Koehler Training In Sydney?

[Kippy]

Maybe as part of your research , arrange to meet up with some trainers, and see what they can do? The more practical info you have under your belt, the more likely you are to choose the best training method for this little pup

That's what she is doing from my interpretation of her post, looking for trainers who do the full monte, not the one's restrictive in methods and tools, she's been there and done that with the worse result possible.

[wuffles]

Maybe as part of your research , arrange to meet up with some trainers, and see what they can do? The more practical info you have under your belt, the more likely you are to choose the best training method for this little pup

That's what she is doing from my interpretation of her post, looking for trainers who do the full monte, not the one's restrictive in methods and tools, she's been there and done that with the worse result possible.

The Koehler method is VERY restrictive from what I understand.

[Weasels]

Who suggested giving a dog a hiding?

You did, but you don't seem to think giving a dog an occasional hiding is abuse. Not sure about Australia but giving your kid a hiding in New Zealand will see you before the courts, and rightfully so.

I didn't, the "hiding" was related to children, not dogs, and just as an illustration. Poor choice of words on my part.

To extend the human metaphor - growing up my brother was a troublemaker and a bit stubborn. Sometimes the only way to get him to listen was a smack on the butt. Not abuse IMO.

I however was genreally a pretty good kid. Once I pushed my parents too far and got a smack. By all reports I completely fell apart emotionally and my parents resolved then and there to never smack me again. If they had continued to smack me knowing the effect it has on me and given my general temperament, that may have been a bit abusive.

I know if someone used a physical correction (like a smack with a belt) on my boy dog, their relationship would never be the same again. IMO You'd want to be damn sure you've got a dog with the temperament to handle physical corrections before you tried them if you valued your dog-handler bond at all.

[ursus]

Kippy summarised the thread quite well. I don't want to hurt my dog. I do not like to jerk the leash, yell or do other unpleasant things. I am all for positive methods and ancouragement and reward. However, I also want to be able to get results when positive methods hit the wall. By results I mean companion dog that I can take for a walk without worrying about her attacking a child or running across the road.

My logic extrapolates from raising children. You know how children spell "love"? "T-I-M-E"! So I spend a lot of time with them: play, talk, listen, walk etc. A Encouragement and reward are the key. However, some things are off limits. For example, if a kid starts a tantrum in a shop because he wants a toy - he will be punished: no TV for three days or something along the lines. If he repeats the behavior - he will be smacked with sufficient intensity, so that next time he starts thinking of repeating the exercise me looking at him will get the idea out of his head. Using rewards in this situation is nothing more than a blackmail: he will behave as long as he gets what he wants. No, certain thing are non-negotiable. Carrot and stick, as old as the world itself. Obviously, I also have many obligations in this relationship. And guess what, we are still great buddies! I love and respect him and he loves and respects me.

I think if I treat my dog the same way I treat my kids, this dog's life is not too bad.

[Aidan3]

Interesting thread. It will be hard to have an open and frank discussion on the Koehler method with no agreement on what constitutes a reward or a correction. The heart-warming anecdotes about Koehler's success might also require some verification. Very early on I met a Koehler trained instructor, he had already started to move on. This is not just a matter of times changing, but changing for a reason. What was considered success in the obedience ring back then would be cringe-worthy today.

[Tassie]

What's martingale, if you don't mind me asking?

It's a kind of limited slip collar - very useful for growing puppies, as the tightening is limited, but they can't wsily back out of them, if they were inclined to try.

Looks something like this picture though you can get them with the smaller bit as chain rather than fabric.

[Kippy]

Maybe as part of your research , arrange to meet up with some trainers, and see what they can do? The more practical info you have under your belt, the more likely you are to choose the best training method for this little pup

That's what she is doing from my interpretation of her post, looking for trainers who do the full monte, not the one's restrictive in methods and tools, she's been there and done that with the worse result possible.

The Koehler method is VERY restrictive from what I understand.

She is talking about trainers who won't use correction based methods, restrict themselves to non aversive methods only. There is a difference between selecting the most appropriate method for the dogs behaviour than not selecting a method or tools because you don't like it?

