Ndtf V Delta Instructors Course

[Cosmolo]

Same here Nek

Why is stress such a bad thing? Isn't stress only a bad thing when it cannot be overcome or dealt with. Learning is stressful- regardless of how its done. Teaching pups and dogs to cope with stress is NOT a bad thing. Its the basis of socialisation. If there was never stress, nothing would change, no one would learn. Our job is to minimise NOT eliminate stress.

[Kelpie-i]

According to Delta book wolves do not use positive punishment, everything is done through body language and posturing. They never fight or do body contact apparently. I was looking for the part where it said they had an in built treat pouch but I couldnt find that part.

I'd love to know where they base this information from. I visited a pack of wolves a couple of years ago in Indiannapolis and let me tell you there was some serious body contact going on....I even have a heap footage of it on DVD to prove it.

I keep in contact with the park via Facebook and apparently they had to remove the then alpha male because his sons were fighting for top position...they almost killed him!

Oh yeah...these were captive wolves so probably doesn't apply.

Dogs are not wolves!

Edited April 19, 2010 by Kelpie-i

[Nekhbet]

frankly I dont know how anyone who has every seen two dogs interact could believe it. Or at least question its validity.

Oh yeah...these were captive wolves so probably doesn't apply

and the wolves in the documentaries are hamming it up for the camera

[Staranais]

I believe she likes me to communicate with her clearly. There's absolutely no reason for me to muddy the waters by trying convoluted methods when a stern glance, or an "uh uh", is all she needs to understand that the boundaries are still in place round here, and she better try another avenue for getting attention or reward.

I think Lindsay and you are talking about two different things, here. A lot of things that people think are P+ are interruptors or NRMs.

I add it to the situation and it decreases the behaviour. It works not by being a conditioned removal of reward, but directly because I am saying "uh" and scowling at her, and to a social animal, that's unpleasant. That's P+, not a NRM, in my book.

Just because some P+ are so mild that they are (IMO) perceived by the dog more as communication or guidance than as a threat, they're still punishment.

I don't understand the concept of pussy footing around avoiding any sort of punishment in case I hurt her feelings by telling her "uh uh". I know her too well for that, I know how to communicate with her without breaking her.

See above. I sure as hell will pussy foot and think real hard before I decide to create an inhibition. That's not something to mess around with IMO.

Really? I like my dog to have inhibitions. Inhibitions against biting me, biting my family, biting strangers, against chasing bikes, chasing the neighbourhood kids, humping me, humping the neighbourhood kids, humping other dogs, against eating my cats, against chasing stock... there are all sorts of things she's experimented with in the past, and that I like her being inhibited from doing. It's very easy and quick to tell her that I don't like those things, and once those limits are in place then she and I can spend our time concentrating on the fun things.

[Prydenjoy]

Hmm it's a shame people will pick and choose what they want to hear from a post without actually acknowledging everything that was said. I hope the OP got the information she needed in amongst all the OT garbage

[Bubitty]

Been reading this thread and am pretty puzzled so I want to ask some questions.

Is yelling at your dog considered to be negative?

The very first time Bitty tried to take something off my coffee table I ROARED at her very loudly and she has never touched anything that does not belong to her since. Thinking about it she did look quite scared after being yelled at but now at 11 months I am pretty convinced she is not scared of me as she is a very cheerful little thing!

Also my older boy, Bubby has never ever told Bitty off for anything and she is really a menace with him (bouncing, pouncing on ears, jumping all over his body, climbing on him) so I sometimes wonder that if he did tell her off once, whether she would be better behaved around him?

[Herr Rottweiler]

Yes some of these posts are just getting silly and petty now!

Poodlefan..that comment about dogs not using P+ on each other...where did you pull that one from?

In all my years on spending such a lot of time around dogs and puppies..i can assure you they most certainly dog! They use P+ in the quick snaps and R- in the pin and holds.

