trainers

[Root Beer]

Shyshepherdess, you read a lot into my posts that isn't there.

 

The fact is that you and I view dogs and training and behavior quite differently. As I said over in the heelwork thread, it is clear that both of us are quite passionate about dogs and training. We approach things from different points of view and we are very likely to disagree about things for a long time to come.

 

Your "vast experience" is not going to change the point of view that I have developed through hands on work with dogs - those with behavior issues, and those who simply need to learn more enthusiastic focus and/or manners and/or competition behaviors. I have watched reinforcement based training work, and work well for all of the dogs whose owners were willing to commit. (No type of training is going to work for the owner who won't commit, of course)

 

So, I am not going to agree with your assessment that it "can't work" in certain situations when I have seen it, in fact, work. I know you will probably argue that, but it's a point on which I am not going to change. I would actually have to see it fail to change my mind. And that has not happened.

 

I have just found in my experience(our training facility being flooded with people who trained at "positive only" places), that the method cannot easily be applied to ALL dogs and owners, especially when things start to take a more destructive turn...

 

Know what? I have found the opposite to be true.

 

And based on the fact that you have not been willing to clearly identify the exact methods that were being used at these "positive only" places, I conclude that these places were not using the kind of sound methodology that I have seen work over and over and over. Any place can call itself "positive only". That says absolutely nothing about the methodology that was being employed, other than that food was being used in some way. That doesn't say much at all. There are a myriad of ways to use food in training, but it - like anything else - can be used ineffectively.

 

Again, I appreciate you taking the time to answer my question. I find it helpful to understand different points of view - especially those with which I do not agree. Your answer shed some light on your perspective, and I find that very useful information to have. Thanks again!

[jdarling]

It's amazing how quickly a posting can take a condescending and passive-aggressive tone, isn't it?

[Maralynn]

Interesting. To me, those two things sound pretty close to the same. "Trying to get away with things" and "running the show" both indicate that the dog is willfully trying to usurp power in some way.

 

I've always looked at these a bit differently. I don't believe dogs "try to get away with things". But with a lack of leadership, they will run the show. Dogs crave a leader and structure. So someone needs to lead. If the human part of the equation doesn't provide it, the dog takes on the role or feels nervous and out of place because they don't have a leader.

[Root Beer]

I've always looked at these a bit differently. I don't believe dogs "try to get away with things". But with a lack of leadership, they will run the show. Dogs crave a leader and structure. So someone needs to lead. If the human part of the equation doesn't provide it, the dog takes on the role or feels nervous and out of place because they don't have a leader.

 

I wouldn't disagree with that.

 

I would disagree, however, that all behavior problems are a result of the dog trying to run the show. Some behavior problems in some dogs - sure. Those would be very easy cases to resolve since a little training would go a long way. But it is often the case that there are other factors involved (fear, stress, lack of trust, etc.) that need to be taken into account and addressed directly with the dog.

 

I'm not saying that you - or anyone else - said that all behavior problems are a result of the dog trying to run the show, just furthering the discussion.

[Maralynn]

I wouldn't disagree with that.

 

I would disagree, however, that all behavior problems are a result of the dog trying to run the show. Some behavior problems in some dogs - sure. Those would be very easy cases to resolve since a little training would go a long way. But it is often the case that there are other factors involved (fear, stress, lack of trust, etc.) that need to be taken into account and addressed directly with the dog.

 

Fear, stress and lack of trust in a dog can be a result of poor leadership on the persons part. The more my dogs trust me, the more they are able to focus and listen. They are confident in my abilities as a leader, they don't have to worry about their environment as much.

 

If my dog doesn't trust me, I need to reevaluate what I'm doing as a leader.

[Root Beer]

Fear, stress and lack of trust in a dog can be a result of poor leadership on the persons part. The more my dogs trust me, the more they are able to focus and listen. They are confident in my abilities as a leader, they don't have to worry about their environment as much.

 

If my dog doesn't trust me, I need to reevaluate what I'm doing as a leader.

 

It can be. It can also be something within the dog as an individual.

 

Often, though, it's a bit of both.

 

Take a severe phobia, for instance. There are some cases where all the leadership in the world cannot override that phobia. The phobia is not triggered because of any lack of leadership on the human's part - there is something about the brain chemistry of the dog that goes nuts in the presence of that trigger. A case like that needs to be addressed at the level of the dog.

 

It can be very frustrating to the human to be told that he or she is causing the problem when, in fact, there is something about the dog that is off. And, it doesn't do a lot of good for the dog if the human becomes focused on keep the dog from running the show when the dog really needs help on a different level.

 

Leadership and structure are definitely important - especially for a dog with any kind of issues. But sometimes that won't provide a full resolution.

