted to kill my cats when I brought home. If I put a choke chain or prong collar on her and yanked her whenever she went after a cat, that would've worked, especially since she is so sensitive. Yelling at her would've worked too. But then I would've had to yell at her everytime she did it. And what if I wasn't around? Instead, by rewarding her for staying calm around the cats, I changed her mindset about the cats. They are no longer something she has to fear or prey for her to try to kill. They are now her playmates, friends to cuddle with, and companions. I can trust Blue alone with them and know that she isn't going to hurt them. The cats needed no training to get used to Blue since they are already dog-friendly because they've been exposed to so many dogs that I've worked with and haven't had any negative experiences because I've always trained the dogs to be good.

[vanillalove]

And what if I wasn't around? Instead, by rewarding her for staying calm around the cats, I changed her mindset about the cats. They are no longer something she has to fear or prey for her to try to kill. They are now her playmates, friends to cuddle with, and companions. I can trust Blue alone with them and know that she isn't going to hurt them.

 

Well, that's exactly the question that went through my head when I was watching your video. What happens if the dog wasn't constantly being treat stuffed and reminded with the head halter to look at her? It seems anytime the dog was a tiny bit more free, he WAS very interested in the other dog, and if you hadn't reminded him with the head halter to look away would Podee have lunged? Are they really friends? And if they are, is Podee able to recognize that the behaviour you expected of him around Blue, is also the same behaviour you expect around other dogs? In the 5 minutes you say it took to become friend with Blue, did Podee become friends with all dogs? Is he no longer extremely aggressive as you said he was? If what you said about changing the mindset of the cats could be applied to this situation with dog aggression, does Podee really have a different mindset around dogs? If you weren't around, would he be friends with a strange dog?

 

I highly doubt it.

 

You said you've seen a lot of posters on these boards who just want the behaviour to go away without care of whether the dog is happy about it or not. Are you not doing the same thing? Are you not just stuffing the dog with treats so it just forgets about the other dog rather than actually dealing with the problem?

 

I am not heckling you or anything, my Pete has proven to be more and more grumpy with dogs as he's getting older and I've actually started to use similar methods as you to change his behaviour. I make him "look at me" when we're passing other dogs, and treat him and we go on our way. But I know that if I weren't around some dog would potentially be mangled. I have not fixed anything about the problem but instead I've learned how to avoid it. At this point in Pete's life, at 9, I'm not looking for him to party it up with dogs at the park so just managing passing dogs on our walks and making him look at me off leash when we play frisbee is enough for us. This isn't my ideal situation though, and if I was raising a pup, I would expect different things.

 

I would just like to know how you think that your method changed Podee's behaviour in the long term? Or if it ever really can? Other people can chime in here, as it would help my situation with Pete as well, and for the future. For the people who winced, what would you have done differently with an aggressive dog?

[in2adventure]

I am an advocate for head halters (especially over prong collars or choke chains) because you have control of their head. This is a huge plus when working with dogs who are trying to lunge and bite. As far as prong collars giving "self-corrections", I don't want a dog to heel because it is afraid of what will happen to it if it leaves my side. I want a dog to heel because it wants to be next to me.

 

I've seen a lot of posts on this board of people who just want the behavior to go away and they don't care if the dog is happy about it or not, just as long as it is behaving. Blue wanted to kill my cats when I brought home. If I put a choke chain or prong collar on her and yanked her whenever she went after a cat, that would've worked, especially since she is so sensitive. Yelling at her would've worked too. But then I would've had to yell at her everytime she did it. And what if I wasn't around? Instead, by rewarding her for staying calm around the cats, I changed her mindset about the cats. They are no longer something she has to fear or prey for her to try to kill. They are now her playmates, friends to cuddle with, and companions. I can trust Blue alone with them and know that she isn't going to hurt them. The cats needed no training to get used to Blue since they are already dog-friendly because they've been exposed to so many dogs that I've worked with and haven't had any negative experiences because I've always trained the dogs to be good.

 

My dogs are taught to heel without a prong and like to be at my side and are not afraid to GENTLY pull on the leash if we meet up with a friend or something else interesting. I've actually had people comment at agility trials about how awesome my "deaf dog" behaved and how focused and happy she was. She's not deaf, she loves her Mom.

 

Self correction is not a bad thing. I think the prong collar comes in handy for when then continually lunge at the end of the line. I expect my dogs to know that when they are on a long line, they need self control. Just because they have extra line to play with, doesn't mean act like an idiot. Lucia is EXTREMELY reactive to chipmunks and such. If she's on a short line I can see it coming and make her sit/stay until the critter is gone. On a long line, she may react before I see it and it's too late. She learned very quickly she can't chase anything while on a leash because it makes her uncomfortable.

 

Every dog is different and needs different training. The work you did with the dog in the video is great. As far as I can see, as long as it works for the family and the dog and the outcome is what you want, mission accomplished. Gentle leaders are great tools.

