# Uncomfortable with dog trainer



## Hitchington (Jun 11, 2012)

Hi. I went to the firsttraining class and feel uncomfortable. The first class was without our dogs. When I adopted my dog he was already amazeingly well trained. I am starting a beginner training class, so I can make sure he stays trained, and I might want to go on to do something like agility.

Here is the problems. 

First off the trainer told us because of where we live we probably dont walk ourdogs. I do walk my dog usually 2 or more hours a day, and I don't like people making assumptions about me.

Next, the trainer keept on incisting that since my dog is a shepherd mix that he is aggressive to other dogs. Hitch is never aggressive with other animals, not with dogs, nor cats, nor horses, nor people. I don't like people making assumptions about my dog without meeting him.

Third, he is making everyone buy either the gentle leader or the front lead harnesses. Hitch does not pull, and he listens to me well just using a normal harness or a collar along with verbal commands. I have tried on the gentle leader my mom has and Hitch hates it, I don't know why I would make him wear it if he is great in what he currently has. Let me again remind everyone that the guy has never met Hitch. I don't mind bringing my mom's gentle leader into class and using it if Hitch all of a sudden changes personality drastically when meating the guy, but I would rather use one of Hitch's current harness.

Am I being to offended for no reason? Is it normal for a dog trainer to be making these assumptions without knowing me or Hitch? Do dog trainers always reccomment training devices without ever meeting the dogs? What should I do, I have already paid a lot of money up front?

Thank you all for your time.


----------



## lisaj1354 (Feb 23, 2008)

Have a talk with the trainer and tell him/her that making such broad assumptions does all the dogs - yours in particular - a grave disservice.

If she/he doesn't change his/her approach, then speak to the manager and see about taking a different class.


----------



## georgiapeach (Mar 17, 2012)

I think you have every right to feel offended. The comment about assuming that your dog must be aggressive w/out even meeting him was a big red flag for me. I'd give the trainer one more chance with your dog present. If he's still negative, I'd ask to be put in a different class with a different trainer (and give the manager your valid reasons as to why).


----------



## winniec777 (Apr 20, 2008)

I would give no more chances. Any trainer who makes recommendations about dogs he's never evaluated is a lousy trainer. Get your money back and find someone who knows what they're doing.


----------



## titiaamor (Nov 17, 2011)

Yes, exactly. Do this ASAP.


winniec777 said:


> I would give no more chances. Any trainer who makes recommendations about dogs he's never evaluated is a lousy trainer. Get your money back and find someone who knows what they're doing.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

winniec777 said:


> I would give no more chances. Any trainer who makes recommendations about dogs he's never evaluated is a lousy trainer. Get your money back and find someone who knows what they're doing.


Mind-boggling, through the years I have met a few trainers that thought they were solving world problems and had a high opinion of themselves. So high that they did not have to actually see the dog they possibly might get for training.

A trainer like this usually trains all the dogs the same, I would compare it to a blacksmith making a horse's hoof fit a shoe rather than the shoe fitting the hoof. The latter usually ends up with a horse that goes lame. 

A competent blacksmith has different size horseshoes because he does not know what shoe he needs before he sees the horse, just as a good dog trainer should have many different tools in their dog training bag as he knows nothing about the dog before he meets him. I would run from this trainer cause he's an incompetent idiot.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

They should have a policy in place where a refund is granted after the first class, especially if it's a dog-less orientation class.

If I were uncomfortable in the least way, I'd take the refund and run like a thief.


----------



## EdDTS (May 30, 2012)

You have every right to be offended. When my clients ask for what I think may be going on with their dog, before I meet the dog, I tell them that what I'm saying probably won't be accurate and it's just based on what they have told me.
However, to make assumptions like the dog is aggressive just based on breed is ridiculous. I'd ask for a refund and leave the class. There is no way this "trainer" really knows anything about training dogs. If he's making everyone buy certain tools then that must be the only way he can train dogs.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

winniec777 said:


> I would give no more chances. Any trainer who makes recommendations about dogs he's never evaluated is a lousy trainer. Get your money back and find someone who knows what they're doing.


Yep, this. 

I also think it's odd that this trainer insists on a gentle leader/front-clip harness. In all of the classes I've been to, the trainers insisted on a normal flat collar.


----------



## PatchworkRobot (Aug 24, 2010)

winniec777 said:


> I would give no more chances. Any trainer who makes recommendations about dogs he's never evaluated is a lousy trainer. Get your money back and find someone who knows what they're doing.


My feelings also.


----------



## Kyllobernese (Feb 5, 2008)

Last Monday, I paid for an 8 week obedience class for Lucy, my six month old Shih Tzu x Maltese. When I arrived there she had a bunch of chain choke collars and a prong collar on the table. She had her Shepherd with her and proceeded to show us what we were going to do with our dogs.

Now I am old enough to know that her method of training is what we "used" to do forty or so years ago because that is how I was first taught. She said we could not use treats. I put Lucy into the class mainly for the socialization which will do her good and won't be using a choke collar on her, the trainer can like it or lump it. The classes are in a park so lots of activity going on and as I want to do Agility with her when she is old enough it is good experience.

Our second class is tomorrow night. We did not do anything with our dogs the first night. Going to be an interesting night. There are only three other dogs in the class: a year old Cane corso x bluetick hound, a seven year old Shih Tzu x and a Westie x Heeler cross.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

Crantastic said:


> Yep, this.
> 
> I also think it's odd that this trainer insists on a gentle leader/front-clip harness. In all of the classes I've been to, the trainers insisted on a normal flat collar.


I often recommend a front attach for dogs who pull (it's one of the things I ask about in that first, dog-less, class) but I don't insist on it. Sometimes people make general statements that other people take as directed specifically towards them. I'd probably wait and see how skilled the trainer is with actual dogs there before making a snap judgment. I'm not a big fan of head halters, but I would rather see someone encouraging people to buy one (especially when a less aversive piece of equipment like a front attach harness is also offered) than see them slap a choke, prong or shock collar on every dog in the class.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

Kyllobernese said:


> Last Monday, I paid for an 8 week obedience class for Lucy, my six month old Shih Tzu x Maltese. When I arrived there she had a bunch of chain choke collars and a prong collar on the table. She had her Shepherd with her and proceeded to show us what we were going to do with our dogs.
> 
> Now I am old enough to know that her method of training is what we "used" to do forty or so years ago because that is how I was first taught. She said we could not use treats. I put Lucy into the class mainly for the socialization which will do her good and won't be using a choke collar on her, the trainer can like it or lump it. The classes are in a park so lots of activity going on and as I want to do Agility with her when she is old enough it is good experience.
> 
> Our second class is tomorrow night. We did not do anything with our dogs the first night. Going to be an interesting night. There are only three other dogs in the class: a year old Cane corso x bluetick hound, a seven year old Shih Tzu x and a Westie x Heeler cross.


Honestly? If you aren't comfortable in the class, and the dogs who are on the prong-and-chokes are not comfortable, it's not likely to be a great socialization experience for your dog.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Kyllobernese said:


> She said we could not use treats. I put Lucy into the class mainly for the socialization which will do her good and won't be using a choke collar on her, the trainer can like it or lump it.


Are you a treat trainer ? What are you going to do if your dog shows a moment of utter brilliance ? feed ??? 

Sounds like potential mutiny on the bounty, lol. 


Handlers DO need to make the decisions for their own dogs. Trainers should be merely making suggestions.


----------



## trainingjunkie (Feb 10, 2010)

My all-time worst training experience came when I showed up for a new class. I had driven 45 minutes to attend. I called ahead and talked to the trainer about methods. She claimed to be a positive reinforcement trainer. 

I showed up with my two dogs heeling side by side on my left. They were calm and happy and never pulled. My "classmates" entered one by one being dragged by their handlers. This was supposed to be a competition level session. I was pretty concerned by the chaos and lack of control. Once everyone was in the room and the other dogs calmed down, I asked the trainer where I could put my training bag. She told me to put it in a different room. I asked if I could keep it closer as I had my treats and toys in it and I was planning on rotating reinforcers. 

The trainer went nuts and actually turned to the class and said, "Class! Class! This person thinks she's going to bring treats into this room! She needs to BRIBE her dogs to get them to work for her!" I then asked her what she used as a reinforcer, as she billed herself as a positive reinforcement trainer. Praise. Praise alone. I thanked her for her time and started to walk out of the class and she told me to come in and at least try a "better way." I told her that I wasn't going to change how I work with my dogs just to fit in. She insisted that if I brought food into the training room, no one would be able to keep their dogs from trying to eat it. THAT was probably true. She kept telling me to stay and I repeated that there was no point. Her parting shot was, "When you decide to actually learn how to train, you can come back. Sorry you wasted a drive." It was awful.

If it's a bad fit, bail. It's easier than fighting.


----------



## hub3 (Jul 10, 2010)

winniec777 said:


> I would give no more chances. Any trainer who makes recommendations about dogs he's never evaluated is a lousy trainer. Get your money back and find someone who knows what they're doing.


Exactly my thoughts.


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

I think I also vote for look for a new trainer...I'm not down with her making assumptions about a dog's behavior sight unseen. When searching for a new trainer, I would ask if you could observe them and their methods before committing to taking their class. That might save you this situation again in the future.


----------



## bgmacaw (May 5, 2012)

I agree that a trainer shouldn't make assumptions about a dog they've never seen, much less worked with. They also shouldn't make assumptions based on breed.


----------



## Amaryllis (Dec 28, 2011)

winniec777 said:


> I would give no more chances. Any trainer who makes recommendations about dogs he's never evaluated is a lousy trainer. Get your money back and find someone who knows what they're doing.


Yup. Any trainer who assumes all GSDs are exactly alike isn't a good trainer.


----------



## cshellenberger (Dec 2, 2006)

winniec777 said:


> I would give no more chances. Any trainer who makes recommendations about dogs he's never evaluated is a lousy trainer. Get your money back and find someone who knows what they're doing.


THIS!!! Don't walk, run away from this trainer!!!


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Our trainer also assumed a few things that annoyed me a bit. We took our dog to a trainer as he's dog reactive. He assumed that our dog probably never showed calm state, and then he was constantly telling us not to be afraid and be calm. First, just coz he got an issue, doesn't mean the rest is bad. Second, we are not afraid of him being dog reactive, coz the worst case scenario is us getting tired of holding him by leash, we can physically restrain him fine anyways. But the nagging with "don't be afraid, and keep calm" can often make me lose my patience and not keep as calm lol.

Another thing that annoyed me was that he assumed that our dominant dog can someday get aggressive if we can't establish leadership soon. Our dog never ever got aggressive with us, the most he did was a very hesitant growl when he was harshly corrected by me. I think that unnecessarily alarming the owners can make things worse, as the owners starts to think that their dogs are dangerous and starts to be harsher and harsher.


----------



## Hitchington (Jun 11, 2012)

Thank you all for the comments and stories. I have since talked to the trainer and feel a little more comfortable with him. I am going to try the lesson with him this week without the gentle lead or front harness and see what happens. There are not many trainers in our area, so I want to give this a fair chance. If I still feel uncomfortable after he meets my dog I will leave the class.