[pipsqueak]

Poodlefan..that comment about dogs not using P+ on each other...where did you pull that one from?

I think that poodlefan meant PP = "purely positive", not positive punishment...

[Herr Rottweiler]

ahh ok..i stand corrected then!

Thanks for pointing that out

[huski]

If a head halter is properly counter conditioned it should not bother the dog to wear it. I had a Boxer on a head halter once, it did fit. There is the option of an easy walk or sporn harness, which does not go over the head but prevents pulling. The "aversive" is in direct proportion to the dogs attempts at pulling, not a (possibly poorly timed) "attack" from its handler. I did say I may or may not recommend one, I wouldn't if there were a more gentle way around it. In my experience people with big out of control dogs don't benefit from a check chain anyway, if the dog is big enough and strong enough to drag its owner, the owner is probably not big enough and strong enough to give an effective check. The head halter is NOT a training tool, the idea is to work with the dog to reinforce the correct behavior, the only reason the head halter is there is so that, if the dog is too big and strong for the handler and it slips up, the handler can more easily manage the situation. I personally do prefer the no pull harnesses, however, I do see more and more people every day walking down the street with their dogs on head halters, the dogs look happy, the owners look happy, everyone is happy.

I don't know how anyone could claim a head collar or anti pull harness are not aversive, they have to be, otherwise they wouldn't work. I personally don't see them as any different to using a prong or a check chain or a martingale or e-collar or any other correctional tool.

[Prydenjoy]

I don't particularly like head halters either, much prefer the easy walk harness, but in the case that the dog is too strong for the owner they can help control an unruly dog. I never suggested that everyone should put their dog on a head halter, just as no one here is suggesting every dog owner buy a prong collar and use it.

Honestly I don't see why people here can't just accept that not everyone has the same opinions as them. Seems like a whole lot of ranting and raving for the sake of it really. It's not getting anyone anywhere, nor is it answering the OP's question.

[huski]

I don't have a problem with the use of those tools, if and when appropriate, but the idea that they aren't aversive or are more positive or less harsh than a check chain (for example).

[Erny]

Honestly I don't see why people here can't just accept that not everyone has the same opinions as them. Seems like a whole lot of ranting and raving for the sake of it really. It's not getting anyone anywhere, nor is it answering the OP's question.

I agree that everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but if they are going to express it publicly why shouldn't the flaws (or otherwise) in that opinion be discussed? Otherwise, what's the point of that opinion being expressed publicly anyway?

I think the OP's question was fairly clearly and well answered inside the first page or two of this thread.

That is :

NDTF teaches all four quadrants of learning/training.

Delta not only doesn't but also has its own agenda which prohibits the discussion and use of certain training methodologies and training tools.

[Staff'n'Toller]

Delta teach the theory of ALL four quadrants of operant conditioning, otherwise I wouldn't have 2 compulsory texts sitting on my bookshelf.

They don't give practical demonstrations of R- or P+ and they advise that if you are not comfortable or experienced and a dog definitely needs aversives in some capacity that you refer to someone who is.

Can that be IT on the subject?!!!! (I don't hold out much hope unfortunately.)

[Guest Willow]

I've skim read the last few pages, so forgive me if this point has been covered, but if anyone had a problem with a trainer affiliated to a professional body, be it Delta or NDTF, surely it would be better to report them to their overseeing body so that they can be held accountable for their actions, rather than tarring either organisation with the "all trainers from this organisation are rubbish" brush on a public forum????

I'm sure there are some really crappy & really excellent trainers coming out of both training courses, and I'm also sure the organisations would like to know about it if individual trainers are dragging down the reputation of the course or the organisation.

[Kelpie-i]

Bub: Is yelling at your dog considered to be negative?

No, as far as the quadrants of learning it is what is termed Positive Punishment, because you are giving (hence the word Positive which is to add + in the scientific point) a punisher or something unpleasant to your dog.

