On The Effective Use Of Punishment

[SkySoaringMagpie]

We actually have some "purely positive" trainers in SA Aidan, that won't do any jobs relating to aggression and eject dogs/owners from their training classes if any aggression surfaces. Some also reject training applications from GSD, Rottweiler and Doberman owners and crossbreeds of That "half" I would question their training ability in general???. The "good" trainers will do any job presented and have the experience and methods at hand to deal with the specific situation required.

Are you talking about a situation where a dog is deemed to require specialist one on one training before it can participate in a standard obedience class with other dogs?

Aggression is a common reason for that. A person can't be expected to run a 1 hour class with a heavy syllabus and 12 other students and at the same time provide intensive training to Fluffy who wants to eat her class members' faces. Someone has to work on an individual basis with Fluffy and her owner first so that Fluffy can participate politely and effectively in the class.

I would only have an issue with someone telling a person they could not attend a standard class if that trainer did not go on to offer one on one sessions themselves, or refer the person to an expert in aggression. Me, I'd refer to an expert. I'm a volunteer with a career outside dog world. I'm good at teaching life skills to your average dog, I'm no expert in aggression tho' I manage a multi-dog household with all that entails. There is nothing wrong with playing to your strengths and knowing your limitations. God knows I'd rather someone say "I can't help you with that but I know this person who can" than barrel in full of ego and bugger it up. And FWIW, I have referred people on to aggression specialists who use correction.

[Erny]

A person can't be expected to run a 1 hour class with a heavy syllabus and 12 other students and at the same time provide intensive training to Fluffy who wants to eat her class members' faces. Someone has to work on an individual basis with Fluffy and her owner first so that Fluffy can participate politely and effectively in the class.

I agree with this. For dogs with behaviour issues - be it aggression or fear without aggression, I like to do one-on-one consults with the owner and dog before they join our classes.

For one, there are times when any group of dogs/people is too high an intensity for the dog to cope with and if it is possible prefer to work on day to day lower intensity situations until the owner gets a handle on how to apply the recommended strategies and until the dog begins to understand what is required and through the strategies programmed at consultation level, begins to increase its self-confidence and confidence in the owner's abilities.

For two, it means that when the owner comes to class, he/she will know what they need to do and when and for a good part do not require one-on-one assistance (other than a bit of help along the way, as you do for any member of class anyway) throughout the class time itself.

But I do understand what Diablo is saying - I know of Clubs who do actively turn their backs on problematic dogs. I know of a Club or two who have recommended pts, when the only thing wrong was lack of leadership and the inability (or preferred avoidance) to apply a well timed correction.

Edited January 10, 2010 by Erny

[Diablo]

A person can't be expected to run a 1 hour class with a heavy syllabus and 12 other students and at the same time provide intensive training to Fluffy who wants to eat her class members' faces. Someone has to work on an individual basis with Fluffy and her owner first so that Fluffy can participate politely and effectively in the class.

I agree with this. For dogs with behaviour issues - be it aggression or fear without aggression, I like to do one-on-one consults with the owner and dog before they join our classes.

For one, there are times when any group of dogs/people is too high an intensity for the dog to cope with and if it is possible prefer to work on day to day lower intensity situations until the owner gets a handle on how to apply the recommended strategies and until the dog begins to understand what is required and through the strategies programmed at consultation level, begins to increase its self-confidence and confidence in the owner's abilities.

For two, it means that when the owner comes to class, he/she will know what they need to do and when and for a good part do not require one-on-one assistance (other than a bit of help along the way, as you do for any member of class anyway) throughout the class time itself.

But I do understand what Diablo is saying - I know of Clubs who do actively turn their backs on problematic dogs. I know of a Club or two who have recommended pts, when the only thing wrong was lack of leadership and the inability (or preferred avoidance) to apply a well timed correction.

That was my "exact" reference Erny especially from some clubs heavily promoting purely positive training. It's almost a case of selecting dogs that fit with their training methods and most likely to achieve. Eject the dogs that are unlikely to achieve on those methods which lessens the failure rate for that club. I know of several dogs that have been deemed untrainable and recommended to be PTS by these clubs and have been successfully rehabilitated by competent trainers using methods required for that particular dog.