----------



## winniec777 (Apr 20, 2008)

Good luck with the class. As with many things, you take what you can from the situation, throw out the crap, and move on.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

sheep said:


> Our trainer also assumed a few things that annoyed me a bit. We took our dog to a trainer as he's dog reactive. He assumed that our dog probably never showed calm state, and then he was constantly telling us not to be afraid and be calm. First, just coz he got an issue, doesn't mean the rest is bad. Second, we are not afraid of him being dog reactive, coz the worst case scenario is us getting tired of holding him by leash, we can physically restrain him fine anyways. But the nagging with "don't be afraid, and keep calm" can often make me lose my patience and not keep as calm lol.
> 
> Another thing that annoyed me was that he assumed that our dominant dog can someday get aggressive if we can't establish leadership soon. Our dog never ever got aggressive with us, the most he did was a very hesitant growl when he was harshly corrected by me. I think that unnecessarily alarming the owners can make things worse, as the owners starts to think that their dogs are dangerous and starts to be harsher and harsher.


Frequently reactive owners are an element in creating reactive dogs. If you hold your breath and tighten up on your leash, the dog is likely to assume that something is wrong, and you need his help to handle it. And good leadership (not dominance) is a key factor in working with reactive dogs. What did you harshly correct your dog for that made him growl at you? What was the harsh correction?


----------



## Hitchington (Jun 11, 2012)

I am glad that I gave this trainer a chance. The class is pretty good. We pretty much went over things that my dog and I know already, but it is nice to have someone to watch us, and make sure we are doing things correctly.

I did come to class with Hitch a little early and asked if it was really really neccessary to use the gentle lead or front leading harness, I had brought my moms just in case. He said that Hitch was not pulling and walking nicely on a loose lead, so he didn't need it.

I really liked how this trainer handled Hitch, he does seem to treat each dog as individuals and handles them all well. I am glad to see that, because how he was acting the first day.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Pawzk9 said:


> Frequently reactive owners are an element in creating reactive dogs. If you hold your breath and tighten up on your leash, the dog is likely to assume that something is wrong, and you need his help to handle it. And good leadership (not dominance) is a key factor in working with reactive dogs. What did you harslty correct your dog for that made him growl at you? What was the harsh correction?


My dog became reactive coz a few dogs went towards him aggressively (one would have bitten him if it wasn't for the muzzle). We never really stressed about dogs getting near him, in fact we always allowed it specially if a dog seems friendly (we allowed loose leash for that). But he started to not allow stranger dogs approach, and gradually it became reactivity that even at distance he started to jump and pull and barks towards them.

The very harsh correction I did back then was hitting. Not a good correction and I didn't maintain calm state.  But well, my trainer once got him really aggressive, as in with the intent to attack, after he got corrected harshly with the pinch collar.  It was the first time he ever got that aggressive, it was dealt right away with strong pinch collar corrections and my dog went to submissive and scared state. I didn't like the over correction, although the last correction was necessary so that my dog won't dare to get too aggressive in the future. But I don't like the over correction just coz he wasn't doing perfect sits or broke away from sit positions. I think that he's a good trainer and he does use reinforcements too (he trained air force dogs for years), but we differ in some ideas about training. Also, I feel that the over (and too harsh) corrections would be what could ever get him to be aggressive towards humans, as no matter how rough he can be with playing or wanting attention, and no matter how confident or challenging he might be, he never ever was mean to humans.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

sheep said:


> But well, my trainer once got him really aggressive, as in with the intent to attack, after he got corrected harshly with the pinch collar.  It was the first time he ever got that aggressive, it was dealt right away with strong pinch collar corrections and my dog went to submissive and scared state.


Now THAT'S one trainer I'd definitely be uncomfortable with, if it were me. All things considered.

But, ... it's YOUR dog I suppose. Meh.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

petpeeve said:


> Now THAT'S one trainer I'd definitely be uncomfortable with, if it were me. All things considered.
> 
> But, ... it's YOUR dog I suppose. Meh.


I'm also kind of uncomfortable with that, but aside of the over harshness in some corrections and the dominance theories I don't agree with, he also is a good trainer and uses positive reinforcement too. We have been teaching our dog to do some agility obstacles too through motivation too.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

"Aside from these two major things he does wrong, he's great!" 

Sorry, heh, but that just sounds silly to me. Dominance theory is an outdated concept. I'm fine with some corrections, but I would never keep using a trainer who over-corrected a dog. Good way to end up with a ruined dog.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Crantastic said:


> "Aside from these two major things he does wrong, he's great!"
> 
> Sorry, heh, but that just sounds silly to me. Dominance theory is an outdated concept. I'm fine with some corrections, but I would never keep using a trainer who over-corrected a dog. Good way to end up with a ruined dog.


Just to be fair, by over correcting I didn't mean any kind of horrible torture (although he was harsh when corrected my dog for having shown aggression), and he doesn't traumatize dogs and the dogs likes him too. But IMO, over correcting dogs (breaking positions and so on) by being little tolerant and demanding perfection can motivate the dogs less when training.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

sheep said:


> it was dealt right away with strong pinch collar corrections and my dog went to submissive and scared state.





sheep said:


> and he doesn't traumatize dogs


Submissive and *scared* = traumatized ... in my opinion.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

petpeeve said:


> Submissive and *scared* = traumatized ... in my opinion.


Submissive and scared temporarily is not traumatized, submissive and scared permanently would be.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

sheep said:


> My dog became reactive coz a few dogs went towards him aggressively (one would have bitten him if it wasn't for the muzzle). We never really stressed about dogs getting near him, in fact we always allowed it specially if a dog seems friendly (we allowed loose leash for that). But he started to not allow stranger dogs approach, and gradually it became reactivity that even at distance he started to jump and pull and barks towards them.
> 
> The very harsh correction I did back then was hitting. Not a good correction and I didn't maintain calm state.  But well, my trainer once got him really aggressive, as in with the intent to attack, after he got corrected harshly with the pinch collar.  It was the first time he ever got that aggressive, it was dealt right away with strong pinch collar corrections and my dog went to submissive and scared state. I didn't like the over correction, although the last correction was necessary so that my dog won't dare to get too aggressive in the future. But I don't like the over correction just coz he wasn't doing perfect sits or broke away from sit positions. I think that he's a good trainer and he does use reinforcements too (he trained air force dogs for years), but we differ in some ideas about training. Also, I feel that the over (and too harsh) corrections would be what could ever get him to be aggressive towards humans, as no matter how rough he can be with playing or wanting attention, and no matter how confident or challenging he might be, he never ever was mean to humans.


Poor dog. There are ways to fix on leash reactivity that don't require harsh collar corrections or hitting.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Pawzk9 said:


> Poor dog. There are ways to fix on leash reactivity that don't require harsh collar corrections or hitting.


First, I'm not hitting to cure his reactivity. Please don't make assumptions for such a sensitive topic so that I won't have to explain it for the next 50 assumptions that might come out of this assumption.

Second, another wrong assumption is that we have not tried other ways. My dog used to ignore even the best treats we could use to draw his attention away from a dog across the street (hams and sausages). We simply couldn't find a positive way to desensitize him from other dogs. Dealing it with alternate methods that are not as cruel as many might think is actually more humane than just leaving him in that constant reactivity state. At least now he has been able to meet a few dogs and soon he will be able to actually interact with other dogs and rediscover the joy of playing with them (he only plays with familiar dogs 'till then).


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

sheep said:


> My dog used to ignore even the best treats we could use to draw his attention away from a dog across the street (hams and sausages). We simply couldn't find a positive way to desensitize him from other dogs.


It's not so much about the value of the treat. It's more about distances from the trigger, and remaining under threshold. If food is seemingly not working, your dog has told you that he is beyond threshold. He is too close to the trigger, to begin with. Back up to a workable starting point where he will accept food, even if that happens to be an entire city block away, and gradually reduce distance from there.

just sayin'.


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

petpeeve said:


> It's not so much about the value of the treat. It's more about distances from the trigger, and remaining under threshold. If food is seemingly not working, your dog has told you that he is beyond threshold. He is too close to the trigger, to begin with. Back up to a workable starting point where he will accept food, even if that happens to be an entire city block away, and gradually reduce distance from there.
> 
> just sayin'.


This. Totally works. Takes consistency, TIME, and, depending on the dog and the severity/causes behind the reactivity, lots of it. But it totally works.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

petpeeve said:


> It's not so much about the value of the treat. It's more about distances from the trigger, and remaining under threshold. If food is seemingly not working, your dog has told you that he is beyond threshold. He is too close to the trigger, to begin with. Back up to a workable starting point where he will accept food, even if that happens to be an entire city block away, and gradually reduce distance from there.
> 
> just sayin'.


I already know about the basics, but we simply can't avoid all dogs, and the streets are not that big. And this is the problem - using positive reinforcement while diminishing the distance can work with many cases, and that's why I've started trying this first. But sometimes it's simply not practical (can't avoid dogs and streets are not big enough so that I could avoid them by distances of entire blogs), and we also don't have the resources (calm dogs that we could use to do desensitizing exercises by gradual approach).


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

sheep said:


> I already know about the basics, but we simply can't avoid all dogs, and the streets are not that big. And this is the problem - using positive reinforcement while diminishing the distance can work with many cases, and that's why I've started trying this first. But sometimes it's simply not practical (can't avoid dogs and streets are not big enough so that I could avoid them by distances of entire blogs), and we also don't have the resources (calm dogs that we could use to do desensitizing exercises by gradual approach).


Not gonna get into the training end of this because I was not there to actually view what was happening. But the reply above does have some truth to it. Just as people live in environments that are not perfect. Sometimes the training environment may also not be the best.

One person/family may not have bunches of people and dogs just waiting to help with the training of their dogs. Then if there are people, are they dog knowledgeable enough to be of any help. Then for conversation lets throw dog aggression into the mix and the new hobby called "suing the pants off" of your neighbor/friend who's dog just bit/scratched them or their's.

Some people have to do the best they can with what they have.


----------



## winniec777 (Apr 20, 2008)

sheep said:


> My dog became reactive coz a few dogs went towards him aggressively (one would have bitten him if it wasn't for the muzzle). We never really stressed about dogs getting near him, in fact we always allowed it specially if a dog seems friendly (we allowed loose leash for that). But he started to not allow stranger dogs approach, and gradually it became reactivity that even at distance he started to jump and pull and barks towards them.
> 
> The very harsh correction I did back then was hitting. Not a good correction and I didn't maintain calm state.  But well, my trainer once got him really aggressive, as in with the intent to attack, after he got corrected harshly with the pinch collar.  It was the first time he ever got that aggressive, it was dealt right away with strong pinch collar corrections and my dog went to submissive and scared state. I didn't like the over correction, although the last correction was necessary so that my dog won't dare to get too aggressive in the future. But I don't like the over correction just coz he wasn't doing perfect sits or broke away from sit positions. I think that he's a good trainer and he does use reinforcements too (he trained air force dogs for years), but we differ in some ideas about training. Also, I feel that the over (and too harsh) corrections would be what could ever get him to be aggressive towards humans, as no matter how rough he can be with playing or wanting attention, and no matter how confident or challenging he might be, he never ever was mean to humans.


