Item About Victoria Stilwell

[JulesP]

Well to start with the crap about her making police men take off prong collars etc is obviously untrue. I counted a couple in the short clip she has up promoting her new show. Which does look interesting.

She has said she doesn't train police dogs and that she wasn't there to train them on that day.

I fail to see how her agreeing to sit in a helicopter was her screwing up.

...have a look at post #59 from TF: ...it is part of the dog's training to charge at people in confined spaces...if the dog is left to make his own choice because he can't hear the handler properly due to the helicopter noise it is one option that he just does what he is trained to do...she made herself a decoy ...

The handler made her a decoy. But thanks so much for sharing your immense wisdom and knowledge about dog training.

...stop thinking that everyone who knows a little bit more than you is an expert :D - he/she might have just done a little bit more reading about dog training instead of reading about the latest fashion news :D

Thank you again for setting me straight. We are sooo lucky to have you here.

[Willem]

Well to start with the crap about her making police men take off prong collars etc is obviously untrue. I counted a couple in the short clip she has up promoting her new show. Which does look interesting.

She has said she doesn't train police dogs and that she wasn't there to train them on that day.

I fail to see how her agreeing to sit in a helicopter was her screwing up.

...have a look at post #59 from TF: ...it is part of the dog's training to charge at people in confined spaces...if the dog is left to make his own choice because he can't hear the handler properly due to the helicopter noise it is one option that he just does what he is trained to do...she made herself a decoy ...

The handler made her a decoy. But thanks so much for sharing your immense wisdom and knowledge about dog training.

...stop thinking that everyone who knows a little bit more than you is an expert :D - he/she might have just done a little bit more reading about dog training instead of reading about the latest fashion news :D

Thank you again for setting me straight. We are sooo lucky to have you here.

...while I fully understand your admiration I think we getting a little bit off topic here :D

[corvus]

I'm an expert in dog behaviour, and dog bite prevention is an area of academic interest to me and I recently wrote a text book chapter about it. But that doesn't mean I think I know how to stop a police dog from chomping on me in error. In fact, I know next to nothing about keeping myself safe around a police dog, which is why if put in Victoria's shoes, I would have done what I was told to do, much like it appears she did. I would trust the handlers knew what they were doing and follow their directions, even if a part of me was thinking "Errrrr.... are you sure this is a good idea?". Trainers don't really like outsiders questioning them. It's wise IMO to keep your head down and let them run their own show. I would also assume this may not keep me safe. These dogs do make mistakes sometimes, and they are supposed to be fast and damaging. Handler's can't anticipate everything. Probably they should have anticipated this, but they are only human, and they would not be the first or last humans to fail to anticipate something that seems kind of obvious in retrospect.

[Lhok]

Seriously accidental bites happen to the best of them, while I was doing the NDTF course in Sydney Steve Austin told me about a massive scar when he copped a bite from a Mal I think it was on his back if I recall properly (was in 2007 so my memory is a bit hazy) as we were discussing bitework there was also a trainer called Glen there and he was all about Rotties.

Pretty sure Steve Austin is fairly well regarded in training circles and if he accidentally copped a bite then I guess it can happen to even the best.

--Lhok

[Willem]

I'm an expert in dog behaviour, and dog bite prevention is an area of academic interest to me and I recently wrote a text book chapter about it. But that doesn't mean I think I know how to stop a police dog from chomping on me in error. In fact, I know next to nothing about keeping myself safe around a police dog, which is why if put in Victoria's shoes, I would have done what I was told to do, much like it appears she did. I would trust the handlers knew what they were doing and follow their directions, even if a part of me was thinking "Errrrr.... are you sure this is a good idea?". Trainers don't really like outsiders questioning them. It's wise IMO to keep your head down and let them run their own show. I would also assume this may not keep me safe. These dogs do make mistakes sometimes, and they are supposed to be fast and damaging. Handler's can't anticipate everything. Probably they should have anticipated this, but they are only human, and they would not be the first or last humans to fail to anticipate something that seems kind of obvious in retrospect.