 

The joy of this board is everyone has great ideas. We will always argue over the best methods, techniques, tools, etc. That is how we all learn and get better at what we do. In the long run everyone wants a similar goal. A well behaved dog that lives a happy life. How we get there doesn't really matter as long as it's safe and effective.

[Maralynn]

Different strokes for different folks...

 

I used a prong on my cat aggressive dog. It fixed the problem quickly. Cats are still interesting to him, but he leaves them alone is not fixated on trying to nip them.

 

Head halters have their uses, but they can also do more harm than a prong in the wrong hands. A heavy handed person coulod easily mess up their dogs neck with one. Prongs are not painful torture device (even though they look like one!) they are more like power stearing for dogs. Anyone with a strong puller, or a bad arm can atest to thier usefulness. My dog is still his same happy goofy self even when wearing a prong. I know they can be abused in the wrong hands, but so can a good deal of training devices.

 

BTW, from your added explanation about Podee, it sounds like it is much more of an owner issue than a dog one. It sounds like they are fearful when dealing with their dog and he picks up in it.

 

Just curious - do they do NILIF or anything simular with him?

[Blue_Sky]

Podee's owners are older, with an aggressive dog who is too strong for them. He has issues of his own, obviously, that he had when they adopted him at 5 years of age. They are great people who are trying their best and just want Podee to be happy. If Podee lived with more able people, his aggression would be much more diminished than it is now. Podee needs to be exposed to as many dogs as possible and have lots of positive experiences around them. Then, he would eventually be reliable with a strange dog. Right now, he is not reliable because his owners avoid seeing other dogs. They walk Podee late at night. While it took 5 minutes to introduce Podee to Blue, at the beginning of his training, it would have taken much, much longer. I've introduced Podee to many dogs and the result is always the same, he becomes their friend.

 

Initially, Podee was on NILF, but I don't believe they are doing it with him anymore.

 

At the end of the video, you'll notice that Podee is not receiving any pressure from the gentle leader. He is fine around the other dog. He would be reliable with THAT dog if left alone. Would Podee be good with a strange dog if no one was around? I doubt it, at this point. Maybe if he'd been around enough dogs prior to that. But why would he ever be put in that situation? I wouldn't let Blue be alone with a strange dog and she is wonderful with dogs. But I don't know what the other dog would be like.

 

It is the ASSOCIATION that he is making between the dog and the good things that are happening to him that are important. If he were more toy motivated, he could be playing with a toy around the other dog. If he were attention motivated, he could be getting petted. He is learning that the other dog equals something he loves. That is the key.

 

Everyone trains in their own way. I don't want my dogs to associate me with punishment. I want them to respect me because I am a fun, trustworthy leader, not because they will get in trouble if they don't listen. I use my methods on any type of animal. Would you use a prong collar on a cat? Or a rat? My cats all had behavior issues when I got them and are now all well adjusted, happy, well behaved animals.

[Maralynn]

Everyone trains in their own way. I don't want my dogs to associate me with punishment. I want them to respect me because I am a fun, trustworthy leader, not because they will get in trouble if they don't listen. I use my methods on any type of animal.

 

I understand where you are coming from. I train using positive meethods, I teach my dogs what I mean, what I expect, etc. I correct when they blow me off. If I tell them something that they understand, they better listen - in some situations they could get hurt or killed if they don't. Correcting a dog should not jepordize your relationship with them if you've built a solid foundation of trust with your dog. If it does, you've probably gone wrong in your foundation with your dog or you're using the wrong type of correction.

 

Would you use a prong collar on a cat? Or a rat? My cats all had behavior issues when I got them and are now all well adjusted, happy, well behaved animals

 

No, do you use a head halter on yours ?

[Ooky]

Right now I am begging for my brother to take his 8 month old rottieXlabXhusky pup in for a bully breed class, or somewhere he can get some good training on how to use a prong for his dog Chewie. Apparently she is so bad she "runs on her hind legs" when on a walk, according to my mother. That's only if the person is strong enough to hold her back. So, my brother's 100-lb fiancee won't walk Chewie at all anymore (this was intended to be her puppy, BTW, although my brother was stupid in insisting the compromise be that they get the type of dog he wanted.) She is in no way meanly aggressive, just aggressive like my Odin in that she *reeeeaaally* wants to run and meet everybody.

 

My brother is a football coach so has no time to take her on walks now, and fiancee just refuses. Its so sad, because if *she* were taught to use a prong similar to how in2adventure is talking about, I think it would solve a LOT of problems in their house and make things a lot better for the dog. This girl could never succeed with all positive methods because she has no confidence in her own ability to control the dog. I talked with her a bit about it, and she truly fails to see how it's way less physical than she believes and way more mental-good communication (both for prong collars specifically and for generally controlling Chewie). Hey, my 110-lb quasi-elderly mom can deal with Chewie (it is so cute, she and my dad run over to get their "granndog" for sleepovers so she can get walks etc). but I know on a few bad evenings, she got out our two-dogs previous old choke chain. My mom knows how to use one correctly, and walked this supposedly unwalkable beast all over the neighborhood.

