An Interesting Link

[SkySoaringMagpie]

When I make reference to "methodology" I tend to be referring to "Positive Reinforcement", "Positive Punishment", "Negative Reinforcement" and "Negative Punishment". There are training "techniques" within each of those methodologies, some of which I'd use and others that I wouldn't. So by me embracing all methodologies doesn't mean I'd use all techniques.

Makes sense.

I suspect much of the debate here (with a couple of exceptions) is about application as well. There is a degree of elitism that is hard to get around. I mean, you do need skill and self control to train appropriately.

Yes - I see the point here as well. No matter how much one might worry about who will apply what and how though, shouldn't mean that a whole "methodology" should be out-lawed when in itself it may prove for some dogs to be the one thing that keeps them safe (as well as other people safe) from harm.

I agree with this, I think where the friction often comes in is people's differing judgements about the extent to which harder techniques should be used on softer and/or younger dogs and softer techniques on older and/or harder dogs. Bearing in mind that hard and soft is also debatable ground. That said, I think people sometimes don't have the background to make a judgment and are assessing the technique against a wrong impression of the dog (or against "everydog" or against the profile of the dogs they see most often or their own baggage, etc etc etc).

When you poke beneath the surface you often find more agreement than disagreement. I can't think of anyone here who has said a check chain on a 10 week old is a good idea for example. The tricky part is that the limitations to an application aren't always readily apparent to a casual observer.

[Quickasyoucan]

When I make reference to "methodology" I tend to be referring to "Positive Reinforcement", "Positive Punishment", "Negative Reinforcement" and "Negative Punishment". There are training "techniques" within each of those methodologies, some of which I'd use and others that I wouldn't. So by me embracing all methodologies doesn't mean I'd use all techniques.

Makes sense.

I suspect much of the debate here (with a couple of exceptions) is about application as well. There is a degree of elitism that is hard to get around. I mean, you do need skill and self control to train appropriately.

Yes - I see the point here as well. No matter how much one might worry about who will apply what and how though, shouldn't mean that a whole "methodology" should be out-lawed when in itself it may prove for some dogs to be the one thing that keeps them safe (as well as other people safe) from harm.

I agree with this, I think where the friction often comes in is people's differing judgements about the extent to which harder techniques should be used on softer and/or younger dogs and softer techniques on older and/or harder dogs. Bearing in mind that hard and soft is also debatable ground. That said, I think people sometimes don't have the background to make a judgment and are assessing the technique against a wrong impression of the dog (or against "everydog" or against the profile of the dogs they see most often or their own baggage, etc etc etc).

When you poke beneath the surface you often find more agreement than disagreement. I can't think of anyone here who has said a check chain on a 10 week old is a good idea for example. The tricky part is that the limitations to an application aren't always readily apparent to a casual observer.

Which is where I think good non-personal debate like this is of value, after all there are more than a few people who lurk on these forums but don't necessarily post. Even if one person gets something out of it is is of value, but if they visit and just see people slagging each other off they probably wouldn't take it seriously.

I have already learned a lot by just reading what is put here, you don't follow it by the book but you weigh up the pros and cons of aspects for yourself and, if necessary, get professional assistance. Hey 20 years ago in the UK check chains were the norm, I am pretty sure we would have used them on our young dogs, (not necessarily at 10 weeks as they weren't out walking then) but young dogs. But things have moved on and people become more aware. And good discussion is part of the education process. :D

I am also of the "camp" that would even go to see something I think I disagree with just to make sure my disagreement was founded. I am not talking dangerous, extreme or hurtful or illegal things here but methods that I might not necessarily think would work. I prefer to be proven wrong than just take things on face value.

ETA: Anita I met a lady in the woods with a rescue today who was a cross with a short coated Saluki. Didn't realise they existed. So learned something new :D

Edited July 23, 2009 by Quickasyoucan

[Erny]

I am also of the "camp" that would even go to see something I think I disagree with just to make sure my disagreement was founded.

I do that :D. But also to 'check in' in case there is a better 'way' (technique) or understanding that I might learn.

I think you learn more 'arguing' your belief (provided you can argue it but remain open-minded enough to acknowledge and even concede some points, even if they don't agree with your own) rather than merely talking to or with the 'converted'. I've been accused and thought of as argumentative for this reason, but it is really my way of checking on my own beliefs, to see if they are solid. But I've also been accused of being argumentative when I've questioned things I don't understand fully and also as my way of checking that I do understand fully. And of course, any 'argument' doesn't have to be with another person. You can argue with yourself by tossing what you've heard around in your head as well.

Edited July 23, 2009 by Erny

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

I am also of the "camp" that would even go to see something I think I disagree with just to make sure my disagreement was founded.

I do that . But also to 'check in' in case there is a better 'way' (technique) or understanding that I might learn.