... you try to put yourself in Victoria's shoes (yeah, these VS dog training boots look awesome :D ), but at the same time you admit that you have not much experience with police dogs while she still tries to sell herself as the expert for dog training, no matter what realm it is...that's the difference.

Edited March 30, 2016 by Willem

[Kavik]

I still remember my introduction to protection training - they told me "we are going to let this dog out. Stand still and don't move!" I did what I was told!

The little I do know is that I don't know a lot :laugh: and that I would follow directions from someone more experienced if in a situation where protection trained dogs are involved

Edited March 30, 2016 by Kavik

[corvus]

I'm an expert in dog behaviour, and dog bite prevention is an area of academic interest to me and I recently wrote a text book chapter about it. But that doesn't mean I think I know how to stop a police dog from chomping on me in error. In fact, I know next to nothing about keeping myself safe around a police dog, which is why if put in Victoria's shoes, I would have done what I was told to do, much like it appears she did. I would trust the handlers knew what they were doing and follow their directions, even if a part of me was thinking "Errrrr.... are you sure this is a good idea?". Trainers don't really like outsiders questioning them. It's wise IMO to keep your head down and let them run their own show. I would also assume this may not keep me safe. These dogs do make mistakes sometimes, and they are supposed to be fast and damaging. Handler's can't anticipate everything. Probably they should have anticipated this, but they are only human, and they would not be the first or last humans to fail to anticipate something that seems kind of obvious in retrospect.

... you try to put yourself in Victoria's shoes (yeah, these VS dog training boots look awesome :D ), but at the same time you admit that you have not much experience with police dogs while she still tries to sell herself as the expert for dog training, no matter what realm it is...that's the difference.

Where has she said she is an expert in working dog training of any sort? She is interested in police dog training and has been in discussion with local units. I've never seen her say she is an expert in this field. In fact, she says in the blog post about the incident: "I was honored and excited to attend, and, as is the case with a lot of my involvement in this field, I was mostly there to watch and observe."

Furthermore, it's a moot point. Even an expert may indeed follow the directions of a dog's handlers. It is the polite thing to do, and it's usually a good way to keep safe. You might work in protection on a daily basis, but it's still someone else's dog and someone else's training and you don't know what the triggers might be. So listen to the handler. As has been said several times already, hang around these dogs long enough and you will probably get bitten. It's got little to do with who you are or how skilled or experienced you say you are. It happens.

[Simply Grand]

Corvus, Lhok, Kavik Voices of reason.

For crying out loud, she got badly bitten, she posted online when she shouldn't have, she explained herself when in a clearer state of mind and said then that it was an accident following a series of decisions by various people. I fail to see how it's any reflection on anyone's training methodology as a whole.

[Willem]

I'm an expert in dog behaviour, and dog bite prevention is an area of academic interest to me and I recently wrote a text book chapter about it. But that doesn't mean I think I know how to stop a police dog from chomping on me in error. In fact, I know next to nothing about keeping myself safe around a police dog, which is why if put in Victoria's shoes, I would have done what I was told to do, much like it appears she did. I would trust the handlers knew what they were doing and follow their directions, even if a part of me was thinking "Errrrr.... are you sure this is a good idea?". Trainers don't really like outsiders questioning them. It's wise IMO to keep your head down and let them run their own show. I would also assume this may not keep me safe. These dogs do make mistakes sometimes, and they are supposed to be fast and damaging. Handler's can't anticipate everything. Probably they should have anticipated this, but they are only human, and they would not be the first or last humans to fail to anticipate something that seems kind of obvious in retrospect.

... you try to put yourself in Victoria's shoes (yeah, these VS dog training boots look awesome :D ), but at the same time you admit that you have not much experience with police dogs while she still tries to sell herself as the expert for dog training, no matter what realm it is...that's the difference.

Where has she said she is an expert in working dog training of any sort? She is interested in police dog training and has been in discussion with local units. I've never seen her say she is an expert in this field. In fact, she says in the blog post about the incident: "I was honored and excited to attend, and, as is the case with a lot of my involvement in this field, I was mostly there to watch and observe."