Leaving the dog's state of mind aside. there's no doubt this can work. But it does nothing to teach the dog that there's no reason to react in the first place. So unless you can be real certain you're always going to be right there to shut the dog down and get him under complete control, it does not solve the problem. Only solves the problem _around you_.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

winniec777 said:


> Leaving the dog's state of mind aside. there's no doubt this can work. But it does nothing to teach the dog that there's no reason to react in the first place. So unless you can be real certain you're always going to be right there to shut the dog down and get him under complete control, it does not solve the problem. Only solves the problem _around you_.


The corrections should be used along with positive interactions in order to solve the socialization of course, or else what we are teaching here is only repressing the reactivity, and not solving the underlying issue which is insecurity/unsureness towards other dogs.

But without diminishing the actual reactivity, there's no possible interaction. That is why we have to diminish the reactivity first. As I've mentioned in some other post already, it was already possible for him to meet a few dogs where he actually could react in a friendly way.

Also, even without positive interaction yet, when a dog calms down or represses the reactivity, he can also start seeing that it's actually not that bad. He can see that passing through other dogs is actually not dangerous and there's no need to react that way.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

sheep said:


> The corrections should be used along with positive interactions in order to solve the socialization of course, or else what we are teaching here is only repressing the reactivity, and not solving the underlying issue which is insecurity/unsureness towards other dogs.
> 
> But without diminishing the actual reactivity, there's no possible interaction. That is why we have to diminish the reactivity first. As I've mentioned in some other post already, it was already possible for him to meet a few dogs where he actually could react in a friendly way.
> 
> Also, even without positive interaction yet, when a dog calms down or represses the reactivity, he can also start seeing that it's actually not that bad. He can see that passing through other dogs is actually not dangerous and there's no need to react that way.


You can A) repress the reactivity or B) solve the underlying issue. Any time you punish the dog for feeling a certain way, you risk making the underlying issue stronger. (I get gigged with a prong collar when I see new dogs). I don't suppose you've read "Click to Calm" have you? Honestly, many dogs are uncomfortable with nose to nose greetings on leash. The leash inhibits natural greeting behaviors and after a few seconds stuck in another dog's face, both dogs are left in an awkward social situation. What frequently comes next is a snark. Repeat this situation often enough, you get reactivity. I think this is something you want. Not necessarily something the dog wants to do. I don't ask my dogs to let other dogs charge into their space. In turn, they don't have any reason to be reactive. They know I'll respect their needs.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Pawzk9 said:


> You can A) repress the reactivity or B) solve the underlying issue. Any time you punish the dog for feeling a certain way, you risk making the underlying issue stronger. (I get gigged with a prong collar when I see new dogs). I don't suppose you've read "Click to Calm" have you? Honestly, many dogs are uncomfortable with nose to nose greetings on leash. The leash inhibits natural greeting behaviors and after a few seconds stuck in another dog's face, both dogs are left in an awkward social situation. What frequently comes next is a snark. Repeat this situation often enough, you get reactivity. I think this is something you want. Not necessarily something the dog wants to do. I don't ask my dogs to let other dogs charge into their space. In turn, they don't have any reason to be reactive. They know I'll respect their needs.


Used incorrectly, a prong can indeed make things worse. But as I've said before, when done correctly, you can diminish the reactivity and then you can make the positive interactions possible (which will be what solves the underlying issue). Also, I already said that our dog was already able to interact with a few dogs in a friendly way. This was not possible before.
I don't remember having said that I've asked my dog to let other dogs charge into his space, his reactivity was not caused by such simple situations nor I ever forced my dog to be invaded by some other dogs. What I've said already was that he got attacked by some other dogs, and they were actually off-leash and we couldn't do much. So now he reacts even with dogs from afar.

I understand that many people who does not like corrections are opposed to corrections, but when some methods doesn't work (we've tried positive approaches that I could research and for some time already), we have to use alternatives. And alternatives are often not as bad as many might think, although it's often misunderstood or not correctly implemented.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

By the way, when I meant that my dog was capable of interacting with a few dogs in a friendly way, I meant that my dog could take initiative in approaching the other dog that is calm, and then he even tries to initiate play after some sniffing and looking. Not some kind of forced meeting or forcing him to submit while other dog invades his space. I just want to explain this so that no more wrong assumptions would be made about this.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

sheep said:


> I understand that many people who does not like corrections are opposed to corrections, but when some methods doesn't work (we've tried positive approaches that I could research and for some time already), we have to use alternatives. And alternatives are often not as bad as many might think, although it's often misunderstood or not correctly implemented.


So, what positive approaches did you try that didn't work?


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Pawzk9 said:


> So, what positive approaches did you try that didn't work?


We've tried to use very high value treat so that I could keep his attention focused on me when a dog appears from somewhere. We walked with treats and did the usual trainings on the streets and keeping his focus. His focus was absolute when we used these new treats (hams and sausages). We avoid crossing with dogs or closeness coz if we are too close, we would sure have threshold. But he would forget about us even when he spots dogs from afar, his reactivity level is too high that unless we have a dog sat calmly from a considerable distance, we can't really get the desensitizing exercise by gradual approach and rewarding good behavior and keeping his focus on us started. But as I've mentioned before, we simply don't have calm dogs we could use to do that, and we also can't avoid other dogs forever (streets are not big enough for him, maybe dogs that are not moving wouldn't trigger as much, but they are dogs that are being walked too).

If I didn't explan it correctly, basically it would be kind of like the one Sophia Yin (although the dogs "used" were the usual stranger dogs that were being walked):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUCl6ndLN7Q


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Forgot to mention, we also tried to reward him when he looked at the other dogs.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

sheep said:


> We've tried to use very high value treat so that I could keep his attention focused on me when a dog appears from somewhere. We walked with treats and did the usual trainings on the streets and keeping his focus. His focus was absolute when we used these new treats (hams and sausages). We avoid crossing with dogs or closeness coz if we are too close, we would sure have threshold. But he would forget about us even when he spots dogs from afar, his reactivity level is too high that unless we have a dog sat calmly from a considerable distance, we can't really get the desensitizing exercise by gradual approach and rewarding good behavior and keeping his focus on us started. But as I've mentioned before, we simply don't have calm dogs we could use to do that, and we also can't avoid other dogs forever (streets are not big enough for him, maybe dogs that are not moving wouldn't trigger as much, but they are dogs that are being walked too).
> 
> If I didn't explan it correctly, basically it would be kind of like the one Sophia Yin (although the dogs "used" were the usual stranger dogs that were being walked):
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUCl6ndLN7Q


Gah. I HATE that video. When you mentioned Sophia Yin, I had a feeling that was what you were going to post. To me, that's a perfect example of what NOT to do. (Then Yin also thinks using a scat mat is hilarious.) She does have some good videos, but the quality of her advice is spotty at times. Again, have you read either "Click to Calm" or "Control Unleashed?" You kind of need to teach the dog what to do in a more controlled environment - like in your house - before just hoping you can get him to offer the behaviors in the real world. He needs a protocol that he understands how to do. If you have absolutely no calm dogs to practice on (I find that hard to believe) Melissa and Doug's has some extremely realistic stuffed dogs that come in many sizes and prices. You can sometimes find a bargain on Ebay. Practically every dog in class treats Cleo (my stuffed bassett hound) as if she were real. Also, you might consider that the chance to get further from the dog (ala BAT or CAT, but I think BAT is better) might be more rewarding in that situation than sausages. Again, you need to teach him the behavior (emergency retreat ala Patricia McConnell in "Feisty Fido") as a behavior. When he's not feeling challenged.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Pawzk9 said:


> Gah. I HATE that video. When you mentioned Sophia Yin, I had a feeling that was what you were going to post. Again, have you read either "Click to Calm" or "Control Unleashed?" You kind of need to teach the dog what to do in a more controlled environment - like in your house - before just hoping you can get him to offer the behaviors in the real world. If you have absolutely no calm dogs to practice on (I find that hard to believe) Melissa and Doug's has some extremely realistic stuffed dogs that come in many sizes and prices. You can sometimes find a bargain on Ebay. Practically every dog in class treats Cleo (my stuffed bassett hound) as if she were real.


Why do you hate that video? I've thought that it was a good way to deal with reactivity.

But well, the stuffed toy idea is interesting lol.  But for example, let's say we try this with a dog reactive dog, and at first he reacts to the plush and then gradually we dealt with it successfully. When we switch to a real dog, would he really get less reactive too, but wouldn't he react when he suddenly realizes that it's alive and not an object? Also, what do you mean by having him offer what I want in a controlled environment at home? Do you mean bringing a stranger dog inside home? Or training? At home there's no distraction so he is ok with the training, but if we bring in another dog it might be chaos and we have even smaller space (and it's not neutral territory).
Actually, there's a small neighbor dog right at the next balcony. When we moved to our current home, he did react a lot to him but eventually got better, although it was when his reactivity was lower.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

sheep said:


> Why do you hate that video? I've thought that it was a good way to deal with reactivity.
> 
> But well, the stuffed toy idea is interesting lol.  But for example, let's say we try this with a dog reactive dog, and at first he reacts to the plush and then gradually we dealt with it successfully. When we switch to a real dog, would he really get less reactive too, but wouldn't he react when he suddenly realizes that it's alive and not an object? Also, what do you mean by having him offer what I want in a controlled environment at home? Do you mean bringing a stranger dog inside home? Or training? At home there's no distraction so he is ok with the training, but if we bring in another dog it might be chaos and we have even smaller space (and it's not neutral territory).
> Actually, there's a small neighbor dog right at the next balcony. When we moved to our current home, he did react a lot to him but eventually got better, although it was when his reactivity was lower.


I hate the video because I dislike watching a dog on a head halter flailing at the end of the leash like a marlin whose just been landed by an inexpert fisherman. It makes me cringe because it looks like a serious opportunity to get some spinal or soft-tissue injuries. It's pretty clear that she's not worked on any skills before putting this dog in the situation. By having him offer behaviors in a more controlled environment, I mean TEACHING him "Look at That" or an emergency retreat in situations that don't set him off, so he can learn what to do, and be more likely able to respond in more challenging situations. This does not mean bringing a strange dog into your home (unless it's stuffed). Honestly, if you haven't read the books I mentioned, that would be a good start towards understanding how to actually work with reactivity in a positive reinforcement based trainng program (not just offering sausage and hoping he's not too over-the-top to take it).


