Curious

[leopuppy04]

LeoPuppy:

What do people think of as "Purely positive"??? Your little tool box sounds very similar to what I have in mine WS - hence the question

I do know a few people who've tried the "purely positive" approach. There's a standing joke that goes around my dog training friends. We reckon you can always spot a purely positive trainer... they're the ones who can't let their dogs offlead because they can't control them.

The standard response mouthed by the purely positive brigade is that for any situation you simply need to give the dog a more positive motivation to do something than not to do it. Show me a motivator more "positive" for many dogs than chasing a kangaroo and I'll be very surprised.

Bottom line for me is that dogs need to know some behaviour has adverse consequences. You do need some negative reinforcement.

and I share many of those sentiments - there is no way a dog can go through life without ever hearing 'no'.....

[Erny]

A "Positive trainer" ... usually will not use a check chain, prong, e collar unless certain circumstances call for it...

My understanding of those people who refer to themselves as "positive trainers" won't use any of the above equipment, under any circumstances regardless. Apart from "positive" seminars I've been to, I believe Delta holds this attitude/protocol as well. I have heard of a few clients where the "positive" methods have not served to remedy certain problematic behaviours, and they have been referred on ..................

[Kelpie-i]

I have met a few people over the years who have come from "purely positive" schools that have unfortunately been asked to leave and given a refund due to their dog showing inappropriate behaviours. These people seek assistance and I can only imagine how upsetting it must be to for them to be told that there is no help for their dog.

Some of these people may then be fortunate enough to find a school/club that will gladly take their dog on board and provide the necessary training to get the dog on track. Yet, it is the very schools/clubs who send these dogs away who are quick to ridicule those schools/clubs who use different methods in order to get the results.

It just doesn't make sense to me.

[Herr Rottweiler]

Forgot to add that I think a combination of positive and negative is a completely natural/normal way for all animals to learn about the world. Do something "right" get a reward, food, warmth, companionship etc, do something "wrong" and go hungry, get eaten, some other physical/mental suffering. Think of a wild dog pack, how do those pups learn right and wrong, if not from a combination of positive and negative outcomes. Same with the way balanced trainers train.

I love it when someone, "gets it".

5 stars!

[MonElite]

A "Positive trainer" ... usually will not use a check chain, prong, e collar unless certain circumstances call for it...

My understanding of those people who refer to themselves as "positive trainers" won't use any of the above equipment, under any circumstances regardless.

Im with Erny - this is also my understanding.

I have been talking a while ago to a friend that is a member of a pure positve list and she showed me a clip of someone doing some work and the dog not really doing what it was supposed to do, the dog simply walked off during the excercise. I said - I dont understand why doesnt this person have the dog on the lead so it cant walk off. Friend explained that the concept is for the dog to work out itself that it needs to be/work with the handler.

Wouldnt this slow the training process down?

[poodlefan]

Leo:

A "Positive trainer" is one that uses 'motivational' methods but doesn't have harsh aversives while training their dogs. Their are reprimands/consequences but not anything physical or 'harsh' ie: a deep growl "AHH" I won't use unless my dog is jumping up on the bench or something similar.... I won't use it if the dog is 'directly engaged' with me - eg: heeling and steps out of position.... A trainer of this sort also usually will not use a check chain, prong, e collar unless certain circumstances call for it... Positive trainers often work on "ignoring incorrect behaviour and rewarding good behaviour". Generally - there is 'no fuss' if the dog makes an error - just placed quietly into position...

Leo, the "purely positive" brigade I know don't use aversives AT ALL. No check chains, no prongs but halti's are fine because they are kind. Pointing out to one of these trainers/owners that halti's are aversive to many dogs ALL the time gets you a blank stare of incomprehension.

Agree with Herr Rottweiler that some of the "purely positive" brigade I've met have been Delta trained.

Edited June 14, 2007 by poodlefan

[Herr Rottweiler]

This is swinging off topic I know but I believe it should be discussed.

On all these threads, there is one thing in common from the more positive minded folks which alarms me. They are always saying that they don't want their dogs to fear them.

