Just Midol

Yeah, I've never really thought of it as a tool but really it is one. Though I'm different in that I don't think using tools is a bad idea, even when they aren't phased out. Like with prongs, some dogs become collar smart regardless of what you do and will only not pull when it's on - no big deal. At least they can walk the dog even if they do have to use the prong every time. It's like when using rewards, rewards are NEVER phased out yet there is this huge expectation for people to phase out aversives. Ian had this idea (don't know of it was mentioned at the Sydney seminar) whereby you put the "tool" (halti, prong, whatever....) on the dog but don't connect it.....connect the leash to a flat leather collar and use that for a week. week 2, you put an odour on the collar ( he used saddle soap as an example) and then connect the tool, so that it can be used, so the dog in theory pairs the fact it is being corrected by the tool, with the odour, as the odour appeared in conjunction with the correction. Week 3, you phase out the use of the tool, but keep the saddle soap on the collar, and if the dog has made the connection between the two....hey presto. I think this is the simplified version of it....but I found it an interesting concept & wonder if it would work. I would like to give it a go though. I think food rewards should be phased out eventually......but did you mean verbal rewards also? If you phase out rewards entirely, then the dog will eventually stop listening. It won't take long before the dog realises he isn't getting anything for what he does. Verbal rewards are useless if your dog doesn't want them. To me, what you just described is using a tool. Just a different type of tool. What's the difference between a dog connecting the correction to a prong or a piece of soap? Or the prong to an odour? I don't really see a difference.

Can you expand on this? In the Mal example (remember that this is about his Mal, not Mals as a breed) he said that while he knew it could pace all day, it could only sprint 200 yards before getting tired and slowing down a lot. Whereas he knew he could sprint for longer than 200 yards. So that gave him extra information he could use when offleash training that he would not apply to say, being offleash with a greyhound, which could cover a mile really, really fast. How does that help? What if the dog gains satisfaction in the chase, without requiring the capture? If the dog does do it for the capture, and has successfully captured many times before then do you think such a method would gain success in a reasonable amount of time (12 months to me, is not reasonable.)

I agree with you. My first vet did that. My second vet (now permanent vet) quoted less than the initial vet and when I asked "What about pain relief and IV!" he simply told me it was included and all dogs get it unless the owners opt out. I was a happy camper.

Yeah, I've never really thought of it as a tool but really it is one. Though I'm different in that I don't think using tools is a bad idea, even when they aren't phased out. Like with prongs, some dogs become collar smart regardless of what you do and will only not pull when it's on - no big deal. At least they can walk the dog even if they do have to use the prong every time. It's like when using rewards, rewards are NEVER phased out yet there is this huge expectation for people to phase out aversives.

At the Perth seminar, he mentioned briefly that even a regular leash can be used as a crutch, and it's not a good idea to rely on it....what I understand from that is that while leads area a legal requirement, the dog should be trained to work without it so that if you find yourself without it one day (for whatever reason) you can still maintain control. He also gave a brief example of a way to phase out the use of either a halti or prong collar within a couple of weeks..... Some don't want to phase out the use of their tools though. Though I agree with him, for the average owner phasing out of the training tools is probably a good idea. I won't ever phase out my e-collar on either the pets or my working dog. I like the fact it has a vibrate which I can use to command the dog to do something (probably a drop) and I always like to have an insurance policy just in case my dog decides that one day, he is going to ignore me. That rabbit at his feet might be inticing.

Well I did say given infinite time and that sometimes it wasn't practical to use no aversives. What I was arguing against was the notion that it simply can't be done. Can't be contained, though? If a Dingo can be contained surely any dog can be contained. Okay, let me put it another way, usually the owners of such dogs either: a) Simply won't contain it, it might be a farm dog. b) Can't afford to contain it. I personally think that's a load of shit, I used to agree with that but I no longer do (and neither of the huskies here recall), all dogs can be taught to recall imo. Sure, if you'll only use positive methods and insist on heavy socialisation then you may not be able to obtain a recall in all dogs... But that's the fault of the method. Some dogs may run through any adversive if you immediately move to high distractions but I doubt many dogs can withstand a level 127 correction for prolonged periods of time. If it came to it (as in one of my dogs was almost at an animal, or had an animal) then I would inflict a very high level correction on them. It would cause vast amounts of pain, and stress, but if it's the only way to save someones pet or livestock then I'd do it (I wouldn't for say, a wild duck though.) Problems with the method, not the dogs. Axle happily ran through barbed wire and got scratches all over his face whilst running for me, but when he 3 shocks from my electric fence (whilst in his "running" drive) he wouldn't go outside for 4 days. Different types of pain in different environments. I believe all dogs can be trained in basic obedience, the only time breed becomes relevant for me is when entering specialist areas such as police/security/protection work and scent detection where purpose bred dogs will perform far better.