 

I keep trying to tell DB and fiancee about how the prong is actually safer, and if used correctly cannot crush the dog's windpipe because the force is distributed evenly around the neck rather than in one area. Look and grandma's results. Girls are NOT too weak to control a 55-lb dog, unless they don't believe they can, don't have the right tools, or the desire to change their own mindsets. This I learned when I did dressage and jumpers. My training wheels then was a snaffle bit, and my regular horse loved being ridden by me anyway.

 

I don't think the positive focus methods used in Blue Sky's videos are bad, maybe just not as effective as the video would lead you to believe (similar to CM criticism). I bet it would take months of meeting all sorts of different dogs that way to truly know the dog was safe with all others in different situations...i.e., no longer dog aggressive.

 

And responding to Kristen's hilarious comment, YES, similar heeling and focus methods to those in the video have already given *me* a bit more crotch-dog than I'd like! They work, though - sometimes I may think Odin is blowing me off or not listening but when I say "watch-me" he instantly does whatever command I last asked for, eyes on my face. We don't use treats on walks anymore. And we can loose-leash walk about 75% of the time, AND his new "I'm gonna go crazy for that small child/dog/person on crutches" default behavior is the most quiveringly excited down you've ever seen, non-cued. But this has taken constant training since day 1 and is still very much a work in progress. Hey, I got time. This is my love and hobby!

 

I've not seen CM (don't have tv either, just dvds/internet) but almost feel like watching some so I would know how to think about it! Seems pretty divided here

 

Edited because I somehow marked the whole post as "lol" and I felt that undercut my oh-so-awesome logic

[stockdogranch]

What's wrong with having a dog focus on you?

Because from watching that video, it looked as if the dog could very easily run into something because he's not looking where he's going; instead, he's so focused on the handler (well, OK, someone said it better--the handler's crotch!). So, OK, it teaches the dog that as long as that handler and her "treat-dispensing crotch" are in the picture, he can be made to behave in the presence of that other dog. But, has he really learned to deal with the other dog? Not at all. I much prefer (no, not prefer--insist on) a dog who can think for him- or herself, so that when the treat-dispensing crotch is no longer there, the dog will know how to behave. Of course, I'm one of those "mean" stockdog people who insists that my dogs have a very clear picture of who's in charge from day one, and, yes, I can and do use "corrections" (the horror!), such as a verbal "acchhtt" or, when teaching one to walk nicely on the leash, an occasional "leash pop," and, God forbid, an occasional scruff shake for a dog who is really being an a-hole. This does not damage their "self-esteem" (sounds like all the spoiled kids I see in school these days), nor are they afraid of me. They understand that I am in charge, and we go on from there. When they encounter a new situation, they can think for themselves and make a decision as to what is an appropriate response. I think they are MUCH more secure in knowing who they are because they have clearly defined expectations and boundaries (gee--I think these are terms CM uses), rather than relying on me to dictate their every move. They also all live in the house and sleep on the bed if they choose. But when I tell them to get off, they do,

 

A

ETA: And, of course, the shorter answer to the original question ("What's wrong with having a dog focus on you?") is that, as stockdogs, if they are looking at me, there are less than f-ing worthless.

[soloagility]

Just curious whether anyone else will find themselves wincing when they watch Blue Sky's video.

 

 

Yep. Those jerks on the head halter were most definitely corrections. Just because the dog was rewarded doesn't mean that this was "positive training". I could just as easily correct with a prong then reward for attention, it's the same thing.

 

IMO, I'd much rather see a dog on a prong than see it getting it's head cranked around with halter corrections.

[Ooky]

Would you use a prong collar on a cat?

 

HA! Good idea... now I know what to threaten Benway with!

 

Just kidding, really. The tasmanian devil in full tornado mode you'd have at the end of that would be too frightening to unleash on the world.

 

And A, I totally see your point too. Odin does run into things at full heel, and me too because I'm looking at him. What can I say, we are both extremely clutzy. My favorite way for him to walk is slightly ahead of me, ears up, holding his own leash in his mouth but still leaving the "J" in. It's pretty ahem, fancy-lad looking. But I know he's alert and happy, and paying attention to his environment. Second favorite, or best in other more unfamiliar situations, few steps behind me, ears relaxed, J in leash, allowing me to be the first to investigate corners, etc. where other dogs may be chained outside or people come around the corner with their dogs or small children. I started with the methods in Blue Sky's video to build foundation and have slowly morphed them (even using "corrections") to target the less-focusy walking behaviors described above. Often his choice which of these two acceptable ways we use, unless I know we are apt to run into surprises. I want him looking at me in games and if we ever did competition heel for anything, but otherwise want him to be his own eyes and ears and brain! But what I like about this foundation is that it seems to have taught him that if there is a scary/interesting something, I'm sort of included in his decision process on it with at least some quick questioning looks that provide me the opportunity to cue a "leave it" OR a "ok, go on" or whatever. We're not 100% on that yet, BTW.

