Type Of Halti Recommendation

[huski]

There could be many reasons a trainer would tell someone to stop going to club while using a new training program. The simplest reason could be that The dog may not be ready to have it's training proofed in a high level of distraction like that. Taking it to club could be putting it in a position where it rehearses the behaviour and makes the owner feel defeated or frustrated. We really can't judge the trainer for advising that, without knowing why.

If the club is such a good place for the dog to be why did it need private training in the first place? Not criticizing the club, just playing devils advocate.

[cavNrott]

There could be many reasons a trainer would tell someone to stop going to club while using a new training program. The simplest reason could be that The dog may not be ready to have it's training proofed in a high level of distraction like that. Taking it to club could be putting it in a position where it rehearses the behaviour and makes the owner feel defeated or frustrated. We really can't judge the trainer for advising that, without knowing why.

If the club is such a good place for the dog to be why did it need private training in the first place? Not criticizing the club, just playing devils advocate.

He's not a trainer Huski, he's a 'behaviourist'.

[Staff'n'Toller]

There's a lot of speculation in this thread, and none of us really know the dog.

The behaviourist may well have said "don't go to training until we get a behaviour change in a low distraction environment, under controlled circumstances". If the dog is in an uncontrolled environment such as a club, it can easily practice (and inadvertently) gain reinforcement for the wrong behaviours. Skip's club may be excellent in handler management but if the behaviourist is not able to be there with the handler that may be the reason for the caveat.

Many qualified trainers who have done extra study in behaviour problem solving call themselves behaviourists. The behaviourist may be very well versed in training standard obedience, we are not to know that either.

I feel a bit uncomfortable that just because the trainer is not known to DOL they are rubbished - and this not a dig at anyone - this happens quite a lot in many threads. There are many excellent trainers in Australia.

There is also a really big divide between what the trainer says and what is heard by the client, it's natural communication inconsistencies. Where the handler of this dog is unsure, she should ask for further clarification.

Tie-outs used to be a common punishment (well, when I was a 16y.o. training my first dog, it was) that may work for dogs who are heavily pack-drive focused because it's a severe form of social isolation when done for long periods. There's a few issues though, you have to have no physical or verbal communication with the dog when you take it out there, the dog has to pair the 'bad' behaviour with the feeling of the isolation and the dog has to be sufficiently pack-drive focused for it to even matter.

If I tie-out my dog on a calm day in the sunshine so they lay down and have a nap it's not really a punishment, is it?

We know now that looking at 'bad' behaviours specifically and teaching alternative behaviours or using methods of impulse control will work more effectively, and do less harm.

Just to go even further off track. :laugh:

[Staff'n'Toller]

Oh - snap Huski - I wrote this out then had to go do something before posting. :laugh:

[huski]

There could be many reasons a trainer would tell someone to stop going to club while using a new training program. The simplest reason could be that The dog may not be ready to have it's training proofed in a high level of distraction like that. Taking it to club could be putting it in a position where it rehearses the behaviour and makes the owner feel defeated or frustrated. We really can't judge the trainer for advising that, without knowing why.

If the club is such a good place for the dog to be why did it need private training in the first place? Not criticizing the club, just playing devils advocate.

He's not a trainer Huski, he's a 'behaviourist'.

I'm not sure why that really matters? Trainers can be qualified behaviourists. Being a behaviorist doesn't mean you can't also be a good trainer.

[huski]

Oh - snap Huski - I wrote this out then had to go do something before posting. :laugh:

Lol I agree with you. It's easy to speculate but many things can be taken out of context or misunderstood and none of us know the trainer or why they recommended what they did.

Personally I don't train anything at clubs, I would use a club for proofing only. Advising people not to ask their dog to work in a high level of distraction straight away is common sense. It's really dog training 101. Distraction and proofing comes later.

[cavNrott]

I would not expect a good trainer to advise a client to tie their pup to the clothes line because he was behaving like a normal untrained pup.

What actually constitutes a 'behaviourist' in NSW? Does a behaviourist need to have a degree, such as a Veterinary Behaviourists have to promote themselves as a behaviourist in NSW? I may need to stand corrected but I thought the term was limited to Veterinary Behaviourists.

eta: I'm of the impression that this pup is not being trained privately and that the 'behaviourist' was attempting to eliminate bad pup behaviour rather than one on one training of the pup.

I'm also of the opinion that private training is the way to go rather than taking dogs to obedience classes at dog clubs.

Edited July 31, 2014 by cavNrott

[Amax-1]

I would not expect a good trainer to advise a client to tie their pup to the clothes line because he was behaving like a normal untrained pup.