Positive and negative are based on scientific principles of adding and removing....not emotive based of good and bad

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

If a head halter is properly counter conditioned it should not bother the dog to wear it. I had a Boxer on a head halter once, it did fit. There is the option of an easy walk or sporn harness, which does not go over the head but prevents pulling. The "aversive" is in direct proportion to the dogs attempts at pulling, not a (possibly poorly timed) "attack" from its handler. I did say I may or may not recommend one, I wouldn't if there were a more gentle way around it. In my experience people with big out of control dogs don't benefit from a check chain anyway, if the dog is big enough and strong enough to drag its owner, the owner is probably not big enough and strong enough to give an effective check. The head halter is NOT a training tool, the idea is to work with the dog to reinforce the correct behavior, the only reason the head halter is there is so that, if the dog is too big and strong for the handler and it slips up, the handler can more easily manage the situation. I personally do prefer the no pull harnesses, however, I do see more and more people every day walking down the street with their dogs on head halters, the dogs look happy, the owners look happy, everyone is happy.

I don't know how anyone could claim a head collar or anti pull harness are not aversive, they have to be, otherwise they wouldn't work. I personally don't see them as any different to using a prong or a check chain or a martingale or e-collar or any other correctional tool.

i totally agree with this statement. they are an aversive.

[Erny]

I've skim read the last few pages, so forgive me if this point has been covered, but if anyone had a problem with a trainer affiliated to a professional body, be it Delta or NDTF, surely it would be better to report them to their overseeing body so that they can be held accountable for their actions, rather than tarring either organisation with the "all trainers from this organisation are rubbish" brush on a public forum????

Hi Willow. It's too many pages of posts to go through I know. I probably would only skim read a portion of it if I was coming in new to it, myself.

But just to clarify and answer to your post - it was made fairly clear throughout the thread that there are trainers, and then there are trainers, regardless of what camp they sprung from.

It is the course topics each of the two orgs (NDTF -vs- Delta) cover and give experience with that is truly the point of discussion here. Conversation just tends to meander a bit, especially when something has been answered earlier in the piece .

Edited April 19, 2010 by Erny

[poodlefan]

I don't particularly like head halters either, much prefer the easy walk harness, but in the case that the dog is too strong for the owner they can help control an unruly dog. I never suggested that everyone should put their dog on a head halter, just as no one here is suggesting every dog owner buy a prong collar and use it.

Honestly I don't see why people here can't just accept that not everyone has the same opinions as them. Seems like a whole lot of ranting and raving for the sake of it really. It's not getting anyone anywhere, nor is it answering the OP's question.

I accept that people's opinons differ, ESPECIALLY on training issues. Its when balanced training gets labelled or judged as inferior, cruel (when it sn't) or a short cut that I will beg to differ. To hear certain pieces of equipment described as "barbaric" by people who've not studied them, seen them or tested them but who are mimicing the philosophy of their parent organisaton says "dogma" to me and I don't like dogma no matter who's sprouting it.

When that same organisation promotes the use of another aversive training tool but denies that it is and ignores the advice of professionals that it can cause long term harm to a dog then I seriously wonder about WTF their agenda really is.

[Guest Willow]

I've skim read the last few pages, so forgive me if this point has been covered, but if anyone had a problem with a trainer affiliated to a professional body, be it Delta or NDTF, surely it would be better to report them to their overseeing body so that they can be held accountable for their actions, rather than tarring either organisation with the "all trainers from this organisation are rubbish" brush on a public forum????

Hi Willow. It's too many pages of posts to go through I know. I probably would only skim read a portion of it if I was coming in new to it, myself.

But just to clarify and answer to your post - it was made fairly clear throughout the thread that there are trainers, and then there are trainers, regardless of what camp they sprung from.

It is the course topics each of the two orgs (NDTF -vs- Delta) cover and give experience with that is truly the point of discussion here. Conversation just tends to meander a bit, especially when something has been answered earlier in the piece .

Cheers Erny....I tried to read it all and then my brain started to hurt