I don't like my dogs to behave in a frightened or submissive posture around me, however I do like to know that my dogs have a slight element of fear of me.

I can understand that some may read the above paragraph and be totally shocked by what I said but here's why I know it's a good practice.

It eliminates the instinctive desire to challenge leadership and settles the dog to understand and accept its place in the pack. It knows that if its told to do something then it must be carried out or there are consequences to face.

This is exactly how all animal groups function on earth, including humans which is how and why we manage to maintain control. When there is no element of fear we face the possiblity of anarchy, which is when the postive trainers ring me in secrecy and tell me that their dog wants to eat them, or they just mask the problem and put the dog to sleep.

What does annoy me is when I see the positive evangelists parading that theirs is only one style and then they get their dog round the corner on a prong and tear into it for embarrising them. (Seen it many times).

Balanced trainers have my respect. They get it and they understand that there is a scale to work with which can be altered depending on the individual dog they have to train. On the flip side to this, purely compulsive or purely positive trainers have my contempt. They ruin dogs and fill shelters.

In summary, this is a difficult topic to discuss on a forum where it is prone to misinterpretation from people who don't understand, however it's aimed at those who really do understand animal psychology.

Good topic

[leopuppy04]

A "Positive trainer" ... usually will not use a check chain, prong, e collar unless certain circumstances call for it...

My understanding of those people who refer to themselves as "positive trainers" won't use any of the above equipment, under any circumstances regardless. Apart from "positive" seminars I've been to, I believe Delta holds this attitude/protocol as well. I have heard of a few clients where the "positive" methods have not served to remedy certain problematic behaviours, and they have been referred on ..................

So where does that put me? I would consider myself a positive trainer.... but if my choice was between my dog running through a property fence and getting killed and an e collar - I would use an e collar without blinking. That is if I had no other choices (ie: building another fence, keeping the dog confined etc,etc,etc).

Sometimes - I think a prong is kinder than a check chain - particularly from what I have seen with the level of corrections people give. Will I use one - I hope I never have to, but I *don't* know what the future holds, so I'm never going to say never.

Hmm... and I just thought i'll just say that my dogs for all of their 'masters' positive airy fairy training () - they are extremely well trained and reliable - I don't agree with the fact that 'all/most' positive trained dogs run amok or are not trained or that the only well trained dog can be achieved through my description of a 'traditional' trainer. Dogs learn through consequences- whatever that may be.

[MonElite]

Fear is part of life, if we didnt fear anything the life would be very dangerous.

And its the same in the dog world. Now Im not sure if fear is the right word Herr Rott, but respect certainly is. I like my dogs to respect me. The same with humans. And there is a fine balance between fear and respect in my opinion. Perhaps respect is a bit of fear together with love and understanding.

Pure fear - no this isnt a method of treating human nor animals - well, not for me.

[leopuppy04]

Interesting HR - just one question though - must they fear you or do you want the respect?

I find that you could get the same respect through something like NILIF - you control their universe and I don't think many dogs challenge someone who has good NILIF skills.....

If you are talking about respect - then yep - I agree 110%

A dog feels confident if they know where they stand - and are comfortable in that position. A dog can be considerably stressed if 'forced' (by lack of leadership) into a top dog position but they are natural subordinates .... well that's what I think

[MolassesLass]

Dogs learn through consequences- whatever that may be.

Exactly why Purely-Positive Training is destined to fail IMO.

To me there is:

Purely-Positive Trainers: No corrections at all (negative consequences), just praise for doing the right thing (positive consequences).

Balanced Trainers: Uses appropriate corrections and praise for doing the right thing. (I'd class you in here Leopuppy04).

Negative Trainers: Uses corrections but very little or no praise.

I think to a certain extent the word "positive" when it comes to dog training is now being used to say you aren't a negative trainer rather than that they actually train via the "Purely-Positive" method. I'm a positive trainer but I don't train the Positive method.

ETA: Do dogs really "respect" people or wouldn't "respect" = "fear" for animals?

Back to just reading.

