# Would you hire this trainer?



## mejohnst (Nov 20, 2013)

We recently moved to a new town. My new vet recommended a trainer for my 1.5 year old Catahoula, who very occasionally displays some very worrying aggression.

The reason I am seeking the opinions of others is I'm concerned about his training style, based on the content of his website. It's vague enough (to me) that I'm uncertain how dominance-based he is. I realize I could call him up and ask him questions, but honestly I don't know what questions to ask.

ETA: Link removed, I have my answer.

It's a smaller town and options are fairly limited. If there's anyone who thinks this guy might be ok, please let me know some good questions to ask prior to scheduling a session.

ETA again: If anyone would care to read post #4 which elaborates on my specific situation, and would care to offer their advice, that would be much appreciated.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

You can post the link. And then if you decide to go with the trainer, you can go back and delete the link. Just ask people not to quote the link.


----------



## jade5280 (Feb 20, 2013)

I would absolutely not recommend any trainer that even remotely suggests dominance or averse training methods when dealing with an aggressive dog. If you are unsure enough about the trainer to make a post here that is probably a good indication to look elsewhere. I personally don't like to go to trainers without a formal education background when dealing with potentially dangerous or serious behavior issues. I would recommend finding a veterinary behaviorist.


----------



## mejohnst (Nov 20, 2013)

I would like to elaborate a little bit. I'm on the fence about how warm & fuzzy I want a trainer to be. My dog, Amos, is a rez rescue at about 12 weeks. I picked him up from the side of the road when we were living there. He has rare and random outbursts with no discernible pattern. At a stranger while in the car, at a human friend across the fence (these were both growl, bark, teeth-baring, totally lose your head incidents). Once I brought a child into my home and Amos just barely contained himself but showed signs of intense fear and I felt he could snap at any moment. And it was this one particular child--up until then, he'd loved the other kids who'd come over.

Most recently, my dog growled/barked/bared teeth at the vet and didn't back down until she had backed way up and I physically redirected him. He had been a dream through the whole appointment, and then I asked her to look at his tooth. When she tried to open his mouth he reacted. She basically told me I was coddling him and I need to be firm. I blew this off...but then, he bit me. In the face.

I take the blame for not listening to his warning. He gave me a growl, which he has never done before and I didn't take it seriously. It was a pretty minor bite, but a bite nonetheless. I am not sure why he wanted me away, or why it so quickly escalated to a bite. This was a couple of weeks after the first vet visit, and a day after he'd been anesthetized and x-rayed. I thought he was recovered from the vet but I suppose he may have still been woozy or traumatized.

Vet has him diagnosed with hip dysplasia and as a distemper survivor (got a look at that tooth). 

Amos' unpredictability is really troubling to me, especially since I am considering having children in the next couple of years. My husband agrees with the vet that the dogs do not see me as someone they should obey...that I am more of a playmate. He says that Amos reacted to me like he would react to our other dog being in his face. Certainly I don't think dominance training is the answer. But what can I do to deal with his unpredictability in a way that doesn't...how can I say this...put him in charge, I guess? I don't want to have to constantly watch him like a hawk for signs of stress in every situation, at times that shouldn't be stressful, like when his friend is passing by the house, or when I am petting him on the couch? He's the dog...he's not the one running the show, right?

Finally...how on earth can a trainer help him with this behavior, when the behavior is so RARE and RANDOM? Like, I doubt Amos will have an incident when the trainer happens to be there. What does positive training look like to correct an aggressive behavior that may not surface when the trainer is there? (Do I not really need a trainer, rather find a way to change my relationship with my dog?)


----------



## ormommy (Mar 30, 2015)

No, I wouldn't hire him. 

1. Check out his blog. He talks about you being the "alpha" and "dominant" dog. This post also gets into it.
2. His private training is very vague, but the "trust and respect" thing makes me nervous.
3. He doesn't exclude "aggressive, nervous, or anxious" dogs from his "pack walking" services. To me that says a lot, that he's willing to throw a known aggressive dog in a group with other dogs and go for a group walk where he states they also receive training. This speaks of either carelessness, overconfidence, or both. I know you aren't looking at dog walking, but it speaks to his general beliefs.

ETA: second the behaviorist, ASAP. Sorry you're dealing with this.


----------



## NicoleIsStoked (Aug 31, 2012)

No way. I wouldn't even give him the time of day. 
Here are the red flags to me:
1) referring to dogs as K9's is usually an indication of harsh training methods and use of aversive tools. This may be a generalization but from my experience, it tends to be quite accurate. 
2) including reactive/aggressive dogs in a group walk is a clear sign that this individual is highly cocky and pretty irresponsible. I'd be willing to bet that dogs in his "pack walks" wear remote collars
3) he claims behaviour problems arise due to lack of respect. That implies that dogs act out of spite to be disrespectful similar to bratty children. This is simply not scientifically accurate. 
4) trainers who use humane, science based methods that utilize rewards are usually very open to say so. They will proudly state on their website that they don't use choke/prong/shock collars, that they train without the use of correction, etc. A trainer that doesn't boast that is usually trying to avoid the fact that they don't follow that philosophy. 

FWIW it sounds like your vet could also use a current education in animal behaviour. 

If your dog is acting out of fear, which he is, a positive trainer will be able to help to build your dogs confidence and reduce/eliminate the fear based defensive aggression. 
You cannot solve fear with intimidation. 
Any GOOD positive trainer should be able to help you, but he recommendation of a veterinary behavioural specialist is a good idea if you can afford it. They are pretty much guaranteed to using only scientifically proven methods and if your situation warrants it, they can also prescribe anti-anxiety meds to help take the initial edge off. 

Good luck.


----------



## lil_fuzzy (Aug 16, 2010)

I haven't read any of his content, I only watched the pack walk video on the home page with the sound muted. And it's a big, resounding NO from me. I would never hire this trainer.

All of the dogs show avoidance behaviours towards him, they are extremely appeasing around him as if they fear a beating, they half-tuck their tails as they sit when he asks, and all of the dogs are wearing prong collars. 

No. Just no.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Anyone who still believes in alpha/dominance/pack leader crap is not educated enough and is not someone you'd want training your dog -- especially an aggressive dog.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> Anyone who still believes in alpha/dominance/pack leader crap is not educated enough and is not someone you'd want training your dog -- especially an aggressive dog.


Although not endorsing the ops trainer. There are some suspect things on website.

I vehemently disagree with crantastics quote here. Most of the best trainers in industry understand the influence of pack structure. 
Show me a trainer with no regard to this and I'll show you a lost trainer, unable to critically appraise the literature, or has alterior motives in proving their school of thought at all costs, to detriment of owners and dogs. Compare the level of structure and obedience from each school of thought. And you will see huge differences In real world results, efficiency and Negative incidents.

http://youtu.be/rNQuqY1oXpE






Here it is being exhibited in real time, with real puppies.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

I agree I would not let that trainer near my dog, and I only read as far as the word 'respect'. 

A good positive trainer could absolutely help you with your dog's issues. I would NEVER use punishment or dominance based methods on an aggressive dog. I have seen it done and it only makes the problem worse.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

I'm in agreement with those above who said no to this trainer.

I'd ask your vet about a full medical work up looking for things like pain, thyroid issues, and other health issues that could cause aggressive behavior. If he's fine medically, request a referral to vet behaviorist. You may also find someone through the IAABC or CAAB.


----------



## BKaymuttleycrew (Feb 2, 2015)

cookieface said:


> I'm in agreement with those above who said no to this trainer.
> 
> I'd ask your vet about a full medical work up looking for things like pain, thyroid issues, and other health issues that could cause aggressive behavior. If he's fine medically, request a referral to vet behaviorist. You may also find someone through the IAABC or CAAB.


I'm going to agree with all of this.

Particularly the full medical work up - Being diagnosed with hip dysplasia tells me there could be some on-going pain issues, and a distemper survivor can have lifelong neurological problems (seizure disorders, etc) which could lead to unpredictable behavior. 

And, to trainers that preach 'dominance'... just say 'No".


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Some of the words he use sound very Ceasar Milan, but he doesn't have any specifics about his training style. I would just email and ask what his training philosophy is, and how he would deal with XYZ problems that you are having with your dog. Just because he uses the word "respect" a lot doesn't mean his training isn't generally sound and mostly positive. I would at least ask him since his website says almost nothing.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

ireth0 said:


> I agree I would not let that trainer near my dog, and I only read as far as the word 'respect'.
> 
> A good positive trainer could absolutely help you with your dog's issues. I would NEVER use punishment or dominance based methods on an aggressive dog. I have seen it done and it only makes the problem worse.


Respect of home is vital when you have a dog expected to follow human rules.

Eating on command. (Positive reinforcement- I.e. Withholding rewards, and giving on desired behaviors) Controlling a desired food source, is the ultimate show of dominance, and goes a long way. Crate training. All of this is establishing resepect. All of this is establishing pack structure. Controlling environment so dog does not make and is reinforced on those behaviors also establishes pack structure.

Controlling access to certain furniture. Or interactions or undesired behaviors to certain family members. Maybe a 4 yr old child. Through good management at start is also enforcing pack structure and respect to the pack leader. Which is something you earn. It is not simply a natural occurrence.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Ah god, not this crap again.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

WesS said:


> Respect of home is vital when you have a dog expected to follow human rules.
> 
> Eating on command. (Positive reinforcement- I.e. Withholding rewards, and giving on desired behaviors) Crate training. All of this is establishing resepect. All of this is establishing pack structure. Controlling environment so dog does not make and is reinforced on those behaviors also establishes pack structure.
> 
> Controlling access to certain furniture. Or interactions or undesired behaviors to certain family members. Through good management at start is also enforcing pack structure and respect to the pack leader. Which is something you earn. It is not simply a natural occurrence.


...what?

I control my dog's environment so she doesn't have the opportunity to make mistakes and/or do things that could be dangerous for her or other animals in the home. I assure you it has nothing to do with her respecting me and/or my house. She doesn't eat the garbage because the garbage can has a lid and is behind a closed door, not because she respects me.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Also to add, although the word 'respect' in itself isn't necessarily a deal breaker, I have never seen a +R trainer describe training in that way.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

ireth0 said:


> Also to add, although the word 'respect' in itself isn't necessarily a deal breaker, I have never seen a +R trainer describe training in that way.


I actually have, which is why I would give him the benefit of the doubt and at least ask. But I agree it's not usually something +R trainers advertise.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Granted, I didn't visit his blog. But nowhere on his main website do I see any discussion of his specific training methods/philosophy or of his experience/education - why is he qualified to be a trainer? 

Anything that is heavy on the testimonials and light on specific information, I'm going to pass on by.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

Watch the video on the guy's front page. His dog's body language makes me cringe.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

Reading the blog, I get the impression that the trainer uses a dominance-style approach to training rather than one grounded in learning theory. For example, in his piece on training calm behavior at the door, the "training" is focused on intimidation tactics (see bolded statements in the quote below).

If I were looking for a trainer to work with an aggressive or fearful dog, I'd want someone with a thorough understanding of learning theory and dog behavior.



> Getting the Front Door Right
> Guests Arrive
> 
> Most people with a dog (unless she happens to be the shy type) have experienced excitement at the front door. As a dog trainer in Flagstaff, arguably the most dog friendly town in America, most clients who call me have a few front door guardians. Reactions I have seen range from an over excited dog barking, pacing jumping, giving no room to the guest; to nervous-aggressive, to straight aggressive. *What ever your personal front door scene may be, if you desire to have more control over these situations, an understanding of jobs and pack roll should be cultivated. When your roll as leader is clearly defined, you will have the respect of the group as the one who sets the rules. *The rules can be whatever you want them to be, if you know the correct way to communicate them.
> ...


from Getting the Front Door Right


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

I actually use a body blocking technique similar to that to teach threshhold (door, gate) manners. But it's nothing to do with dominance and everything to do with "Look, dude, what gets you what you want? Oh yea, manners."

Also, I hate it when my dog takes my roll. Then I don't have anything to make a sandwich with.


----------



## mejohnst (Nov 20, 2013)

Oh, see, this is why I wanted to ask you guys. I had a feeling you could read between the lines a bit better than I. 

Thank you, based on this feedback I will start looking for a vet behaviorist...hopefully I can find one in this state!!

Out of respect for the man's business, I am going to remove the link now. In my neck of the woods, there's definitely a market for his kind of services, unfortunately.

Now, here's another question: Would you ditch the vet who recommended him? Or keep going to her for her very thorough work, and just ignore the behavior advice?