 

It sounds like this might come back to haunt me if we ever get on stock! I'm sure his decisions in that area would be mostly faster and better than mine, and won't need my second guessing.

[vanillalove]

But, has he really learned to deal with the other dog? Not at all. I much prefer (no, not prefer--insist on) a dog who can think for him- or herself, so that when the treat-dispensing crotch is no longer there, the dog will know how to behave.

 

These are my thoughts exactly.

 

It is the ASSOCIATION that he is making between the dog and the good things that are happening to him that are important. If he were more toy motivated, he could be playing with a toy around the other dog. If he were attention motivated, he could be getting petted. He is learning that the other dog equals something he loves. That is the key.

 

I have a feeling, or rather, I KNOW that Podee would not be able to be introduced to a new dog off-leash and whatever other hardware, and without the assistance of the treat crotch and think for himself and how he should behave with this new dog. I know this because Podee is similar to my Pete. It's not that your method doesn't work to help manage a aggressive dog. I sure as hell knows it does, my Pete is a perfect example. In the long run though, I don't think it ends up actually changing the dog's mindset on how they are going to respond going into a new situation with a new dog, with all hands-off. I do also see where you're coming from though and I think positive reinforcement is great in a lot of situations, but I don't think it's truly effective on it's own in situations like serious dog aggression. At least, I haven't had the success with it with Petey yet.

 

Maybe I'm just a skeptic, but in my experience with Pete, I don't think he's picked up on anything about association with another dog and his treats or frisbee. I personally, just think he's far too interested in whatever I've got going on than kicking the crap out of the other dog. Pete is both toy and food motivated, if I'm at the park with my friend and his dog, I can be tossing the frisbee or ball for the both of them, and the other dog could literally be sitting almost on top of Petey and he acts completely civil. You would never know that this dog is the same dog who pulled so hard to get at another dog, he ripped his corkscrew long line stake right out of the ground. But the next day, if I'm just letting Pete frolic in a park where no dogs are usually found and he runs across one, hell breaks loose. The previous day's events have no long term effects on him, which is why I don't think it actually changes their mind set. The fact of the matter is that my dog will still kick the crap out of a dog, regardless, I can just distract him with a treat.

 

I would be interested in your thoughts on this. I just want to see where the association could ever become long term?

[Root Beer]

It looked like the typical positive reinforcement approach to this sort of problem.

 

Really? It looks very little like any positive reinforcement approach I've ever seen.

 

Maybe styles of positive reinforcement vary from region to region, but personally I would not do what I saw in that video to any dog. Not even in theory.

[Root Beer]

It's really interesting, because in spite of the use of completely different technique, you and I think a lot alike!

 

Because from watching that video, it looked as if the dog could very easily run into something because he's not looking where he's going; instead, he's so focused on the handler (well, OK, someone said it better--the handler's crotch!). So, OK, it teaches the dog that as long as that handler and her "treat-dispensing crotch" are in the picture, he can be made to behave in the presence of that other dog. But, has he really learned to deal with the other dog? Not at all.

 

I concur!

 

I much prefer (no, not prefer--insist on) a dog who can think for him- or herself, so that when the treat-dispensing crotch is no longer there, the dog will know how to behave.

 

I require exactly the same thing.

 

They understand that I am in charge, and we go on from there. When they encounter a new situation, they can think for themselves and make a decision as to what is an appropriate response. I think they are MUCH more secure in knowing who they are because they have clearly defined expectations and boundaries (gee--I think these are terms CM uses), rather than relying on me to dictate their every move. They also all live in the house and sleep on the bed if they choose. But when I tell them to get off, they do,

 

Totally the same here. I most likely teach them that I'm in charge using different techniques, but the end result is the same. The dog has clearly defined expectations and boundaries (CM certainly didn't invent those concepts!) and it provides the dog with security.

 

ETA: And, of course, the shorter answer to the original question ("What's wrong with having a dog focus on you?") is that, as stockdogs, if they are looking at me, there are less than f-ing worthless.

 

And the same would be true of an Agility dog. The dog would be worthless and doing Agility with such a dog would be quite dangerous.

 

Even in other performance sports where sustained eye contact is needed to some degree, the dog must still be able to perform certain exercises with focus elsewhere.