Furthermore, it's a moot point. Even an expert may indeed follow the directions of a dog's handlers. It is the polite thing to do, and it's usually a good way to keep safe. You might work in protection on a daily basis, but it's still someone else's dog and someone else's training and you don't know what the triggers might be. So listen to the handler. As has been said several times already, hang around these dogs long enough and you will probably get bitten. It's got little to do with who you are or how skilled or experienced you say you are. It happens.

well, she declares herself as 'one of the world's most recognized and respected dog trainers', however, from a 'recognized and respected dog trainer' I expect to get the science around 'operant conditioning' right (she stresses her scientific approach pretty often). Have a look at her 4 pillars of positive training: while she stresses 'positive reinforcement' (first pillar) she doesn't list 'negative punishment', however she uses 'negative punishment' all the time!!! ...nothing wrong with using it, but don't call it 'positive reinforcement'.

And of course her handling / training is not force free...every time she / we use the leash to pull the dog in the direction we decide to go we are applying force!...a trained dog will just follow without force, but he was not born like this. There are a lot of shows in which she heavily (as far as it is possible with her VS dog training boots :D ) is pulling the leash to control the dog - it's not force free!

She is obviously a smart business woman with a selling concept and her acting and catwalk performance in her shows might draw some audience (but won't get her an Oscar), however, IMO she is not a very authentic person, and for me the later one is a very important 'pillar' when it comes to dog training.

ETA:...and I couldn't find any disclaimer on her page that would exclude working dogs and / or police dogs from her expertise.

Edited March 31, 2016 by Willem

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

Have a look at her 4 pillars of positive training: while she stresses 'positive reinforcement' (first pillar) she doesn't list 'negative punishment', however she uses 'negative punishment' all the time!!! ...nothing wrong with using it, but don't call it 'positive reinforcement'.

I had a look (Cos I've never heard of these 4 pillars and it's unfortunate that she doesn't include a fifth pillar of "control the environment" or something. Just to make it look different to Operant Conditioning (4 quadrants).

You say she doesn't mention "negative punishment" - did you read what she wrote? Here it is. And she calls her method "positive training" not "positive reinforcement" which I don't like because gee - "positive punishment".

https://positively.com/dog-training/positive-training/what-is-positive-training/

In short, positive reinforcement means that if you reward a behavior you like, there is a better chance of that behavior being repeated.

When paired with negative punishment (the removal or withholding of something the dog wants like food, attention, toys, or human contact for a short period of time)

or using a vocal interrupter to redirect negative behavior onto a wanted behavior and to guide a dog into making the right choices, these methods are a foundational element of the core of positive training

But we shouldn't get hooked up on semantics. Forcing a dog to do something and beating it or scolding it when it doesn't do what you want are not reliable training methods compared to reward based training.

[raineth]

I'm an expert in dog behaviour, and dog bite prevention is an area of academic interest to me and I recently wrote a text book chapter about it. But that doesn't mean I think I know how to stop a police dog from chomping on me in error. In fact, I know next to nothing about keeping myself safe around a police dog, which is why if put in Victoria's shoes, I would have done what I was told to do, much like it appears she did. I would trust the handlers knew what they were doing and follow their directions, even if a part of me was thinking "Errrrr.... are you sure this is a good idea?". Trainers don't really like outsiders questioning them. It's wise IMO to keep your head down and let them run their own show. I would also assume this may not keep me safe. These dogs do make mistakes sometimes, and they are supposed to be fast and damaging. Handler's can't anticipate everything. Probably they should have anticipated this, but they are only human, and they would not be the first or last humans to fail to anticipate something that seems kind of obvious in retrospect.

... you try to put yourself in Victoria's shoes (yeah, these VS dog training boots look awesome :D ), but at the same time you admit that you have not much experience with police dogs while she still tries to sell herself as the expert for dog training, no matter what realm it is...that's the difference.