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Pawzk9 said:


> I hate the video because I dislike watching a dog on a head halter flailing at the end of the leash like a marlin whose just been landed by an inexpert fisherman. It makes me cringe because it looks like a serious opportunity to get some serious spinal or soft-tissue injuries. It's pretty clear that she's not worked on any skills before putting this dog in the situation. By having him offer behaviors in a more controlled environment, I mean TEACHING him "Look at That" or an emergency retreat in situations that don't set him off, so he can learn what to do, and be more likely able to respond in more challenging situations. This does not mean bringing a strange dog into your home (unless it's stuffed). Honestly, if you haven't read the books I mentioned, that would be a good start towards understanding how to actually work with reactivity in a positive reinforcement based trainng program (not just offering sausage and hoping he's not too over-the-top to take it).


The halter sometimes scares me too, just by imagining the possible accidents that it could cause by sudden reactions and running. I remember there's a harness that is attached on the front that can make the dog turn when he pulls, it might be a safer option instead of halters. Also, the halter can put pressure on the sensitive muzzle area.

About emergency exit situations, I'm not sure if this counts, but I tell him "go go go" when he gets fixated on a dog, and this is something he knows that I tell him for continue walking (encouragement tone of voice like "let's go"). But well, aside of the gradual approach while controlling the threshold level through treats (or other motivations) and distance, and LAT, I couldn't find much information about alternate positive methods. If those books have more information and alternatives, it might be helpful. Since you are familiar with the books, can you tell me an alternate method that I could apply in my case (given the environment/resources limitations - since my dog's reactivity is better, we don't have the same threshold level limitation now)?


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

sheep said:


> About emergency exit situations, I'm not sure if this counts, but I tell him "go go go" when he gets fixated on a dog, and this is something he knows that I tell him for continue walking (encouragement tone of voice like "let's go"). But well, aside of the gradual approach while controlling the threshold level through treats (or other motivations) and distance, and LAT, I couldn't find much information about alternate positive methods. If those books have more information and alternatives, it might be helpful. Since you are familiar with the books, can you tell me an alternate method that I could apply in my case (given the environment/resources limitations - since my dog's reactivity is better, we don't have the same threshold level limitation now)?


You know what? I've given you the names of three very good books that offer a protocol for working with reactivity. Click to Calm, Control Unleashed and Feisty Fido. You might also look at Grisha Stewart's BAT. If you don't want to buy, I suggest you see if your library has them. I can't do justice to a few hundred pages in a post for you. Internet posts can provide some information about where to look, but if you really want the whole picture, you may have to do some reading.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Pawzk9 said:


> You know what? I've given you the names of three very good books that offer a protocol for working with reactivity. Click to Calm, Control Unleashed and Feisty Fido. You might also look at Grisha Stewart's BAT. If you don't want to buy, I suggest you see if your library has them. I can't do justice to a few hundred pages in a post for you.


I guess that I will have to check what the reviews says first to get a better idea which book might be a good start. My only concerns about buying them (aside of the costs), is that they might not have much information that I haven't already heard about, or that the other methods might also not be practical and applicable in my situation due to the environmental/resources limitations.


----------



## Engström (Jul 19, 2012)

It depends upon trainer for sure... I love getting trained for trainer. I hope I will do it someday. It looks fun.


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

sheep said:


> I guess that I will have to check what the reviews says first to get a better idea which book might be a good start. My only concerns about buying them (aside of the costs), is that they might not have much information that I haven't already heard about, or that the other methods might also not be practical and applicable in my situation due to the environmental/resources limitations.


How do you know if something will work until you try it? Its like saying you don't like a food without having tried it. Just because you don't think it will work doesn't mean it won't.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

gingerkid said:


> How do you know if something will work until you try it? Its like saying you don't like a food without having tried it. Just because you don't think it will work doesn't mean it won't.


As I've said before, I've already tried the positive way but it didn't work with our case. I already knew about the existence of these books before this topic, and did some research online about possible positive methods (desensitizing through gradual approach, BAT and LAT for example). I don't know if these books really has much new or useful information for our case, but then I can't just buy every single book to see if any of them have anything new that could really help anyways. Also, if they really present alternate methods of what I did, then the information of these methods shouldn't be that hard to find since these books are popular after all. But I still would give any book a try if it's really worth it, that is why I've asked for some information about alternate methods that could be found in one of these books.

I think that just coz someone uses corrections, it doesn't mean that they didn't try positive methods already or knows anything about them (I'm not a master of course, but then I'm familiar with the basics already). And honestly, I think that my previous posts already gave a lot of information of what I've tried and what is working and how it's working. It's a bit frustrating to get questioned over and over again, and even got wrong assumptions, while I could get so little new information or tips that could actually be used for our case.


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

sheep said:


> As I've said before, I've already tried the positive way but it didn't work with our case. I already knew about the existence of these books before this topic, and did some research online about possible positive methods (desensitizing through gradual approach, BAT and LAT for example). I don't know if these books really has much new or useful information for our case, but then I can't just buy every single book to see if any of them have anything new that could really help anyways. Also, if they really present alternate methods of what I did, then the information of these methods shouldn't be that hard to find since these books are popular after all. But I still would give any book a try if it's really worth it, that is why I've asked for some information about alternate methods that could be found in one of these books.
> 
> I think that just coz someone uses corrections, it doesn't mean that they didn't try positive methods already or knows anything about them (I'm not a master of course, but then I'm familiar with the basics already). And honestly, I think that my previous posts already gave a lot of information of what I've tried and what is working and how it's working. It's a bit frustrating to get questioned over and over again, and even got wrong assumptions, while I could get so little new information or tips that could actually be used for our case.


Relax, it was just a question. No where do you mention any specifics about the positive methods you've used, just that you've used "positive methods".

Firstly, there are four different training "methods": positive reward, positive punishment, negative reward, negative punishment. In animal behaviour/training, "positive" refers to the addition of something and negative refers to withholding something.
Briefly:

Positive reward: animal obeys command, animal is given treat
Positive punishment: animal doesn't obey command animal is squirted with a spray bottle (for example).
Negative reward: I'm less clear on this than the others, but I think it would have to go hand in hand with positive punishment. animal obeys a command and it doesn't get punished.
Negative punishment: animal doesn't obey, animal doesn't get treat (or toy, or petting, etc.)

Secondly, we have no idea about your dog's behaviour, age, history, etc. aside from the information you have provided (which is not very much). Its very difficult to give advice about a dog you know nothing about. Assuming your dog is an adult dog 2+ years old (again, I do not know because its never been said), trying a positive method for a couple of weeks and not seeing any results doesn't mean they're not working, it just means your dog needs more time. Nearly all behavioural issues (aggression, resource guarding, anxiety, etc), especially in adult dogs, take years and years to develop and can't be fixed overnight with ANY method. It can take months to see any improvement, and years (depending on the dog and its history, of course) to fully address the problem.

I also understand what you were saying about being unable to "train" on walks because there are other dogs around... You don't have to completely avoid other dogs on walks, as long as you are rewarding the behaviour that you want (i.e. if your dog looks at another dog without barking, growling, etc. regardless of the distance between them). Once a dog gets within your dog's threshold, your dog is going to react no matter what treats you hold in front of him. At that point you either have to do what you need to in order to keep your dog away from the other dog while it goes past, or move on yourself, even if that means turning down a side street, or just plain walking in the other direction. Then reward your dog once he is calm and listening to you again. Your dog isn't going to suddenly behave perfectly around other dogs, which kind of sounds like what you're expecting.

(most) Dogs don't act perfectly all the time. They're living beings- just like children. You can do all you can do to train them and prepare them to be well behaved, but sometimes they just won't be, even in situations where they've behaved well before.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

gingerkid said:


> Relax, it was just a question. No where do you mention any specifics about the positive methods you've used, just that you've used "positive methods".
> 
> Firstly, there are four different training "methods": positive reward, positive punishment, negative reward, negative punishment. In animal behaviour/training, "positive" refers to the addition of something and negative refers to withholding something.
> Briefly:
> ...


I already provided much information about what I did as positive method, so I'm not going to post about it again. As for how long we've been trying that, it has been some 2 months already. I don't recall having expected perfect behavior from my dog with other dogs (so I'm not sure why you've said that it sounded like I've expected that), but I think that if even with 2 months we are not seeing minimal results (mainly coz there's no ideal environment for training for our high reactivity situation), then the method is not working at all.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

sheep said:


> As I've said before, I've already tried the positive way but it didn't work with our case. I already knew about the existence of these books before this topic, and did some research online about possible positive methods (desensitizing through gradual approach, BAT and LAT for example). I don't know if these books really has much new or useful information for our case, but then I can't just buy every single book to see if any of them have anything new that could really help anyways. Also, if they really present alternate methods of what I did, then the information of these methods shouldn't be that hard to find since these books are popular after all. But I still would give any book a try if it's really worth it, that is why I've asked for some information about alternate methods that could be found in one of these books.
> 
> I think that just coz someone uses corrections, it doesn't mean that they didn't try positive methods already or knows anything about them (I'm not a master of course, but then I'm familiar with the basics already). And honestly, I think that my previous posts already gave a lot of information of what I've tried and what is working and how it's working. It's a bit frustrating to get questioned over and over again, and even got wrong assumptions, while I could get so little new information or tips that could actually be used for our case.


Thing is, just shoving treats at a dog is not all that positive reinforcement based training is about. In your description of what you did that was positive-reinforcement based, it was basically you gave him ham and sausages on walks. Good treats are nice. They aren't effective if the dog is over threshhold. You need to have foundation skills which have been carefully and thorougly taught that you can rely on. That they learn where learning is easy and then those skills are gradually introduced into more challenging situations. I get so tired of people saying they tried positive reinforcement and it "didn't work" and it turns out all they did was try to feed their dog yummy stuff. It's not about the food. It's about the training. Yes, it may take a little longer to build that foundation (your dog probably didn't develop his bad habits overnight) though LAT tends to work quite quickly. Thing is, if you take the "short cut" and try to punish the behavior away, and hope that you impressed the dog enough that no matter how insecure he feels, he's afraid to give that behavior again. Because if he does, chances are your next punisher will have to be more severe to get the same effect, and so on, in a downward spiral.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Pawzk9 said:


> Thing is, just shoving treats at a dog is not all that positive reinforcement based training is about. In your description of what you did that was positive-reinforcement based, it was basically you gave him ham and sausages on walks. Good treats are nice. They aren't effective if the dog is over threshhold. You need to have foundation skills which have been carefully and thorougly taught that you can rely on. That they learn where learning is easy and then those skills are gradually introduced into more challenging situations. I get so tired of people saying they tried positive reinforcement and it "didn't work" and it turns out all they did was try to feed their dog yummy stuff. It's not about the food. It's about the training. Yes, it may take a little longer to build that foundation (your dog probably didn't develop his bad habits overnight) though LAT tends to work quite quickly. Thing is, if you take the "short cut" and try to punish the behavior away, and hope that you impressed the dog enough that no matter how insecure he feels, he's afraid to give that behavior again. Because if he does, chances are your next punisher will have to be more severe to get the same effect, and so on, in a downward spiral.


Actually, I also get so tired of judgemental people who don't know nor understand other people's situation nor they can accept that there are methods that actually don't work with some, while all they do is to make wrong assumptions about what they have done and criticize what they misunderstood and don't agree with.