[juliepoudrier]

Because from watching that video, it looked as if the dog could very easily run into something because he's not looking where he's going; instead, he's so focused on the handler (well, OK, someone said it better--the handler's crotch!). So, OK, it teaches the dog that as long as that handler and her "treat-dispensing crotch" are in the picture, he can be made to behave in the presence of that other dog. But, has he really learned to deal with the other dog? Not at all. I much prefer (no, not prefer--insist on) a dog who can think for him- or herself, so that when the treat-dispensing crotch is no longer there, the dog will know how to behave. Of course, I'm one of those "mean" stockdog people who insists that my dogs have a very clear picture of who's in charge from day one, and, yes, I can and do use "corrections" (the horror!), such as a verbal "acchhtt" or, when teaching one to walk nicely on the leash, an occasional "leash pop," and, God forbid, an occasional scruff shake for a dog who is really being an a-hole. This does not damage their "self-esteem" (sounds like all the spoiled kids I see in school these days), nor are they afraid of me. They understand that I am in charge, and we go on from there. When they encounter a new situation, they can think for themselves and make a decision as to what is an appropriate response. I think they are MUCH more secure in knowing who they are because they have clearly defined expectations and boundaries (gee--I think these are terms CM uses), rather than relying on me to dictate their every move. They also all live in the house and sleep on the bed if they choose. But when I tell them to get off, they do,

 

A

ETA: And, of course, the shorter answer to the original question ("What's wrong with having a dog focus on you?") is that, as stockdogs, if they are looking at me, there are less than f-ing worthless.

 

Amen sistah! You've said everything I would have said, and said it beautifully. My sister substitute teaches and we just had a long discussion today about how kids could benefit from the training techniques I use on my dogs: set expectations and boundaries, be consistent, and be fair. No feel good, I'm worried he won't love me, etc., crap--just fair and consistent. It works.

 

On Cesar, I saw only one or two of his shows back in the early days. The concern I have with Cesar and any other TV dog trainer is that most average pet owners don't have the ability to read their dogs, nor the appropriate timing to make things work. A classic example was at a Jack Knox clinic and a couple who audited and had a dog-aggressive dog. While Jack was talking, the dog kept misbehaving badly any time another dog walked by. Jack asked if he could take the dog from the couple. In less than a minute he had the dog's full attention. One or two properly timed corrections had the dog listening to Jack and not making any attempt to lunge at passing dogs. The dog went back to its owners. The owners then attempted to emulate Jack, but their timing was so bad that the dog was never going to get the idea. Instead the poor thing was wondering why its people were correcting it, especially since the corrections were occurring way after the fact of the misbehavior. The dog that had been comfortable and confident in the hands of the experienced and competent trainer went back to being confused and wrongly corrected in the hands of its well-meaning but clueless owners. So what I worry about with programs like Cesar's are instances as described above where he basically hung a dog--a trainer who knew what he was doing and knew how to do it without damaging the dog. How many yahoos out there will try the same thing, overdo it or get it wrong? And who will pay the price? The poor dog. In principle, I don't have a problem with training shows, but I really do wish they could emphasize the "don't try this at home without expert help" aspect as well (do they?).

 

 

 

J.

[juliepoudrier]

I I haven't trained any BCs in herding yet, but I know if I had a BC decide to take a "grip" to the extent of mauling the sheep and ignoring my voice commands, I guarantee I won't be wasting time with "positive reinforcement" but getting over there ASAP to get that dog off the sheep!

Tru,

I think I get what you mean by this example WRT the discussion about prong collars, which I think means that in certain instances, you need to be able to correct quickly and effectively (prong collar or haul the dog off the sheep), but I hope you don't actually believe that stockdog training is somehow based on positive training, unless you consider letting the dog work as being positive reinforcement (which it is, but that's not the same thing as, say, throwing treats to the dog or clicking a clicker when it gets something right). You may know that already, but in case others are reading this and wondering, I thought I would clarify.

 

To expand on Anna's post above, my dogs are raised to understand what a correction is (essentially a correction word, like Aahht! or Hey!), and that correction means "stop what you are doing--I don't like that." It tells the dog it should do something else, but doesn't dictate what that something else is ( I don't even want the dog to look at me when it hears such a correction--I want it to put its brain back where it belongs and keep working properly--that is, focusing on the stock). This is critical to stockdog training and I think it's where our philosophy often diverges from other training philosophies. So if my dog were going in for an inappropriate grip, I would say, clearly and firmly, "Hey!," which would signal to the dog that I didn't like what it was doing. Only if the dog refused to let go would I step up the correction. You're right that it's not the time for positive training when another's life/limb is at stake.

 

I used a prong collar on one dog I had who has extremely hard headed, not in an aggressive way or anything, more like an ADHD dog. It was after that dog that I got into stockdogs and I have to say I've never needed a prong collar since. There's something about the whole philosphy of raising and training a stockdog that just seems to eliminate the need for all the extra training devices....

 

J.

[Eileen Stein]

>

It looked like the typical positive reinforcement approach to this sort of problem. . . . What made you wince, Eileen?

 

Yes, that's pretty much why I asked. I guess it IS pretty much typical positive reinforcement. I'm sure that many people find this a normal familiar sight. Not me.

