Willem

ask yourself what is the purpose of a collar, harness etc...is it only for fashion?...then it is not aversive...and could be made from paper; however in most cases the purpose is not fashion, but for facilitating a tool that allows to apply a force if required.

Only if the leash pull actually influences future behaviour. I think you will find that is a big 'if'. My dogs walk nicely on leash until they detect bread/chicken bones/cat poo nearby, and then they throw themselves in unison towards the ground lollies, creating heaps of leash pressure that I instantly contribute to by pulling them back. Yet, if anything, they do it MORE now than they did a year ago. What does that tell us? It tells us a) in this context pulling is not punishing; and b) in this context, the possibility of accessing the ground lollies is highly reinforcing and they have figured out the most likely behaviour to achieve this. Guys. Quadrants are only confirmed AFTER behaviour change. Declaring anyone uses any quadrant without knowing what the effect on behaviour was is putting the cart before the horse. it tells us that by avoiding negative punishment in the past you reinforced this behaviour - I used negative punishment with our dog (did a lot of crazy walking) and she became a good loose leash walker responding to the slightest increase in leash tension...conversely to you I don't have to use 'heaps of leash pressure' now to control the dog. Eta: so actually 'lead pulling' always affects the future behaviour: if you don't stop it respectively let the dog get away with it you reinforce this behaviour (positive reinforcement)...

every time we use a leash (and by law we have to) to control the dog or pull him into the direction we decide to go, we use force and negative punishment: removing the stimulus (the direction / obstacle the dog aims for) to decrease behavior (dog pulling in this direction). By using a prong / choke collar it even adds some positive punishment. ...or when using a crate: just another removal of appetitive stimulus (freedom) to decrease behaviour (there is a reason why crates are made from solid material and not made from paper), hence its negative punishment. For training like agility, yeah I can't see that anything else than positive reinforcement would give the same result, but the day has 24 hours and there is a lot of time left without an official obedience or agility training - still the dog needs to be managed and - by law - most dog owners who e.g. walk their dog have to use negative punishment from time to time for safety reasons...otherwise you could just use a string to walk the dog instead of a leash. ETA: yes, I'm aware that the conditioning where a dog responds to the pain inflicted via a prong collar could also be negative reinforcement = escape (pain / stimulus gets removed after the dog follows the owner)...

quote from the link: ..."Associate Professor Zuber said the ANKC should look at their breeding standards instead of seeking to re-engineer dogs." ...the biggest problem seems to be the breeding standard amended over the last 70 years, not whether it is a BYB or an 'ethical' breeder.

report into the strategies for controlling stray dogs ...some interesting reading about the adopted strategies of various European countries regarding controlling stray dogs...

A Simple Way of Reducing Long-Term Stress in Dogs Dogs have an evolutionary need to walk Walking Your Dog: How to Do It Well and Why It's So Important ...don't waste your time on Fakebook - walk your dog instead!

...here the 'free' version: http://scentdogsaustralia.com/uploads/3/4/6/0/34604456/number_of_training_sessions_and_learning_in_dogs.pdf Note: no matter what search engine you use (Google, Bing, Yahoo....) they are all biased and aim to earn some money somehow...so depending on the topic the search engine will likely rank goods you have to pay for higher than free goods... if you find an article you have to pay for: do a second search (perhaps with a different search engine) and enter just the title and you might find the article without having to pay for it. ETA:...keep in mind that a) the owner of the site that provides the 'free' article so it can be accessed via such an alternative link and / or b) the download of the particular article from this site might still violate 'fair use' and therefore proprietary rights.

...see 3rd link, e.g. 'Supportive Therapie' ....and the stats include open pyometra too. ETA:..and of course the section wrt 'open pyometra' in the first link.

quote: (ii) Closed-cervix pyometra The availability of antiprogestin-based drugs has completely changed the clinical approach to a problem whose only solution for the last decades has been ovariohysterectomy. The administration of aglepristone during diestrus in the bitch will cause opening of the cervical os with consequent emptying of the uterine content. Following treatment with a dose of 10 mg/kg aglepristone administered on days 1, 2 and 8 in 15 bitches with closed pyometra, opening of the cervix was reported to occur after 26±13 hours in all treated animals. Although the success rate in closed cervix pyometra following 3 administrations of aglepristone alone is reported to be around 20%, a follow-up treatment of the same dosage of the antiprogestin at day 14 and 28 associated to a prostaglandin treatment once the purulent vulvar discharge becomes evident has risen the success rate to 90%. Antiprogestins can be used to avoid recurrence of pyometra at subsequent cycles should the owner decide not to breed the bitch immediately. Bitches with a closed cervix pyometra and with liver or kidney insufficiency are not considered good candidates for a medical treatment with aglepristone. from http://www.poulvet.com/dog/articles/pyometra_article.php. Note the limited suitability for dogs with liver or kidney insufficiency. Note also that the repeated use of aglepristone has been associated with development of pyometra: http://www.vetbook.org/wiki/dog/index.php/Aglepristone http://www.blendivet.de/PDFs/Pyometra.pdf...shows success rates regarding the use of aglepristone from various studies.