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

I just love the argument that if you act like a leader and have assertive body language, your dog is automatically going to know what you want. And if they're doing what you don't want, even if you never communicated with them what you do want, they're being defiant. I use body blocking too. But the first few times I did it my dog had no idea what the heck I was doing.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

chimunga said:


> I use body blocking too. But the first few times I did it my dog had no idea what the heck I was doing.


Right? They're like, "Huh? Maybe if try THIS way... no? Ok I'll just cut around here and... no?" lol.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

chimunga said:


> I just love the argument that if you act like a leader and have assertive body language, your dog is automatically going to know what you want. And if they're doing what you don't want, even if you never communicated with them what you do want, they're being defiant. I use body blocking too. But the first few times I did it my dog had no idea what the heck I was doing.


I agree with what you are saying here in this specific post. 

It's really not that simple. Trainers who understand the different responses of different dogs, and why they behave in certain ways, will always be a cut above the rest.
Being naive that it plays a role is a bad trainer. Utilizing copy paste approach on how to 'carry yourself with every single dog' is just wrong.
Not every problem is a dominance problem. Not even close. But to ignore its existence and possible effect is equally detrimental.

Another brilliant lecture by ellis.

http://youtu.be/rm21nqCG2Fw


----------



## jade5280 (Feb 20, 2013)

If it were me I would find another vet. I don't ask or take training advice from my vet, but blaming you for your dog acting aggressively during a vet exam when the dog is acting out of pain and fear is a little insulting. 

One time my dog got something stuck in his mouth and he bit SO pretty good when he was trying to look in his mouth. He didn't bite because we 'coddle' him. He bit because he was in pain and it was a reflex reaction. 

Some dog are fine with people poking and prodding them...some aren't.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

sassafras said:


> Right? They're like, "Huh? Maybe if try THIS way... no? Ok I'll just cut around here and... no?" lol.


Please, mom, I'm trying to get over there. I'm sure you're not intentionally blocking my way. Maybe I'll just go the other way. No? Okay.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Some vets, like some dog owners and some dog trainers, have specific philosophies about training and behavior. If their medical knowledge and skills are sound, you can often just ignore whatever training/behavior advice and go on with your life.

Having said that. In this instance I would personally find a different veterinarian. Not strictly because of the advice, but because YOU have a dog who is fear aggressive at the vet. Unless you want your dog to become more and more terrified of the vet with each visit, YOUR dog needs a vet who really understands and is sympathetic towards fear aggression AND is wiling and able to find a work around that doesn't involve bullying your dog.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

mejohnst said:


> I would like to elaborate a little bit. I'm on the fence about how warm & fuzzy I want a trainer to be. My dog, Amos, is a rez rescue at about 12 weeks. I picked him up from the side of the road when we were living there. He has rare and random outbursts with no discernible pattern. At a stranger while in the car, at a human friend across the fence (these were both growl, bark, teeth-baring, totally lose your head incidents). Once I brought a child into my home and Amos just barely contained himself but showed signs of intense fear and I felt he could snap at any moment. And it was this one particular child--up until then, he'd loved the other kids who'd come over.
> 
> Most recently, my dog growled/barked/bared teeth at the vet and didn't back down until she had backed way up and I physically redirected him. He had been a dream through the whole appointment, and then I asked her to look at his tooth. When she tried to open his mouth he reacted. She basically told me I was coddling him and I need to be firm. I blew this off...but then, he bit me. In the face.
> 
> I take the blame for not listening to his warning. He gave me a growl, which he has never done before and I didn't take it seriously. It was a pretty minor bite, but a bite nonetheless. I am not sure why he wanted me away, or why it so quickly escalated to a bite. This was a couple of weeks after the first vet visit, and a day after he'd been anesthetized and x-rayed. I thought he was recovered from the vet but I suppose he may have still been woozy or traumatized.


That just sounds like a scared dog. The vet should not have pressed forward with the exam if the dog was showing signs of fear. He was telling you to back off, the vet told you not to listen. So when you tried to be firm, he took that as you aren't listening to him, and he had to express himself another way. If he had actually wanted to hurt you, he would have. 



mejohnst said:


> Vet has him diagnosed with hip dysplasia and as a distemper survivor (got a look at that tooth).
> 
> Amos' unpredictability is really troubling to me, especially since I am considering having children in the next couple of years. My husband agrees with the vet that the dogs do not see me as someone they should obey...that I am more of a playmate. He says that Amos reacted to me like he would react to our other dog being in his face. Certainly I don't think dominance training is the answer. But what can I do to deal with his unpredictability in a way that doesn't...how can I say this...put him in charge, I guess? I don't want to have to constantly watch him like a hawk for signs of stress in every situation, at times that shouldn't be stressful, like when his friend is passing by the house, or when I am petting him on the couch? He's the dog...he's not the one running the show, right?


It probably looks unpredictable to you, but there are probably stress signals you aren't seeing.



mejohnst said:


> Finally...how on earth can a trainer help him with this behavior, when the behavior is so RARE and RANDOM? Like, I doubt Amos will have an incident when the trainer happens to be there. What does positive training look like to correct an aggressive behavior that may not surface when the trainer is there? (Do I not really need a trainer, rather find a way to change my relationship with my dog?)


I would probably find a behaviorist. I wouldn't ever use a dominance based trainer, but I especially wouldn't use one on a dog that is so scared and unpredictable.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

sassafras said:


> Some vets, like some dog owners and some dog trainers, have specific philosophies about training and behavior. If their medical knowledge and skills are sound, you can often just ignore whatever training/behavior advice and go on with your life.
> 
> Having said that. In this instance I would personally find a different veterinarian. Not strictly because of the advice, but because YOU have a dog who is fear aggressive at the vet. Unless you want your dog to become more and more terrified of the vet with each visit, YOUR dog needs a vet who really understands and is sympathetic towards fear aggression AND is wiling and able to find a work around that doesn't involve bullying your dog.


Really depends what the vet needs to do. And how fearful the dog is. Training and generalizing behaviors will go a long way in making the dog less fearful at vet and in general life with the correct trainer.

It's not the vets job to make the dog not scared of him and everything around him.
As long as the vet is not abrasive and a complete ****** I don't see what he can really do?
At the end of the day, he is going to stick a needle into dog. He is going to assess that painfull leg.
Vet does not have to be the dogs favorite person. Neither is the vet in a position to make the dog less fearful.

The vet just needs to practice as considerately as possible. But not much else he do really. This does not sound like a vetenary problem. It sounds more like a behavioral problem.

Is he only fearful at vet? Or also at other places? Being fearful at vet is common with many dogs. It might not even be fear of the vet. It may be of getting on the examination table. Where he gets vaccinated or assessed. The fear may be a fear of people rather than the vet himself.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Unless it was an emergency situation, I would expect a vet to back off if my dog was that visibly upset about what the vet was doing, and approach it a different way/restrain the dog/let me calm it/etc and so on. 

Yes, the problem is on the part of the dog (fear aggression/possibly pain related), but the vet exacerbated the problem by forcing the dog into the position.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

WesS said:


> It's not the vets job to make the dog not scared of him and everything around him.


Well, that's debatable. I personally believe it's the vet's job to treat their patients competently AND humanely - which includes mental distress. In any case, it IS the vet's job to do a thorough examination and if with each passing year the dog becomes more fearful, at some point that's going to become difficult if not impossible to do. 



> As long as the vet is not abrasive and a complete ****** I don't see what he can really do?


There are a LOT of things a veterinarian can do to put a fearful dog at ease. Sophia Yin has a great DVD about low stress handling for veterinary professionals that every veterinarian and veterinary technician should watch. 



> At the end of the day, he is going to stick a needle into dog. He is going to assess that painfull leg.
> Vet does not have to be the dogs favorite person.


What if the dog is so scared that these things can't be done safely? How can a veterinarian even do their job? The choices aren't "scared" or "favorite person" - there is also the "uncomfortable but tolerant" category which most fearful dogs can achieve with some consideration. Every dog? No. But most IME. And each dog deserves the chance at least IMO.



> Neither is the vet in a position to make the dog less fearful.


This is absolutely incorrect. I guarantee you that a veterinarian is in a very good position to help the dog. How a veterinarian approaches a dog like this can either make the dog better or worse at subsequent visits. Very, very simple things that veterinary professionals can do to help a dog like this beyond saying "don't coddle him."


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

sassafras said:


> I actually use a body blocking technique similar to that to teach threshhold (door, gate) manners. But it's nothing to do with dominance and everything to do with "Look, dude, what gets you what you want? Oh yea, manners."
> 
> Also, I hate it when my dog takes my roll. Then I don't have anything to make a sandwich with.


It's not so much the technique as it is the phrasing: sharing calm energy, LEADER claiming ownership of space, and understanding of jobs and pack roll [sic].

I mean, I use body blocking with my dogs, but I also have taught other cues that I can use to get the desired behavior and I certainly don't interpret my dog's wanting to rush the person coming in the front door as taking on a leadership position. It's more likely to be because Katie's a pushy bitch and wants all the attention (and she hasn't learned that staying put is more rewarding than greeting the person at the door).


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

sassafras said:


> Well, that's debatable. I personally believe it's the vet's job to treat their patients competently AND humanely - which includes mental distress. In any case, it IS the vet's job to do a thorough examination and if with each passing year the dog becomes more fearful, at some point that's going to become difficult if not impossible to do.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sophia yin is an amazing human being. She spent considerable time becoming a behaviorist. She posted multiple dog training videos and focused on training to remedy many issues. Yin was a dog trainer as well as a vet. Most vets are not dog trainers.

Their handing is important as a vet etc. but they are not going to magically change a fearful dog.
This is a cohesive relationship with a dog trainer.

Yin had a phd in behavior.. Another vet may have just as valuable phd in surgery or something else.

So it's not fair to expect the same from every vet.

It's okay for a vet to refer to a trainer. Now if you don't agree with the vets recommendation of trainer that's fine. But his propensity to work inter professionally with others is a plus in my book and to realise his limitations.

The vet does not have the time to build confidence in a fearful dog. He would be there all day and treated only a single dog.

So unless vet did something terrible, no he is not to blame.

We can all learn a lot from Sophia yin and her critique of her own profession. She is a role model.

But you are oversimplifying the matter.


----------



## Joy Job (May 20, 2015)

I'm 'no to trainer' kinda person and if I am in pretty need then I'll go to a better one.. I mean not preferring this one..


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

I am not saying that vets should never refer to trainers or that the vet is to blame for anything. What I am saying is that THIS vet is not a good match for THIS dog in my opinion because their answer to the dog's fear is to tell the owner "don't coddle" and personally I think that's unacceptable. 

There is absolutely time within the context of a normal appointment to either help these dogs or exacerbate their fear _at the veterinarian_. No a vet is not going to make a fearful dog a confident dog in one visit or even ten visits. But how a veterinarian approaches and handles a dog like this at appointments can make the different between a panicking dog and a tense but tolerant dog. The whole point of Sophia Yin's low stress handling DVD is to give veterinarians and their staff who aren't behaviorists simple tools to use in everyday practice.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

I don't expect our vets to be trainers or behaviorists, or to treat behavior issues during a visit. I do expect them to have a basic understanding of animal body language and learning theory (psy 101 level), and to treat my dogs kindly and with compassion and *not* exacerbate existing fear issues. There is certainly time for a vet to interact with animals in a positive manner during a routine visit.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

I mean... as a less extreme example. My dog didn't like the vet looking in her ears last time we were there. Kept moving her head away, pulling back, etc. Instead of telling me 'not to coddle' her and physically restraining her, I was allowed to feed her treats and she then happily stood there and let the vet do whatever.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

mejohnst said:


> Finally...how on earth can a trainer help him with this behavior, when the behavior is so RARE and RANDOM? Like, I doubt Amos will have an incident when the trainer happens to be there. What does positive training look like to correct an aggressive behavior that may not surface when the trainer is there? (Do I not really need a trainer, rather find a way to change my relationship with my dog?)


I can't really offer specifics of course, but a large part of behavior mod involves determining the dog's triggers, anticipating when and where they may occur, setting the dog up in that environment if necessary, and then remaining under threshold and counter-conditioning with food treats or whatever. All in an effort to change the dog's emotional response to the fear-inducing stimuli.

As for the relationship you have with your dog, again that's hard to comment on over the internet because I don't know where you currently stand and where there is room for improvement. This is usually the type of thing that requires detailed, first-hand observation by an outside source such as a trainer or behaviourist. No offense intended .. but yeah, there are probably areas of significant deficiency in the relationship which can be readily rectified by you after obtaining a thorough assessment and knowledgeable direction from a pro.