As I've said before (I must have repeated "as I've said before" a few good times), I have been doing the usual training exercises with him during walks (as a matter of fact, yeah it's not that shoving treats into the dog, it's about motivation, control of trigger and dog's emotional level, making him feel safe and associating trigger with positive feelings instead and so on), and it has been fine, but since he was too reactive that without perfect environment (somewhere that allows good deal of distance plus calm dogs that are not moving nor reacting back), he would lose attention soon and we can't even begin at the supposed lower level before threshold. I'm not sure what else foundations you talk about, although I've asked for some advice already and you just told me to read all the books.

Seeing how you reply is just another typical person who is all about positive methods and when they see someone that uses corrections, all they assume is that they probably knew nothing at all about the positive methods they've used, and then all they can do is to criticize about how they chose the easy route and so on. While ignoring the fact that the methods might in fact not work for every dog and conditions, and that corrections can work as alternatives (my dog had interacted positively with a few dogs already, by taking initiative and trying to initiate play, thanks to not reacting crazily) and are not so bad and dramatic as you and many positive only guys tend to paint as.

Also, at least I was open to learning by asking you some alternate method described in some of the books. And I believe that you wouldn't need to post the entire books just to give some tips that could be useful for our situation.

When we don't agree with someone, we could at least be more polite. If you really love dogs and want to contribute to their happiness by having more people use more positive methods, then do it positively to truly convince people, and not by "correcting" them with all the judgemental and critical way of expressing your disagreement.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

sheep said:


> Actually, I also get so tired of judgemental people who don't know nor understand other people's situation nor they can accept that there are methods that actually don't work with some, while all they do is to make wrong assumptions about what they have done and criticize what they misunderstood and don't agree with.
> 
> As I've said before (I must have repeated "as I've said before" a few good times), I have been doing the usual training exercises with him during walks (as a matter of fact, yeah it's not that shoving treats into the dog, it's about motivation, control of trigger and dog's emotional level, making him feel safe and associating trigger with positive feelings instead and so on), and it has been fine, but since he was too reactive that without perfect environment (somewhere that allows good deal of distance plus calm dogs that are not moving nor reacting back), he would lose attention soon and we can't even begin at the supposed lower level before threshold. I'm not sure what else foundations you talk about, although I've asked for some advice already and you just told me to read all the books..


Yeah, what a horrible concept to suggest that someone actually read a book or two, so they can really understand a training protocol instead of working off snippets that people are willing to spoon feed them over the internet. When asked what your "positive reinforcement" that didn't work was, you answered that you took hams and sausages on walks. Just as you aren't going to learn a training method by a couple of paragraphs I could give you on this forum, I have to form opinions based on the little bit of information you give me about what you do. And excuse me if I don't see how your training helps the dog "feel safe" when your trainer hits him so hard with a prong collar that he grovels.



sheep said:


> Seeing how you reply is just another typical person who is all about positive methods and when they see someone that uses corrections, all they assume is that they probably knew nothing at all about the positive methods they've used, and then all they can do is to criticize about how they chose the easy route and so on. While ignoring the fact that the methods might in fact not work for every dog and conditions, and that corrections can work as alternatives (my dog had interacted positively with a few dogs already, by taking initiative and trying to initiate play, thanks to not reacting crazily) and are not so bad and dramatic as you and many positive only guys tend to paint as.
> 
> Also, at least I was open to learning by asking you some alternate method described in some of the books. And I believe that you wouldn't need to post the entire books just to give some tips that could be useful for our situation.
> 
> When we don't agree with someone, we could at least be more polite. If you really love dogs and want to contribute to their happiness by having more people use more positive methods, then do it positively to truly convince people, and not by "correcting" them with all the judgemental and critical way of expressing your disagreement.


Shrug. I am not typical of any group of people. I simply say what I say, and I don't tend to candy coat it. I was not rude to you. I suggested several really good resources. You'll study them or you won't. I am willing to read books and do research and go to classes and seminars to improve my skills and understanding of how things work and why they work. Interestingly, I don't limit my exposure to clicker training only, but to a wide variety of philosophies and techniques. . If I tried to explain to you what it takes a couple of hundred pages to write, or several days to present properly, you will again be going on spotty and partial information, and probably again find out it doesn't work for you because you only have some of the information.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Pawzk9 said:


> Yeah, what a horrible concept to suggest that someone actually read a book or two, so they can really understand a training protocol instead of working off snippets that people are willing to spoon feed them over the internet. When asked what your "positive reinforcement" that didn't work was, you answered that you took hams and sausages on walks. Just as you aren't going to learn a training method by a couple of paragraphs I could give you on this forum, I have to form opinions based on the little bit of information you give me about what you do. And excuse me if I don't see how your training helps the dog "feel safe" when your trainer hits him so hard with a prong collar that he grovels.


If you've paid enough attention when you have read what I wrote, you will notice that I've said more than just giving sausages and hams.
If you don't have much information about what I do, then don't make those wrong assumptions and then base your critics on them.
And as I've said it before, the pinch collar was the last resource. It was before the pinch collar that I was trying the more positive methods to try to make him feel safe and form positive associations with the triggers. It didn't work, so after 2 months of not working at all and not able to start with lowest level without threshold due to limitations, I've switched to corrections (I've explained how it worked already - after the reactivity decreases, he can actually learn that it's not that bad and he began approaching other dogs without all the reactivity, which in the end is the interaction that solves the underlying insecurity). About what the trainer did, it was over correction that I did not agree with in a situation, and I will talk to him about it soon.

But well, why would it be that bad to give away some tips you have learned from the books? Just some tips or describing a method or two is of course not the same as the entire informations one can learn from the books, but it's a start and it can help to get better idea. Maybe you could give some tip that actually makes me think "that is true, why didn't I think about that??" and get more interested in the books. After all, I can't simply get all the books and read them all to see if there are indeed alternate methods that are useful for our situation, every time people suggest a few books. I'd need to at least read some reviews and know if it's not what I might already know before spending money on all the books.



Pawzk9 said:


> Shrug. I am not typical of any group of people. I simply say what I say, and I don't tend to candy coat it. I was not rude to you. I suggested several really good resources. You'll study them or you won't. I am willing to read books and do research and go to classes and seminarsto improve my skills. If I tried to explain to you what it takes a couple of hundred pages to write, or severak days to present properly, you will again be going on spotty and partial information, and probably again find out it doesn't work for you because you only have some of the information.


I think that one thing is not sugar coating something, another thing is making wrong assumptions and criticizing. 

About the books, maybe it could be partial information, but again, if someone tells me some tips or tell me some few possible alternatives, then I might start to take more interest on the books. For example, what might be helpful if a dog is easily going to threshold while we can't avoid other dogs approaching or have much more distance while they are not calm or sitted? What might be useful to do in this kind of environment? I can actually tell one that I just remembered some days ago - instead of exercising during walks, we could have lots of play and threadmill run for some 30mins before going out. It can actually make a dog calmer and take away all the initial edgy energy so that it can help him be less reactive or at least slightly less.
What I need is something different and not just some set of protocols that might not work well in less perfect environments, what I need is something more than just the basics of doing gradual approaches while trying to have our dog associate the trigger positively. And if the books are really that rich in information, it should have a lot more than what I know, and I'd like to have a small confirmation before deciding what books to get.


Honestly, I don't intend to be rude too and I just wanted to learn from others too. But that doesn't mean that I would have much patience for those who doesn't have much for me and even get judgemental just coz they don't agree/like with something.


----------



## Gally (Jan 11, 2012)

sheep said:


> Also, what do you mean by having him offer what I want in a controlled environment at home?


You said you've used LAT but did you train the behavior first in a non distracting environment with objects that your dog does not react to? For the exercise to work you need to build up distractions slowly and build up from non trigger items so your dog understands the cues before you use them in the "real world".

I would also use the protocol for relaxation if you haven't already. Once you do the whole program you can start adding in things that make him mildly uncomfortable and rewarding him for staying calm. Eventually you can work your way up to doing this with dogs around but it will probably take a long time to get to that point.
http://dogscouts.org/Protocol_for_relaxation.html

Fully conditioning a reactive dog can take a lot longer than two months but is well worth the effort.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Gally said:


> You said you've used LAT but did you train the behavior first in a non distracting environment with objects that your dog does not react to? For the exercise to work you need to build up distractions slowly and build up from non trigger items so your dog understands the cues before you use them in the "real world".
> 
> I would also use the protocol for relaxation if you haven't already. Once you do the whole program you can start adding in things that make him mildly uncomfortable and rewarding him for staying calm. Eventually you can work your way up to doing this with dogs around but it will probably take a long time to get to that point.
> http://dogscouts.org/Protocol_for_relaxation.html
> ...


Actually I've relied more on the attempts to keep his attention on me while not approaching other dogs so soon and from afar (since if he passes threshold level, it would be no use) than LAT. Although what I've also done, before the reactivity got too bad, and after the reactivity got better, is to give him praises and butt scratch whenever he looks at other dogs. If it is bellow the threshold level, it always gets him to wag tail and lower the ears. He just loves the butt scratch and I use the usual tone of voice that he knows it's good (the usual silly happy voice).

But thanks for the link.  I've read everything but the days instructions yet. There are a few good points that sometimes we tend to forget. Although the head halter part is a bit no-no for me (this tool makes me imagine scary things).
I would say that we can get his attention and stay calm around 70% even outside home (but only usual routes), and 95% if we hold valuable treats (although yeah, too high value treats might get him too excited rather than calm).

But well, just wanted to add that what we have been doing is not just corrections. We corrected whenever he reacted, but then we allowed gradual approach and rewards/praises whenever he was not reacting. He's not the type that runs away from dogs, he goes to other dogs instead. So we rewarded whenever he was fine and calm (even if just petting - as we don't want to give too much excitement), and corrected if he reacts, while let him make the choice of approaching calmly. In the end, when he started to be friendly after the sniffing, we praise even more and he got more and more confident towards the dog he met.