[shysheperdess]

I would agree with Maralynn that trust and leadership are intertwined. I actually notice when working with people and there dogs that when the dogs DO finally get some leadership through the necessary amount of structure and disipline the dogs often appear more relaxed. They are relaxed and secure because they KNOW whats expected of them. Having a loving, trustful bond that is built off of mutual respect between you and your dog is the key to a harmoniuos relationship.

 

 

That's part of the reason that I so strongly disagreed with what the OP's trainer did with there dog during there "session". She had NO relationship with that dog, no bond, no trust. ALL she taught that dog in that situation was to be fearful, the dog had no idea what was being asked of her or what was going on and because it came from a total stranger I doubt it carried over at all to helping her with her day to day problems....

[shysheperdess]

I think dogs having true "severe phobias" are very rare. I feel often times people try to find excuses for what might possibly wrong with the dog other than the obvious....which would be a general lack of a key element for the dog to be emotionally, psychologicly, physicly right. Usually some simple structure, training, disipline.....come to jesus meeting or whatever.

 

I am NOT condoning Cesar Milan's methods in any way, but one philosophy he seems to push that I tend to agree with is the fact that to many people do not treat there dogs as DOGS. There try to "humanize" them, it's in our nature. I have an intense emotional bond with my dogs, and I am not trying to take away from the wonderful relationship most people have with there pups, but I see it all to often. He proclaims through observing pack of wild dogs, etc. that none of these animals in that setting had "phobias", "fears", issues in general. It's only through dogs interaction with people that these issues develop. Dogs in wild packs, or wolves, or even interaction with fellow "pet dogs", there communication is very "no-nonsense", "to the point", no emotion involved. Everyone knows there place and what's expected of them. VERY different from dogs interactions with us at times. Just a thought.

 

I am not discounting of course the times where a true physical, psychological problem plays a part in behavior issues, just a different thought...

[Donald McCaig]

Dear Pet Dog Trainers,

 

A few years ago, when I was first introduced to the pet dog training world I was startled by the name calling, the accusations of animal abuse and ineffectuality. The Koehler Method folk thought the positive trainers were useless, the positive trainers thought the ecollar trainers were cruel, the drive trainers thought behaviors were psuedo-scientists and how the insults flew.

 

Since these insults were exchanged between people who have one very big thing in common: they ALL want mannerly, happy dogs and ALL of them have devoted a significant part of their lives to that end; the commonplace disrespect was puzzling.

 

Its not as if none of these methods work. While any of these methods can be cruel, none are intrinsically cruel.

 

 

Bobby Daziel and Derek Scrimagour are, among sheepdog trainers, the least alike. I've never heard either of them say a hard word about the other.

 

What's with you guys?

 

DOnald McCaig

[njnovice]

I think you are absolutely doing the right thing by finding another trainer. I remember a trainer using that same method on one of my mother's German Shepherds, and the dog reacted very much like your dog did. That pronged collar certainly wasn't effective on Cheyenne, because after that day, she had to be literally DRAGGED back into the obedience school. She went back to wearing a choke collar in class, which is what my mother has used on everyone of her German Shepherds, except for her current one (she wears a flat collar). Every other dog in class wore a pronged collar, and a couple dogs started becoming aggressive towards their owners when corrected with it. So, I do think that you need to be aware of your individual dog. In Cheyenne's case, she responded with fear much like the OP's dog. Other dogs responded with aggression towards the owner.

 

That being said, I am not anti-pronged collar in the slightest. Both Mick and Sinead wear pronged collars when I take them out for walks. Mick is a horrible puller, and Sinead becomes a puller, if I walk both together on the coupler (how I usually do it, and yes, they are an odd-looking couple). Both of them do just fine with a pronged collar, and actually run to the door excited when they see me pull it out. It depends on the dog. With Mick, I tried every other no-pull harness/assorted training methods, and he was still a puller. The pronged collar was an instant fix for him. He's a stubborn hard dog. He needed something harsher. Sinead has a much softer temperment, but she's built like a mini-tank (pit bull), so I just use one on her, too.

[Root Beer]

What's with you guys?

 

You know, Mr. McCaig, that is something I have thought and wondered about a lot myself. I honestly don't know the answer.

[sluj]

Suzanne Clothier has written some wonderful articles. Her take on 'positive punishment' is worth a read:

 

http://flyingdogpress.com/content/view/35/97/

[Eileen Stein]

It sure is. Thanks for posting it.

[JohnLloydJones]

Suzanne Clothier has written some wonderful articles. Her take on 'positive punishment' is worth a read:

 

http://flyingdogpress.com/content/view/35/97/

Ooh, I missed this until now. Yes, momma dog (or in this case, grandma) knows best and an occasional correction works wonders. The key word is occasional, though and that's why things fall apart when people try to use it all the time.

[flyer]

Suzanne Clothier has written some wonderful articles. Her take on 'positive punishment' is worth a read:

 

http://flyingdogpress.com/content/view/35/97/

 

 

Great article. Thx.