poodlefan

It's just the purely positive trainers, is it? Nope. But two wrongs don't make a right. Language is powerful stuff and can be used to escalate and de-escalate the emotional values in a behaviour. The classic case of the latter was the coining of the term "collateral damage". Even the term "purely positive" is an interesting one. I've come to the conclusion that many trainers who consider themselves "positive" trainers actually aren't. There are quite a few folk who think because they don't use check chains to reef their dogs around they are "positive" trainers. The reality is somewhat different.

How old is the dog? Where does she sleep and has the weather got colder where you are?

Good point. However if the handler won't control the dog, you sometimes don't have options. There's only so much skin damage I'm prepared to tolerate. I'd had some ripper scratches from handlers dogs over the years. No bites yet but one hell of a muzzle thump from a dog I insisted be muzzled in class. I consider that a cheap lesson. A friend of mine recently had her T-shirt torn and some nasty scratches from a dog that the handler would not keep off her even with repeated requests. You can spin out of the humpies if you see "that look" and the first paw wraps around you in an exploratory fashion.

I'll be there Sunday. I"ll keep an eye out. It would be nice to see you and Indi again. My guess is she's grown some!

Serves you right. If you'd gone to Maccas she'd have been OK. Let me guess, you were towing the trailer but Sway was in the car?

left overs Bugger the dogs, left over roast veg and gravy gets chucked in the freezer for me and I'm sure it's not part of your dogs daily diet. I know yours get Kingsleys too :D Not this year they haven't. Poor things.

My dogs like gravy on the left over roast veggies. :thumbsup:

by Twist around rapidly 180 to shake its hold and swiftly step out of range? It's a manoevre I learned in martial arts class to deal with a human hold, and its usually pretty effective. Perhaps not suitable for those with lower back problems. Have to say tho', it's been a long time since a dog tried to hump me. You could also try to pull it off by the leash. But gee some of those big humpy dogs are strong. Not so bad if you see it coming. When they grab you from behind and the handler just stands there, you need to discourage them fast. Still, arguably its preferable to coping a leg full of pee due to handler inattention. What I cant' fathom is the handlers who see it and let the dog finish!!

I suspect most Delta qualifed folk have never seen field work, let alone participated in it. That goes for most dog folk in Oz. I've never been to any trials. I know some gundog folk train without either. I mull over this stuff quite a bit. I wonder if PP trainers are happy to work that way because there really aren't any serious consequences for them or their dog if the dog fails to perform. For dogs where particular behaviours of a particular standard, and more importantly undesireable behaviours that must be eliminated, perhaps PP fails to deliver? My doctor attended a puppy course taught by a Delta qualified instructor. Participants were told that saying "no" to your dog more than once was "abuse".

I don't see room in this world for trainers who abuse dogs or treat every dog/handler team with the same methods regardless of their efficacy. They're out there too. Jeanne when you use words like "punishment" to describe all use of aversives then you shouldn't be surprised if folk take issue with it. Its the emotion and value labelled use of words like "punishers" that give a lot of balanced trainers the shits with the PP crowd. The general suggestion is that aversives are used because the trainer is less capable than a PP trainer. Stick around.. you'll hear it. "Punishment" to me is the use of a harsh aversive with no aim of correcting the behaviour and frequently not at the time it occurs. Hitting a dog for chewing up something when you get home hours later is "punishment". To me the description of all aversives as "punishers" is emotive and fails to discrminate between the humane use of an aversive (which may not involve anything physical) in correct timing and simply taking out your frustration or bad temper on a dog who's done something you didn't like. I frown on punishers.. but I don't label anything that's not positive reinforcement as that. If I yell "OI" when my dog sticks his nose on the kitchen bench to snag some food, am I "punishing" him? Corvus would probably argue I"m using an interrupter but I'm not.. I'm telling him what hes doing is unacceptable. Picture a group class Jeanne. A handler with a large young male dog is among them. As you talk to the handler the dog exhuberantly clasps your waist with its front paws and starts to hump you while the handler stands there helpless with embarassment. Is a loud "GET OFF" and a shove "punishment"? How the hell else do you deal with it in a timely manner? Or do you do as one PP handler I know does and allow her adult dog to do this to regularly to her because "he must be stressed". Everyone else thinks hes a dominant shite with few manners but there you go. I only have a problem with PP trainers when they fail to find methods to sort out the myriad of self rewarding undesireable behaviours that present in your average run of the mill group of adult dogs. How their own dogs behave is entirely up to them. But when some try to dress up the methods they use to correct them as anything but what they are.. humane use of aversives, then I'll call them for it because like it or not, they're doing what balanced trainers do openly. Changing the language doesn't change the outcome. I use positives. I don't know a trainer that doesn't thank God. I don't use physical corrections on my dogs apart from the odd rattle of the leash when one is pulling a bit. One dog is not suited for any at aversives at all. But I own small (or mostly small) people focussed dogs with softish temperaments. Id say the casual observer watching me train might think I was PP. I certainly prefer strongly to train that way but horses for courses I say. My friend who works with out of control young ACDs on a regular basis needs more tools in her training toolbox than I usually use. If you want to only use positives then good luck to you. I'm not sure how you'll teach a dog that there are some unacceptable behaviours but I admire your tenacity in sticking to what you believe in. I just don't think it works all that well in the real world, particularly for hard headed dogs with ingrained self rewarding behaviours that need to be eliminated. The competition obedience ring is not the real world by the way. I've watched many a trialling dog drag its handler outside the ring and heel beautfully in it. Its called situational behaviour and its quite common.