It's likely a two-part solution involving some of each of the above. And perhaps more.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

ireth0 said:


> I mean... as a less extreme example. My dog didn't like the vet looking in her ears last time we were there. Kept moving her head away, pulling back, etc. Instead of telling me 'not to coddle' her and physically restraining her, I was allowed to feed her treats and she then happily stood there and let the vet do whatever.


Most vets do this. I'll bet hers does too. But your dog is not fearful. Sometimes a vet just has to have dog restrained. Not like you can work with the dog for a week, or months before he gets his injured leg examined. Or desensitize the fear of getting the ear examined.

What you are saying is important, but sometimes it's just not practical. A gentle natured vet goes a long way. But it's unfair to have such severe critique of a professional which such limited evidence.

Just my opinion. 

She can try a different vet, and see if dog responds better after a few visits. (First visit will obviously be a bit better, due to different environment and diff connotations) I.e. Vet has never stuck a needle in the dog or touched an injured leg.

I think his overall medical competencies are of more important consideration than just these considerations. You don't want to end up with a goody two shoes that sacrifices good examination technique to please the dog. When my dog is injured you do what you have to. If it's a possible acl tear that may even mean putting dog under and relaxing the dog to do better tests. Really depends on what needs to be done medically.


----------



## kadylady (Sep 23, 2010)

sassafras said:


> There is absolutely time within the context of a normal appointment to either help these dogs or exacerbate their fear _at the veterinarian_. No a vet is not going to make a fearful dog a confident dog in one visit or even ten visits. But how a veterinarian approaches and handles a dog like this at appointments can make the different between a panicking dog and a tense but tolerant dog.


Agree so much^^ About a year ago I switched my dogs to a new vet. Zoey is super fearful at the vet's office and Luke, my non fearful dog, was getting fearful at the old place. My new vet is absolutely fantastic with all of my dogs. She always gives Zoey a few minutes to acclimate to the room and to her, takes time to feed her treats and just goes really slow with her. Rather than using a tech, she allows me to restrain her when needed during appointments, which the old place did not allow and I think it has really helped Zoey a lot. This has all really helped Zoey and she's been making baby steps to being less fearful about the place. She has even given our new vet a few kisses at our last appointment! Which is a huge improvement from cowering and shaking under the chair the whole time. And my vet didn't have to spend hours training or confidence building my dog. She just had to show her a little compassion and understanding. And because of that, she got all my business and the other place lost it.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Very, very simple things can make a huge difference for these dogs. Something as simple as how you greet and approach them sets the tone for the whole appointment. Who handles them, how many staff are in the exam room. Whether they are on an exam table or the floor. What types of treats and how they are given. What location on the body are you giving vaccines, drawing blood. What type of restraint are you using - for some dogs, less is more. If the dog needs a muzzle, who puts it on and will you take a few minutes to introduce it? Does the dog need medication to smooth things along. How do you talk to them, are you aware of the tone of your own voice and your posture, tension etc? How are you interacting with the owner? 

These are some of my favorite patients because it is SO easy and rewarding to have a visit be neutral instead of negative, even if it's never going to be happy fun time for these dogs. Most of them improve over the years and it can be a real relief for owners to see their dogs be less stressed even if they aren't happy at the vet.


----------



## mejohnst (Nov 20, 2013)

I should clarify: Amos didn't bite me at the vet. He bit me at home, the day after his second trip to the vet, during which he was anesthetized and x-rayed. So he may have still been stressed from this experience.

Sadly, the vet remembered him as "the dog who tried to bite me" when my husband took him in for his x-ray. So I'm not that excited to go back to her, even though she's the first vet who took the time to address my plethora of health concerns.

So, what kind of certification do I look for in a behaviorist? Any specific board, or string of letters after the name? Preliminary research is giving me "certified professional dog trainers" and one vet that offers "behavioral counseling" and referrals to a "certified behaviorist." OK...certified by whom? I may have to go to the big city for this one.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

mejohnst said:


> I should clarify: Amos didn't bite me at the vet. He bit me at home, the day after his second trip to the vet, during which he was anesthetized and x-rayed. So he may have still been stressed from this experience.
> 
> Sadly, the vet remembered him as "the dog who tried to bite me" when my husband took him in for his x-ray. So I'm not that excited to go back to her, even though she's the first vet who took the time to address my plethora of health concerns.
> 
> So, what kind of certification do I look for in a behaviorist? Any specific board, or string of letters after the name? Preliminary research is giving me "certified professional dog trainers" and one vet that offers "behavioral counseling" and referrals to a "certified behaviorist." OK...certified by whom? I may have to go to the big city for this one.


Well to all the previous commenters. This really swings things, towards what I was saying all along. This is a training issue. This is an issue of a fearful dog most probably. This is an issue with regards to being fearful, in its place of comfort, with the dogs carer. Not a vet handling issue at all.

My advice is to seperate your training requirments for your dog, and the medical expertise of your vet. The two are not always transferable. If you like your vet otherwise, not a reason to flee the scene.


----------



## mejohnst (Nov 20, 2013)

Well he did, in fact, growl/bark/snap at the vet, even though I was doing all the things I've learned from positive training resources--being calm, praising and treating for good response to vet, speaking in a positive and soothing manner. Getting bit, in a different time and place, was my own fault, and I have already admitted that. I was not with him for two of the other incidents--one I witnessed from inside the house, the other I wasn't present at all. Yes, it's absolutely a training issue, hence why I'm interested in getting professional training help. He seems to be fine and then he'll just flip out at the drop of a hat. I do need help reading his cues and anticipating this behavior. This isn't one isolated incident, it's a series of isolated incidents, which I really don't want to develop into more of a pattern. I want to help him understand he cannot react this way, to these stressors, even though they are stressful.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

mejohnst said:


> I want to help him understand he cannot react this way, to these stressors, even though they are stressful.


Instead, I would approach it from a "I want him to not be stressed by these situations" mindset.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

mejohnst said:


> So, what kind of certification do I look for in a behaviorist? Any specific board, or string of letters after the name? Preliminary research is giving me "certified professional dog trainers" and one vet that offers "behavioral counseling" and referrals to a "certified behaviorist." OK...certified by whom? I may have to go to the big city for this one.


Karen London, PhD, CAAB
Board Certified 2005
3100 W. Shannon Drive
Flagstaff, AZ 86001
Tel: 928-774-7424
E-mail: [email protected]

listed here http://www.animalbehaviorsociety.org/web/applied-behavior-caab-directory.php

I'm not necessarily endorsing her, you'll have to do your own research and exercise your own judgement.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

ireth0 said:


> Instead, I would approach it from a "I want him to not be stressed by these situations" mindset.


This.

As for the pack/dominance stuff, I just finished debating with some other newbie about that and I'm still tired. I'll just paste a bunch of links and anyone who cares can read them and THEN we can argue about it.

The Dominance Controversy (Dr. Sophia Yin)
De-Bunking the "Alpha Dog" Theory
AVSAB Position Statement on the Use of Dominance Theory in Behavior Modification of Animals
Misconceptions of the Mythical Alpha Dog (Dr. Ian Dunbar)
Wolf expert L. David Mech's site (he helped popularize the whole "pack order"/alpha/dominance thing, but later learned that much of what he believed was wrong)

Plus:

Enforcing vs. Reinforcing – Reflections on Leadership and Dogs
The History and Misconceptions of Dominance Theory
Is Punishment an Effective Way to Change the Behavior of Dogs?
Leader of the Pack

Getting more in-depth with (applied animal behaviorist) Patricia McConnell's series of blog posts about this:

The Concept Formerly Described as "Dominance"
The “D word” and Social Relationships in Dogs
Dogs & “Dominance” –What’s a Person to Do?
Dog Training and the “D” Word


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> This.
> 
> As for the pack/dominance stuff, I just finished debating with some other newbie about that and I'm still tired. I'll just paste a bunch of links and anyone who cares can read them and THEN we can argue about it.
> 
> ...



Love that you quoted Mech. Read his work more carefully. And how he disproved some things in 'wild wolves' but HIS and others, ORIGINAL WORK on 'ARTIFICIAL PACKS' Still stands. As far as I am concerned on wolf/dog relationship, where it exists. We are forming artificial packs, unless you birthed the dog yourself.

Original video from first page of his website. which you quoted. Listen CAREFULLY, to what he is ACTUALLY saying in the WHOLE VIDEO till the END.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

I mostly include Mech in that list (which I copy/paste in dominance-related threads) when people start going on about being the "dominant" "alpha" the way they think wolves do. Wolves aren't like that, and dogs aren't like wolves (wild or captive) anyway. Feral dogs don't even really form packs. And regardless, pack theory has nothing to do with training manners or managing a fearful/aggressive dog.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> I mostly include Mech in that list (which I copy/paste in dominance-related threads) when people start going on about being the "dominant" "alpha" the way they think wolves do. Wolves aren't like that, and dogs aren't like wolves (wild or captive) anyway. Feral dogs don't even really form packs. And regardless, pack theory has nothing to do with training manners or managing a fearful/aggressive dog.


You can always pull the 'dogs are not wolves' card. But I didnt pull it out. You did. So now you cant pull it back. Its either a source backing what you are saying. Or it is not. Let me remind you, that wolves are fairly close ancestors of the dog. In any case, My original source, was an interaction with dogs, observed, by breeder/ respected dog trainer, who has produced many many top quality liters, from, pets, to police service dogs, and observed them, just as well, if not better than Mech's time with wolves.

Typical reply. Let me remind you that you quoted Mech as your source, not me. Now you are pulling it back? Typical. He is a reliable source when you think he is saying what YOU WANT him to say. But suddenly its not a reliable source, when he is saying the opposite. Talk about selective reading.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

ireth0 said:


> Instead, I would approach it from a "I want him to not be stressed by these situations" mindset.


Very much this ^^^^



> So, what kind of certification do I look for in a behaviorist? Any specific board, or string of letters after the name? Preliminary research is giving me "certified professional dog trainers" and one vet that offers "behavioral counseling" and referrals to a "certified behaviorist." OK...certified by whom? I may have to go to the big city for this one.


for (vet) behaviorists
IAABC 
CAAB
ACVB
AVSAB

A little more info: Finding Professional Help


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

No comment on the rest of the links, then? Yin, Dunbar, McConnell, Donaldson? Or are you just going to focus on the one you think I disagree with? (I agree with it. But I do not think that dogs are like wolves. My bad for leaving my usual little spiel about how dogs are not wolves anyway off my note about Mech.)


----------



## missc89 (Jan 20, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> No comment on the rest of the links, then? Yin, Dunbar, McConnell, Donaldson? Or are you just going to focus on the one you think I disagree with? (I agree with it. But I do not think that dogs are like wolves. My bad for leaving my usual little spiel about how dogs are not wolves anyway off my note about Mech.)


It's unfortunate that there isn't this thing called agreeing with some of what someone says, but disagreeing with other things. I wasn't aware that you either had to be 100% for something or 100% against it. Darn, and here I thought grey areas were a thing...


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Yeah, I don't see how the artificial packs Mech wrote about are anything like a dog or two (or even three or four) in a household, anyway. Those were "an assortment of wolves from various sources placed together and allowed to breed at will." They were adults who should have been in their own family packs in their own territories. Of course there was going to be conflict. This all has nothing to do with owning dogs, which are not wolves, would not otherwise be living in family packs, and are not in competition for food or breeding.

I love Mech's video. I have watched it several times. It says nothing about dogs. However, way too many people think that they should base their dog training on how wolves behave thanks to some terrible reality TV personalities spouting nonsense. I link Mech to show people that the idea they have about (all) wolves jockeying for position and attempting to usurp the alpha is incorrect, and therefore they should reconsider the idea of being the all-powerful "alpha" to their dogs.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> No comment on the rest of the links, then? Yin, Dunbar, McConnell, Donaldson? Or are you just going to focus on the one you think I disagree with? (I agree with it. But I do not think that dogs are like wolves. My bad for leaving my usual little spiel about how dogs are not wolves anyway off my note about Mech.)


Not familiar enough with others 'original' work. Dont know if they have any. I can also produce tons of links saying the exact opposite. I commented on the one persons, who's work I am familiar with. And HAVE actually read some of his ORIGINAL work.