----------



## Gally (Jan 11, 2012)

A description of how to go about starting LAT. http://clickerleash.wordpress.com/2...itive-approach-to-dealing-with-reactive-dogs/ Control Unleashed does an even better job of describing it though.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

sheep said:


> About the books, maybe it could be partial information, but again, if someone tells me some tips or tell me some few possible alternatives, then I might start to take more interest on the books. For example, what might be helpful if a dog is easily going to threshold while we can't avoid other dogs approaching or have much more distance while they are not calm or sitted? What might be useful to do in this kind of environment? I can actually tell one that I just remembered some days ago - instead of exercising during walks, we could have lots of play and threadmill run for some 30mins before going out. It can actually make a dog calmer and take away all the initial edgy energy so that it can help him be less reactive or at least slightly less.
> What I need is something different and not just some set of protocols that might not work well in less perfect environments, what I need is something more than just the basics of doing gradual approaches while trying to have our dog associate the trigger positively. And if the books are really that rich in information, it should have a lot more than what I know, and I'd like to have a small confirmation before deciding what books to get.
> .


ham, sausages and butt rubs. I think you really need a training plan. I've told you three good books and one good program to find a training plan. I'm happy to share information with people who are really interested in it, and interested in taking what I offer and taking the initiative to find out more about it on their own (i.e. reading the book). But I'm not getting that feeling here. You admit that you've been doing "watch me" instead of LAT. You don't mention how you used positive reinforcement other than feeding your dog high value treats, telling him good boy and giving butt scratches. 
That's not a training program, and if you actually had a positive reinforcement based training program that failed, I'd be interested in knowing exactly what it was. And guess what? very few people actually have a perfect environment to work in. I know in my classes we have a less than ideal environment to work with - dogs are much closer than they would be out on a walk, and inside a strange location which is more social pressure than being out in the open. And yet, those protocols work. I don't have to punish dogs with a prong collar to get them to stop with the reactivity. And that is all kinds of dogs, including some with really bad habits and owners with not-so-great timing.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

sheep, honestly I think you may not be describing the methods you've tried so far as clearly as you think you have and that is creating some of your frustration with people's replies. Not a criticism, just an observation. It's one thing to say "I tried LAT" or "I tried to desensitize him to approaching dogs" but another to actually explain the specific components of what LAT and desensitizing was _to you_.

For example, I could say "well whenever we see a dog on walks I say look at that and give him a treat." That's not really, truly LAT although I might say to someone, "but I've already tried LAT!" (Not saying that is what you did or said, just using it as an illustrative example.)


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

sassafras said:


> sheep, honestly I think you may not be describing the methods you've tried so far as clearly as you think you have and that is creating some of your frustration with people's replies. Not a criticism, just an observation. It's one thing to say "I tried LAT" or "I tried to desensitize him to approaching dogs" but another to actually explain the specific components of what LAT and desensitizing was _to you_.
> 
> For example, I could say "well whenever we see a dog on walks I say look at that and give him a treat." That's not really, truly LAT although I might say to someone, "but I've already tried LAT!" (Not saying that is what you did or said, just using it as an illustrative example.)


This.



> Actually, I also get so tired of judgemental people who don't know nor understand other people's situation nor they can accept that there are methods that actually don't work with some, while all they do is to make wrong assumptions about what they have done and criticize what they misunderstood and don't agree with.


People will make "wrong assumptions" only when there is not enough information available. When you say you used "LAT" that doesn't mean anything to me, and even if it did that doesn't mean that it means the same thing to me as it does to you. This happens ALL the time in every day language; people interpret different words or phrases in different ways and it can easily lead to misunderstanding if the person you're trying to communicate with doesn't interpret the word or phrase the same way as you do. It doesn't mean either interpretation is wrong, they're just different and without clarification can lead to some huge misunderstandings, which is clearly what's happening here. I hope you're able to reduce (or eliminate) the reactivity in the end.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

gingerkid said:


> This.
> 
> 
> 
> People will make "wrong assumptions" only when there is not enough information available. When you say you used "LAT" that doesn't mean anything to me, and even if it did that doesn't mean that it means the same thing to me as it does to you. This happens ALL the time in every day language; people interpret different words or phrases in different ways and it can easily lead to misunderstanding if the person you're trying to communicate with doesn't interpret the word or phrase the same way as you do. It doesn't mean either interpretation is wrong, they're just different and without clarification can lead to some huge misunderstandings, which is clearly what's happening here. I hope you're able to reduce (or eliminate) the reactivity in the end.


Actually, LAT ("Look at That") is a very specific game that anyone who had read Leslie McDevitt's book would recognize and understand how it is played. But "Sheep" has indicated that she not only hasn't read the book but probably won't. So, if she hasn't read about specifically how it works, but tells me she did it and was unsuccessful, I have to wonder if she really did it, or was doing something else based on an internet post that she thinks was "LAT". When people say that positive reinforcement based training doesn't work for their dogs but positive punishment does (not this specific poster, but other people who say that as well) I frequently find out, if I dig deeper and they are honest, that they were either doing it incorrectly or not doing it at all. Many people seem to think that the only thing that qualifies one as a positive reinforcement based trainer is using lots of treats and playing nice, nice with their dog. (Oh, and "ignoring" bad behavior)


----------



## Deaf Dogs (May 28, 2012)

Pawzk9 said:


> Actually, LAT ("Look at That") is a very specific game that anyone who had read Leslie McDevitt's book would recognize and understand how it is played. But "Sheep" has indicated that she not only hasn't read the book but probably won't. So, if she hasn't read about specifically how it works, but tells me she did it and was unsuccessful, I have to wonder if she really did it, or was doing something else based on an internet post that she thinks was "LAT". When people say that positive reinforcement based training doesn't work for their dogs but positive punishment does (not this specific poster, but other people who say that as well) I frequently find out, if I dig deeper and they are honest, that they were either doing it incorrectly or not doing it at all. *Many people seem to think that the only thing that qualifies one as a positive reinforcement based trainer is using lots of treats and playing nice, nice with their dog. (Oh, and "ignoring" bad behavior)*


I just LOVE how people assume that!!! 
"Well I dont want to have to carry treats and a clicker everywhere for the rest of the dog's life"
"But ignoring bad behaviour wont teach the dog that it's wrong!"
"but I want my dog to follow rules"
"Positive methods dont work for every dog" (this has to be the single biggest myth out there about dogs. it works for every other zoo, movie, and trained wild animal out there, why wouldn't it work for your dog? It's the paople that cant get it to work, not that the dog cant learn using these methods... and I've likely opened a can of worms here...)

I think I'll shut up now, before I make it worse...


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Pawzk9 said:


> ham, sausages and butt rubs. I think you really need a training plan. I've told you three good books and one good program to find a training plan. I'm happy to share information with people who are really interested in it, and interested in taking what I offer and taking the initiative to find out more about it on their own (i.e. reading the book). But I'm not getting that feeling here. You admit that you've been doing "watch me" instead of LAT. You don't mention how you used positive reinforcement other than feeding your dog high value treats, telling him good boy and giving butt scratches.
> That's not a training program, and if you actually had a positive reinforcement based training program that failed, I'd be interested in knowing exactly what it was. And guess what? very few people actually have a perfect environment to work in. I know in my classes we have a less than ideal environment to work with - dogs are much closer than they would be out on a walk, and inside a strange location which is more social pressure than being out in the open. And yet, those protocols work. I don't have to punish dogs with a prong collar to get them to stop with the reactivity. And that is all kinds of dogs, including some with really bad habits and owners with not-so-great timing.


I already wrote about what my training plan was. Keeping his attention and focus on me by doing the usual training exercise through commands, motivated by treats and praises. I don't see how different it really is from the exercises of the protocol for relaxation, which is what you guys describe as the foundations we need to solidify at safer environments before expecting the same behavior outside home. You can resume my method as simply treats and rubs conveniently, while ignoring the fact that the method I've used consisted in rewarding calmness, keeping the positive feeling and making him associate the triggers positively.
Also, how is praising and rubbing him when he looks at other dogs "watch me"?

And maybe those dogs in your class doesn't have such high reactivity that they don't need a great distance or completely still and calm dogs to even make it possible to start without passing threshold.



Pawzk9 said:


> Actually, LAT ("Look at That") is a very specific game that anyone who had read Leslie McDevitt's book would recognize and understand how it is played. But "Sheep" has indicated that she not only hasn't read the book but probably won't. So, if she hasn't read about specifically how it works, but tells me she did it and was unsuccessful, I have to wonder if she really did it, or was doing something else based on an internet post that she thinks was "LAT". When people say that positive reinforcement based training doesn't work for their dogs but positive punishment does (not this specific poster, but other people who say that as well) I frequently find out, if I dig deeper and they are honest, that they were either doing it incorrectly or not doing it at all. Many people seem to think that the only thing that qualifies one as a positive reinforcement based trainer is using lots of treats and playing nice, nice with their dog. (Oh, and "ignoring" bad behavior)


Or maybe you simply often misunderstand and make wrong assumptions of what other people did, when "you try to dig deeper and they are honest". Or maybe you actually don't dig deeper and just make assumptions when they tell you how it failed.

The books might have more information, but is it completely different from what can be found online? Aren't the basics the same?

Also, you've said that other people doesn't seem willing to learn. I've asked you to give a few more information about alternative methods that can be found in the books and you just proceeded to say how you already gave reference of books, so that if I don't want to learn then I just don't want learn. What I feel here is that someone is not really having the patience and is more into judging and criticizing and making wrong assumptions rather than helping. If I don't really care about the books I wouldn't have asked about them anyways.



sassafras said:


> sheep, honestly I think you may not be describing the methods you've tried so far as clearly as you think you have and that is creating some of your frustration with people's replies. Not a criticism, just an observation. It's one thing to say "I tried LAT" or "I tried to desensitize him to approaching dogs" but another to actually explain the specific components of what LAT and desensitizing was _to you_.
> 
> For example, I could say "well whenever we see a dog on walks I say look at that and give him a treat." That's not really, truly LAT although I might say to someone, "but I've already tried LAT!" (Not saying that is what you did or said, just using it as an illustrative example.)


Yeah, actually I've thought that I was clear about the methods, but then it still gets misunderstood. And the more I've tried to explain, the more it gets misunderstood. Honestly, I don't know what more to explain or how to really explain so that it gets understood, but if I have to explain all the aspects of what I did, I could write a book too lol. But well, to tell the truth, I'm regretting how I've let a snowball roll down the mountain and now it's too late. *sigh*



gingerkid said:


> People will make "wrong assumptions" only when there is not enough information available. When you say you used "LAT" that doesn't mean anything to me, and even if it did that doesn't mean that it means the same thing to me as it does to you. This happens ALL the time in every day language; people interpret different words or phrases in different ways and it can easily lead to misunderstanding if the person you're trying to communicate with doesn't interpret the word or phrase the same way as you do. It doesn't mean either interpretation is wrong, they're just different and without clarification can lead to some huge misunderstandings, which is clearly what's happening here. I hope you're able to reduce (or eliminate) the reactivity in the end.


When I don't have enough information, I ask for more and don't make wrong assumptions. Coz it's unfair and it only triggers more misunderstandings (specially in dog forums). And I wouldn't criticize what I don't fully understand too.

But well, about the reactivity, it has been getting better already. He met a few dogs and could take initiative to approach them, sniff them and then try to initiate play. Also, during walks, we could pass through some dogs without him reacting much (but some safe distance is still needed). But he would still react if other dogs gets reactive (and some little guys of the neighborhood can react a lot), but with calmer dogs he's ok now. But with approaches, only with calm dogs (and females works better) or at least friendly dogs can work. He is still unsure about them and we have to let him take the initiative to approach.