 

My second reaction to it is that getting a dog to focus on me like that is something that would be detrimental to nearly everything I'd want to do with the dog. My third reaction is that the dog's head is being pulled quite a bit, including around treat #22 or so, just before the dog lies down and the screen says he's relaxed. My fourth reaction is that the dog is wearing an incredible array of restraints (he's being worked by a trainer, not the owners, so what difference does it make what the owners need in order to control him?). My fifth reaction is that if you're going to say "he's safe around the other dog. They could even be off leash together," then why don't you show them off leash together. Nothing I saw indicated how the dog would behave if he wasn't being distracted -- constantly fed and having his head pulled away.

 

But I have to admit that my first, primary, instinctive reaction is visceral. That is not how a dog should look. That is not how a dog should interact with its person -- as if she were a Pez dispenser. That is not how a dog should interact with the world -- or rather, fail to interact with the world. That is deforming, diminishing, almost degrading.

 

It's the way I feel when I see, for example, a KC basset hound, and realize that people deliberately bred the dog, over many generations, to be like that. Yes, the basset is cute. Yes, the basset doesn't know there's any other way to be -- doesn't know that ears (to say nothing of sexual organs) don't need to drag on the ground, or that running doesn't need to take that much effort. It is probably happy enough. Its breeders think they've produced something wonderful. They wouldn't understand what I'm talking about when I wince, when I say, "That is not how a dog should look. Why would you want to do that to a dog? Why would you think that was a good result?"

 

As I said, it's a visceral reaction. I'm not advocating it or defending it or explaining it. It's a wince. I just wondered if anyone else felt it too.

[beachdogz]

Re Prong Collars:

Went to a seminar where the expert said she used pinch collars (actually, the SMALL ones) on ALL dogs in her class. After the whole room winced, she asked for a volunteer. (I always volunteer...a very bad personality trait sometimes.) Anyways, she put a choke collar on my left arm and a pinch on the right. Attached leashes to both collars and put handlers at the end of each leash. Then, she told the handlers that when she said "Go", they should give a hard leash correction. After I almost **** myself for volunteering for this, I braced myself mentally for the pinch correction. To my utter surprise, it was the choke collar that HURT. The pinch was not comfortable, but did not hurt nearly as much as the choke, since all the pressure of the choke collar is in one place, while the pinch pressure is distributed evenly around the collar and therefore the neck.

 

So I went home and put a small pinch on my 100+ GSD male who was conformation trained to pull on the leash. I started heeling and as he pulled, I gave a very small tug on the leash and he immediately corrected himself into position. No yelping, nothing notable. It just worked well..and with VERY LITTLE force on my part.

 

So I think pinch collars have their place in the training world.

 

Re TV dog evangelists:

Years ago I had a friend who was asked to bring her well-trained dog to a local TV station that was interviewing an internationally famous dog trainer. She assumed they would want her to demonstrate advanced exercises. She was told to wait off-camera while they interviewed the famous trainer, who was telling how her method taught dogs immediately how to heel. My friend was amazed when they came and took just her dog (not her) and presented the dog to the trainer on TV as an "untrained" dog. She then watched as this trainer miraculously taught this "untrained" dog to heel. Ever since I heard that story, I don't believe everything I see in videos or TV shows.

[MrSnappy]

tEver since I heard that story, I don't believe everything I see in videos or TV shows.

 

Several years ago I offered Briggs as a candidate for 'rehab' on a fairly famous dog trainer's television show at the height of his popularity. After speaking with the producers for some time, we were not invited to be on the show because - and I quote - "As an owner, (I) was too knowledgeable ." In other words, I knew too much about dog training to be fooled by any quick fix this trainer could offer in a 1/2 hour segment for the purposes of television. As I would not be suitably impressed by his - ahem - techniques, I was not a good candidate for the program. No one ever did say whether Briggs was a good candidate for being rehabbed or not.

 

So I don't believe too much of what I see either.

 

RDM

[Eileen Stein]

After speaking with the producers for some time, we were not invited to be on the show because - and I quote - "As an owner, (I) was too knowledgeable ." In other words, I knew too much about dog training to be fooled by any quick fix this trainer could offer in a 1/2 hour segment for the purposes of television. As I would not be suitably impressed by his - ahem - techniques, I was not a good candidate for the program.

 

My guess is that they want an owner who is clueless enough for the viewers to relate to, and maybe even clueless enough for the viewers to feel superior to. Probably that's more the reason they decided you weren't a good candidate.

[bcnewe2]

I guess I could have been nicer with my original statement and might have made more sense to the op but what freaked me out was this was done in the name of positive training. Which I don't know much about but do know that wasn't positive training. The head pulling was a form of correction. Soft or hard it was correction. The thing which freaked me out was how helpless the dog was to do anything other than what the lady wanted. At no time was he given a choice to make. Maybe the alternative was a treat but he didn't get any say in the matter.