Either way, people have different definitions on observations, and using human words to describe them. So your image of 'pack structure' might be similar to my image of 'controlling a food source' i.e. Clicker training. 
So basically I am protesting with your statement that trainers that use the term 'pack structure' are bad trainers. I didn't attack anybody you did. You ruled out great trainers like Michael Ellis, with that one statement. A trainer, that anybody here would be lucky to get ANY exposure to. Dont make blanket statements rulling out some of the top DOG MEN/WOMEN, in the industry.
There will always be grey lines and connotative meanings, and how you apply the knowledge. I just disagree with your blanket statement. 
If you look at Ellis, he is also very critical in how some trainers interpret 'dominance' as a one size fits all approach. Again we are using human words, to describe a world of the dog, which is more instinctual and physical than comprehension of language and human meanings. The auditory stimulus, is to get them more in tune with our human language.

So I agree there are grey areas. So lets not discard some of the greats with 'blanket statements' about how bad 'pack structure' is as a concept. We will agree to disagree, and move on. Also be more careful on who you quote to support your perception of the world. I have read significantly on both sides of the fence. Have you?



missc89 said:


> It's unfortunate that there isn't this thing called agreeing with some of what someone says, but disagreeing with other things. I wasn't aware that you either had to be 100% for something or 100% against it. Darn, and here I thought grey areas were a thing...


I actually agree with this. I dont know if this post is against me. But either way. Grey areas are CERTAINLY a thing. People can take pack structure/dominance approach completely wrong, and then everybody goes labeled like these guys. Its not them against us, and us against them. Its about dogs. And we all share love for our dogs. Otherwise we wouldn't be here, excited to talk about dogs.


----------



## mejohnst (Nov 20, 2013)

ireth0 said:


> Instead, I would approach it from a "I want him to not be stressed by these situations" mindset.


Thanks, this is a very useful way to think of it. I think I've been too much down the road of "I have to eliminate his stressors from his environment," thinking that's the positive training approach, but then I end up feeling controlled by the dog. And I can't always control his environment. Control freaks, anonymous, here!


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> Yeah, I don't see how the artificial packs Mech wrote about are anything like a dog or two (or even three or four) in a household, anyway. Those were "an assortment of wolves from various sources placed together and allowed to breed at will." They were adults who should have been in their own family packs in their own territories. Of course there was going to be conflict. This all has nothing to do with owning dogs, which are not wolves, would not otherwise be living in family packs, and are not in competition for food or breeding.
> 
> I love Mech's video. I have watched it several times. It says nothing about dogs. However, way too many people think that they should base their dog training on how wolves behave thanks to some terrible reality TV personalities spouting nonsense. I link Mech to show people that the idea they have about (all) wolves jockeying for position and attempting to usurp the alpha is incorrect, and therefore they should reconsider the idea of being the all-powerful "alpha" to their dogs.


Again you originally quoted Mech to prove your stance about dogs not me. Mech has always researched wolves, not dogs. So no use trying to back away from it. We are going in circles now.


----------



## mejohnst (Nov 20, 2013)

petpeeve said:


> ...
> 
> I'm not necessarily endorsing her, you'll have to do your own research and exercise your own judgement.


Thank you! My google searches have been turning up dominance oriented trainers and vague "certifications."

Would just like to note: I had no intention of starting a training theory debate. My dogs have been positively trained, though I'm certainly not perfect. It's rough with rez dogs because their origins are unknown. They often display this very zero-to-sixty behavior from calm to batsh** and as the owner it's very overwhelming. You think you've been doing well, and all of a sudden your dog turns into a freakasaurus. I've seen this in several of the rez dogs adopted by friends, into loving homes, and we are all just scratching our heads!

A far cry from my chillaxed golden retriever I had as a child, but still very rewarding relationships!


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

WesS said:


> Again you originally quoted Mech to prove your stance about dogs not me. Mech has always researched wolves, not dogs. So no use trying to back away from it. We are going in circles now.


Again, she has explained multiple times why she used that link. You can agree with some aspects of what a person says and disagree with others. Using a link from Mech doesn't equate to "I agree and support everything Mech has ever said about dogs and wolves"



mejohnst said:


> Thank you! My google searches have been turning up dominance oriented trainers and vague "certifications."
> 
> Would just like to note: I had no intention of starting a training theory debate. My dogs have been positively trained, though I'm certainly not perfect. It's rough with rez dogs because their origins are unknown. They often display this very zero-to-sixty behavior from calm to batsh** and as the owner it's very overwhelming. You think you've been doing well, and all of a sudden your dog turns into a freakasaurus. I've seen this in several of the rez dogs adopted by friends, into loving homes, and we are all just scratching our heads!
> 
> A far cry from my chillaxed golden retriever I had as a child, but still very rewarding relationships!


My dog is from a reserve as well!


----------



## mejohnst (Nov 20, 2013)

ireth0 said:


> My dog is from a reserve as well!


Good for you! Aren't they cool? I wish there was more publicity about the plight of these animals. It is very sad to see so many out there, I wished I could have taken them all with me...


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

mejohnst said:


> Good for you! Aren't they cool? I wish there was more publicity about the plight of these animals. It is very sad to see so many out there, I wished I could have taken them all with me...


She is the best. 

At the shelter I got her from there is now a dog that could possibly be her daughter as well.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

ireth0 said:


> Again, she has explained multiple times why she used that link. You can agree with some aspects of what a person says and disagree with others. Using a link from Mech doesn't equate to "I agree and support everything Mech has ever said about dogs and wolves"


Well not really. He is an original source. You cant quote half his work in a single paper. Its a deviation of facts. You cant agree with half of a single study, and disagree on the other half of the same work. That makes sense on absolutely no level. In his latest work he clearly states, that the preconcieved notions and misrepresentations on wolves were strictly in completely wild wolves born in the wild. Here he described the 'leaders' as the breeding male/female. New 'leaders' would breed their own packs. Before he made conclusions on artificial packs. His work on artificial packs, still dictates alpha theory. It says that in the latest work. 

He also clearly states in his work, where even in wild wolves there are rare cases, where their is challenge for position. (Usually a roaming wolf). But he said it was too rare, to cite it as common interactions.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Yes, and I disagree that dogs are like the artificial wolf packs or that we should train dogs like wolves at all. I said that earlier. That doesn't mean I disagree with Mech's writing, which was on wolves, not dogs. Most people think that we should train and manage dogs like wild wolf packs (I've seen many comments about how "mother wolves" discipline their pups). I link Mech to show people that wild wolf packs do not work the way they think they do.

That said, the OP trains positively anyway and didn't intend for this to turn into a training debate. You said you wanted to move on, so that's fine by me.


----------



## missc89 (Jan 20, 2015)

WesS said:


> Well not really. He is an original source. You cant quote half his work in a single paper. Its a deviation of facts. You cant agree with half of a single study, and disagree on the other half of the same work. That makes sense on absolutely no level. In his latest work he clearly states, that the preconcieved notions and misrepresentations on wolves were strictly in completely wild wolves born in the wild. Here he described the 'leaders' as the breeding male/female. New 'leaders' would breed their own packs. Before he made conclusions on artificial packs. His work on artificial packs, still dictates alpha theory. It says that in the latest work.


The entire point of PhD's and behaviourists and all of that jazz (coming from someone who is studying psychology), if your theory cannot be proven wrong, it's a bad one, and you need to try again. There are two sides to everything, and no one person has all of the answers. Yes, someone CAN agree with half of what person says, and not agree with the other half. For example, someone can believe that feeding their dog raw is better, and someone can believe that feeding canned pre-made food by a company is better. Who is right? Neither, and both, because there is good and bad to both, and it always depends on the individual itself.

Like you, I agree with some things that you say, but I disagree with most of what you say. This is what is called "middle ground" and "not believing everything you read/hear" and it teaches people to question things and makes them go out and do more research for themselves.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

missc89 said:


> It's unfortunate that there isn't this thing called agreeing with some of what someone says, but disagreeing with other things. I wasn't aware that you either had to be 100% for something or 100% against it. Darn, and here I thought grey areas were a thing...





missc89 said:


> The entire point of PhD's and behaviourists and all of that jazz (coming from someone who is studying psychology), if your theory cannot be proven wrong, it's a bad one, and you need to try again. There are two sides to everything, and no one person has all of the answers. Yes, someone CAN agree with half of what person says, and not agree with the other half. For example, someone can believe that feeding their dog raw is better, and someone can believe that feeding canned pre-made food by a company is better. Who is right? Neither, and both, because there is good and bad to both, and it always depends on the individual itself.
> 
> Like you, I agree with some things that you say, but I disagree with most of what you say. This is what is called "middle ground" and "not believing everything you read/hear" and it teaches people to question things and makes them go out and do more research for themselves.
> 
> And clearly my previous post kinda went over your head...but at least I got to repeat my example here.


Most behaviourists/psychologists in the 21st century, and based on the plethora of evidence, all agree, that both nature and nurture play an important role. Hardly the same thing. Again she made the absolute statements that pack structure can not exist and everyone who believes that should be discounted and you should stay away from them. 

I NEVER made a case for the opposite. I am not interested in disproving anybody else. I am interested, in disproving her statement that anyone who talks about pack structure is a bad source. Some of the best sources, feel exactly that way. Also I find a lot of benefit from some of Sophia Yin's experience, and highly admire her, even though my inclination is more balanced, than all positive. I am not interested in working in absolutes. Cranstanic is. 

I am further not interested in all aversive training. (The other side of the fence). If you read a lot of what I say, you will see I am almost completely positive. But the key word here, I dont discount entire work by very reputable people, because it does not fit with my 'conscience' or idea of the world. A lot of it is valid. I acknowledge what each source says. And then I make a decision, on what I chose to do with my own dogs. 

I dont go around pretending, that people, who train dogs with e-collars from puppies, produce some of the best service dogs. Better than all positive. I just chose not to do it. For several reasons.


----------



## missc89 (Jan 20, 2015)

WesS said:


> Most behaviourists/psychologists in the 21st century, and based on the plethora of evidence, all agree, that both nature and nurture play an important role. Hardly the same thing. Again she made the absolute statements that pack structure can not exist and everyone who believes that should be discounted and you should stay away from them.
> 
> I NEVER made a case for the opposite. I am not interested in disproving anybody else. I am interested, in disproving her statement that anyone who talks about pack structure is a bad source. Some of the best sources, feel exactly that way. For example I find a lot of benefit from some of Sophia Yin's work. I am not interested in working in absolutes. Cranstanic is.


Actually if I am not mistaken, all Cranstanic said is that "pack mentality does not apply to domesticated dogs" and that people who believe in this statement to be true are (generally) not good dog trainers because they are using means that have proven to be ineffective when treating dogs with certain types of predisposed behaviour based on the history of dog training and how its come to evolve to what it is today. We are moving further and further away from 'pack mentality' training with every generation with more people going in to canine behaviour and just generally studying the domestic dog more.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Lemme take my initial comment and just --

Anyone who still believes in alpha/dominance/pack leader crap in the context of training/managing pet dogs is not educated enough and is not someone you'd want training your dog -- especially an aggressive dog.

There. Nothing to do with whether or not captive wolf packs have a dominance structure.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

missc89 said:


> It's unfortunate that there isn't this thing called agreeing with some of what someone says, but disagreeing with other things. I wasn't aware that you either had to be 100% for something or 100% against it. Darn, and here I thought grey areas were a thing...





missc89 said:


> Actually if I am not mistaken, all Cranstanic said is that "pack mentality does not apply to domesticated dogs" and that people who believe in this statement to be true are (generally) not good dog trainers because they are using means that have proven to be ineffective when treating dogs with certain types of predisposed behaviour based on the history of dog training and how its come to evolve to what it is today. We are moving further and further away from 'pack mentality' training with every generation with more people going in to canine behaviour and just generally studying the domestic dog more.


I agree with this though. People fail to realise, that we spend hours on end with our dogs. No need to cite wolves. People have more observations withs dogs, than Mech ever had with wolves. The top trainers, have been doing it for generations. Some have evolved some not. This is one who has. How is this for a balanced approach? Can any of the all positives replicate this (this guy IS mostly positive, but not completely, he believes in pack structure, is he a lesser trainer?)? I love it when they always quote opperant conditioning and the work of skinner. But ignore the positive punishment quandrant, and its efficiency, in correcting unwanted behaviours. Its called 'proofing' the dog, for reliability.

Proof is in the pudding at the end of the day. Show me any evidence of this type of obedience in an all positive system.

Forrest Micke - Great trainer.





Edited footage of single trick dogs dont count. The whole point of proofing the dog, is to have reliability in commands for DURATION and in any environment, not when dog feels like it. I can show hundreds of videos like this one. Can you show me one with this level of precision, from an all positive approach? Note multiple dogs. Multiple distraction. Multiple handling of 3 dogs. Note absolute ENGAGEMENT with dogs. This is all positive. The refinement, is not strictly positive however. Perfect sits. Perfect downs, perfect heels. Perfect and immediate response times.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> Lemme take my initial comment and just --
> 
> Anyone who still believes in alpha/dominance/pack leader crap in the context of training/managing pet dogs is not educated enough and is not someone you'd want training your dog -- especially an aggressive dog.
> 
> There. Nothing to do with whether or not captive wolf packs have a dominance structure.