...maybe not for the OP, but perhaps for others.

@ raineth: as I said, do some reading first...the likelihood of Pyometra increases with the age of the bitch - show me / us some evidence that the 25% is the figure for bitches lets say till 5 years old - I don't believe that there is any study out there that would verify this figure for younger females. Hence stating to spay bitches ASAP to avoid health issues won't stand any scientific evaluation - Hemangiosarcoma is one of the most common cancers in dogs and by early spaying the risk is 5x higher (for females) compared to an entire dog - and there is no cure for Hemangiosarcoma while the chances in case of Pyometra are not so bad. Everyone to its own - but I will contemplate about spaying our dog when she is 5-6 years old.

...do some reading first - you may trade one disease for another, and bone cancer, hypothyroidism, hemangiosarcoma (5 times higher risk!!!) etc. etc. is not a pleasant experience either.

Corvus, thanks for the advise - unfortunately it came too late. The injury happend when I tested various footwear regarding suitability resisting a leash pulling dog. I'm embarrassed as my test preparation was lousy - and I should have known it better, I guess I got carried away! Thankfully no none else was injured during the testings...so clearly, it is time for me to quit this entertaining thread. However, before I embark on the road to recovery, a last link showing the footage of the accident (not mine - VS's accident) which was finally released - I guess it was just a question of time till something like this popped up: VS's bite accident

...but why would you cite an article that - falsely - contradicts 'THE SCIENCE BEHIND POSITIVE TRAINING'?... a little bit off topic, but here 2 links that explains the 'real' difference between wolfs and dogs: http://www.everythingwolf.com/news/readarticle.aspx?article=38 https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130117152012.htm the articles are somehow unrelated, however Pat Goodmans article / findings make totally sense in context with Kathryn Lord's findings. ETA: bugger, it happened again...I guess it is time to quit....

it is also 'worthwhile' to have a look at her The Science Behind Positive Training page and the links she lists - for sure they are better sources out there for dog training, and the last link 'The long-terms Effects of Spanking' is about kids!!!...nothing to do with dogs! (I admit it was one of the first links I followed as I contemplated whether the 'Spanking' was somehow linked to her VS dog trainings boots). ETA: the only really interesting article I found is 'Alpha Status, Dominance, and Division of Labor in Wolf Packs by L. David Mech1'...unfortunately her link links to a site where you have to pay $30 for the article - here the free version: http://www.wolf.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/267alphastatus_english.pdf However, the article is solely about wolfs, nothing to do with dogs and it's an absolute mystery why it is listed under 'Scientific Links About Positive Training vs Dominance and Punishment-Based Training'. ...so much about her science behind positive training... ETA:...here another - free! - link of one of her cited articles http://www.pawsoflife.org/Library/Behavior/Bradshaw_2009.pdf ...somehow interesting, but I fail to see that it adds to her 'Science behind Positive Training'...looks like she just filled the page without having read the articles...I guess the main thing for her is that it looks good...

yeah, but if you follow the link under 'The Four Pillars of Positive Training:' The use of positive reinforcement she dedicates a whole site to 'positive reinforcement' - where is her site where she explains 'The use of 'negative punishment' she shows all the time in her shows?...because the scientific terms are so confusing it seems to be even more important to provide some clarifications for her readers...but nil, zilch... anyway, you might be right, too much semantic... what bothers me are her generalisations for the sake of marketing, e.g. what does she actually mean wrt outdated, unsuitable and old fashion trainings methods in contrast to her shiny modern newly developed trainings philosophy?.... when B.F. Skinner issued his first findings (e.g. http://uwf.edu/ejordan/web/Learning_Blog/Entries/2011/7/18_Gulfarim_Vital_Details_files/How%20to%20Teach%20Animals%20by%20Skinner.pdf - 1951) she wasn't even born!...and e-collars are not a tool of the past either! ETA:...bugger, forgot to mention her VS dog trainings boots in this post...

I had a look (Cos I've never heard of these 4 pillars and it's unfortunate that she doesn't include a fifth pillar of "control the environment" or something. Just to make it look different to Operant Conditioning (4 quadrants). You say she doesn't mention "negative punishment" - did you read what she wrote? Here it is. And she calls her method "positive training" not "positive reinforcement" which I don't like because gee - "positive punishment". https://positively.com/dog-training/positive-training/what-is-positive-training/ But we shouldn't get hooked up on semantics. Forcing a dog to do something and beating it or scolding it when it doesn't do what you want are not reliable training methods compared to reward based training. ...I said she doesn't list it (as a pillar I meant) ...if she uses science to back up her philosophy, and uses 'positive reinforcement as her first pillar', consequently she should have made 'negative punishment' as her second pillar as she uses it in every show I watched so far (I admit I only watched a few - while her VS dog trainings boots are awesome, they still don't get me to watch every episode :) ).

as MRB said: the use of haltis has some risks as they give the handler a mechanical / leverage advantage that allows him to use less force. Similar to using the jack to lift a car: while it makes it easy for us to lift the car, the weight of the car is still the same. Imagine a 5 meter leash attached to a harness, a collar, and halti and a dog that accelerates full and get stopped abrupt after 5 meters by the leash: with the harness there might be no injuries, the collar might break his neck....the halti will...

