Willem

I have to agree with that, and I'd also say as a training method for Willems it's been a complete fail. So either you don't find it aversive enough to change your behaviour or you have no idea what behaviour is supposed to change. Either way - it's not working. So it's not exactly a punishment either (in the scientific jargon), it's just unpleasant. Unless you have a masochistic or troll drive. I think argument for the sake of argument is highly rewarding for Willems. So when we try to punish by saying "you are wrong, here is why" he actually finds that to be an opportunity for reward because he can argue back. We all know it too, I suspect. We know that not responding would extinguish the behaviour, but we continue to engage for our own reasons. Excellent example of how animal (including human) learning and behaviour works :D ...as I tried to explain in my last post: it is a little bit different; I get 'zapped' by the 'force-free' promoting army to make me believe that force-free is the way to go - that's just not very convincing isn't it :D ? Eta:...if I would use the ease of handling of the 'zapping' method some members demonstrate here as a benchmark, I'm actually quite happy that I'm not born as the dog of some members here :D

I have to agree with that, and I'd also say as a training method for Willems it's been a complete fail. So either you don't find it aversive enough to change your behaviour or you have no idea what behaviour is supposed to change. Either way - it's not working. So it's not exactly a punishment either (in the scientific jargon), it's just unpleasant. Unless you have a masochistic or troll drive. now that's a real interesting one :D ...the forum (or better some members) employ(ed) what they call 'old fashion' training methods when it comes to convince me that 'force-free' trainings methods are the way to go....and you wonder why I have problems to believe that those 'force-free' methods are really the best way to go :D talking and writing is one thing - the actions behind another....

not much concrete information on this page, however, scrolling down the page I stumbled over the picture that says 'LEAD BY EXAMPLE' and I ask myself why do they promote such an advanced harness-collar system if they don't apply force? ...why do they promote a harness that constrains a dog more than any other harness and collar would, if it is not about controlling the dog via a leash??????

when discussing dog training I think we can leave out '2a' (we don't talk about military realms), '4a' is very specific (also doesn't contradict the physical definition), '5'...do we really need to discuss this as it refers to writing? leaves '3', violence, compulsion and constraint: for me this are all terms that can be caused by applying a physical force (which would be measurable in Newton), but the outcome (violence, compulsion and constraint) is not so easy measurable, at least not in physical units. I understand that some people associate automatically violence when they hear / read the term force, however, IMO this is not justified. If you lift a glass, you use a force (to overcome gravity), that's not violence. If people promoting positive reinforcement training in combination with force-free training, why don't they use just the term violence-free instead if they mean violence respectively violence-free?

..contradicts somehow the statement in the article where it says ....'Trainer’s who hit dogs are not trainers. They are animal abusers. Any trainer or programs that advocate hitting a dog should be avoided. A dog should not ever be hit with the hand, rubber hose, stick, newspaper, finger, or any other object or appendage. Dogs do not learn anything from that form of abuse, except to fear their owner, environment, and possibly turn aggressive. The only thing that should come from the owner’s hand is love, and an occasional treat'. saying this, I also think some statements in this article are at least debatable, but overall I still find it interesting and can agree to a lot of it.

http://k9-trainer.com/infopages/Compulsive.html ... some good thoughts in this article

force is defined by the physics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force ... there is not much room for other interpretations. It might be that many people using the term 'force' in the context of force-free dog training mean actually abuse free / torture free etc. However, force is not abuse, nor is it automatically pain inflicting - it's just 'force'. 'Tension' in context with 'force' is just force per square cross-section. We use 'force' all the time, no one would think about 'abuse' when just lifting a glass - however without force we couldn't lift the glass. Eta:...wrong link...fixed now.

that's force too - and some dogs have a good endurance in this pulling games. The pulling for this approach applies even a higher force compared when doing the crazy walking where you aim to change direction every second(s). By doing so it doesn't allow the dog to position himself plus you pull sideways which requires much less force. But I agree, there are other options out there - the worst thing is doing nothing and get dragged for years behind your dog, which leads first to own frustrations, then less walking and at the end you have an also frustrated dog. The crazy walking worked for me.