Crastanic: Is Ivan Balbanoav not eductated enough? Multiple IPO world champion. First of the USA. Also has work on establishing pack structure? Immidiate down off of a sprint? How would you train that? Or immediate stand off a sprint? 100m perfect recall, to sit, infront of packed capacity crowd, other dogs etc.





Crantastic: Is michael Ellis not educated enough?





Crantastic: Is Forrest Mike not educated enough? Another video, with another trainer working same time.





I can keep going with this list forever. You have discounted most of the greats, with a single sentence. So no. Its completely unfair, and untrue statement.

Go ahead. Make my day and post a Zack George video.


----------



## missc89 (Jan 20, 2015)

Dude..you're the only one still fighting this battle..

And not many people here like Zak George, so, yeah.

And we're not saying those methods don't work, they do, but not how most people on DF train their dogs. We don't use them as tools, they are an extension of who we are, so we treat them with the same type of respect you would any other living being.

Parrelli is becoming more increasingly popular in the horse world, why? Because it is 'natural horsemanship'. 

You create a bond with your horse through mutual respect and training, not through fear and domination. The same can apply to dogs. Have you SEEN a dog that's been beaten to submission? I've seen more fear reactive dogs through dominance training than I have through +R training. It may be anecdotal evidence, but I think the strong change in the winds of training support my case.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

missc89 said:


> Dude..you're the only one still fighting this battle..
> 
> And not many people here like Zak George, so, yeah.
> 
> ...


I am not endorsing domination, especially in the way you and most people understand it. I am saying the statement she made is incorrect. All the trainers I showed, are balanced trainers. (Watch the video's wonderful for ANY dog enthusiast to see what is really possible at the top level). They all use highly positive methods. 
But her theory on using the word, alpha or pack hierarchy as an identification tool for a bad trainer is not valid. That is all I am saying. I would even say using the word dominance.. But people think of it the wrong way. People like nice words, and dominance is not a nice word. Again in my mind, controlling a food source, for desired behaviours is a form of dominance. Again its in the eye of the beholder. 

All these trainers I showed, have created a mutual respect with REWARD BASED TRAINING. So again I am not disagreeing with you. Just the identification of a bad trainer based on her single sentence quote. Here it is:


Crantastic said:


> Lemme take my initial comment and just --
> 
> Anyone who still believes in alpha/dominance/pack leader crap in the context of training/managing pet dogs is not educated enough and is not someone you'd want training your dog -- especially an aggressive dog.
> 
> There. Nothing to do with whether or not captive wolf packs have a dominance structure.


----------



## missc89 (Jan 20, 2015)

WesS said:


> I am not endorsing domination. I am saying the statement she made is incorrect. All the trainers I showed, are balanced trainers. (Watch the video's wonderful for ANY dog enthusiast to see what is really possible at the top level). They all use highly positive methods.
> But her theory on using the word, alpha or pack hierarchy as an identification tool for a bad trainer is not valid. That is all I am saying. I would even say using the word dominance.. But people think of it the wrong way. People like nice words, and dominance is not a nice word. Again in my mind, controlling a food source, for desired behaviours is a form of dominance. Again its in the eye of the beholder.


I believe she was saying that in her own experience, trainers that deal with alpha or pack hierarchy are not good trainers, In Her Opinion. She is allowed to have one, and you are allowed to disagree with it. 

I agree with Cran in that I would not believe a trainer who uses those types of methods to be effective for what I want to get out of my dog. If it works for you that's fine, but it doesn't for Cran, and I am lead to believe that this may be the stance they were taking. I don't want to put words in their mouths, but that's what I got from it.

If I were to get a dog where I believed that more 'alpha' training would be beneficial, I would probably do it. I'd look for a 'balance' in what works for dogs and what doesn't.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

WesS said:


> I agree with this though. People fail to realise, that we spend hours on end with our dogs. No need to cite wolves. People have more observations withs dogs, than Mech ever had with wolves. The top trainers, have been doing it for generations. Some have evolved some not. This is one who has. How is this for a balanced approach? Can any of the all positives replicate this (this guy IS mostly positive, but not completely, he believes in pack structure, is he a lesser trainer?)? I love it when they always quote opperant conditioning and the work of skinner. But ignore the positive punishment quandrant, and its efficiency, in correcting unwanted behaviours. Its called 'proofing' the dog, for reliability.
> 
> Proof is in the pudding at the end of the day. Show me any evidence of this type of obedience in an all positive system.
> 
> ...


Wow. I'm absolutely convinced of the superiority of a balanced system after seeing that. I'll be foregoing the hippy dippy all-positive mindset that's served me well for years now, in favour of returning to a choke collar and P+. Definitely. 

Oh. Hang on though ... just realized, think I'm probably gonna also need to get a Mal or BC to complete the transition .... 


FWIW, depending upon one's definition of "perfect", I happened to notice some imperfections in there too (not to mention the footage that YOU posted was highly edited, despite your call for others to post UNedited footage). So, bottom line no system is infallible nor "perfect" as you eluded to.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

WesS said:


> But her theory on using the word, alpha or pack hierarchy as an identification tool for a bad trainer is not valid. That is all I am saying.


Well, no. That's NOT all that you're saying. You got some jabs in against all-positive techniques / trainers, as usual. 

That is, unless you go back and edit your posts, as usual.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

missc89 said:


> It's unfortunate that there isn't this thing called agreeing with some of what someone says, but disagreeing with other things. I wasn't aware that you either had to be 100% for something or 100% against it. Darn, and here I thought grey areas were a thing...





petpeeve said:


> Wow. I'm absolutely convinced of the superiority of a balanced system after seeing that. I'll be foregoing the hippy dippy all-positive mindset that's served me well for years now, in favour of returning to a choke collar and P+. Definitely.
> 
> Oh. Hang on though ... just realized, think I'm probably gonna also need to get a Mal or BC to complete the transition ....
> 
> ...


Um I dont believe that is edited. But whatever. Ill take your word for it. Youtube forrest Micke, for MANY MANY unedited videos. There is one posted later on, that is certainly unedited. in my second post.

Here is 20 minutes of footage in one sitting, in a real mondioring test. There is some editing, just to de-mark different exercises. But its one test, and one sitting. Probably lose your attention. But here it is. This is Cindy, from Leerburg, works extensively with Frawley, Ellis, Micke, same school of thought. Balanced reward based training. And yes they believe in pack structure.

Full test is a 45 minute affair, required to test the dog extensively. How is that for duration? No retakes. One sitting. There is nothing here that can be 'cheated' or modified with multiple takes when dog 'feels' like it.





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbgbx-vfNDg
Even MORE demands on dog.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

missc89 said:


> It's unfortunate that there isn't this thing called agreeing with some of what someone says, but disagreeing with other things. I wasn't aware that you either had to be 100% for something or 100% against it. Darn, and here I thought grey areas were a thing...





petpeeve said:


> Well, no. That's NOT all that you're saying. You got some jabs in against all-positive techniques / trainers, as usual.
> 
> That is, unless you go back and edit your posts, as usual.


Thats a lie. All my editing was done to add addition information and make post better and more understandable. Im sure there are records of edits somewhere. You will see that is not true.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Great. I'll watch the newest one later after I have a coffee.

Just curious. Got anything else with .. say ... an Irish Setter, or maybe a Basset, or *some* kind of N.O.B. ??? Frankly and honestly I'm growing a little "inattentive" as you say watching all of these videos you keep posting of typically hard and highly driven breeds ...... 


BTW, not a lie, just statement of fact. Your posts are frequently edited and not just to add more info.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

missc89 said:


> It's unfortunate that there isn't this thing called agreeing with some of what someone says, but disagreeing with other things. I wasn't aware that you either had to be 100% for something or 100% against it. Darn, and here I thought grey areas were a thing...





petpeeve said:


> Great. I'll watch the newest one later after I have a coffee.
> 
> Just curious. Got anything else with .. say ... an Irish Setter, or maybe a Basset, or *some* kind of N.O.B. ??? Frankly and honestly I'm growing a little "inattentive" as you say watching all of these videos you keep posting of typically hard and highly driven breeds ......
> 
> ...


I was apparently temp ban for 'backdoor moderating'. What happened was I had a disagreement with somebody. And they accepted their post was wrong. So I offered to delete my posts, if they edited their sentence. We subsequently both agreed to delete all posts. I messaged somebody that his post was out of context with our deletion. Somebody complained I guess. And that got me the stick. 

I did not fundamentally change any 'attacks' on anybody here. That is not true. I post too fast. And I think of more to say, so it gets edited. You will see the edit times on each post correspond. I dont often edit a post after my next post, unless its to fix a link, and so forth. You are attacking me now. And its not nice. 

Its one thing to disagree with me. Its another thing for everybody to jump on the wagon defending what he said, she said. people can speak for themselves. FYI Michael Ellis, is very well known for his contribution, and material for training small breeds. He has done extensive work with them. He has a strong focus on pet training, more so than some other competitors like Ivan.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

What are we arguing about, now?

Still wouldn't hire the trainer in the OP.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

sassafras said:


> What are we arguing about, now?
> 
> Still wouldn't hire the trainer in the OP.


I think we're arguing about good trainers subscribing to pack and alpha theories.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

ireth0 said:


> I think we're arguing about good trainers subscribing to pack and alpha theories.


We've argued this before. Can't we just link to those threads?


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

ireth0 said:


> I think we're arguing about good trainers subscribing to pack and alpha theories.


Oh hahaha, no.

I mean, one can be a very _effective_ trainer subscribing to pack and alpha theories. One can probably be a very effective trainer subscribing to all sorts of theories. 

But not what I would consider "good."


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

sassafras said:


> Oh hahaha, no.
> 
> I mean, one can be a very _effective_ trainer subscribing to pack and alpha theories. One can probably be a very effective trainer subscribing to all sorts of theories.
> 
> But not what I would consider "good."


Exactly. The method you are using should cause the least harm while still being effective. Just because it works does not mean it's good for the dog.


----------



## parus (Apr 10, 2014)

WesS said:


> I was apparently temp ban for 'backdoor moderating'. What happened was I had a disagreement with somebody. And they accepted their post was wrong. So I offered to delete my posts, if they edited their sentence. We subsequently both agreed to delete all posts. I messaged somebody that his post was out of context with our deletion. Somebody complained I guess. And that got me the stick.


As it should have. I remember that exchange. You basically said you'd keep harassing the person until they changed their post. That they went along with it didn't make it acceptable conduct for a forum like this. (FTR I wasn't the one who complained, but I'm glad a mod did take a look at the situation.)


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

WesS said:


> I was apparently temp ban for 'backdoor moderating'. What happened was I had a disagreement with somebody. And they accepted their post was wrong. So I offered to delete my posts, if they edited their sentence. We subsequently both agreed to delete all posts. I messaged somebody that his post was out of context with our deletion. Somebody complained I guess. And that got me the stick.
> 
> I did not fundamentally change any 'attacks' on anybody here. That is not true. I post too fast. And I think of more to say, so it gets edited. You will see the edit times on each post correspond. I dont often edit a post after my next post, unless its to fix a link, and so forth. You are attacking me now. And its not nice.
> 
> Its one thing to disagree with me. Its another thing for everybody to jump on the wagon defending what he said, she said. people can speak for themselves. FYI Michael Ellis, is very well known for his contribution, and material for training small breeds. He has done extensive work with them. He has a strong focus on pet training, more so than some other competitors like Ivan.


Nope. You were primarily banned for attacking and insulting forum members on that thread, and secondarily for backseat moderating, but the backseat moderating had nothing to do with pm's to other members. You attempted to instruct a forum member on what they could or could not post, and THAT is something only mods are permitted to do. In fact, had your insults and attacks been more directly aimed at individuals and/or included any name calling, you would have received a permanent ban rather than the temp one you received. It was a close call, and I chose to be lenient. I'd advise you not to make me regret it.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Kuma'sMom said:


> Nope. You were primarily banned for attacking and insulting forum members on that thread, and secondarily for backseat moderating, but the backseat moderating had nothing to do with pm's to other members. You attempted to instruct a forum member on what they could or could not post, and THAT is something only mods are permitted to do. In fact, had your insults and attacks been more directly aimed at individuals and/or included any name calling, you would have received a permanent ban rather than the temp one you received. It was a close call, and I chose to be lenient. I'd advise you not to make me regret it.