It's a bit like a tradesman coming out to fix your air conditioner and says you need a new one because he can't remove a screw because he doesn't use screwdrivers since some morons held up the servo attendant with a screwdriver or something equally as stupid........what's sort of tradesman is that?.........same type as a dog trainer who won't use an Ecollar ;)

[Aidan3]

For example, if a kid starts a tantrum in a shop because he wants a toy - he will be punished: no TV for three days or something along the lines. If he repeats the behavior - he will be smacked with sufficient intensity, so that next time he starts thinking of repeating the exercise me looking at him will get the idea out of his head. Using rewards in this situation is nothing more than a blackmail: he will behave as long as he gets what he wants.

Using punishment in the same situation leads to the same outcome. He will behave as long as he gets what he wants, to avoid the punishment.

If you think rewards should be used that way, you will have a very poor outcome and punishment will be your only option.

Kids and dogs can be fairly creative at solving problems, finding ways to get what they want and avoiding punishment is like a sport to some of them. Rewards, used correctly, bring it all to the front under your terms.

[wuffles]

She is talking about trainers who won't use correction based methods, restrict themselves to non aversive methods only. There is a difference between selecting the most appropriate method for the dogs behaviour than not selecting a method or tools because you don't like it?

It's a bit like a tradesman coming out to fix your air conditioner and says you need a new one because he can't remove a screw because he doesn't use screwdrivers since some morons held up the servo attendant with a screwdriver or something equally as stupid........what's sort of tradesman is that?.........same type as a dog trainer who won't use an Ecollar ;)

So it's not ok for trainers to insist on positive only methods, but it IS ok if they want to use correction and punishment and not consider positive?

I'm not sure what you're arguing with me about as I am all for the right method for the individual dog.

[persephone]

without worrying about her attacking a child or running across the road.

I would never ever implicitly trust a dog to not run across a road. never. Dogs near roads are always leashed and under my control. The attacking a child bit - that's a lot to do with socialisation when young, and once again, never say never .

there is no way you can be 100% sure that an accident won't happen.

[ursus]

For example, if a kid starts a tantrum in a shop because he wants a toy - he will be punished: no TV for three days or something along the lines. If he repeats the behavior - he will be smacked with sufficient intensity, so that next time he starts thinking of repeating the exercise me looking at him will get the idea out of his head. Using rewards in this situation is nothing more than a blackmail: he will behave as long as he gets what he wants.

Using punishment in the same situation leads to the same outcome. He will behave as long as he gets what he wants, to avoid the punishment.

If you think rewards should be used that way, you will have a very poor outcome and punishment will be your only option.

Kids and dogs can be fairly creative at solving problems, finding ways to get what they want and avoiding punishment is like a sport to some of them. Rewards, used correctly, bring it all to the front under your terms.

The phrase in bold doesn't make any sense: the purpose of punishment is to get him to behave while not getting what he wants. Do you mind to illustrate how would you use rewards in my example?

[Red Fox]

And who's choice was that? Could you not have taken the dog to see someone else?

Chasing and biting is prey drive - normal. Pulling on leash (unless the dog has been taught otherwise) is also normal. Playing rough with other dogs is normal too for some dogs and pretty easily fixed - you just don't allow it. I'm not sure which behaviourist you saw but they sound pretty damn useless to me.

My dog was under two coaches and one behaviorist. I think it is a decent effort. Your last sentence basically summarises it. That's why I am doing my own research so I can filter out incompetent trainers for whom being politically correct is more important than getting results.

And so you should.

These threads do my head in. My advice to you Ursus is to read up as much as you can on different methods and pick the one that suits your dog. Choose a trainer whom you trust and are 100% comfortable with - regardless of what method they use.

Every dog is different, just like every child is different. Some dogs need to be motivated, some need to be calmed, some can cope with harsh training methods, others will react by either shutting down or comming up the leash at you. Hard, soft, low drive, high drive... it's all relative.