I missed you other question ...but it's answered now (or at least I tried). wrt authentic: for me it is more a journey than a fix goal and my hope is that the older I get the more authentic I become. I believe that dogs are very good in sensing the emotional state of a person, thus if you think you are someone you are not, the communication between you and your dog will very likely be heavily compromised. On the other hand, being authentic will ease the communication significantly. E.g. if you are scared of some dogs, they will very likely sense it and then of course you would have some challenges if you want to train them, especially if you think you can trick the dog by impersonating a fearless handler. It won't matter whether you say to others that you are not scared - they might believe you, but the dog senses something different. It is similar with all the other emotions, fears, uncertainties, anger, anxieties etc.. If you approach another dog while walking your dog and the other dog looks aggressive and scares you, you will transmit your feeling through the leash to your dog and if you do this often the dog will become leash reactive (because his alarmed state gets every time reinforced when you transmit this scary feelings). A lot of people have some fear of dogs (IMO it is quite natural), and while they might love dogs (maybe only smaller dogs) - somewhere there is also this subliminal fear of bigger dogs. This subliminal fear can make it difficult to fill the role of a leader. Some people are not really scared of dogs, but are scared of getting bitten, again this subliminal fear might get in the way. An unbalanced personality will also cause some challenges, or people who are easily frustrated, depressed etc. etc.. . The problem is we are what we are, and if the dogs can sense this, it might be better for us to face our own weaknesses instead of trying to hide them. That might come with some inconvenient consequences: we might have to face that our qualifications to be a leader might not be so good. Nevertheless it will open up also opportunities: if we face our weaknesses we have the chance to improve in this particular realm. So, in nutshell, training your dog starts with training yourself....so much about my understanding of 'authentic'.

I missed this one... the challenge is that you have to start from somewhere - and most dogs are not born with perfect leash behaviour. Now you have a problem: on the one side you want to walk the dog, on the other hand training a leash pulling dog for loose leash walking with positive reinforcement takes quite some time. Obviously walking the dog while he still pulls will compromise the positive reinforcement training heavily, so you have to make a decision whether positive reinforcement is really the best method here - which means you have severe problems walking the dog while the objective is not achieved. Hence in this case IMO doing something like crazy walking, which includes some kind of force to correct the direction / pulling is the better choice. You can walk your dog and use crazy walking (the neighbours might be alarmed about those strange 'dance moves' and circles :) ) and don't have to wait at home till the unwanted pulling is extinct. Of course you can still combine this training with positive reinforcement. You can achieve a significant change for a leash pulling dog in a few days with this approach - it is very hard to achieve the same result just with positive reinforcement in the same time. No matter what the tool is you choose, the objective is always loose leash walk (which means no tension in the leash).

you know that no matter how I try to answer this questions (I think both questions are related) I will have to duck for cover :D ? Dogs have different traits and characters, or even medical conditions, so that explains why some dog are easier to train and some will provide more problems if you benchmark them with easy trainable dogs. But beside these factors, I think every dog owner has to answer these questions for him/herself. Sometimes it is not the choice of tools, but lack of persistence and discipline when using them. Positive reinforcement - and there is no doubt that it is for a good reason so successful and popular - requires a lot of persistence and discipline, more than other trainings methodologies actually. If you want to imprint the wanted reflex in the dogs brain via this way it needs a precise plan and persistent execution of the plan, and repetition, repetition, repetition. You let the dog get away with the unwanted behaviour for a few days and all your effort in positive reinforcement you put in over weeks is lost. Then people get frustrated ... and give up...and therefore failed as a leader (the dogs senses this). I'm sure there are many other reasons, personality, ...are you authentic enough?...you can't lie to dogs, they don't give a damn whether you have the new fancy cloth, iPhone, whether you are a millionaire, washed and combed, how many followers you have on twitter and so on....you have to be authentic.