What actually constitutes a 'behaviourist' in NSW? Does a behaviourist need to have a degree, such as a Veterinary Behaviourists have to promote themselves as a behaviourist in NSW? I may need to stand corrected but I thought the term was limited to Veterinary Behaviourists.

eta: I'm of the impression that this pup is not being trained privately and that the 'behaviourist' was attempting to eliminate bad pup behaviour rather than one on one training of the pup.

I'm also of the opinion that private training is the way to go rather than taking dogs to obedience classes at dog clubs.

A Vet behaviourist is the only formal qualification which extends to all animals not specifically dogs. Anyone can call themselves a dog behaviourist and "qualified" generally means they have attended a training scheme like the NDTF course and the like. Vet behaviourists can also prescribe drugs for behavioural issues.

[Simply Grand]

There's a lot of speculation in this thread, and none of us really know the dog.

The behaviourist may well have said "don't go to training until we get a behaviour change in a low distraction environment, under controlled circumstances". If the dog is in an uncontrolled environment such as a club, it can easily practice (and inadvertently) gain reinforcement for the wrong behaviours. Skip's club may be excellent in handler management but if the behaviourist is not able to be there with the handler that may be the reason for the caveat.

Many qualified trainers who have done extra study in behaviour problem solving call themselves behaviourists. The behaviourist may be very well versed in training standard obedience, we are not to know that either.

I feel a bit uncomfortable that just because the trainer is not known to DOL they are rubbished - and this not a dig at anyone - this happens quite a lot in many threads. There are many excellent trainers in Australia.

There is also a really big divide between what the trainer says and what is heard by the client, it's natural communication inconsistencies. Where the handler of this dog is unsure, she should ask for further clarification.

Tie-outs used to be a common punishment (well, when I was a 16y.o. training my first dog, it was) that may work for dogs who are heavily pack-drive focused because it's a severe form of social isolation when done for long periods. There's a few issues though, you have to have no physical or verbal communication with the dog when you take it out there, the dog has to pair the 'bad' behaviour with the feeling of the isolation and the dog has to be sufficiently pack-drive focused for it to even matter.

If I tie-out my dog on a calm day in the sunshine so they lay down and have a nap it's not really a punishment, is it?

We know now that looking at 'bad' behaviours specifically and teaching alternative behaviours or using methods of impulse control will work more effectively, and do less harm.

Just to go even further off track. :laugh:

Good post, I agree Esp. the bolded bit.

[Kavik]

I agree that the behaviourist advising not to go to the club yet is not necessarily a bad thing - clubs are very high distraction environments!

[persephone]

excellent post , staff& toller , even tho originally I did think a tie-up time out was odd - but if one has no crate etc - and dog is not normally tied up - then yes , a few minutes lack of freedom fits the bill .

as per the Super nanny's "naughty step" though - this MUST be delivered correctly ;) ;)

[huski]

I would not expect a good trainer to advise a client to tie their pup to the clothes line because he was behaving like a normal untrained pup.

What actually constitutes a 'behaviourist' in NSW? Does a behaviourist need to have a degree, such as a Veterinary Behaviourists have to promote themselves as a behaviourist in NSW? I may need to stand corrected but I thought the term was limited to Veterinary Behaviourists.

eta: I'm of the impression that this pup is not being trained privately and that the 'behaviourist' was attempting to eliminate bad pup behaviour rather than one on one training of the pup.

I'm also of the opinion that private training is the way to go rather than taking dogs to obedience classes at dog clubs.

It isn't something I would suggest, but I think a lot of things can be lost in translation too so without actually speaking to the trainer/behaviourist we can't be sure exactly what they recommended or the context in which it was given.

If the owner isn't getting results with this trainer, though, and they are following their program to a T, then I would be inclined to look at another trainer or behaviourist.

[Coracina]

Getting a little off topic, but for anyone curious about the trainer/behaviourist terminology;

It's unfortunately really unclear and not particularly well-regulated in Australia at the moment. Anyone can call themselves a trainer, behaviourist, dog psychologist, dog behaviour specialist, whatever qualifications they have (or don't have). So me with my no qualifications and limited experience, I could set up shop as a trainer and behaviourist tomorrow if I wanted to

The only exception as far as I know is vets can't call themselves specialists unless they're actually Fellows (not just members) of the Behaviour Chapter of the Australian College of Veterinary Scientists so they'll have FACVSc (Animal Behaviour) after their name, or an equivalent qualification from overseas. Unfortunately that rules out a lot of vets with quite a bit of experience and further study in behaviour, including some people who only see behaviour cases! Who can call themselves a veterinary behaviourist or a veterinary behaviour consultant is a bit up in the air, but at the least they're a vet with more knowledge and experience with behaviour than average. Any vet is theoretically able to give advice and prescribe medication for behaviour treatment/management, but how knowledgeable they are on behaviour varies quite a bit as you might expect in such a diverse field.