If you're in NSW Steve Courtney would be your best bet. Very experienced trainer, very balanced in his approach and lovely guy. http://www.k9pro.com.au/pages/How-to-Contact-Us.html Shoot him an email, he would be better placed to answer your questions than anyone here.

And best of luck with your new pup.

Everyone else, get your knickers out of a knot. No one is forcing the OP to use Koehler, or Michael Ellis or Susan Garrett for that matter. They are only suggestions. Each to their own, grow up...

[megan_]

It is important to remember that your new dog isn't your old dog. Your old dog had aggression issues and aggression is very complex. Aggression can't be solved via trainers and training methods - you need careful management and behavioural advice. It is a shame that the last person couldn't offer you a solution. Bear in mind though that some dogs just aren't stable (bad breeding, bad luck) and there is nothing that can cure them - they require life long management or PTS.

The best way to counter aggression is to:

i) Buy a well bred dog

ii) Controlled socialisation when it is a pup (lots of positive, happy experiences).

There are many of us on this forum that have happy, healthy, well adjusted dogs and we don't have to constantly dish out punishment to get them that way.

If you constantly have to correct your dog then rather than dishing out more punishment I'd be asking myself whether I had actually trained the dog properly in a way that *they* understand. Dogs aren't good generalisers and I flinch when people say their dog doesnt' listen to them when they're in a different environment and "ZING" dog is punished. How about teaching the dog in different environments in the first place.

When you add aggression into the mix it gets even more complicated. Dog hates kids. Dog reacts at kids. Dog gets correction - that hurts. Dog realises that kids = bad things happen to me = dog hates kids more. That, or in the more dangerous scenario, dog still hates kids but learns not to give a warning bark. Owner thinks dog is cured, dogs stays silent while kids approach. With no warning, dog bites kid.

I understand that you want a balanced trainer but Koehler isn't really considered balanced? Even the trainers that I know who use ecollars, check chains etc say that if you aren't rewarding and praising 99% of the time then you need to rethink your strategy.

[Kippy]

She is talking about trainers who won't use correction based methods, restrict themselves to non aversive methods only. There is a difference between selecting the most appropriate method for the dogs behaviour than not selecting a method or tools because you don't like it?

It's a bit like a tradesman coming out to fix your air conditioner and says you need a new one because he can't remove a screw because he doesn't use screwdrivers since some morons held up the servo attendant with a screwdriver or something equally as stupid........what's sort of tradesman is that?.........same type as a dog trainer who won't use an Ecollar ;)

So it's not ok for trainers to insist on positive only methods, but it IS ok if they want to use correction and punishment and not consider positive?

I'm not sure what you're arguing with me about as I am all for the right method for the individual dog.

No, I am saying to provide someone with the best opportunity to rehabilitate a dog's behaviour, they need a full set of tools and apply whatever is necessary to help the dog, bearing in mind we are not talking minor behavioural issues in this case the OP has presented was a life or death case, sadly death won, I think that is a terrible predicament to be faced with making such a decision without giving everything possible a red hot go.

Edited December 12, 2011 by Kippy

[Aidan3]

For example, if a kid starts a tantrum in a shop because he wants a toy - he will be punished: no TV for three days or something along the lines. If he repeats the behavior - he will be smacked with sufficient intensity, so that next time he starts thinking of repeating the exercise me looking at him will get the idea out of his head. Using rewards in this situation is nothing more than a blackmail: he will behave as long as he gets what he wants.

Using punishment in the same situation leads to the same outcome. He will behave as long as he gets what he wants, to avoid the punishment.

If you think rewards should be used that way, you will have a very poor outcome and punishment will be your only option.

Kids and dogs can be fairly creative at solving problems, finding ways to get what they want and avoiding punishment is like a sport to some of them. Rewards, used correctly, bring it all to the front under your terms.

The phrase in bold doesn't make any sense: the purpose of punishment is to get him to behave while not getting what he wants. Do you mind to illustrate how would you use rewards in my example?

You mentioned "blackmail", I think you probably meant "bribery" but it doesn't matter too much. The implication was that he was only behaving to get what he wants. Well, the only reason anyone ever does anything is to get what they want or need, whether that is to obtain something or avoid something else. I turn up to work each day to obtain money, which I only need to avoid starvation and homelessness.