Where has she said she is an expert in working dog training of any sort? She is interested in police dog training and has been in discussion with local units. I've never seen her say she is an expert in this field. In fact, she says in the blog post about the incident: "I was honored and excited to attend, and, as is the case with a lot of my involvement in this field, I was mostly there to watch and observe."

Furthermore, it's a moot point. Even an expert may indeed follow the directions of a dog's handlers. It is the polite thing to do, and it's usually a good way to keep safe. You might work in protection on a daily basis, but it's still someone else's dog and someone else's training and you don't know what the triggers might be. So listen to the handler. As has been said several times already, hang around these dogs long enough and you will probably get bitten. It's got little to do with who you are or how skilled or experienced you say you are. It happens.

well, she declares herself as 'one of the world's most recognized and respected dog trainers', however, from a 'recognized and respected dog trainer' I expect to get the science around 'operant conditioning' right (she stresses her scientific approach pretty often). Have a look at her 4 pillars of positive training: while she stresses 'positive reinforcement' (first pillar) she doesn't list 'negative punishment', however she uses 'negative punishment' all the time!!! ...nothing wrong with using it, but don't call it 'positive reinforcement'.

And of course her handling / training is not force free...every time she / we use the leash to pull the dog in the direction we decide to go we are applying force!...a trained dog will just follow without force, but he was not born like this. There are a lot of shows in which she heavily (as far as it is possible with her VS dog training boots :D ) is pulling the leash to control the dog - it's not force free!

She is obviously a smart business woman with a selling concept and her acting and catwalk performance in her shows might draw some audience (but won't get her an Oscar), however, IMO she is not a very authentic person, and for me the later one is a very important 'pillar' when it comes to dog training.

ETA:...and I couldn't find any disclaimer on her page that would exclude working dogs and / or police dogs from her expertise.

This is definitely why she was bitten. Police dogs can't stand it when you forget to mention negative punishment.

[Willem]

Have a look at her 4 pillars of positive training: while she stresses 'positive reinforcement' (first pillar) she doesn't list 'negative punishment', however she uses 'negative punishment' all the time!!! ...nothing wrong with using it, but don't call it 'positive reinforcement'.

I had a look (Cos I've never heard of these 4 pillars and it's unfortunate that she doesn't include a fifth pillar of "control the environment" or something. Just to make it look different to Operant Conditioning (4 quadrants).

You say she doesn't mention "negative punishment" - did you read what she wrote? Here it is. And she calls her method "positive training" not "positive reinforcement" which I don't like because gee - "positive punishment".

https://positively.com/dog-training/positive-training/what-is-positive-training/

In short, positive reinforcement means that if you reward a behavior you like, there is a better chance of that behavior being repeated.

When paired with negative punishment (the removal or withholding of something the dog wants like food, attention, toys, or human contact for a short period of time)

or using a vocal interrupter to redirect negative behavior onto a wanted behavior and to guide a dog into making the right choices, these methods are a foundational element of the core of positive training

But we shouldn't get hooked up on semantics. Forcing a dog to do something and beating it or scolding it when it doesn't do what you want are not reliable training methods compared to reward based training.

...I said she doesn't list it (as a pillar I meant) ...if she uses science to back up her philosophy, and uses 'positive reinforcement as her first pillar', consequently she should have made 'negative punishment' as her second pillar as she uses it in every show I watched so far (I admit I only watched a few - while her VS dog trainings boots are awesome, they still don't get me to watch every episode :) ).

Edited March 31, 2016 by Willem

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

consequently she should have made 'negative punishment' as her second pillar

Flawed logic.

She includes "negative punishment" with "positive reinforcement" which is her "first pillar"

In the diagram bit she says "use positive reinforcement" not "this pillar is positive reinforcement"

You're arguing about semantics. She named her first thing - "first pillar" and wrote a description, she did not equate it with the scientific term which is part of Operant conditioning.

And I so hope someone comes up with a better naming system for the components of Operant Conditioning and the science study it is part of. Cos the semantic are really really confusing. Which is why she was trying to avoid the terms as much as possible.