If I was looking for a trainer/behaviourist then I'd be looking at their training style (for both their canine and human clients), reputation, qualifications and experience in about that order and never mind what they call themselves.

For the original question;

Especially with a dog who lunges, I'd have two leashes - one on a flat collar (or a martingale, or a well-fitted regular harness, whatever you're aiming to be walking on - probably not a check collar though because you can't quite pop them like this) and one on the head collar, held like the reins of a double bridle except for the handles of the leads around your wrist like normal. A euro leash (aka a double-ended leash) does pretty much the same thing, but I like to use a very light leash on head collars (like a puppy or toy dog leash, or even just a bit of light cord or rope), I think there's less confusion without a heavy clasp swaying off it and varying the pressure and it helps to keep track of which leash goes where. Anyway, if you've got the grip right you get a gentle collar pressure before the head collar engages and you can still do light corrections with the head collar even if the dog is pulling as hard as they can. It also means they don't snap their head around as badly if they lunge when you're not expecting it, and if worst comes to worst and you have to physically hold your dog back from something at least you're not exacerbating the issue by causing pain with the head collar while you do it. It also gives you back-up if they manage to slip the head collar, and a bit of encouragement to try to ditch the head collar so you don't have to keep managing two leashes :p

As far as brands go, I don't like gentle leaders so much, I think ones with cheek-pieces (like the Halti brand ones) fit better. I've heard good things about the Infin-8 ones but haven't used them myself. I don't like head collars that much in general, because I see them used poorly so often but if it's the difference between being able to walk your dog and being stuck at home they're definitely worth it.

ETA: I'm a vet student with an interest in behaviour, hence why I'm familiar with the terminology debate :)

Edited October 23, 2014 by Coracina

[Nekhbet]

Especially with a dog who lunges, I'd have two leashes - one on a flat collar (or a martingale, or a well-fitted regular harness, whatever you're aiming to be walking on - probably not a check collar though because you can't quite pop them like this) and one on the head collar, held like the reins of a double bridle except for the handles of the leads around your wrist like normal. A euro leash (aka a double-ended leash) does pretty much the same thing, but I like to use a very light leash on head collars (like a puppy or toy dog leash, or even just a bit of light cord or rope), I think there's less confusion without a heavy clasp swaying off it and varying the pressure and it helps to keep track of which leash goes where. Anyway, if you've got the grip right you get a gentle collar pressure before the head collar engages and you can still do light corrections with the head collar even if the dog is pulling as hard as they can. It also means they don't snap their head around as badly if they lunge when you're not expecting it, and if worst comes to worst and you have to physically hold your dog back from something at least you're not exacerbating the issue by causing pain with the head collar while you do it. It also gives you back-up if they manage to slip the head collar, and a bit of encouragement to try to ditch the head collar so you don't have to keep managing two leashes

A head collar is NOT to be used to pop or correct the dog at all. As for any level of snapping the head around that is unacceptable in my books and has the potential to cause structural harm, either on the face itself around the eyes or the vertebrate/muscles in the neck. Because now you're also tethered quite nicely to your dog if it does lunge you risk harm to the handler because none of the equipment stops the dog properly. You can't hold a lead decently, you now have your hands full so you can't do any work under stress if your dog is a lunger otherwise you have no way to hold rewards.

This is not a nicer, less 'cruel' option at all. These pieces of junk are marketed as the 'nice' way and look what kind of advice goes with it. I'm sick of seeing dogs with scars along their faces from them, crab walkers, sore necks, weeping eyes etc and dont say its because of misuse because then all FF trainers and behaviorists my clients have tried before must not know how to use them either.