By using punishment you take the "blackmail" analogy even further, he only behaves to avoid punishment. I don't see how this is better than only behaving to get what he wants? Is it more reliable, more flexible, a better experience for the child? What is it that appeals?

If you wait until the kid has the tantrum to use rewards, you've missed the boat. The rewards are supposed to come for good behaviour, not to bribe them out of behaviour you don't like. For that matter, the only reason kids use a tantrum is because it gets rewarded in some way. It's hard to ignore a tantrum, it's embarrassing to the parent so every so often they'll do something to respond to the tantrum.

My child is rewarded for being good. It starts with easily achievable things, staying close, making good choices, earning the things they want. Same with my dogs and my client's dogs, we don't wait until the dog has a 'tantrum'.

[Kippy]

When you add aggression into the mix it gets even more complicated. Dog hates kids. Dog reacts at kids. Dog gets correction - that hurts. Dog realises that kids = bad things happen to me = dog hates kids more. That, or in the more dangerous scenario, dog still hates kids but learns not to give a warning bark. Owner thinks dog is cured, dogs stays silent while kids approach. With no warning, dog bites kid.

That's a possibility but it can also go like this too: Dog hates kids. Dog lunges at kids. Dog gets corrected - that hurts. Dog stops lunging period and behaves it's self.

Edited December 12, 2011 by Kippy

[Aidan3]

When you add aggression into the mix it gets even more complicated. Dog hates kids. Dog reacts at kids. Dog gets correction - that hurts. Dog realises that kids = bad things happen to me = dog hates kids more. That, or in the more dangerous scenario, dog still hates kids but learns not to give a warning bark. Owner thinks dog is cured, dogs stays silent while kids approach. With no warning, dog bites kid.

That's a possibility but it can also go like this too: Dog hates kids. Dog lunges at kids. Dog gets corrected - that hurts. Dog stops lunging at kids and behaves it's self.

If the training stopped there, that would be wishful thinking. Wishful thinking is dangerous thinking when it comes to dangerous dogs and kids. You would have absolutely no evidence that this dog would be safe.

[persephone]

Dog lunges at kids. Dog gets corrected - that hurts. Dog stops lunging period

and altho it still hates kids, it is prevented from lunging ..

You haven't taught this dog to see kids in a different light - you've not stopped the aggression, just stopped the action.Dog was corrected for the action, not the thought/feeling

[Kippy]

When you add aggression into the mix it gets even more complicated. Dog hates kids. Dog reacts at kids. Dog gets correction - that hurts. Dog realises that kids = bad things happen to me = dog hates kids more. That, or in the more dangerous scenario, dog still hates kids but learns not to give a warning bark. Owner thinks dog is cured, dogs stays silent while kids approach. With no warning, dog bites kid.

That's a possibility but it can also go like this too: Dog hates kids. Dog lunges at kids. Dog gets corrected - that hurts. Dog stops lunging at kids and behaves it's self.

If the training stopped there, that would be wishful thinking. Wishful thinking is dangerous thinking when it comes to dangerous dogs and kids. You would have absolutely no evidence that this dog would be safe.

Do you have any evidence of wishful thinking in that scenario or is it just your feeling on the matter?

I have a couple of examples, one was a next door neighbours dog years ago who used to chase cars. He was hit by a car coming the other way when focused on another, luckily he went under the car and got a few scrapes injury wise that was all but a decent fright in the process. He never chased a car again or ran onto the road, what happened there?

Another was a dog when we were kids used to chase us on our bikes and try to bite our legs. A friends older brother kicked the dog in the head one day when it chased him, the dog never chased bikes again.

I am not saying it's a good thing or advocating that hurting a dog is best to gain a desired behaviour but pain or unpleasantness can correct a poor behaviour as in the above examples I have seen for myself, true stories.

Edited December 12, 2011 by Kippy

[persephone]

Kippy those examples you gave are different from an owner giving a leash correction.