Cosmolo

I would be looking at getting a trainer to assist you in learning how to give this pup an effective, well timed correction. I wouldn't ignore the mouthing, growling etc as you need to teach him now whats acceptable and whats not. He needs to understand that putting his mouth around a person is never acceptable.

Rusky- do you really believe natural horsemandship is purely positive?? Can you give an example of what part of the process would be purely positive? And headcollars?

Rusky- may i ask if you use headcollars? And if you consider them to be a positive tool?

Monty doesn't use positive punishment- but he uses lots of negative reinforcement, as does Pat Parelli with the 7 games. I have seen Pat and other horsemen get on unstarted horses in half an hour- but not without stress and negative reinforcement. Everything done with horses involves applying of some kind of pressure and removing it. These horsemen don't clicker train and or use food/ play/ pat rewards- they use the removal of pressure- that they applied! Rusky- i also read one of Monty's books (don't think it was shy boy though) and there was 24 hour pressure on the horse as tess suggests. And.. dogs aren't horses. Predator and prey.

The temp tests will also help with that because alot of the mis matches are a result of staff and subsequent adopters being unaware about certain problems the dogs have and/ or how difficult that particular dogs problem might be to modify. There are lots of things on the list, believe me!

Kelpie-i, i can only comment on the temp tests i have had experience with which were mainly in WA. The testing took place inside the kennel only and was basically a test to see if the dog would accept handling. They did not test for food or toy guarding, prey/ play drive, any obedience- walking on lead etc or with other animals. They later changed it slightly so that if the dog was on lead, being walked through the aisle with dogs barking on either side and it reacted with any intensity, it would fail. The tests were conducted by an unqualified trainer and a vet nurse. The vet would then give an opinion when the dog was vet checked. Dogs that come in having growled at, snapped, lunged or bitten any child were immediate pts- we had a lovely beagle come in that had been tortured by its owners children and it growled once (owner ticked box on form) automatic pts. It was not an option for a dog to be homed 'not with young kids', the idea being that if it could not cope with them, it shouldn't be homed at all. We were not allowed to say that a dog could not go with children, nor could we reject applications for particular dogs because of children. The tests seen in the US on Animal Precinct etc are completely different. We are currently in the process of developing a real temp test ourselves that covers as many bases as possible to firstly be introduced at one of the smaller Melbourne shelters, with the hope of expanding it and/ or putting the pressure on larger orgs (not just RSPCA) to test more thoroughly. At the moment there are dogs passing that shouldn't and dogs failing that shouldn't. We are now making attempts for that to change.

We consult in Camberwell too- and often use our own dogs to set up dog to dog situations in a controlled way when appropriate. Training in drive can be great- but you do need to know how to do it properly so that you are really improving the dogs behaviour, and learn how to inhibit drive and/ or teach the dog that certain things are not prey objects when required.

they are all great- but just LOVE Xia- what a spunk!!

Pretty sure its not Erny. Lablover, happy to respond if you want to create another thread in general or something.

I disagree Lablover, and i saw the assessments that were being done- not what i would ever consider to be good assessment procedures. My problem is that their stance and some procedures/ temp testsing comes from a position of ignorance, not knowledge and resulting choice.

No, because i also experienced many other complete disasters- just because they didn't happen in my home, doesn't discount them.

Not what i would consider to be significant. Pulled on lead, little bit of dominance to strange dogs, mild anxiety during storms.

My parents and i adopted an RSPCA dog 3 1/2 years ago.

I did have good experiences with positive training when i started- hence why i still refer many people in Perth to Kathy Koppellis McLeod. I don't know anyone in Perth who i would refer to as a really good balanced trainer- certainly not Bark Busters! But over here i know a fair few who i would consider to be exactly that. I just came to recognise that it does not work for every dog and that i needed to broaden my horizons as far as training concepts and techniques went.

Are you saying that the positive punishment caused the fear aggression in those dogs? Any bad training = Bad results, regardless of technique. But i believe dogs are individuals and i know they don't all respond to the same techniques. I am a convert, when i lived in Perth i was a positive only trainer and thought i would never use and kind of corrections. But now i do- when i feel they are appropriate and necesary.

Rusky- i do not believe that all dogs can be practically trained with positive reinforcement- so we will have to agree to disagree on that point. It is not possible to control the environment and outside influences enough to set up the situation required for every dog to be trained this way. I have a dog who had been through 3 homes, 2 of whom had tried positive techniques to resolve some very extreme fear based issues without any success. She has now improved beyond even my expectations through a combination of rewards and appropriate corrections. I have many clients who have tried positive techniques with no or limited success because the technique is not suitable for their individual dog. So, without facts to the contrary, i continue to believe that a balanced approach, tailored to the dog and owner is best.