Untrue. I dont know who banned me. But you had incorrect information. Alla was the forum member this happened with. The whole thing was about communication error. Also I cant 'tell' anybody what to delete, if they dont want to. Please contact and ask her what really happened. We had a private discussion. Both of us were happy with what happend. We applauded each other, for coming to terms so nicely, and being so mature. We had a good fruitfull communication afterwards, privately. We were both happy, that the off-topic posts were removed, as it was in-fact a miscommunication of intended ideas. And she thought it strange you considered that back moderating. She also runs a forum. With her permission, I can show you the private messages. The whole thing ended very civil. And we agreed in the end.

It also happened without warning, or inquiry. I understand you have a difficult, unthankful job. But I also felt a bit unfairly treated.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

This isn't going to end well.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

Given that I was the one that banned you, I'm pretty confident I know what and what didn't happen. I'll also remind you that arguing with forum mods and especially accusing them of lying is very much against forum rules. You won't get another warning on this.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

op2:

(too short)


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

I say..... Dog is acting up...... Just dry hump the dog while biting its ear. That will show it who is boss......

That will cure it of all its issues....


----------



## Pia (Dec 17, 2014)

Wess, I was reading all you have presented in this thread with a great interest, as I usually find an exchanging of opinions and a civilized debate more educational than any cheer team repeating and copy-pasting itself. Have to say though, got shivers when you started backing up with Leerburg - aren't they actively promoting e-collar training aggressive dogs, which equipment sold by Leerburg is also marketed heavily in nearly every article and podcast by Ed Frawley?
However, I just listened the other day to Frawley's podcast about his approach of training with markers, and I loved it, even if it made me wonder if it's a kind of "go with the flow and stay in business" thing, or if Frawley is really reconsidering his previous believes (like Skinner did close to the end of his life).

Anyway, as an uneducated newbie I would love to be able of having a peaceful debate with you and others on the whole alpha/pack leader/dominance controversy, if the board Administration permits, since it looks like a no-no thing to question the All Positive kikopup education on here (?)

That providing you don't get yourself banned permanently in the mean time 
I have a board, been running it for 8+ years and the rules are similar to the rules here: discussing Moderators' decisions will get any User banned. It's in the Board Rules, among other rules, signing up is checking that "I accept" box, not my fault if people don't read it, I am not a kindergarten mama. Been thinking about it in the context of social structures within species and across the species, i.e. is any social group forming a structure with a clear boss/leader/alpha (it's just semantics really, right?) and how does that apply to our every day life with family dogs and to training?


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Pia said:


> Wess, I was reading all you have presented in this thread with a great interest, as I usually find an exchanging of opinions and a civilized debate more educational than any cheer team repeating and copy-pasting itself. Have to say though, got shivers when you started backing up with Leerburg - aren't they actively promoting e-collar training aggressive dogs, which equipment sold by Leerburg is also marketed heavily in nearly every article and podcast by Ed Frawley?
> However, I just listened the other day to Frawley's podcast about his approach of training with markers, and I loved it, even if it made me wonder if it's a kind of "go with the flow and stay in business" thing, or if Frawley is really reconsidering his previous believes (like Skinner did close to the end of his life).
> 
> Anyway, as an uneducated newbie I would love to be able of having a peaceful debate with you and others on the whole alpha/pack leader/dominance controversy, if the board Administration permits, since it looks like a no-no thing to question the All Positive kikopup education on here (?)
> ...


There is no sell-out. These are the methods they believe in today. In the past, they had different methods. But they have been in the industry for over 50 years. Methods, and literature changes.

The methods are refered to Balanced-Reward Based training. When you see that it tells you they use corrections. But it also tells you most of their training is done with Rewards and positively. (All things equal - people can pretend to be anything they want). If I am looking for a dog trainer, these words are what I look for. It shows a more diverse range of tools. The question is how do they apply those tools, and for what reasons?

Leerburg is essentially a production company led by Ed Frawley. Yes he sells equipment too. But he only sells quality equipment, for one he stopped selling quick release prongs, because they were a liability issue. He could make more money i believe not selling prongs and e-collars, to increase his 'public image'. Instead he tries to educate instead of selling out. Methods have evolved and changed over the years. Today he runs an online university and is somewhat of an academic, collecting literature, and presenting courses, through other reputable trainers such as Michael Ellis. Its no lie, they all use e-collars when necessary on their own dogs (but don't really focus on teaching this in their beginner courses at all) Its for proofing. It does not mean they just fit, or tell you to fit a prong on any and every dog. And its used for perfection. It is not what they use to teach the dogs the commands. Yet most of their material, is not on e-collar use or prong. Today, through evolution, and more than 50 years of experience, they have evolved and updated training methods. They believe in teaching the dog in multiple environments positively to understand commands, and eventually proof the dog. (There is a point in every dogs life, where his surroundings, or a cat, or some other stimulus is more enticing, than any high value treat, or toy reward. Also many people don't nurture the prey drive, into treating a dog, or play. (I.e. feeding in motion.). 

But the thing is, using their methods, the beginning IS all positive. They have some of the BEST clicker training methods, and its all based on Michael Ellis' work, who brought Frawley more in line with the benefits of positive reinforcement. Everything they teach, is backed and explained with literature. And you never have to proof the dog if you dont want to. If you don't want totally reliable recalls etc. There is no shortcut with these methods. It is time consuming. Its building from the ground up. This includes, dog management, it includes building engagement, it includes strict socialisation with manufactured environments. This is not the quickfix method. Going completely aversive is a completely different school of thought. These guys get picked on because of their popularity. If some of the same people critical of leerburg saw how others are using aversive, they would be shocked.

Look these guys know what they are talking about. I will attach a brilliant video by Michael Ellis about his philosophy of dog training if you are interested. Its over an hour long. (He did actively go all positive during the big revolution, he learnt a lot, and made some interesting conclusions, all in the video. But it explains everything better than I ever can. Feel free to private message me with any questions you may have. If you decide you like this approach, message me where to get started. It is what it is. When people have information from multiple perspectives, they can decide for themselves. 





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xe0-oqqoXvw

Many police dogs training, use e-collars in a very young age on dogs. The thing is they have mastered their use to communicate, and not punish. This is an even more different school of thought. I do not follow these. But they will also make a good case. The E-collar is essentially a physio tens machine. It can be just felt, or it can contract the muscles(that is essentially what it does, it does not shock the dog). The negative results are from mis-use. And you wont be using an e-collar any time soon anyways. In fact you never have to on this method. Its just a tool. And tools used correctly can improve a dogs life, and used incorrectly can put them in a complete and utter state of 'helplessness'.

The prong is another contentious issue. But on the right dog, it can prevent a prolapsed disc. On another dog, it may cause them to completely buckle. If I take out my prong collar, my dogs get so excited because they are going on a walk. They certainly seem to like it. Most of my initial training was done without a prong. And was all Marker training (Clicker training basically).


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Pia said:


> Anyway, as an uneducated newbie I would love to be able of having a peaceful debate with you and others on the whole alpha/pack leader/dominance controversy, if the board Administration permits, since it looks like a no-no thing to question the All Positive kikopup education on here (?)
> 
> Been thinking about it in the context of social structures within species and across the species, i.e. is any social group forming a structure with a clear boss/leader/alpha (it's just semantics really, right?) and how does that apply to our every day life with family dogs and to training?


At the end of the day people can call it what you like. I also believe in affording 'pet dog freedoms', and I dont train, or have the expertise to train anything at all like the guys I showed. Yet my dogs seem more capable, that a lot of some of the other popular trainers circulating with celebrity status.

There is a fine line, where it makes the dog more happy to be under control. Dog can get off-lesh time, and has a reliable recall, and can avoid dangers etc. On the other hand maybe you dont want a robot. The methods are geared with on/off switches between work and play. And work/training can also be fun! Infact It HAS TO BE FUN. Certain commands can be proofed and be non-negotiable. At the end of the day, thats user discretion. It also depends on dog genetics. It depends on 'hardness of the dog'. One dog might not care at being corrected, and another may develop fear. Its not a copy and paste approach for every dog. But the methods are SENSITIVE to different dogs.

The fact of the matter is, whatever you call it. Be it pack structure or building a relationship. You build associations with dogs. In these associations you are either the unfathomable leader, and the dog listens every time, or you give more slack. Some of it is also a matter of training ability. Ivan Balbanoav (Multiple world champion in the video). Has perfected the ability to train top quality dogs and give them luxuries many serious competitors dont dream of. He truly is one of the greats. He can allow his dogs for unrestricted play and so on, and still achieve on field. Whilst other lesser trainers may need to crate/kennel for insubordinate amounts of time and their only focus is the field work.

In any case, the theory of training, stems from old methods producing obedient, yet reactive dogs, who sometimes were a ticking time bomb. The theory of reward based training, is to educate the dog positively, and establish a bond. 

Either way, its about building a positive relationship. Pack structure is just the idea, that basically you nurture the dog in a nothing is free mindset. He earns what you give him. Eventually there are consequences if he choses not to mind you. These are not sever consequences. When he learns there is only one way in which he has a 'positive' time and avoids corrections, he learns those are clear rules. So they stick to them. This is pack structure. You are basically saying choice is limited when a command is given. Your authority is supreme. 

In the home, your wife might say clean the dishes. Your answer? Its your turn maybe? 
Similarly your boss says send me that email... What are you going to say? You do it? Easy way to get fired. That is an example of pack structure again. It is everywhere around you. Without pack structure however dogs sometimes get confused in a human world. They piss of owners. Owners react in wierd ways without consistency.

If you follow certain rules. And the dog has to follow them strictly also, and they clear and non-negotiable. There is no such thing as a dog disobeying a known command, and then he 'just does not do it'. There is no 'oh well, I told him, he didn't listen. You tell the dog to get out of the house. You make sure there is only one outcome. He leaves the house and goes outside. I.e. dont pee in the house. Dont get into rubbish. Dont run out the gate. Come when called. Dont run like maniacs in the house. Rest of the time its your time. But those human rules are non-negotiable, they learn to abide. Its not constant nagging. Its not losing your temper when things go wrong. You need to understand the rules as well as your dog. There is no emotion. It is just the rules. Its a manufactured state the world works for you and your dog to coexist. Also you try not to set-up dog to fail. this is managment. If you dont want him in bin, dont leave him with the ability to get in, or the constant temptation to fish something out esp. when you are not there.

You dont hand in a university assignment? Well you dont get the degree. So what. Well now maybe you dont get that job? Maybe your unhappy? Well if you followed some rules to studying every day, you wouldnt be in the mess of turmoil right? 

Rules create better living. You dont have to be strict. The videos I showed is a high level of training. It just shows what these guys are capable of. It also shows that they can do it 95% positively. Your rules dont have to be as strict. And they dont expect the dogs to follow rules, before they have 'showed them the rules' positively. They teach them to understand what they want. They teach them to have fun, and be rewarded. 
Pack structure is about not living just in the dogs world. Its about bridging the gap of communication, yet you have final say in what happens. Not the dog.


Pack structure happens in everything. The fact that the dog does not have access to your fridge, and your dinner plate is PACK STRUCTURE. He is being told its not for him. If he could talk and you asked him, he would immediately say. Well I want that. I want it now. 
MAny people say dont feed the dog at the table. I agree with that to an extent. But I can feed my dogs at the table. They know the food is mine. And again Nothing is free. I say down. They maintain the down, and I might drop a piece. They know there is no way in hell they are getting at my plate of food. I have a low table they can easily reach. They dont go for it. They know its my plate if I am in the room. Sometimes I can leave the room. Other times I can leave it for long periods. (But i try not to. And they are not saints. Every dog gets naughty, and if they do get the food, suddenly it becomes a reinforcing behaviour, and the rules are being incentivised to be broken-this would be a case of bad management.)

So again. Wether wolves have it, or dogs have it naturally, I believe they do. But to be honest its irrelevant. You are the boss. And they live in the same roof. They follow your rules. That is pack structure. The same way kids are expected to listen to their parents, and an employee is expected to listen to his boss or get the stick. Now if you are just a tyrant, and force everything and humanless and heartless. Employees will quit, take you to court etc. Same with a dog. It might turn on you, it might completely shut down in fear. Balanced training is building a relationship, and not just enforcing your will. Its about being patient. Its about understanding your dog. Its about using all tools in the best way possible. Its about being clear and precise. And its about you being the leader.


----------



## Pia (Dec 17, 2014)

> If you decide you like this approach, message me where to get started.