as a sidenote: it is actually pretty interesting how those threads develop; I think there are really good comments from all sides. One idea that really puzzles me is the one that we might become actually the appetitive stimuli after bonding and training the dog. And why shouldn't it be like this? ...we start with treats, and slowly without knowing the transfer of value makes us the appetitive stimuli. Why do we fall in love with partners?...because they lure us with treats :D ?...do clicker training :laugh: ? ...in a way our partners are our appetitive stimuli, and when we embark on a dog owner / dog relationship similar principles might be at work...

yes, but who is in charge of all this?...who protect them as good as possible?...who goes the last mile to comfort them if required? - its you, and they sense all the love you put in to train them and to manage their daily life, and that is why they trust you and are less stressed. You are their appetitive stimuli now, and that is why you can do with them what you do. It helps to use the tools (whatever tools you decide to use) the right way, but the tools without the right attitude, affection and leadership are worth not much. If dogs do what their owners want them to do because they trust their owner, and feel protected and comforted, then why do many much loved, cared for and protected dogs not do what their owners want them to do? Why do they still pull and not recall and not accept getting their nails cut and bolt out of gates etc etc ect even though that is what their owners want in order to keep them safe? Dogs (and all animals) repeat behaviours that are rewarding for them, by their own standards and perceptions. Simple as that. The key to avoiding conflict and frustration between owners and dogs is to teach/train/manipulate the dog into believing that what they want and what we want them to do are one and the same, by demonstrating that that is the most rewarding option for them. ...because the owners didn't earn their trust as a leader. It is not enough just to love them, it needs a little bit more to convince them that you are a trusted leader - there is still training required. You also have to built the communication between you and the dog: they don't know automatically what drop, sit etc. and a recall means. Eta: that is actually one of the things I tried to explain in your thread and why I think it might not be a good idea to join this training: if you have to compromise too much in this training, you leadership would be compromised too - you would feel monitored because you might do something differently, more pressure for you (= more pressure for the dog), at the end the dog might ask herself bloody hell what I'm doing here?...of course it won't be so dramatic, but your dog will very likely sense that not everything is fine, and that is not the best trainings environment.

yes, but who is in charge of all this?...who protect them as good as possible?...who goes the last mile to comfort them if required? - its you, and they sense all the love you put in to train them and to manage their daily life, and that is why they trust you and are less stressed. You are their appetitive stimuli now, and that is why you can do with them what you do. It helps to use the tools (whatever tools you decide to use) the right way, but the tools without the right attitude, affection and leadership are worth not much.

If you read through the thread you will see that there is quite a development wrt 'using corrections' - I don't have to use much correction anymore now that she is 17 month old. Her recall is impeccable for her age, she comes because she loves to come, not stressed with tail between the leg. Her performance in her obedience classes (3) and agility is at least above average. Her behaviour at home is impeccable - she loves company, but has no problems to entertain herself with her dedicated toys without destroying anything else. She doesn't bark, the neighbours love her, she gets a lot of positive feedback from the owners of her dog friends. No aggressions to other dogs, people etc.. It is a pleasure to walk her, I can call her off from cattle, cats and other wildlife when required, the problems we had at the start with getting her focus when other dogs where around disappeared. We do confidence games in obedience (e.g. walking the dogs though boxes with plastic bottles and the like...), if I tell her she can do it she does it without hesitation (not many dogs do this, even normally much more confident dogs in her class hesitate and it takes ages till they do the first step). She is not perfect (how boring would it be), but she is a great little dog. so is this all the result of what I'm doing?...or just a lucky positive outcome despite what I'm doing? And wrt zapping: I think I get zapped here on the forum quite often :D . Eta: don't be frustrated!...that's the last thing I want.