Anita- just to be clear, i lived in WA until a few years ago, was working directly with/ for RSPCA WA until 3 years ago hence where my information comes from. And Pax- RSPCA have knocked back the offer of training and other programs, hence why we now work with AAPS where we have a great relationship that i believe truly benefits the dogs. Believe me, i am not one to stand and judge without exploring options and getting involved.

Rusky- i don't know how long ago you were asked but myself and another family member worked for RSPCA, in the dog training dept and 5 years ago, when i was there, they were running all puppy classes and adult group classes as positive training, including the banning of correction chains BOTH in their classes and ALSO for walking dogs in the shelter. And no you can't see the dog that was wrecked- because he's dead now.

Rusky- it is NOT recent that RSPCA have started with positive training, as i said in my previous post, in WA it has been at least 5 years and i believe it was a national initiative so the other states would be the same. RSPCA VIC have definitely had it for at least 2 1/2 years. And who is delivering the positive punishment in the shelters that you argue have failed? Certainly not qualified, experienced and up to date trainers that i know of!

I second Erny's sentiments and question- maybe this is a bit off topic but what i want to know is whether positive purists believe euthanasia or multiple rehomings are better options than use of punishment in training? I would like the RSPCA's answer to that one- based on outcomes, their stance must be yes. Rusky- i have given an example of where poorly timed positive rewards/ training resulted in serious aggression in a dog- i don't deny that this is uncommon but for some dogs, poor positive training can be just as detrimental as training involving correction. The RSPCA in WA have embraced positive training for at least 5 years- and i can say for a fact that the inability to look outside the square has resulted in some dogs being euthanased when their problems could have been resolved with relative ease, given a balance of correction and positive reward. How can this be a good thing?

I used to be very involved in horses, had an extremely difficult horse and used to rack my brain- trying to think of what must have happened to him before. A more experienced friend said to me at the time that it doesn't make a great deal of difference what happened to him before- you have him as he is now and we work with what we've got and try to make things better. There are many dogs that i see where their history is unknown, and we can guess (educated as it may be, it is still a guess) that they may or may not have been abused. At times we will be right and at times we might be wrong- but it doesn't change the fact that the dog now has a particular problem that needs resolution. That will always be my focus- even with one of my own dogs who was the most extreme fear case i have seen.

I don't know if this is any help to you but we have puppy school in Sth Melbourne starting on the 5th and Ormond likely on the 12th January? Bit far i know

I think everyone agrees that you can wreck a dog with poorly applied corrections. But i also see many dogs whose owners went down a positive only path and this caused huge problems- one example that springs to mind was a cattle dog that they had used 'positive' training with to try and extinguish his mouthing as a puppy. By the time i saw him, the mouthing was now serious biting and i honestly believe more could have been done to prevent the problems with this dog if different techniques (including appropriate corrections) had been applied from the beginning. Building drive is great- but there are some people who i don't encourage to build drive because they are likely to build the drive, never use it and this can create unnecesary problems. I also see alot of adult dogs who don't care much for food, pats or toys to begin with. Applying appropriate corrections to supress other behaviours (that the dog normally finds more rewarding than the motivation the owner is offering) can then increase the value of what the owner has so for me, its never 'correction only' training. I think this is a misconception that some people have that if you use corrections you don't/ can't/ won't use positive reinforcement. I have heard RSPCA before make the comparison between training dogs and dolphins. Aside from the obvious difference in terms of the animals themselves, the dolphins environment is also completely controlled and they don't have access to fish at any other time! Dogs have access to food, affection and toys much of the time- and are required to work within the constraints of society and behave a certain way- something a dolphin would never be expected to do.

A good trainer will have a range of tools and choose what will suit that particular dog and owner- positive or not. My issue with the RSPCA's statement is that it is a blanket statement which is not true for all dogs or all owners. I have to disagree with the suggestion by some that purely positive training can not mess up a dog if applied incorrectly- i see many examples where it has done exactly that. I deal with pet dogs too- but many of them have serious behavioural issues, or the owners have an immediate need for resolution due to the nature of the issue. I have no problem with positive training/ trainers and recommend a purely positive trainer in Perth to anyone who asks as i do not know any 'balanced' trainers over there who i would be comfortable to refer to. But my preference is always for a trainer with an open mind and knowledge regarding different training tools and techniques.

Thanks for the positive comments- i think Turtle is going to be just fine! He is a lovely boy, just in need of some guidance and boudaries which newnewf is more than capable of doing! And to all the Turtle lovers.. I got to meet AND play with him!!!