----------



## titiaamor (Nov 17, 2011)

I'm so happy to hear it has improved!


sheep said:


> But well, about the reactivity, it has been getting better already. He met a few dogs and could take initiative to approach them, sniff them and then try to initiate play. Also, during walks, we could pass through some dogs without him reacting much (but some safe distance is still needed). But he would still react if other dogs gets reactive (and some little guys of the neighborhood can react a lot), but with calmer dogs he's ok now. But with approaches, only with calm dogs (and females works better) or at least friendly dogs can work. He is still unsure about them and we have to let him take the initiative to approach.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

titiaamor said:


> I'm so happy to hear it has improved!


Thanks!  We still have to be patient and it's hard to find him good friends to meet, but hopefully he will regain the trust for other dogs he once had and see them as play pals instead.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

sheep said:


> I would say that we can get his attention and stay calm around 70% even outside home (but only usual routes), and 95% if we hold valuable treats


I think before you go any further you will need to improve that 70% to something more in the neighbourhood of 99%, and be able to draw upon that whenever neccessary. You can see the dog in the video posted earlier has well above average heeling w/attention skills ("Laying the Foundation" segment). You will also see that the approaching dog has above average attention skills too, and remains entirely calm and generally focused on it's handler, although facing away from the excited dog. Something to keep in mind when recruiting an assistant for the beginning stages.

I admit I'm not all that familiar or experienced with actual LAT, but I would think that a RETURN to above average attention, post "looking", is essential. Does your dog have those prerequisite skills ? At "70%", doesn't sound like it so perhaps something to work on, there.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUCl6ndLN7Q
Merely an observation, but I thought it peculiar that she actually FED the other handler's dog at that one particular point in time (~3:50') then circled around behind the other handler leaving both dogs in a vulnerable physical orientation to each other (~3:57'), these two elements precipitated a "near-miss" face-to-face encounter between the dogs :doh: ooops is right. Rule #1 in my world? .. NEVER feed someone else's dog unless doing so is directly related to the behaviour issue at hand. Rule #2? .. ALWAYS keep yourself positioned between two unfamiliar dogs in close quarters if one or both show signs of reactivity, at least until all safety concerns have been thoroughly addressed. 
Just my nickel's worth.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

petpeeve said:


> I think before you go any further you will need to improve that 70% to something more in the neighbourhood of 99%, and be able to draw upon that whenever neccessary. You can see the dog in the video posted earlier has well above average heeling w/attention skills ("Laying the Foundation" segment). You will also see that the approaching dog has above average attention skills too, and remains entirely calm and generally focused on it's handler, although facing away from the excited dog. Something to keep in mind when recruiting an assistant for the beginning stages.
> 
> I admit I'm not all that familiar or experienced with actual LAT, but I would think that a RETURN to above average attention, post "looking", is essential. Does your dog have those prerequisite skills ? At "70%", doesn't sound like it so perhaps something to work on, there.
> 
> ...


Yeah I need to continue improving his focus so that it can get even better.
The dogs we used for the first interactions were calm and friendly ones, they just sat there waiting for my dog to approach. After that, outside the training we've tried to get our dog to meet a neighbor's dog, but he didn't like him and the other dog also started to get stiff. He seems to not like either too submissive or dogs that are also unsure too, but if the other dog is calm or shows playfulness then he gets the message and feels more confident (if it's female then it also makes things easier lol).

I also wouldn't feed the other dog or put him in a too near vulnerable position, at least before things have improved better.

By the way, one of the other methods that seemed to work with my dog is the following: we have a big balcony that is next to the neighbor's balcony. There's a small dog there and my dog first reacted a lot towards him. What I did is that we go out to the balcony, and whenever he reacts towards him, I take him inside home. After just a few times, he understood the message (going after the other dog = no freedom of going to the balcony) and stopped reacting much (the other dog is very submissive and not reactive, unless towards outside dogs in the streets). The only problem with this method is that it is even less practical outside home, unless we really have dogs sitting still and calmly.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

sheep said:


> I already wrote about what my training plan was. Keeping his attention and focus on me by doing the usual training exercise through commands, motivated by treats and praises. I don't see how different it really is from the exercises of the protocol for relaxation, which is what you guys describe as the foundations we need to solidify at safer environments before expecting the same behavior outside home. You can resume my method as simply treats and rubs conveniently, while ignoring the fact that the method I've used consisted in rewarding calmness, keeping the positive feeling and making him associate the triggers positively.
> Also, how is praising and rubbing him when he looks at other dogs "watch me"?.



That's not a training plan. That's management (of a sort) A training plan would give your dog skills that you could call on when needed. I didn't say that praising and petting your dog is "watch me" but you stated that you don't really do LAT but try to get your dog's attention on you. After you stated that you did LAT but it didn't work.




sheep said:


> And maybe those dogs in your class doesn't have such high reactivity that they don't need a great distance or completely still and calm dogs to even make it possible to start without passing threshold.


I'll bet some of them would make your dog look like a total lump when it comes to reactivity. But we give them skills they can use to overcome it. And we don't have to bring them to their bellies with prong collars.




sheep said:


> The books might have more information, but is it completely different from what can be found online? Aren't the basics the same?


Not really. Often if you get your bits and pieces from various internet sources, you may get enough information that you THINK that you know what you are doing, but you don't really have a basic enough understanding of the procedures and how and why they work to be successful. Then when you don't have the depth of information that you need to succeed, it's the method's fault, not yours.




sheep said:


> Also, you've said that other people doesn't seem willing to learn. I've asked you to give a few more information about alternative methods that can be found in the books and you just proceeded to say how you already gave reference of books, so that if I don't want to learn then I just don't want learn. What I feel here is that someone is not really having the patience and is more into judging and criticizing and making wrong assumptions rather than helping. If I don't really care about the books I wouldn't have asked about them anyways.?


If you are interested, then read them. If you are happy with punishing your dog for being reactive, then don't bother. I can't condense several hundred pages into a book report thorough enough to allow you to fully understand the theories and activities involved.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Pawzk9, with all the last 4 paragraphs, you managed to:
- misunderstand what I've been doing and labeled it the way you think it fits;
- assume that the reactivity of my dog is probably not much compared to those of your classes, and even dramatized the whole prong collar thing by saying to use them to bring the dogs to their bellies (next time maybe dragging the dog by the collar also?);
- assumed that I blamed the method when I've thought I know all but it didn't work - I've been saying what I did didn't work, and what I've learned couldn't be applied due to the limitations, and then asked for more information or tips, a few good times. At least other members tried to give some of their two cents while not being as judgmental or non judgmental at all;
- that I'm happy punishing my dog instead - how more judgmental can it get?


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

sheep said:


> Pawzk9, with all the last 4 paragraphs, you managed to:
> - misunderstand what I've been doing and labeled it the way you think it fits;
> - assume that the reactivity of my dog is probably not much compared to those of your classes, and even dramatized the whole prong collar thing by saying to use them to bring the dogs to their bellies (next time maybe dragging the dog by the collar also?);
> - assumed that I blamed the method when I've thought I know all but it didn't work - I've been saying what I did didn't work, and what I've learned couldn't be applied due to the limitations, and then asked for more information or tips, a few good times. At least other members tried to give some of their two cents while not being as judgmental or non judgmental at all;
> - that I'm happy punishing my dog instead - how more judgmental can it get?


Shrug. Play the victim if you want to. But every "assumption" you think I have made is based on exactly what you wrote.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Pawzk9 said:


> Shrug. Play the victim if you want to. But every "assumption" you think I have made is based on exactly what you wrote.


I'd say the same. And assume whatever you want to. There's no point in debating when someone is going to assume over and over again how someone is bringing their dogs down to their bellies or are happy to punish their dogs, just coz they don't agree with corrections.


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

Pawzk9 said:


> Shrug. Play the victim if you want to. But every "assumption" you think I have made is based on exactly what you wrote.


I agree, poor writing is the barrier to higher communication, PawzK9. Its not that anyone is attacking you Sheep, its just very unclear sometimes what you are trying to say, or perhaps you are very clearly saying something which has another meaning to someone else (i.e. the rest of us, in this case).


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

gingerkid said:


> I agree, poor writing is the barrier to higher communication, PawzK9. Its not that anyone is attacking you Sheep, its just very unclear sometimes what you are trying to say, or perhaps you are very clearly saying something which has another meaning to someone else (i.e. the rest of us, in this case).


I don't think that saying things like "If you are interested, then read them. If you are *happy* with punishing your dog for being reactive, then don't bother" or other similar things when you didn't understand what someone is trying to explain, or when someone asked for a bit more information before buying the books is really not attacking or being mean. When people can't understand each other, they ask more questions, and not get judgmental for what they don't agree and can't understand.

I honestly don't know how much more information I'd need to provide so that you guys would start to understand a bit or at least not making wrong assumptions to fill the gaps of logic when you can't get what someone wrote (like "I didn't understand what she wrote so let's just assume she's throwing treats to the dog in hope that he would get better?"). But what I see here is that while some members are more polite, some are rather judgmental, and I'm not going to post every single detail that I could remember so that you can finally feel satisfied when you finally find something you can truly criticize instead of just using wrong assumptions.

IMO, if you think that there's not enough information, then ask more questions in a polite way. If you don't agree something, express it in a polite way. Actually, I've thought that this was a neutral forum and not a positive only one. I've joined another forum that is neutral, and never got judged this way just coz I've talked about pinch collars, and the members would actually try to help (and even if some of them don't agree, they never said things like "happy punishing your poor dog").


----------



## winniec777 (Apr 20, 2008)

sheep said:


> how more judgmental can it get?


....you could be asked if you'd rather support nazis....

....carry on....


----------



## titiaamor (Nov 17, 2011)

I just wanted to point out that Sheep is in Portugal and has made high-level grammar mistakes that reveal Sheep to perhaps be someone who learned English as a foreign language.



gingerkid said:


> I agree, poor writing is the barrier to higher communication, PawzK9. Its not that anyone is attacking you Sheep, its just very unclear sometimes what you are trying to say, or perhaps you are very clearly saying something which has another meaning to someone else (i.e. the rest of us, in this case).


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

petpeeve said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUCl6ndLN7Q
> Merely an observation, but I thought it peculiar that she actually FED the other handler's dog at that one particular point in time (~3:50') then circled around behind the other handler leaving both dogs in a vulnerable physical orientation to each other (~3:57'), these two elements precipitated a "near-miss" face-to-face encounter between the dogs :doh: ooops is right. Rule #1 in my world? .. NEVER feed someone else's dog unless doing so is directly related to the behaviour issue at hand. Rule #2? .. ALWAYS keep yourself positioned between two unfamiliar dogs in close quarters if one or both show signs of reactivity, at least until all safety concerns have been thoroughly addressed.
> Just my nickel's worth.


I'd call it at least $5 worth. Great observations.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

sheep said:


> they never said things like "happy punishing your poor dog").


Umn. and guess what - I never said "happy punishing your 'poor' dog" either. Fact is, if you (general you) are comfortable with punishing - i.e. willing to do so when other methods would work better - you're not going to be all that open to other strategies, and likely to give up on them without giving them time to work properly. Possibly not even interested enough to take the time to understand them.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

titiaamor said:


> I just wanted to point out that Sheep is in Portugal and has made high-level grammar mistakes that reveal Sheep to perhaps be someone who learned English as a foreign.