I think you learn more 'arguing' your belief (provided you can argue it but remain open-minded enough to acknowledge and even concede some points, even if they don't agree with your own) rather than merely talking to or with the 'converted'. I've been accused and thought of as argumentative for this reason, but it is really my way of checking on my own beliefs, to see if they are solid. But I've also been accused of being argumentative when I've questioned things I don't understand fully and also as my way of checking that I do understand fully. And of course, any 'argument' doesn't have to be with another person. You can argue with yourself by tossing what you've heard around in your head as well.

i do this as well. it is always not personal but sometimes i need to ask questions or make statements to see if it is really what i think or have learned.

the point about an open mind is vital because if i don't have that then i am just being argumentative for the sake of it.

i don't know how to attach more than one quote but i totally agree with AsQuickAsYouCan, a good non-personal debate is great and i have also learned a lot from this post.

better than that, i have had to really think about what i do believe in and challenge myself in some of those ideas.

sometimes it is very easy for me (and probably others) to just accept what i know as being correct because of habit and a good jolt to this helps me be a better dog owner, which is really what i want to be.

i have had dogs for many (too many :D ) years and my methods have changed as i learn more and as community attitudes change. i like to keep up with the latest new thing, which is sometimes eerily like the old!!! the end result is to try to find the best way for me help my dogs reach their full potential.

i would like more discussions that have been like this one, thank you all again!!

eta AQAYC, i am also originally from the UK and i also remember how we used to train our dogs, we often just opened the front door and let them out so they could go to the toilet then we would whistle for them to come home :D no picking up of dog pooh and no thought that they would come to any harm

Edited July 23, 2009 by Jaxx'sBuddy

[Quickasyoucan]

eta AQAYC, i am also originally from the UK and i also remember how we used to train our dogs, we often just opened the front door and let them out so they could go to the toilet then we would whistle for them to come home :D no picking up of dog pooh and no thought that they would come to any harm

Yeah unfortunately the Brits are still not good on the picking up poo front but that's very very off topic :D

[SkySoaringMagpie]

ETA: Anita I met a lady in the woods with a rescue today who was a cross with a short coated Saluki. Didn't realise they existed. So learned something new :D

Ooh, now I'm going to go completely off topic. Were you in the UK? It's not too uncommon there I understand because travellers and other fringe breeders breed longdogs for lamping and typically use saluki/greyhound crosses.

The book "Walking Ollie" is about a saluki/greyhound cross rescue. And yeah, the writer also does not pick up poo!!!

This is the author's blog where he has pictures of his dogs, the grey grizzle is a pure smooth Saluki: http://walkingollie.wordpress.com/

Sadly Ollie died last year, don't read the entry about that without a full box of tissues. It looks like he has a gorgeous new rescue lurcher tho'. :D

/off topic

[corvus]

I have already learned a lot by just reading what is put here, you don't follow it by the book but you weigh up the pros and cons of aspects for yourself and, if necessary, get professional assistance. Hey 20 years ago in the UK check chains were the norm, I am pretty sure we would have used them on our young dogs, (not necessarily at 10 weeks as they weren't out walking then) but young dogs. But things have moved on and people become more aware. And good discussion is part of the education process. :D

Oh god, I am so relieved someone said that.

Geez, nothing gets my hackles up more than an emotional argument. Except maybe an emotional argument in which I get accused of doing something I couldn't even imagine doing.

I don't come into these discussions to try to convert people who I know have already made up their minds about something. I do it to share my experiences in the hopes that people will go into things with more information. No one ever notices that I've shared the troubles I've had with positive methods as well. It's more for the lurkers than the regulars.

It's not really methods that I'm interested in, but attitudes. I don't like corrections because I'm the exact kind of person that would have been Penny if I were a dog. If that makes sense. :D I always said Penny was a little too much like me. I strive to treat animals gently because I would want to be treated gently. Corrections in themselves aren't ncessarily bad, but they do often make me an unpleasant person because I can't always do it with neutrality. As much as you choose a training method that suits your dog, you also have to pick one that will suit you. If I'm conflicted about physical corrections, then my dog is probably going to find it confusing if I use them. You have to be true to yourself. I think that when you are true to yourself, that's when your dog gets you and you start finding magic.

[Quickasyoucan]

ETA: Anita I met a lady in the woods with a rescue today who was a cross with a short coated Saluki. Didn't realise they existed. So learned something new :D

Ooh, now I'm going to go completely off topic. Were you in the UK? It's not too uncommon there I understand because travellers and other fringe breeders breed longdogs for lamping and typically use saluki/greyhound crosses.

The book "Walking Ollie" is about a saluki/greyhound cross rescue. And yeah, the writer also does not pick up poo!!!

This is the author's blog where he has pictures of his dogs, the grey grizzle is a pure smooth Saluki: http://walkingollie.wordpress.com/

Sadly Ollie died last year, don't read the entry about that without a full box of tissues. It looks like he has a gorgeous new rescue lurcher tho'.

/off topic

Sorry off topic but indulge us :D Yes I am in South East England. I met the lady with the dog again today. He is a rescue and the reason I found out about the smooth saluki bit was I was bemused by the dog's size too big to be a whippet but really too small to be a grey unless it was a v small one. She said saluki breeders can tell immediately because of the dogs ears. Apparently she entered her dog in a fun type country fair dog show recently and the judge happened to be a saluki breeder who told her all about correct weight etc and said she had a very nice dog, albeit a cross. I watched the dog do zoomies round a field today just because he could, very very fast and very impressive. I also met a rescue Lurcher as well, seems they crop up in rescue quite often. The saluki cross was beautiful to watch in motion. :D

[Cosmolo]

I think here are lots of good points being made here. And I think the use of emotive language has a big part to play in getting people's backs up- especially when its a generalisation or something not being properly understood. And i have alot more arguing going on in my head than ever with other people