Can you expand on this?

Yeah, umm, usually if a dog has self rewarded with stock chasing you don't have a few months. It's either a quick result, or death. There is no inbetween. If the dog is stock chasing it means it can't be contained.

And here was I about to come back and do a nice polite edit after I got a chance to read the next page. If you click "quote" you can go to the next page and it remembers the quote selection. That way you can hit the quote buttons on all the posts you feel like replying to as you browse the full thread, doing this means you'll be able to read the entire thread before responding. I think it's like being a good driver. Most people think they are, yet find themselves surrounded by idiots on the road. You've summed up how I feel exactly! So many idiot drivers around me I think I'm a good at implementing the things I know in training, but I know very little so there isn't a lot I can implement so you must be the other one midol Bingo! Or there are a couple thousand... I've interacted with heaps of them on an e-collar discussion group on Yahoo. They all seem pretty cluey. Many of them probably know more about the e-collar than Ian does. Dammit. The way I read it was more fun Though if he has only met one or two people who know how to use them then he must not interact with other trainers. I wish I had have known of his seminar, I'd have enjoyed it once I ignored the "I'm right" bits. It couldn't possibly be worse than the 12 hours of lower house debate I listened to overnight

I don't believe it's prey drive simply because I don't see how pulling weight or running with no direction relates to hunting. If someone can explain the link to me I'd appreciate it It's definitely instinctual and breeding has amplified it, but trainers seem to discuss four drives: Pack, Prey, Play & Food. I can't see how a Huskies desire to run & pull relates to any of those completely. If anything, I think it comes under an entirely new heading & drive type. I don't know of many other breeds (non-sleding breeds that is) that have the instinctual desire to run and keep on running that Huskies have. Most from what I've seen are running to get to something (prey), because they smell something (prey) or because they see something (prey) where to me Huskies just seem to enjoy running. This was very evident in Axle where he'd simply run for the hell of it with no direction or cause. He'd stop to sniff when he accidentally trod in a piece of cow shit but other than that I saw no other prey type behaviours exhibited from him whilst running away. ETA: forgot two words.

My parents have had dogs all of my life. All of them have been well trained, suitable for being of lead with a reliable recall and great dogs to live with. Do they understand the quadrants - no, guess they should never have had dogs for the last 40 years then. Some people just do things "cos they work" with no understanding of why, doesn't necessarily make them a bad owner. On the other hand I know quite afew people that know the quadrants very well and go on and on about them but would I want them near my dogs. Hell no, not if the way their own dogs are trained is an example of how they put their knowledge of quadrants to use! Good job for reading the entire thread, because I didn't mention trainers once, not ever.

I hope that never catches on. I wouldn't buy a puppy from a breeder who does that. From what I've read from him he seems to be a "my way or the highway" type of trainer, he is right, everyone else who disagrees with him is wrong with no shades of grey. Keep reading then Midol. That's not what he's like at all. He's got a healthy ego and strong opinons but he's got years of experience and seeing him chat to trainers, I think an open mind also. I bet you'd be surprised to learn he's not totally against e-collars for example. That's something a lot of people dont' know about him but he is talking about using them aversively only for certain types of behaviour modification. Being a vet, and dealing with problem dogs, his focus is on giving dogs the best start in life to prevent training and behavioural issues. Personally I think some of his ideas are very good. His view is that if you want a pup for a family home, buy a pup from a family home. He thinks pups should be raised inside, with the family and all the sights and sounds of a normal domestic environment. I'd be delighted to buy a pup raised in the manner he describes. Look how many posts we get right here on DOL from new puppy owners struggling with toilet training for a start. I heartilyagree with him on his puppy raising views and there are studies that support his views also. There are studies that support anything and everything. So he is not totally against e-collars, but there are only 1 or 2 people who know how to use them correctly. Let me guess, he knows how to use them correctly doesn't he? Sorry, he comes off as closed minded and believes if he wouldn't do it, then the method is wrong. The fact he is a vet means nothing to me, I no longer consider being a "vet" as a plus when it comes to dog training & behavioural work. It's a neutral attribute and if anything, the only vets I've seen talk use it as a way to make them seem more credible than those without a degree. Regardless, I'd read his books and watch his DVDs. He obviously knows something even if he does seem to oppose any technique that he doesn't personally use & appears to be pretentious. That could just be the way people speak about him though, rather than how he actually is. I doubt that very much. He knew he was speaking to positive trainers in WA. He said exactly what the op said. There may be a place for an e collar but so far he has only met one or two people who need or know how to use them. The pet owner who visits a trainer for a single session or buys one online is a worry. I think that's a load of crap as well. E-collars aren't hard to use. I learnt mine via one session and my dogs are perfectly fine. If you understand the theory & can read your dog then it's not very hard to put into practice.