Thank you, but I am not drawn to Ed Frawley's philosophy on living with dogs in general, and training in particular, it kinda rubes me the wrong way.
But will watch the video out of curiosity, thank you.

I spent a few weeks on reading and listening to everything I found on their website, because as a newbie I wanted to learn from various sources in hope of finding the foundation on how is it really to live with a dog, and to go from there.

Although I found some information on their website that was useful, like the article about no one touching your dog (one extreme end, which compared with another extreme about the puppy meeting/interacting with 100 people each month gave me a more laid back outlook on puppy socializing), the impression as whole about their approach left me with a rather bad taste in my mouth and made me wonder what is the point of even living with a dog and where is the joy of it. Something like "Me Master - you dog", which is not the kind of relationship I am looking for with my dog. 

Then again the Zak and kikkopup videos with all positive tons of treats and high pitched voice and it looks so sweet and everybody is happy, except we are not being shown long term results in the real life, they are not being recorded or maybe hidden, I haven't found any, which I find rather disturbing, it is like "if you do this and this, your dog will be like that, you gotta believe me".
And a high pitch voice is not me, I don't normally speak like this and won't doom myself to make a fake performances... I was still thinking there has to be something else, something more natural for both my dog and me.
I don't consider Cesar Millan show as other than a show, seen a few episodes. However, he seems to be very true about one thing, at least when it comes to my dog: more exercise = more content and cooperative dog. So I am not skipping Tina's time out in the nature, it is something I signed for when bringing dog to my family.

I was purchasing books, DVDs, recording of seminars and you name it until I came over Suzanne Clothier and something clicked and resonated with my heart and mind. That is what I want for both Tina and myself. I want a relationship in which I know I am not a dog and not trying pretending one, and fully aware she knows I am not a dog, I can't speak her language and she can't speak mine, but we work together on ways to communicate and to be happy together. Without physical punishment and without psychologically driving the dog out of the dog. It is a challenge great enough for Tina to live and to find herself in my human world.
Don't get me wrong, I am not looking for partnership. I am the boss and I do not negotiate about this with my dog. I provide food, shelter and safety and I don't beg for obedience - I teach it, show how to then expect it. Every single time, not when the dog feels like it. Same way as I provide the food, shelter, safety, health care and so forth every single time and I don't play on these things. She is not afraid of me, but somehow she knows that when I ask her to get away from the litter box, I mean it and am not paying her for doing so. That's basically my approach. I don't know all the professional terms for training, the technicality of it, nor do I bother to know, as the obedience I am referring to is a peaceful living together with benefits for both.

But I am not for all positive training, because I've come to learn there is no such a thing unless I doom myself to act against myself, which I won't.
Sometimes I use a sharp "NO", sometimes I use a sharp "QUIET" when she does not respect that I am taking a nap on the couch (I don't yell, it is not in my nature, but it's not a lovey-dovey tone either), sometimes I don't talk to her on the way home if she has ignored me and acted too much like a maniac, and she can tell I am not much happy with her right then and going straight to her place even if she knows there is no other punishment than my silence and grumpy face. When I calm down, I call on her, we "shake hands" and all is fine again.
So that's the picture. She still has very weak recall and no manners when greeting people and other dogs. It is better than it used to be, but she is still not reliable at all. One day is fine, the other is not, so we have to go in for really learning and proofing this in various scenarios. 
That is why I loved Ed Frowley's podcast, because he was talking about getting out with the dog and for start not asking for anything, none, just marking with a "Yes" (he says he doesn't use clicker) and treat for anything that you like in the dog's behavior.
Previously I learned from S. Clothier about just sitting somewhere with an overexcited dog and do people watching together, will try to combine these 2 this weekend.

I am still confused on the concept of supposedly scientifically proved (I take science with a grain of salt, it has admitted to be wrong so many times before, lots of "lucky guessing" there too; believe it is more like you wrote about learning from direct observation and interactions over time) non existing ranking, pack leaders or alphas.
If that is so, why people proclaiming themselves as teachers, guides and all positive handlers, have at the same time bought so blindly to the multibillion cage industry, willingly caging their dogs as they please, deceiving themselves that when a dog gives up on begging to be released from this prison, it means the dog "has settled", "loves his crate", "a safe den" - when it's obvious this is not for the dog's best, it is for the convenience of dog guardians and to protect their belongings (so called preventing bad decisions on the dog's part). I don't question the desire to not having our homes ruined by our dogs, and of course there is the safety aspect, but caging is caging, it is an act of dominance no matter how nicely we are trying to wrap it or twist it around.
The den theory is a big baloney, wolf puppies spend only the few first weeks in their dens, the dens do not have locks on, and besides "dogs are not wolfs".
Since when caging has become a positive thing? Isn't it pretty recently and with huge attitude changing campaigns from those who benefit (manufacturers, sales people, then veterinarians, trainers and behaviorists who treat developed problems)? Why don't we question caging?

"Why" - in the context of all positive name trend. I am under the impression that many things just got new names.
If there is no pack leader, who is running the show? Who is in charge of nearly every minute and every aspect of the dog's life? Not the dog herself for sure.
And why is the number of behavioral issues growing and not decreasing since the all positive training took over? (the number of family dogs vs aggression and separation anxiety issues ratio is growing, don't have the statistics on hand right now but can try to find them again). 

I am not trying to be provocative. It is just that these questions have been bubbling in me for a while and they want to get out there!
It is the notion of saying all positive and anything else is being labeled as "this crap again", while not all of it looks really positive to me - why insisting on calling it all positive and burying the not so positive in tons of quasi scientific yada yada wrapped in tons of professional terms unknown to the "general public", the "average Joe", the "lurker"?
Does anyone else feel sometimes there is something false about it? Am I missing something?
I am open for any explanations that are results of one's own thinking, I've seen everything that is to see in the widely copy-pasted links, some reasonable stuff and lots of yada yada, the notion is still there.

Sorry for all this editing, correcting grammars, English is not my first nor second language.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Pia said:


> Response


The 1 hour video answers most of your questions. Its a brilliant watch. How he refers to 'pavlovs dogs'-popular scientific experiment in how he times the marker/clicker to reward, and so forth. He explains why the mark proceeds the food and hand movement, and how the dog builds associations and so forth. And why the dog is is relating the correct behaviour with the clicker/mark and not the time the food is placed.

And Leerburg is not a source you need to follow. Just a way of thinking that is easily accessible to get information. Also becarefull with the website a bit. He has some outdated articles that are still up from many years ago. His better material is paid and updated. You should not limit yourself to one source of information, or perception of how its done. But also don't confuse the dog by sporadically using multiple sources. You need to be consistent. The problem for example with Zack George is he has many little snippets of information. Easily digestible. But you dont train a dog with snippets of information, you work from the ground up. Phase one has nothing to do with commands or obedience. First its about 'charging your marker' to have associative meaning. Its about engagement and getting dogs attention. Rewarding for anything that makes his engagement on you. Some people's advice is very 'reactive'. They tend to be reactive humans, even though they dont want reactive dogs. They deal with a problem after the fact, not act in a responsible way to prevent it ever happening.

The take away message, is to be able to identify better trainers, and not be restricted to one school of thought. Its best to get involved in some formal clubs. You will be amazed at how much information and attention to details some of the sport dog trainers have. And they perfectly able to adapt to a pet dog, in fact a lot of those guys have pet dog classes.


This is the whole don't touch the dog thing explained. Its about controlling the socialisation and environment. They talk about ideals. They set you up for success. You don't have to be that strict about it. The takeaway message is uncontrolled socialisation can produce just as bad results as it can good. You dont throw your little 3 yr old child into a soccer field full of 10 years old playing soccer. Or let every stranger pet him or pick him up. It would be completely abnormal. Yet we allow it with dogs? Make sense? Also counter to what we are trying to achieve, in getting the dog to focus on us, and not on strangers. A dog more interested in his surroundings is a hard dog to train.

Michael ellis on socialisation.




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EORq7MOOioA


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

> Right? They're like, "Huh? Maybe if try THIS way... no? Ok I'll just cut around here and... no?" lol.


Absolutely mind boggling.

As a retired (mostly, did train 1 dog last year) trainer. With Pierce I use the body blocking and prayer method. If it doesn't help it doesn't hurt.


----------



## Pia (Dec 17, 2014)

WesS said:


> There is a fine line, where it makes the dog more happy to be under control. Dog can get off-lesh time, and has a reliable recall, and can avoid dangers etc. On the other hand maybe you dont want a robot. The methods are geared with on/off switches between work and play. And work/training can also be fun! Infact It HAS TO BE FUN. Certain commands can be proofed and be non-negotiable.


Yes, I feel like that too.




WesS said:


> It depends on 'hardness of the dog'. One dog might not care at being corrected, and another may develop fear. Its not a copy and paste approach for every dog. But the methods are SENSITIVE to different dogs.


There was one dog that attacked Tina once. High aggression level. No drama, the owner was very fast on getting to the scene and pulling the dog away. But then... he had beaten the dog pretty hard, after which suggested doing the dog greeting over again, while his dog was crunching and shaking next to, and his wife was explaining how much the husband likes to rescue abandoned dogs. I said "no thank you", had to take care of my scared dog. Tina is fine, but I doubt I will ever forget that sight. 




> Pack structure is just the idea, that basically you nurture the dog in a nothing is free mindset. He earns what you give him. Eventually there are consequences if he choses not to mind you. These are not sever consequences. When he learns there is only one way in which he has a 'positive' time and avoids corrections, he learns those are clear rules. So they stick to them. This is pack structure. You are basically saying choice is limited when a command is given. Your authority is supreme.


Resonates with me. And with many others on this forum, from what I've been reading for the past 6 months. 
That is why I don't get it why there is such aversion to using terms like "pack leader", "pack structure" etc.
From what I have learned and seen in my life, there is a pack structure formed as soon as any group gets established. Within species or across the species.
Been living with cats for many years - even animals as independent and complex as cats form a pack structure with their human guardian, i.e. which one gets first on the bed and has the right to the place perceived as best. Not to mention the structure between themselves. Interestingly enough, and mentioned in some works, it is not the alpha that is always the first, BUT no one takes his food, space or any of his rights - everything is waiting for him.
In the attempt to protect the cats, I placed Tina below them in our pack structure. The cats eat first, then it is her turn. 
And you know what? After just a short time not only did she stop even coming into the kitchen before the cats have finished eating, but she also removes herself if one of the cats wants to sit on the couch, they can play with her toys, sleep on her bed and taste her treat bones. She tried to be next after me when she was a little puppy, she was stubborn, but I was even more stubborn and didn't let her climb this "ladder" no matter what.
So one can say I have imposed on her a place in the pack structure chosen by me. Then she discovered pleasures that only she is allowed, like walks, and she has also taken on the role of watching the home and the cats whether I am away or at home. She will be resting peacefully on the porch and not mind a high pitch barking of my neighbor's little dog, as long as he is barking on her side. If he goes and barks through the screen at the cats, she will be there in a second with a loud response. He has stopped visiting us. Also, when I go out on the porch, all my animals go off my sun lounge. 
Is this a pack order or is it not a pack order? Looks like a pack structure to me.


Thank you for explaining in such an easy way, I really appreciate that, as all of this is still a new ground for me.

Someone said once, a really intelligent person is not showing off with terms knowing the respondent does not understand these, but getting down to the respondent's level in an honest attempt to explain. Do not remember who said it, but a wise guy for sure


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

Pia said:


> Wess, I was reading all you have presented in this thread with a great interest, as I usually find an exchanging of opinions and a civilized debate more educational than any cheer team repeating and copy-pasting itself...Anyway, as an uneducated newbie I would love to be able of having a peaceful debate with you and others on the whole alpha/pack leader/dominance controversy, if the board Administration permits, since it looks like a no-no thing to question the All Positive kikopup education on here (?)


There are many of us here that are not completely positive. But it takes time, learning, and observation to know when and how to correctly use any kind of correction. So as a rule, when we're giving out advice to someone who's skills we do not know, we shy away from corrections. Corrections can become a crutch to someone that does not know how to use them. It feels _good _to the dog owner to punish your bad dog for doing something he wasn't supposed to. We like to anthropomorphise dogs, and that causes us the think that they "wronged" us intentionally. IMO, it's only okay to start using corrections when you have a firm understanding of dog psychology and body language. 

And frankly, if you know anything about dog body language, you can clearly see that dominance is BS. 