Jeanne: Based on that statement Jeanne, I think its very clear that you don't get it at all. The major difference between the Delta square and the NTDF square is that the Delta square is smaller but with much higher walls.

So those of us who know and train alongside Delta qualified trainers know nothing. OK.

I accept that people's opinons differ, ESPECIALLY on training issues. Its when balanced training gets labelled or judged as inferior, cruel (when it sn't) or a short cut that I will beg to differ. To hear certain pieces of equipment described as "barbaric" by people who've not studied them, seen them or tested them but who are mimicing the philosophy of their parent organisaton says "dogma" to me and I don't like dogma no matter who's sprouting it. When that same organisation promotes the use of another aversive training tool but denies that it is and ignores the advice of professionals that it can cause long term harm to a dog then I seriously wonder about WTF their agenda really is.

Apparently he is a stinky Beagle too!!! Sorry, no ideas. If he'd been a fluffy I'd have suggested clipping out the underside of his feet. You could always not sniff them I suppose.

What breed/s is Charlie?

AL: So its done and the pup doesn't get HD. How do you know it was going to without the procedure? If its being done in the name of "research", then pup owners shouldn't be bleeding from the wallet for the privilege of providing the research subjects.

Back paddock, indoor plant place side. Not sure on agility yet. He can have onlead exercise but not sure what else. I'll make the call on Wednesday. Yes, he needs a care pack. Pigs ears and a Hav to squash would be good. Yes I still love him. Its only his relationship with my wallet that's been damaged.

Corvus: Personally, I think any study that focusses on the impact of socialisation experiences in pups would need to have covered some of this ground. All new experiences are potentially stressful. I'd have thought its when initial stress is not matched with further negative reinforcement or is positively reinforced that the stressor is no longer regarded negatively. Such studies have been around for a while haven't they? Any animal that's been trained in any method is subjected to stress. Learning can be taxing.

Dogs don't practice PP amongst themselves. They clearly both use and understand the use of aversives. Watching an adult dog train a pup as to the limits of acceptable behaviour is fascinating. I think that for some PP folk "aversive" has to equal "cruel" or "harsh". Yet, as an adult dog aptly demonstrates, subtle use of aversives and discouragement does not have to be so. You always don't have to yank a dog's head off to discourage it. But (try not to faint here) IMO if 5 minutes of strong (but correct) use of a check chain coupled with praise and reward for the right behaviour, or the fitting of a prong collar sees a habitual puller that has been confined to the backyard get to go on walks again, is that so terrible? Would the dog be better off going beserk with frustration while not getting further than the front driveway or (and quite probably) not getting out at all for weeks while the behaviour is modified? Which is the worse result for the dog? ETA: None of my dogs has ever needed a check chain but they've had the benefit of training from the beginning. If I was a volunteer pound dog walker, I WOULD be looking for a quick fix!

Nope. Deshonko stick to churning out the live stuff. Cheaper to produce and much higher rate of return for a 'better' dog than the one just offloaded.

I don't think societies needs have changed all that much. I think what's changed is our attitude to and understanding of dogs. People seem to want them to be a one size fits all easy temperament in a range of attractive external packages, they want to find one without effort and in many cases resent being asked questions to establish their suitability to own one. Once they've got one they don't want to put much effort into training it but expect that it will behave like the highly trained dogs they see on TV or in the movies. To me, the further we live from nature and the less we share our lives with animals, the more we seem to expect that they should just fit in with what we want and that no sacrifices should be necessary to own one. Failure to understand the needs of a dog and the specific temperaments and needs of particular breeds sees so many dogs offloaded. Dogs lives are more isolated, restricted and controlled these days than at any time in the past. Frankly for a lot of puppy buyers out there, the ideal dog probably looks like this: And sadly, there are folk out there selling pups who are prepared to tell buyers that a live dog is no more work than that. :D Its not dogs that need to change IMO but societies attitudes to them.

Jeanne: Then my honest advice to you is to keep dog training as a hobby and don't do it for living. I think it would break your heart. Many people use dog trainers as the option of last, not first, resort. You'd stand between dogs and the pound or the needle a lot. Many of their owners are only interested in quick fixes. Most you will only see for 6 weeks tops. In that time the dogs will learn all they'll ever know.

Why would a person who espouses positive only methods be suddenly talking about conditioning a dog to wearing an aversive control tool? Isn't your philosophy that you can achieve the results you want without the use of any aversive methods? An aversive harness or a head halter that is applied constantly to lower a dogs drive (as it does for some dogs with a halti) is OK provided the dog doesn't appear to be unhappy? I've seen dogs walked "happily" on a halti with a flexilead. Doesn't mean its not doing the dog harm. In my experience the vast majority of dogs fitted with a halti for control issues will wear it for the rest of their lives. They'll be head checked in it, yanked around by kids, tied up with and yes, walked on a flexilead wearing one. Something to think about when you fit one to a dog, that's for sure. Few people ever bother to use two leads (or a double ended one) with a halti. Nor do they do the work to prevent the same problems reoccuring in a more aversive form of restraint.

I've seen a large dog wearing a sporn harness pull its handler down the path at our club on its two back legs only. No pull harnesses also work on the aversive principle... and not very successfully for some dogs functioning in high levels of drive.

This is one of the reasons our club has a 'control test' that dog and handler must pass before starting agility. It's not competion obedience stuff but focusses on analysing whether the dog has offlead control under distraction (including other dogs).