What drive are they using to pull a sled? Why do they find it so enjoyable to pull sleds, which in turn leads to their desire to run? I have my own beliefs and theories on this, but I want to hear others views.

I hope that never catches on. I wouldn't buy a puppy from a breeder who does that. From what I've read from him he seems to be a "my way or the highway" type of trainer, he is right, everyone else who disagrees with him is wrong with no shades of grey.

No, I was talking about trainers the entire time. I apologise for not making that clear. When it comes to a person not interested in the concepts (and I still think the quadrants are a concept) then tell them it however you want as long as it gets the point across, but I'd expect every trainer to understand them.

Ever taught an obedience class Midol? Why would you need to explain it to someone at an obedience class? Why would they care? - He's anti using the quadrant and thinks that dogs read things in a more binary way - ie, it's either good for dogs or bad for dogs. His criticism of the quadrant was that it doesn't make intuitive sense, and that it's confusing for new people and fodder for pointless trainer arguments. That applies to both trainers and new dog owners. I am only commenting on the trainer side. If a dog TRAINER can not grasp the quadrants then they shouldn't be training.

I don't expect them to pick it up quickly, but to dismiss them as "too hard" is ridiculous. If someone doesn't get it after repeated explanations then clearly DT is not for them. A degree in zooloogy is about as relevant as a degree in accounting is when it comes to training dogs.

5 seconds? You seriously expect training theories to be summarised in 5 seconds. It takes more than 5 seconds to explain luring and luring is one of the most basic things you can do... The 4 quadrants are incredibly intuitive, I don't understand how anyone can have trouble with them. If you passed grade 5 english and maths you should be able to figure it out incredibly quickly. Again, two words. If your intelligence level is so low that the meaning of two words confuse you then dog training isn't for you. Your entitled to your belief but entirely irrelevant in this thread.

Kavik, to me the terminology isn't even that hard. You need to learn what two words mean. Punishment and Reinforcement. If someone can't remember the definitions of two words then I worry about them.

The quadrants are hardly difficult to understand. If you can't understand them, perhaps it would be a wise idea to rehome your dog.

I've got a feeling I hit reply in the wrong thread, but I'm going to work now so will look when I get back

I'm going OT here. I hate people who say my dogs are untrained Wrong. They are trained, in the few things I want them trained in minus a few things we are working on. So my dogs howl when I come in... Ever considered that I TAUGHT them to do it? My dogs run everywhere on lead when walking... Maybe, just possibly, I allow them to do it? They do zoomies in the house? Fantastic! I want them to.

There are none. Even the science degrees only have a few subjects on animal behaviour. In fact, last I looked into zooloogy there was only 2 subjects on animal behaviour. This is why I don't see how a degree is relevant in dog training.

Yes, because dressage gets so much airtime in Australia. Whatever, not really interested in discussing this with you further. Jules, thanks.

Are you saying you have never heard of dressage before? It IS called dancing with dogs/heeling to music......it is just the title of the dance!!!! Do you understand? Of couse I've heard of dressage before. All I know is it is some kind of horse event though. In fact, I'd say the majority of people who aren't into horses won't know what it is. I've never watched it. I am failing to see how it is obvious why it was called dressage. BTW, the page refers to it as Heelwork to Music/Dessage, not Dancing with Dogs.