which animal and who has absolute control over its environment? ...we all struggle to maintain a certain level of control, but as most of us are not living on a remote island by themselves, plus there are all these uncertainties in life 'control over its environment' is nothing else than wishful thinking - for humans and animals. Diseases (maybe not experienced by ourselves, but partners, kids...), financial struggle (or food hunting for animals), job loss, climate ...etc. etc. are all factors that can't be controlled! I think the most stress causing methodology is trying to control everything!...won't take long and you are burned out and depressed. 'Give an animal control over its environment and it copes better, both behaviourally AND physiologically' sounds good, however, in this life it is just an imaginary dream. Evolution is science, struggle for survival is science, and that is what shapes behaviour - and it doesn't mean it comes without stress. Lets go back to the 'dogs': how much control do you want to give to your dog? ...equal partnership at least?...and would this work?...I doubt it. And I strongly believe that my dog has much less stress in her life if I lead her strong and wisely and make most of the decisions for her.

that (the highlighted text) is at least debatable. Stress is a response to environmental conditions and a reaction to a challenge. Thereofore the more choices humans (and animals) have, the more stress it can cause. I say can, as it really depends on a lot of parameters and individual capabilities. Clearly, having choices doesn't automatically eliminate stress, but the pathway to the right decision can be a very, very stressful experience and can inflict even traumas. Eta: ...if the environment provides the human or social animal with a strong leader, and they have full trust in this leader: this is indeed a very good recipe to minimize stress, but it implies that a lot of choices are actually made by the leader. Eta: ...think about the meaning of 'trust'...

I assume you would be far out of your depth if asked to explain how you get to this conclusion - and beside your limited capability in this realm: this would be off-topic anyway. However, feel free to start your own thread if you want to elaborate this further.

agree absolutely!...it is the 'toxic energy' that hurts, not the force...

of course - but playing tug gives you an understanding of the forces the dog can apply. I trained for over 30 years marshal art, and playing with forces, recognise and manage forces and movements etc... was a crucial part of the training. Playing tug with a dog is like a revelation and tells you a lot about character of the dog, aggression, anxieties, power, all kind of behaviours etc...and this is what can be used to find the right degree for correction.

...should have waited :D ... agree 100% with the red highlighted text - but agree only partly with your last sentence. Playing tug should give you a good indication about how the dog responds to force applied - that's the context of the game! The challenge wrt correction is to start with the right force (not too much - not to little) with the objective to reduce it to zero. I communicate with my dog via the leash - a very gentle tug (like someone pads you on the shoulder) is now enough to get me her attention.

it is / was meant as a correction, if I don't get this message to her I'm doing something wrong - like all the dog owners who get dragged behind their dogs for years: they still apply respectively counter the same force via the leash, but the message was never picked up (not from the dog owner and not from the dog :) )

I just did some training with her and also played the take-it/leave-it game with the flirt pole. And I noticed that, when I allowed her to catch the lure and play tug of war, that the force involved (MRB would say that the dog applied the force, however physics tells me the force can only occur if I counter the force on the other side) is actually much higher than what I would apply when correcting her. She is not a heavy BC, just 17 kg, but pure muscles, bones and tendons. When she pulls the lure, jerks and shakes her head - my 11 year old daughter would have problems to counter the forces involved....and it is pure play for her (the dog)!...it just shows me that the force I use(d) - 'used' because I rarely have to use leash pulling to correct her now - is / was still far from pain inflicting abuse. Force is just another form of communication when used this way. Eta: ... of course others are eligible to disagree...

...sorry, I get the message 'link is broken'?...I'm still resisting to surrender to Fakebook, so that could be the cause too Fixed - sorry :) thanks - yes, recall over a long distance doesn't seem to be a problem if there is a strong bond between handler and dog. I don't think that it is just a technical perfect recall training that get you there. I assume it is the handler itself who becomes the appetitive stimuli (or to whom the 'value is transferred') if there is a strong bond.

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/frog-hit-by-lawn-mower-flown-to-cairns-hospital-for-life-saving-treatment/ar-AAgQXeM?ocid=spartandhp is it wisely to use (waste?) resources this way?