I had two clients sunday both pulled massively and could not concentrate. First client said after months with a trainer they had a 40m reactivity threshold on both a front attach harness and head halter. OK. After half an hour we did not have a reactivity threshold and had perfect concentration now the rubbing, pinching and frustrating restraint was gone. Wagging tail, perfect dog with absolutely to die for focus. Second dog almost dragged the owners over on a head halter. Bin. Large dog could now be walked by teenage child without ripping its face apart, hands were free for rewards to be given and focus maintained because hands were free to guide the dog to what it was meant to do. Dog training is not about leverage, it's not about using force and equipment to try and get your dog to behave because that is all this 'nice' stuff tries to do. If you are going to correct a dog use a correction chain, prong collar or martingale because they're MADE to be popped without causing harm to the animal. We have forgotten the leash and collar are incredibly important tools in communicating to the dog what and how to do things NOT just tethering yourself to it - it's this old knowledge disappearing why we have so many new fangled gadgets on the market. Go backwards to go forwards, go get some experience from some of us dinosaurs, you might learn something because not all of it is written on a piece of paper or the internet.

[Amax-1]

This is not a nicer, less 'cruel' option at all. These pieces of junk are marketed as the 'nice' way and look what kind of advice goes with it. I'm sick of seeing dogs with scars along their faces from them, crab walkers, sore necks, weeping eyes etc and dont say its because of misuse because then all FF trainers and behaviorists my clients have tried before must not know how to use them either.

The fact is, you can train a dog to walk beside you without a collar and leash at all, so for the most part these contraptions evolve from the motivation to make money not train dogs more efficiently. To be an effective training tool, it must have an on off switch and when off it resembles to the dog that it's not under equipment restraint and when it's on, the dog is under pressure of restraint from the wrong behaviour. Does the dog feel like it's off leash free of equipment wearing a harness or head collar in the right behaviour? A loose leash walk on a prong collar it does in equipment comparison :D

[Aidan3]

I could forgive the OP for being confused about the seeming contradictions here. I certainly am.

[Nekhbet]

The fact is, you can train a dog to walk beside you without a collar and leash at all, so for the most part these contraptions evolve from the motivation to make money not train dogs more efficiently. To be an effective training tool, it must have an on off switch and when off it resembles to the dog that it's not under equipment restraint and when it's on, the dog is under pressure of restraint from the wrong behaviour. Does the dog feel like it's off leash free of equipment wearing a harness or head collar in the right behaviour? A loose leash walk on a prong collar it does in equipment comparison

I agree Amax but prong collar and correction chain is a dirty, horrific word to some people because the label says it like it is and is not a marketing scheme.

[Amax-1]

The fact is, you can train a dog to walk beside you without a collar and leash at all, so for the most part these contraptions evolve from the motivation to make money not train dogs more efficiently. To be an effective training tool, it must have an on off switch and when off it resembles to the dog that it's not under equipment restraint and when it's on, the dog is under pressure of restraint from the wrong behaviour. Does the dog feel like it's off leash free of equipment wearing a harness or head collar in the right behaviour? A loose leash walk on a prong collar it does in equipment comparison

I agree Amax but prong collar and correction chain is a dirty, horrific word to some people because the label says it like it is and is not a marketing scheme.

We see horrific car accidents in the media on a regular basis demonstrating what happens when cars are not driven properly, yet we continue to drive cars, but we don't use check chains and prong collars for what reason is mystifying when you know how to use them properly? Sure they can injure a dog when misused just as a head collar can

Edited October 27, 2014 by Amax-1

[Stressmagnet]

I just had the instructor at my puppy class tell me this about check/choke collars:

1. They cause spinal and neck injuries

2.. They cause reactive aggression because if you use them to stop a young dog from lunging toward people or other dogs, your dog associates the pain (?) of the check correction with people/other dogs and will then become reactive.

I use a check collar. I don't yank or jerk harshly - it barely tightens - and my dog is heeling well. I'm now worried.

[Nekhbet]

I just had the instructor at my puppy class tell me this about check/choke collars:

1. They cause spinal and neck injuries

2.. They cause reactive aggression because if you use them to stop a young dog from lunging toward people or other dogs, your dog associates the pain (?) of the check correction with people/other dogs and will then become reactive.

I use a check collar. I don't yank or jerk harshly - it barely tightens - and my dog is heeling well. I'm now worried.

Both are a load of bulltish.

If you put your back into yanking your dogs neck and rip him off his feet - yes. You will hurt your dog.

Point 2 is rubbish. What actually happens is people do not know how to correct and redirect attention, they gave pops too low in level and loaded the dog so it actually reacted more. The collar was blamed when in fact it was incorrect technique in general that made it happen.

I use them a lot for my clients particularly those with strong or reactive dogs for a safety purpose too. None of the dogs associate the collar with the other dog or the 'scary' thing at all, in fact they're safer to control and a lot happier. There's more to using a chain then ripping a dog off it's feet, a LOT more in the technique. It can be a wonderfully subtle tool for communication.

Don't worry. Find a new puppy school that actually has REAL education and not that rot.