[m-j]

I know of several dogs that have been deemed untrainable and recommended to be PTS by these clubs and have been successfully rehabilitated by competent trainers using methods required for that particular dog.

I can actually say the same but going the opposite way with a service dog that was nearly kicked out of the police force, positive methods were applied and the dog got to keep his job.

cheers

M-J

[Erny]

I can actually say the same but going the opposite way with a service dog that was nearly kicked out of the police force, positive methods were applied and the dog got to keep his job.

Unfortunately yes - it can happen both ways. Which is why having an open mind along with a good broad knowledge of different techniques and when and how to apply them according to what would work the best for the dog, taking the owner into account also, is a good thing.

Edited January 10, 2010 by Erny

[Aidan]

Half of the clicker and treat trainers will and do run a mile when faced with seriously aggressive dogs or at times deem them untrainable.

I'm glad you said "half"! I must be in the other half But to be completely honest, you cannot possibly use 'purely positive' methods with any fear or aggression case, there is necessarily an aversive involved in whatever the fear-inducing stimulus is.

We actually have some "purely positive" trainers in SA Aidan, that won't do any jobs relating to aggression and eject dogs/owners from their training classes if any aggression surfaces. Some also reject training applications from GSD, Rottweiler and Doberman owners and crossbreeds of That "half" I would question their training ability in general???. The "good" trainers will do any job presented and have the experience and methods at hand to deal with the specific situation required.

A good trainer does the best thing by the dog and it's family, my opinion. Nearly all of my clients are referred from other qualified people who feel that the dog would be better with me at that time. I don't think they are bad trainers at all, they just have different skills. Same as I would be a terrible agility or obedience trainer, I just don't have any high-level experience with those activities and have decided not to focus my efforts there. If someone came to me looking for those skills I would refer them on.

[corvus]

Corvus, stupid comments as above which I responed need to be highlighted and answered, so what I suggest that you do is screen ALL the posts that don't relate to the topic instead of singling out the debates that you can't win or disagree with

Oh, I've got you figured out. *adds another notch*

The thing is, for some reason Diablo thinks this thread is about purely positive trainers - none of which are on this board (or if they are they are too smart to make themselves known) and hey, the topic is actually the effective use of punishment - and has responded by attacking said trainers. Presumably if Diablo is so supportive of punishments they might have something useful to say about Steve White's Rules of Punishment and whether they agree with them all or not and why.

Several people have pointed out the rules that have led them to NOT using punishments. That is relevant and I am glad they contributed. This dissing of trainers that are either hypothetical or not on the board to defend themselves is really drifting from the original topic.

M-J has pointed out that even following the rules to the letter can result in an ineffective punishment. M-J, I can't speak for Steve White, but I would suggest that your case may have been an exception to the rule. I agree that 100% is a tall order for anything in the real world, but I still agree with the rule because I think in the vast majority of cases it is key to the effectiveness of that punishment. I know that from experience.

[Diablo]

Corvus, stupid comments as above which I responed need to be highlighted and answered, so what I suggest that you do is screen ALL the posts that don't relate to the topic instead of singling out the debates that you can't win or disagree with

Oh, I've got you figured out. *adds another notch*

The thing is, for some reason Diablo thinks this thread is about purely positive trainers - none of which are on this board (or if they are they are too smart to make themselves known) and hey, the topic is actually the effective use of punishment - and has responded by attacking said trainers. Presumably if Diablo is so supportive of punishments they might have something useful to say about Steve White's Rules of Punishment and whether they agree with them all or not and why.

Several people have pointed out the rules that have led them to NOT using punishments. That is relevant and I am glad they contributed. This dissing of trainers that are either hypothetical or not on the board to defend themselves is really drifting from the original topic.

M-J has pointed out that even following the rules to the letter can result in an ineffective punishment. M-J, I can't speak for Steve White, but I would suggest that your case may have been an exception to the rule. I agree that 100% is a tall order for anything in the real world, but I still agree with the rule because I think in the vast majority of cases it is key to the effectiveness of that punishment. I know that from experience.

It's also of relevence to debate the reasons for people being led not to use punishments which I have responded. I don't know what Ginnea Pigs has do with the topic Corvus do you???

[m-j]

I agree that 100% is a tall order for anything in the real world,

Especially if that "thing" is able to problem solve.

cheers

M-J