 

I also thought the focus on the treater was way over the top. You get that sort of thing in stockwork (not actually the same but similar) with a dog that's not allowed to make it's own choices. Either the dog gives up and only does what you want or the dog quits or in the case of a hard or tough dog, you get uncontrolled gripping. I've seen handlers that tried to control the dog so much that my take on it was they either dove in out of frustration or dove in and gripped cause that was all that they got in the area of owning it's sheep, or working the sheep. Not good training in any event.

 

In the video, that dog didn't even get a chance to quit. And it was mentioned in a different post that all the devices on the dog were very strange. If I needed more than a flat buckle collar to give a correction or for that matter no collar, I'd be failing miserably as the dogs trainer. The dog would be winning, take the stuff off and what do you have?

 

As you all know Mick can be a dog aggressive dog, He tries hard not to but when they get in his space or block him from seeing sheep or lord forbid, his working the sheep, someone's going to get a correction. Just today, he had a great time on sheep, when we came off he went over to a friend to get a pat, as he was quite pleased with himself and he knew I was too. Well the guy had a young dog lying by his side. The dog jumped up to correct Mick for getting to close to her owner. Mick tried to ignore the dog, but the dog was intent on telling Mick off for coming up to his owner. By the time I got there, Mick was already engaged in teaching the offending dog what he thought of her snappy behavior. Mick didn't start anything, didn't really want to get involved but he ended up in a brawl. No collar on either dog. A quick "HEY YOU" stopped both in their tracks. No collar needed, no heavy handed correction but the tone of both our "HEY YOUS" told both dogs to knock it off and quick.

What do you think Poddie would have done in that case?

 

I don't need my dogs to be social, or play with other dogs. But they better listen to what I have to say when I say it. And no I don't care if they're happy about it or not if it's in response to a bad behavior. Are you happy the Podee is being himself when he attacks other dogs, why should he think you are?

 

Later Blue Sky mentioned that she has read about other people on here that don't care if their dog is happy or not, they want an obedient dog. I don't know of anyone on here that doesn't care about the well being of their dog. But this is the message that some PP trainers get out of any other sort of training. To bad, we could all learn a thing or two from each other.

 

Off my soapbox now

OMT...as far as CM hanging the dog on the show last night. I didn't see that as hanging, I saw it as getting the dog under control and not getting bit. I've seen hanging, that wasn't it. The one and only time I saw someone string a dog up (what they called it instead of hanging) the dog passed out after. Wasn't a pretty thing and in my book totally unneeded. IMO what CM did was needed to at least keep himself from getting bit. I don't know what I'd have done with last nights dog on CM, I don't think I'd of touched that dog with a 10 foot poll.

[juliepoudrier]

Kristen,

I don't know if you were responding to my reference to hanging or not, but my point was that CM knew what he was doing. How many folks watching that might think--wrongly--that they can replicate it? How many would know when such measures were even necessary? How many dogs or people might get hurt as a result? Like I said before, that's really my only complaint with any of the dog expert training shows. There's nothing to stop every clueless yahoo out there from trying the same thing only it's not the same thing and the poor dog will suffer as a result.

 

J.

[Root Beer]

. . . but what freaked me out was this was done in the name of positive training. Which I don't know much about but do know that wasn't positive training. The head pulling was a form of correction. Soft or hard it was correction. The thing which freaked me out was how helpless the dog was to do anything other than what the lady wanted. At no time was he given a choice to make. Maybe the alternative was a treat but he didn't get any say in the matter.

 

Thank you for pointing that out, Kristen. I am bothered, also, that this particular technique is being presented as a representation of positive training.

 

In true positive training the dog always has a choice. The dog can choose to be right to earn the reward/reinforcement or the dog can choose to be wrong and not earn the reward/reinforcement. Forcing the dog to be right and then stuffing treats in the dog's face is not positive training, no matter what actual positive training might look like on the surface to those who don't train that way.

 

You may or may not agree on whether or not that is the best way to train, but that's the basic gist of how positive training functions. The dog in the video was being trained through a mix of punishments and rewards. Much, so I understand, as Cesar does.

[bcnewe2]

I don't know if you were responding to my reference to hanging or not, but my point was that CM knew what he was doing.

Julie

I went back and looked, guess I was. But your post and my responce goes to further your statement of how many people don't realize what CM is doing and how it can be used in a fashion to either harm or in the least not get the desired reactions across, because you were responding to what others had described and had not watched the episode. It's a shame that people are so ignorant of the good he does, they see something that they don't understand and jump on the CM is bad wagon.

 

I don't think CM is bad, but yes he can be taken out of context. I don't think he's out to harm dogs, only does what he thinks will work. It's up to the public what they do with his training.

How many people could say things like that about JK or other good trainers out there. I've heard and don't remember if it was Jack that said, he does not allow taping of his clinics because what he does is for that particular dog and situation, not every dog or every situation can be treated in the same manner.