... you try to put yourself in Victoria's shoes (yeah, these VS dog training boots look awesome :D ), but at the same time you admit that you have not much experience with police dogs while she still tries to sell herself as the expert for dog training, no matter what realm it is...that's the difference. Where has she said she is an expert in working dog training of any sort? She is interested in police dog training and has been in discussion with local units. I've never seen her say she is an expert in this field. In fact, she says in the blog post about the incident: "I was honored and excited to attend, and, as is the case with a lot of my involvement in this field, I was mostly there to watch and observe." Furthermore, it's a moot point. Even an expert may indeed follow the directions of a dog's handlers. It is the polite thing to do, and it's usually a good way to keep safe. You might work in protection on a daily basis, but it's still someone else's dog and someone else's training and you don't know what the triggers might be. So listen to the handler. As has been said several times already, hang around these dogs long enough and you will probably get bitten. It's got little to do with who you are or how skilled or experienced you say you are. It happens. well, she declares herself as 'one of the world's most recognized and respected dog trainers', however, from a 'recognized and respected dog trainer' I expect to get the science around 'operant conditioning' right (she stresses her scientific approach pretty often). Have a look at her 4 pillars of positive training: while she stresses 'positive reinforcement' (first pillar) she doesn't list 'negative punishment', however she uses 'negative punishment' all the time!!! ...nothing wrong with using it, but don't call it 'positive reinforcement'. And of course her handling / training is not force free...every time she / we use the leash to pull the dog in the direction we decide to go we are applying force!...a trained dog will just follow without force, but he was not born like this. There are a lot of shows in which she heavily (as far as it is possible with her VS dog training boots :D ) is pulling the leash to control the dog - it's not force free! She is obviously a smart business woman with a selling concept and her acting and catwalk performance in her shows might draw some audience (but won't get her an Oscar), however, IMO she is not a very authentic person, and for me the later one is a very important 'pillar' when it comes to dog training. ETA:...and I couldn't find any disclaimer on her page that would exclude working dogs and / or police dogs from her expertise.

for the sake of unbiased information: you can use it on a PC...there are extensions for browsers out there.

I don't have an account and don't need an account, and I don't know a good reason why someone would need an account. yes, people can steal your photos. The simplest way is to make a screen shot, but it also happens that accounts get hacked. there are only a few exceptions / areas in the internet that are not used commercially, e.g. Wikipedia (in the meanwhile some people, brands, companies try to use Wikipedia for marketing too, so there are quite some biased pages up there and sorting this out is big work for Wikipedia). So rest assured, someone is earning $$$ with your Fakebook account, Instagram, usage of any Google service etc. etc.... This might happen 'behind the scene' (e.g. Google pays Apple billions of $$ for the employment of their search engines that allows them to access user data) or directly by placing Ads on the site you open.

... you try to put yourself in Victoria's shoes (yeah, these VS dog training boots look awesome :D ), but at the same time you admit that you have not much experience with police dogs while she still tries to sell herself as the expert for dog training, no matter what realm it is...that's the difference.

...have a look at post #59 from TF: ...it is part of the dog's training to charge at people in confined spaces...if the dog is left to make his own choice because he can't hear the handler properly due to the helicopter noise it is one option that he just does what he is trained to do...she made herself a decoy ... The handler made her a decoy. But thanks so much for sharing your immense wisdom and knowledge about dog training. ...stop thinking that everyone who knows a little bit more than you is an expert :D - he/she might have just done a little bit more reading about dog training instead of reading about the latest fashion news :D Thank you again for setting me straight. We are sooo lucky to have you here. ...while I fully understand your admiration I think we getting a little bit off topic here :D

...have a look at post #59 from TF: ...it is part of the dog's training to charge at people in confined spaces...if the dog is left to make his own choice because he can't hear the handler properly due to the helicopter noise it is one option that he just does what he is trained to do...she made herself a decoy ... The handler made her a decoy. But thanks so much for sharing your immense wisdom and knowledge about dog training. ...stop thinking that everyone who knows a little bit more than you is an expert :D - he/she might have just done a little bit more reading about dog training instead of reading about the latest fashion news :D

The trainers and handlers obviously thought it was ok to do. ...the handlers and trainers are responsible too; there might have been some kind of pressure on them to remove any items, e.g. muzzles, that would contradict her 'positive only' message - it is hard to ignore all the accusations in the fist link of the OP and it seems that she got actually sued once for 'lack of experience' (fraud). She sells herself as a 'dog bite prevention expert' (look at her page) and experienced dog trainer, but when shit happens she is only a bystander?