[Willem]

yeah, but if you follow the link under 'The Four Pillars of Positive Training:'

1. The use of positive reinforcement
   

she dedicates a whole site to 'positive reinforcement' - where is her site where she explains 'The use of 'negative punishment' she shows all the time in her shows?...because the scientific terms are so confusing it seems to be even more important to provide some clarifications for her readers...but nil, zilch...

anyway, you might be right, too much semantic...

what bothers me are her generalisations for the sake of marketing, e.g. what does she actually mean wrt outdated, unsuitable and old fashion trainings methods in contrast to her shiny modern newly developed trainings philosophy?.... when B.F. Skinner issued his first findings (e.g. http://uwf.edu/ejordan/web/Learning_Blog/Entries/2011/7/18_Gulfarim_Vital_Details_files/How%20to%20Teach%20Animals%20by%20Skinner.pdf - 1951) she wasn't even born!...and e-collars are not a tool of the past either!

ETA:...bugger, forgot to mention her VS dog trainings boots in this post...

Edited March 31, 2016 by Willem

[Willem]

it is also 'worthwhile' to have a look at her The Science Behind Positive Training page and the links she lists - for sure they are better sources out there for dog training, and the last link 'The long-terms Effects of Spanking' is about kids!!!...nothing to do with dogs!

(I admit it was one of the first links I followed as I contemplated whether the 'Spanking' was somehow linked to her VS dog trainings boots).

ETA: the only really interesting article I found is 'Alpha Status, Dominance, and Division of Labor in Wolf Packs by L. David Mech1'...unfortunately her link links to a site where you have to pay $30 for the article - here the free version: http://www.wolf.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/267alphastatus_english.pdf

However, the article is solely about wolfs, nothing to do with dogs and it's an absolute mystery why it is listed under 'Scientific Links About Positive Training vs Dominance and Punishment-Based Training'.

...so much about her science behind positive training...

ETA:...here another - free! - link of one of her cited articles http://www.pawsoflife.org/Library/Behavior/Bradshaw_2009.pdf ...somehow interesting, but I fail to see that it adds to her 'Science behind Positive Training'...looks like she just filled the page without having read the articles...I guess the main thing for her is that it looks good...

Edited March 31, 2016 by Willem

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

Don't blame David for that stuff. He knows it's wrong

http://www.davemech.org/news.html

One of the outdated pieces of information is the concept of the alpha wolf. "Alpha" implies competing with others and becoming top dog by winning a contest or battle. However, most wolves who lead packs achieved their position simply by mating and producing pups, which then became their pack.

The other problem with his original study is that it was on unrelated wolves (not part of the same family pack) stuck in a cage/run that was way too small for their relationship comfort.

[Kavik]

it is also 'worthwhile' to have a look at her The Science Behind Positive Training page and the links she lists - for sure they are better sources out there for dog training, and the last link 'The long-terms Effects of Spanking' is about kids!!!...nothing to do with dogs!

(I admit it was one of the first links I followed as I contemplated whether the 'Spanking' was somehow linked to her VS dog trainings boots).

ETA: the only really interesting article I found is 'Alpha Status, Dominance, and Division of Labor in Wolf Packs by L. David Mech1'...unfortunately her link links to a site where you have to pay $30 for the article - here the free version: http://www.wolf.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/267alphastatus_english.pdf

However, the article is solely about wolfs, nothing to do with dogs and it's an absolute mystery why it is listed under 'Scientific Links About Positive Training vs Dominance and Punishment-Based Training'.

...so much about her science behind positive training...

It is quite obvious as to why Mech's work is listed under scientific links about positive training vs dominance and punishment training. If you have read anything of Mech's or watched the YouTube clip linked there, you would know that he has been studying wolves for a very long time, and is the person who pretty much pioneered the term and usage of the dominance hierarchy such as the use of alpha and omega. The original study was done on captive wolves which were not related and were just thrown in together. Not on wild wolf packs which he explains are family units. It is important, because dog training commandeered those terms, and the 'alpha roll' which he explains (and anyone with any sense can see when watching dogs interact anyway) is actually one dog choosing to roll over to the other one, there is no physical force used to get the dog to do this.