 

Guess that could go for or against CM. But like I said before, I like him. It's like some posters on here saying that stockdog trainers or people that don't use postive methods are out to harm a dogs feelings or worst yet, harm/hurt a dog. THey don't really know enough about other training methods to be making such observations or statements.

 

Kristine, No prob. I knew that couldn't be what you or other true PP trainers are about.

[juliepoudrier]

Kristen,

I think I was very clear in my statement that I haven't watched CM recently (don't get Nat'l Geo channel) but at least have seen some of his shows in the past. It's a shame you choose to focus on the fact that I don't watch his shows and seem to take that further to imply that I shouldn't comment since I haven't seen him at work. So I'll try again, because apparently you missed (or chose to ignore) the part of my post where I grouped CM in with all televised trainers, and pointed out quite specifically that the concern I have is not with anyone's techniques per se (even I am smart enough to recognize that I can't judge what I haven't seen--and in the case of the hanging, I simply used that example because someone else had already used it, not because I was offended by the act itself, although I do worry--as I clearly pointed out--that others might decide to try that for the wrong reasons and using the wrong technique), but rather than people watching just don't necessarily get it, and in trying to emulate what they see from *any trainer* on TV can and probably does cause more harm than good. That's not a value judgement about CM's techniques--or any other trainer's for that matter--it's a judgment on the real value of such TV programming, which IMO (take it or leave it) does a disservice to all the folks who may watch such trainers (not just CM) and think they can replicate the techniques at home with no actual expert there to guide them. If people watched these shows just for entertainment value or just so they could figure out that it *is* possible to rehab a dog, in the hands of an expert or at least with expert guidance, then I would agree that such shows have value. But when John Q. watches any of those trainers and then concludes, usually wrongly, "I can do that myself," then the show steps over the line from being educational to being potentially harmful. That's my point. The distinction is between an expert using a technique and just anyone else doing it. I don't know how that compares to folks saying the stockdog trainers are out to harm dog in your mind, but in my mind the two aren't even related. I'll repeat: THESE COMMENTS ARE NOT ABOUT CM'S TRAINING TECHNIQUES--THEY ARE ABOUT THE VALUE OF SUCH SHOWS WHEN IT COMES TO THE APPLICATION OF THEIR TECHNIQUES BY THE GENERAL (NON-DOG-SAVVY) PUBLIC.

 

J.

[bcnewe2]

Yes Julie you were clear and I thought I was clear that I didn't even realize that you had posted the statement about hanging a dog. My comment went to further your statement about CM being taken out of context. Your post shows that, by what you thought happened to a dog from other posters here. It was not meant as a dig at you or your thoughts just a point I was making. I don't think you shouldn't comment.

 

Julie writes: I don't know how that compares to folks saying the stockdog trainers are out to harm dog in your mind, but in my mind the two aren't even related.

 

I don't compare the 2 techniques. What I was comparing was people take stockdog training out of context too.

 

Blue sky writes: seen a lot of posts on this board of people who just want the behavior to go away and they don't care if the dog is happy about it or not, just as long as it is behaving.

and this

Stockdogranch writes: I'm one of those "mean" stockdog people who insists that my dogs have a very clear picture of who's in charge from day one, and, yes, I can and do use "corrections" (the horror!), such as a verbal "acchhtt" or, when teaching one to walk nicely on the leash, an occasional "leash pop," and, God forbid, an occasional scruff shake for a dog who is really being an a-hole. This does not damage their "self-esteem" (sounds like all the spoiled kids I see in school these days), nor are they afraid of me. They understand that I am in charge, and we go on from there. When they encounter a new situation, they can think for themselves and make a decision as to what is an appropriate response. I think they are MUCH more secure in knowing who they are because they have clearly defined expectations and boundaries (gee--I think these are terms CM uses), rather than relying on me to dictate their every move. They also all live in the house and sleep on the bed if they choose. But when I tell them to get off, they do,

The above is what I was referring too. It's the only way in which you could remotely compare the 2 techniques. To some, stockdog training taken out of content can seem bad or harsh. To me, it's common sense and can translate to reg. dog life.

I don't care if you post your opinions or not. We are usually in agreement. I don't think we are disagreeing now. You just took my comments in a way that they weren't meant to be taken.

 

I still like CM, I've watched more than I'd like to admit. He is usually in a situation that the owners are very clueless, like the statement that I think you made earlier, where a couple were at a JK clinic and the dog was misbehaving towards other dogs. Jack had it stopped in a few seconds, the people tried to emulate what he was doing and could not get the same reactions from the dog.

(I did not look back for your specifc quote, going from memory so excuse me if I didn't get it totally right, it might not have even been you)

Just a comparison.

I think some if not all people do understand exercise, discipline and affection makes for a good dog. That is his true message.

I'm not sure he did himself any favors showing the dog that he highlighted Friday night. It was a dog that was way out there, not the average dog.

 

Just my opinions, yours may differ.