Edited June 14, 2007 by molasseslass

[JulesP]

Lol Leo I wouldn't consider myself a purely positive trainer but would not use a e collar or prong collar (or halti or correction collar)! I think that there is always an alternative. Note that I don't have the breed of dog that would require a prong collar either, I am not in danger of being pulled over!

Can't think of a reason my I would need a e collar. I don't consider a normal farm fence adequate safe fencing for a dog so therefore would always have proper dog fencing (one of my pet hates). Wouldn't use it to train a re-call.

[poodlefan]

I'd like to consider myself to be a balanced (I call that positive as opposed to "purely positive") trainer.

I don't want my dogs to fear me, even a little, but I do want them to respect me amd to know that the consequences of some behaviour will be adverse. I know some of my friends consider my approach to be on the side of being too soft and I am lucky to have dogs that is OK with.

I hate seeing things go wrong in obedience and agility and the dog starting to shut down and begin appeasing behaviour. In my view, for that dog, the trainer has got the balance of training methods too far skewed towards negativite reinforcement. I particularly hate seeing bad temper taken out on dogs and it happens far too often for my liking.

Edited June 14, 2007 by poodlefan

[Herr Rottweiler]

ETA: Do dogs really "respect" people or wouldn't "respect" = "fear" for animals?

5 stars for your thinking

Respect is a human trait that we liken our relationship with our dogs. Even though I would use the term respect, in my opinion it's gained through an element of fear.

Don't forget guys that fear is not limited by physical pain. What about the fear of having something taken away or the fear of being abandoned. Don't think so 2 dimensional.

[Kelpie-i]

HR: I don't like my dogs to behave in a frightened or submissive posture around me, however I do like to know that my dogs have a slight element of fear of me.

Totally agree HR. It should be a "healthy" fear, one of respect as opposed to one of fear for life (if you get what I'm saying).

Leopuppy: I find that you could get the same respect through something like NILIF - you control their universe and I don't think many dogs challenge someone who has good NILIF skills.....

This is not always going to be the case. Good leadership sets the foundation for respect however some dogs will continue to test the boundaries in certain situations throughout their life, whether it be whilst out in public or in the training ground. If the owner has good leadership and handling skills, then that owner will be able to take control and rectify the situation more easily.

Didn't Barbara Woodhouse make mention of "purely positive" trainers in one of her books many years ago? I cannot remember exactly what was written but she predicted that there would be many more uncontrollable dogs as a result of the "new trend" in dog training.

[JulesP]

Poodlefan the dogs could also just be really soft. I've never touched my border but just a look can have him cowering on the gound. Makes training interesting sometimes!

[Herr Rottweiler]

Kelpie-i

5 stars... you get it

[poodlefan]

HR:

Respect is a human trait that we liken our relationship with our dogs. Even though I would use the term respect, in my opinion it's gained through an element of fear.

Don't forget guys that fear is not limited by physical pain. What about the fear of having something taken away or the fear of being abandoned. Don't think so 2 dimensional.

Respect: deference or esteem. I want my dogs to defer to my wishes because they rate me as higher than them in the pack order.

Fear: terror, dread or horror. Not how I want my relationship to be based.

Maybe to an extent we are using words that we feel more comfortable with to express our training philosophies. Maybe fear is down the bottom of this somewhere HR but when I consider effective leadership (primate or canine), the leader rules quietly and authoritively without being a physical bully or creating fear. The alpha dog in my house has never bitten or snapped at any dog. He's far too subtle. The alpha wanna be on the other hand is bully.

[MolassesLass]

PF, I think the key is to ask yourself WHY the dogs defers to you ("respects you"). Because it "fears" the consequences otherwise surely (perhaps "dislikes" is the better word given the definition you've posted of fear)?

Maybe alpha-wannabes need to actually perform the correction rather than just posture it will happen (like a true alpha will) because tha pack doesn't "fear" the consequences, meaning the dog won't submit and thus forcing the alpha-wannabe to actually challenge.

I'm not a good dog trainer but I love discussing and theorising about behaviour, hope you all don't mind.

[Herr Rottweiler]

PF, you're using the word, "fear" as an extreme which is not what I explained and you're being specific to your own dogs where i'm generalising