He is basically saying his previous work showing a dominance hierarchy in wolves was incorrect, that wolves create a family unit, and that the adults are in charge merely because they are the parents. So any dog training based on his idea of a dominance hierarchy cannot be correct, as even wolves do not have one

Edited March 31, 2016 by Kavik

[Willem]

...but why would you cite an article that - falsely - contradicts 'THE SCIENCE BEHIND POSITIVE TRAINING'?...

a little bit off topic, but here 2 links that explains the 'real' difference between wolfs and dogs:

http://www.everythingwolf.com/news/readarticle.aspx?article=38

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130117152012.htm

the articles are somehow unrelated, however Pat Goodmans article / findings make totally sense in context with Kathryn Lord's findings.

ETA: bugger, it happened again...I guess it is time to quit....

Edited March 31, 2016 by Willem

[corvus]

Willem. Lie down before you hurt yourself.

[Simply Grand]

I'm an expert in dog behaviour, and dog bite prevention is an area of academic interest to me and I recently wrote a text book chapter about it. But that doesn't mean I think I know how to stop a police dog from chomping on me in error. In fact, I know next to nothing about keeping myself safe around a police dog, which is why if put in Victoria's shoes, I would have done what I was told to do, much like it appears she did. I would trust the handlers knew what they were doing and follow their directions, even if a part of me was thinking "Errrrr.... are you sure this is a good idea?". Trainers don't really like outsiders questioning them. It's wise IMO to keep your head down and let them run their own show. I would also assume this may not keep me safe. These dogs do make mistakes sometimes, and they are supposed to be fast and damaging. Handler's can't anticipate everything. Probably they should have anticipated this, but they are only human, and they would not be the first or last humans to fail to anticipate something that seems kind of obvious in retrospect.

... you try to put yourself in Victoria's shoes (yeah, these VS dog training boots look awesome :D ), but at the same time you admit that you have not much experience with police dogs while she still tries to sell herself as the expert for dog training, no matter what realm it is...that's the difference.

Where has she said she is an expert in working dog training of any sort? She is interested in police dog training and has been in discussion with local units. I've never seen her say she is an expert in this field. In fact, she says in the blog post about the incident: "I was honored and excited to attend, and, as is the case with a lot of my involvement in this field, I was mostly there to watch and observe."

Furthermore, it's a moot point. Even an expert may indeed follow the directions of a dog's handlers. It is the polite thing to do, and it's usually a good way to keep safe. You might work in protection on a daily basis, but it's still someone else's dog and someone else's training and you don't know what the triggers might be. So listen to the handler. As has been said several times already, hang around these dogs long enough and you will probably get bitten. It's got little to do with who you are or how skilled or experienced you say you are. It happens.

well, she declares herself as 'one of the world's most recognized and respected dog trainers', however, from a 'recognized and respected dog trainer' I expect to get the science around 'operant conditioning' right (she stresses her scientific approach pretty often). Have a look at her 4 pillars of positive training: while she stresses 'positive reinforcement' (first pillar) she doesn't list 'negative punishment', however she uses 'negative punishment' all the time!!! ...nothing wrong with using it, but don't call it 'positive reinforcement'.

And of course her handling / training is not force free...every time she / we use the leash to pull the dog in the direction we decide to go we are applying force!...a trained dog will just follow without force, but he was not born like this. There are a lot of shows in which she heavily (as far as it is possible with her VS dog training boots :D ) is pulling the leash to control the dog - it's not force free!

She is obviously a smart business woman with a selling concept and her acting and catwalk performance in her shows might draw some audience (but won't get her an Oscar), however, IMO she is not a very authentic person, and for me the later one is a very important 'pillar' when it comes to dog training.

ETA:...and I couldn't find any disclaimer on her page that would exclude working dogs and / or police dogs from her expertise.

This is definitely why she was bitten. Police dogs can't stand it when you forget to mention negative punishment.