I just wanted to point out that after a year of joining different dog forums, plus a few good years of joining other kinds of forums, this is the first time that I've ever got accused of making high level grammar mistakes. Maybe if I didn't reveal where I live, I wouldn't get accused of that just coz a few members couldn't understand what I was trying to explain.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Pawzk9 said:


> Umn. and guess what - I never said "happy punishing your 'poor' dog" either. Fact is, if you (general you) are comfortable with punishing - i.e. willing to do so when other methods would work better - you're not going to be all that open to other strategies, and likely to give up on them without giving them time to work properly. Possibly not even interested enough to take the time to understand them.


And the assumptions continues... If I really didn't care about learning more about alternative methods that might work better, I wouldn't have asked for more information about the books. Yet all I've got were things like "I already told you about the books, if you don't want to learn, which is what I sense". But well, no matter what, people who uses corrections will often be seen as people who are unwilling to learn about alternate methods anyways.


----------



## titiaamor (Nov 17, 2011)

Oh, I live in Brazil and the mistake you made around the word 'home' a native speaker would never make, and I hear Brazilians doing it all the time- especially my DH! I'm a linguist and ESL instructor, so I could be reading too much into it.


But I didn't mean to accuse, I was only trying to be helpful and say that some nuances might have been missed in the conversation.



sheep said:


> I just wanted to point out that after a year of joining different dog forums, plus a few good years of joining other kinds of forums, this is the first time that I've ever got accused of making high level grammar mistakes. Maybe if I didn't reveal where I live, I wouldn't get accused of that just coz a few members couldn't understand what I was trying to explain.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

titiaamor said:


> Oh, I live in Brazil and the mistake you made around the word 'home' a native speaker would never make, and I hear Brazilians doing it all the time- especially my DH! I'm a linguist and ESL instructor, so I could be reading too much into it.
> 
> 
> But I didn't mean to accuse, I was only trying to be helpful and say that some nuances might have been missed in the conversation.


Hmm can you tell me what is the mistake I've made around the word 'home'? Should I use 'my home' instead of just 'home'? Also, if you don't mind, can you tell me what were the high-level grammar mistakes I've made (or at least some of them)?

I don't think that the grammar mistakes I might have made are what caused the misunderstandings, and I think that the misunderstandings are rather due to how I'm explaining the methods I've used (and some people's reaction towards correction collars). But even so, it would be good to improve my English and learn where I actually failed.


----------



## bgmacaw (May 5, 2012)

sheep said:


> Hmm can you tell me what is the mistake I've made around the word 'home'? Should I use 'my home' instead of just 'home'?


It's typical for the word 'home' to have a personal pronoun ("my home", "your home"), a demonstrative adjective ("this home", "that home") or a determiner ("a home", "the home") in front of it to clarify the meaning.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

bgmacaw said:


> It's typical for the word 'home' to have a personal pronoun ("my home", "your home"), a demonstrative adjective ("this home", "that home") or a determiner ("a home", "the home") in front of it to clarify the meaning.


I see, so it was really that, thank you.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

sheep said:


> And the assumptions continues... If I really didn't care about learning more about alternative methods that might work better, I wouldn't have asked for more information about the books. Yet all I've got were things like "I already told you about the books, if you don't want to learn, which is what I sense". But well, no matter what, people who uses corrections will often be seen as people who are unwilling to learn about alternate methods anyways.


If you want to paraphrase what I wrote to what you think I wrote, you might provide the actual quotes so people can decide whether or not I actually said what you say that I said.


----------



## titiaamor (Nov 17, 2011)

There are several very high level mistakes that a native speaker just wouldn't make (there are other mistakes native speakers make <smile>)

For example, native speakers would just say 'outside' or 'inside' and not include home and other little small things many people might not even notice. I don't want to hijack the thread, but if you'd like you can PM me and I'd be happy to explain the other errors.  I am a teacher and love to help!


But you are clearly an advanced speaker and writer...




sheep said:


> Hmm can you tell me what is the mistake I've made around the word 'home'? Should I use 'my home' instead of just 'home'? Also, if you don't mind, can you tell me what were the high-level grammar mistakes I've made (or at least some of them)?
> 
> I don't think that the grammar mistakes I might have made are what caused the misunderstandings, and I think that the misunderstandings are rather due to how I'm explaining the methods I've used (and some people's reaction towards correction collars). But even so, it would be good to improve my English and learn where I actually failed.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Pawzk9 said:


> If you want to paraphrase what I wrote to what you think I wrote, you might provide the actual quotes so people can decide whether or not I actually said what you say that I said.


I actually should have used that argument of when you started to write all those assumptions about me.



Pawzk9 said:


> I've told you three good books and one good program to find a training plan. I'm happy to share information with people who are really interested in it, and interested in taking what I offer and taking the initiative to find out more about it on their own (i.e. reading the book). But I'm not getting that feeling here.





Pawzk9 said:


> Actually, LAT ("Look at That") is a very specific game that anyone who had read Leslie McDevitt's book would recognize and understand how it is played. But "Sheep" has indicated that she not only hasn't read the book but probably won't.





Pawzk9 said:


> If you are interested, then read them. If you are happy with punishing your dog for being reactive, then don't bother.





Pawzk9 said:


> Fact is, if you (general you) are comfortable with punishing - i.e. willing to do so when other methods would work better - you're not going to be all that open to other strategies, and likely to give up on them without giving them time to work properly. Possibly not even interested enough to take the time to understand them.


Now it would be fair if you could quote what I wrote that showed how I'm probably not interested in learning more with the books or alternate positive methods, and rather be happy to punish my dog. But maybe I could help a bit:



sheep said:


> If those books have more information and alternatives, it might be helpful. Since you are familiar with the books, can you tell me an alternate method that I could apply in my case (given the environment/resources limitations - since my dog's reactivity is better, we don't have the same threshold level limitation now)?





sheep said:


> I don't know if these books really has much new or useful information for our case, but then I can't just buy every single book to see if any of them have anything new that could really help anyways. Also, if they really present alternate methods of what I did, then the information of these methods shouldn't be that hard to find since these books are popular after all. But *I still would give any book a try if it's really worth it, that is why I've asked for some information about alternate methods that could be found in one of these books*.


 (I've highlighted the bold part)



sheep said:


> Also, at least I was open to learning by asking you some alternate method described in some of the books. And I believe that you wouldn't need to post the entire books just to give some tips that could be useful for our situation.


But well, why would it be that bad to give away some tips you have learned from the books? Just some tips or describing a method or two is of course not the same as the entire informations one can learn from the books, but it's a start and it can help to get better idea. Maybe you could give some tip that actually makes me think "that is true, why didn't I think about that??" and get more interested in the books. After all, I can't simply get all the books and read them all to see if there are indeed alternate methods that are useful for our situation, every time people suggest a few books. I'd need to at least read some reviews and know if it's not what I might already know before spending money on all the books.[/QUOTE]

Not quoting the rest since it's redundant.


You see, I've been intending to say that the positive methods I've used/know didn't work so that I've used correction instead. My methods didn't work coz I didn't have enough information and coz of the limitations of the real life, but I have blamed the official methods, the books, and the entire positive training philosophy. That is why I intend to learn more if there are actual good resources, coz if I can learn better ways that can in fact work in similar cases, then I might not need to resort to corrections again in the future, for the similar cases.

I can understand that misunderstandings can happen. But we could be more patient with each other instead of being mean for what we didn't understand.


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

titiaamor said:


> There are several very high level mistakes that a native speaker just wouldn't make (there are other mistakes native speakers make <smile>)
> 
> For example, native speakers would just say 'outside' or 'inside' and not include home and other little small things many people might not even notice. I don't want to hijack the thread, but if you'd like you can PM me and I'd be happy to explain the other errors.  I am a teacher and love to help!
> 
> ...


Thank you, I'd like to have your help for that.  I will PM you for that.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

sheep said:


> But well, why would it be that bad to give away some tips you have learned from the books? Just some tips or describing a method or two is of course not the same as the entire informations one can learn from the books, but it's a start and it can help to get better idea. Maybe you could give some tip that actually makes me think "that is true, why didn't I think about that??" and get more interested in the books. After all, I can't simply get all the books and read them all to see if there are indeed alternate methods that are useful for our situation, every time people suggest a few books. I'd need to at least read some reviews and know if it's not what I might already know before spending money on all the books.




You see, I've been intending to say that the positive methods I've used/know didn't work so that I've used correction instead. My methods didn't work coz I didn't have enough information and coz of the limitations of the real life, but I have blamed the official methods, the books, and the entire positive training philosophy. That is why I intend to learn more if there are actual good resources, coz if I can learn better ways that can in fact work in similar cases, then I might not need to resort to corrections again in the future, for the similar cases.

.[/QUOTE]

Amazon has lots of book reviews. Possibly some of those people can write a better book report than I can. If I give you bits and snippets, that still isn't going to give you enough information to use them correctly. I think a big problem - not just with you - is that many people try to operate on the bits and snippets instead of the actual complete procedures given in the books. Of course I am used to - on this list at least - to get feedback from people who have taken my recommendations on books and read them, and used them. Control Unleashed is sort of the training program I really like because it works with what the dog really needs, and much of it is counter-intuitive to the way we normally think about training. However it sort of presumes a fairly advanced understanding of clicker training. Click to Calm is more basic and offers much of the same sort of program more simply. (both are reasonably priced) Feisty Fido is basic and a quick read (and cheap) The only place I disagree with it is that I really don't like head halters for situations like this. Aggression in Dogs is excellent, but an advanced read (and fairly expensive)


----------



## sheep (Aug 22, 2012)

Pawzk9 said:


> Amazon has lots of book reviews. Possibly some of those people can write a better book report than I can. If I give you bits and snippets, that still isn't going to give you enough information to use them correctly. I think a big problem - not just with you - is that many people try to operate on the bits and snippets instead of the actual complete procedures given in the books. Of course I am used to - on this list at least - to get feedback from people who have taken my recommendations on books and read them, and used them. Control Unleashed is sort of the training program I really like because it works with what the dog really needs, and much of it is counter-intuitive to the way we normally think about training. However it sort of presumes a fairly advanced understanding of clicker training. Click to Calm is more basic and offers much of the same sort of program more simply. (both are reasonably priced) Feisty Fido is basic and a quick read (and cheap) The only place I disagree with it is that I really don't like head halters for situations like this. Aggression in Dogs is excellent, but an advanced read (and fairly expensive)


Thanks for the explanation. I've checked the reviews and the table of contents of the book 'Aggression in Dogs' by Brenda Aloff at Amazon, and the books seems very complete. I've never heard of this book before, but I think that this might be the ideal book to start with, since it's better to have a solid understanding of the nature of aggression before deepening the knowledge of different methods (although it seems that 'Aggression in Dogs' also offers some exercises to do). I've checked the other books before, and 'Control Unleashed' also caught my attention, it seems to be a set of activities/games that can help a dog to be calmer, even towards other triggers.


----------