The reason we copy/paste is because we have this argument ALL THE TIME. We're tired. We get into this argument on this forum atleast once a week, if not more. We're all pretty reasonably open-minded people. I change my mind on aspects of dog training constantly as new information is given to me. And the argument that dominance trainers give us always boils down to: "It works for me, it's worked for me for 20+ years, so it must be the best." (Sometimes they quote old, disproven science too.) And we can all quote science and give our own anecdotes till the cows come home, we can come up with reasoned arguments, but they never budge. So.... we copy/paste. Because we know it's not going to convince them in the end anyways.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I do really wish more of the 'big name' trainers of ALL flavors did more work with not border collies and not malinois. I love those kinds of dogs but the methods just don't always translate to 'regular dog' so well. Even in my group, Hank makes me look a lot better than Mia does. Because drive and biddability go a long ways.

Not saying these guys COULDN'T train other breeds but I would like to see it happen. I understand why people want their niche dogs for their sports. Heck I will probably stick with more Hank-like dogs (various breeds but drive and trainability) because it's easier and more fun to train with for me. But I'd just like to see trainers demoing with a basset hound or a saluki or a husky sometime.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Laurelin said:


> I do really wish more of the 'big name' trainers of ALL flavors did more work with not border collies and not malinois. I love those kinds of dogs but the methods just don't always translate to 'regular dog' so well. Even in my group, Hank makes me look a lot better than Mia does. Because drive and biddability go a long ways.
> 
> Not saying these guys COULDN'T train other breeds but I would like to see it happen. I understand why people want their niche dogs for their sports. Heck I will probably stick with more Hank-like dogs (various breeds but drive and trainability) because it's easier and more fun to train with for me. But I'd just like to see trainers demoing with a basset hound or a saluki or a husky sometime.


It's a good point. Toast at 7 months is basically where it took a couple years to get with Squash.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

missc89 said:


> It's unfortunate that there isn't this thing called agreeing with some of what someone says, but disagreeing with other things. I wasn't aware that you either had to be 100% for something or 100% against it. Darn, and here I thought grey areas were a thing...





Laurelin said:


> I do really wish more of the 'big name' trainers of ALL flavors did more work with not border collies and not malinois. I love those kinds of dogs but the methods just don't always translate to 'regular dog' so well. Even in my group, Hank makes me look a lot better than Mia does. Because drive and biddability go a long ways.
> 
> Not saying these guys COULDN'T train other breeds but I would like to see it happen. I understand why people want their niche dogs for their sports. Heck I will probably stick with more Hank-like dogs (various breeds but drive and trainability) because it's easier and more fun to train with for me. But I'd just like to see trainers demoing with a basset hound or a saluki or a husky sometime.


Most of them generally chose not to own anything other than a working breed. But Ellis is hard at work creating material, and working with small dogs.
Here is one such video with some tips.





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjAghoeFiXE

Genetics do invariably play a role. Some small dogs are actually bred for work, such as many terriers. Many however are not. So there are different challenges. 

Maybe look into some of the Agility sport people. They are constantly working small breeds.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I involved in agility already. 

There's some that do choose small breeds but it's generally the same handful of breeds over and over. Shelties mostly. Sometimes JRTs, poodles, and papillons. Poodles, paps, and shelties tend to be moderately drivey and most often very biddable.  JRTs can be extremely high drive. And there are many trainers who work solely with border collies. And not just any border collies, ones bred specifically for the sport and traits the trainers want to deal with. High drive, highly biddable. There's not many people out there really working dogs that are very far from 'ideal'... low drive and/or highly independent. I have had friends go to big name people for seminars with hounds, sporting breeds, etc only to be told their dog would never be able to compete and they should get a BC or that the trainer teaching the seminar can't work with a dog with no toy drive.

I understand WHY. I really do because they choose the kinds of breeds I would choose and own. They're fun, they're drivey. It's much nicer to have a dog that you can skip straight to the fun part of training and not painstakingly work to build drive with. Papillons are probably one of the easiest small breeds to work with but it's still not the same as working with Hank. And Hank is a smaller guy but very high drive with both food and toys and it makes absolute worlds of difference. If I tried to train Summer and Mia like I did Hank we'd get nowhere. 

It's not the fact that the trainers are cherry picking their dogs that bugs me, it's that if a trainer is going to market themselves and their methods as working on 'dogs' and not marketing themselves as 'really good ipo trainer for working bred malinois' or 'really good agility trainer for high drive border collies' then they need to work and actually demo using other breeds and types of dogs. 

But I guess it's a vicious cycle because in order to make money off their training, they need their names out there and to do that they need top tier dogs and they're not likely to chance it with a dog lacking the traits that make them excel at the chosen sport. And the trainers paving the way with the elite dogs are going to be further tailoring methods towards that type of dog. 

I do know of a few agility folk that run off breeds. Robin Kletke has run papillons, border collies, and _afghan hounds_. There is a lady that does USDAA and wins big with rescues (still herder rescues but has overcome a lot of fearfulness). The one dude with the corgi x acd from animal control that won cynosport (but his younger dog is a sport bred borderstaffy if I recall correctly). 

Idk, I just get tired seeing all the pro trainers having the same breed all the time. And then those dogs being presented as 'good dog training'. It IS GREAT dog training. But I'm just not sure how applicable it is to ALL dogs.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

missc89 said:


> It's unfortunate that there isn't this thing called agreeing with some of what someone says, but disagreeing with other things. I wasn't aware that you either had to be 100% for something or 100% against it. Darn, and here I thought grey areas were a thing...





Laurelin said:


> I involved in agility already.
> 
> There's some that do choose small breeds but it's generally the same handful of breeds over and over. Shelties mostly. Sometimes JRTs, poodles, and papillons. Poodles, paps, and shelties tend to be moderately drivey and most often very biddable. JRTs can be extremely high drive. And there are many trainers who work solely with border collies. And not just any border collies, ones bred specifically for the sport and traits the trainers want to deal with. There's not many people out there really working dogs that are very far from 'ideal'... I have had friends go to big name people for seminars with hounds, sporting breeds, etc only to be told their dog would never be able to compete and they should get a BC or that the trainer teaching the seminar can't work with a dog with no toy drive.
> 
> ...


I think people need to question more why they buy novelty pets, based on conformation and looks. As opposed to functional dogs. Who are healthier just by virtue of breeding high performing dogs with high performing dogs.

People get cute little tea-cup yorkshire terriers. Little do they realise, that the emphasis on 'small' is an emphasis on the 'runts'. Sometimes breeders purposefully malnourish those dogs to get them smaller and smaller and stunt developmental growth. 

So no you wont really find knowledgeable trainers falling for such breeds. Many will enter the market as Ellis is doing now, and trying to work them. These guys have a lot of experience, because they are manipulating drives, and pushing well bred dogs to the limit over the years. There success comes from observing failures, and bad practise too over the years. They have seen it all, and pet owners from all walks of life are coming to him for advice. And it is all transferable, to the fear mechanism inherent in many poorly bred dogs. But a lot of the time they chose not to own them as personal dogs. It is what it is. Dog breeders can be terrible people, and breed for all the wrong reasons to make profits.

We have an English Bulldog now, with the most hip displatia of all breeds. Can hardly breathe, or move. Yet people chose such dogs. They support these breeders, who are essentially either puppy mills, or hide behind some flawed breed standard with no purpose, selling dogs that are very likely to be weak nerved, and scared.

Thats the simple truth. The best trainers, although will help train them, wont neccessarily own such dogs. They are more likely to adopt a mixed dog from a shelter (which is great) than go that route.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

I like my trainer because while she runs two bc mixes she demonstrated pretty danged fast that she knew how to adjust to other breeds and individual dogs. Her up and coming puppy is a roughg collie, of all things.

That said, I'm kind of torn? On one hand, I get it. Molly is further along at one than Kylie is at three, and Kylie is no slouch. She was further along than Thud at four months old. Sometimes working with her feels like cheating: she learned a flashier, tighter, heel than I've ever taught in fifteen minutes. Without food, and with good pivots and finishes.

On the other hand, I don't think it's bc/mal specific. I think they're the most common breeds instructors have and work with, but I know some who are so used to GSDs that they can't adjust to effectively train anything else. Or, well, anything without a fairly hard temperament and lots of drive. As in, the methods used for them would NOT work with Molly, and it's not like Bcs and maps don't come with training challenges... They're just predictable challenges.

So, honestly I think the best you can do in general is look for people with flexibility and willingness to adjust based on the dog in front of them.

Whether its a bc, a coonhound, or something else.

...also, I have no idea what anything WesS said had to do with the price of tea in china. A lot of dogs are functional and not Bcs or mals, not all small breeds are runts, and...what?


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I'm not sure why the focus on small dogs? A lot of the less than traditional 'dog training' dogs are actually bred for function and are larger. Working line huskies? Racing whippets? Hunting lurchers? Stock Guardians? Bred for jobs but still much less 'drivey' in a traditional dog trainer's lingo and much more independent. I haven't really seen any professional trainers working these breeds.

Like I said, I get why people choose the more biddable, focused, more driven types of dogs. I think that people marketing their ideas and methods as general 'dog training' absolutely need experience really truly working more than just one niche of dogs (ownership would be different but I'd prefer them to own more than just one breed). There's nothing wrong with being a niche trainer, I just wish it was more widely recognized and people admitted to it better.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I guess what I'm saying is I'd love for a big name sport trainer (NOT throwing out any specific people- use your imagination) go adopt some random young husky or hound or what have you and just SEE how far they take it. It just doesn't happen much at all in any sport.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

CptJack said:


> ...also, I have no idea what anything WesS said had to do with the price of tea in china. A lot of dogs are functional and not Bcs or mals, not all small breeds are runts, and...what?


Did not say anything against small breeds. I just cited problems with the really really small ones. Bred to be smaller and smaller. Going into 'toy-breed category'

http://terriblyterrier.com/teacup-dogs/


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Laurelin said:


> I guess what I'm saying is I'd love for a big name sport trainer (NOT throwing out any specific people- use your imagination) go adopt some random young husky or hound or what have you and just SEE how far they take it. It just doesn't happen much at all in any sport.


Would make for a heck of a training video, though.

Or for that matter, a really really soft dog. I can tell you that Squash and Toast can take corrections that would put Maisy under the bed for a week. She's not super biddable, she's super soft... good thing she loves to pull or I wouldn't know what to do with her.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Laurelin said:


> I guess what I'm saying is I'd love for a big name sport trainer (NOT throwing out any specific people- use your imagination) go adopt some random young husky or hound or what have you and just SEE how far they take it. It just doesn't happen much at all in any sport.


But a husky IS a working dog (or at least thats what its origins stem from). You need to understand what its used for. Plenty of people working them. You don't buy a sled dog, to get it certified in IPO. 

A hound is also a WORKING dog. Its a hunting dog/sniffer.
People are chosing them for looks and cuteness, not really for what they are bred to do. Work a hound in tracking (An IPO trainer will have experience in tracking). He will be very capable.

This is a people problem. Not a trainer problem. If people realise what their dogs were bred to do, and get with people involved in those avenues, you will be surprised how much they really know about them and how much those people can help you with them.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Wouldn't it be neat if we could give all trainers one of each type of dog and see what came out of it?


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Laurelin said:


> Wouldn't it be neat if we could give all trainers one of each type of dog and see what came out of it?


That, I'd pay good money to see.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

sassafras said:


> That, I'd pay good money to see.


Me too. (too short)


----------



## NicoleIsStoked (Aug 31, 2012)

I didn't thoroughly read this entire thread, nor am I going to. But what I will say is that I would take Zak George over Ellis or Leerburg any day. 
I would not let Ellis or Leerburg come within 50 feet of my dog for a million dollars. Anyone who subscribes to current SCIENCE based methods, and wants their dog to trust them, not fear them- knows that Leerburg and Ellis are a joke. 
In fact, I would even go as far to call the Leerburg an animal abuser. Straight up. 

if you feel the need to use punishment to train your dog, you are either:
A) refusing to acknowledge a dog's intelligence and ability to learn with their brain, OR
B) not a skilled enough trainer to know how to properly communicate your instructions without punishment

Both of these come down to being a problem with the human, not the dog. 

Nobody will ever deny the effectiveness of teaching through punishment. It works with every species on earth. But just because it works, doesn't make it acceptable or necessary. 

When my grandmother was a child she was left handed and that was not permitted in school. Every time she was caught writing with her left hand, the teacher would slap her with a ruler. You can bet that she learned to be ambidextrous very quickly, but today that teacher would be charge with child abuse. 

Times change and people need to too n


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

WesS said:


> But a husky IS a working dog (or at least thats what its origins stem from). You need to understand what its used for. Plenty of people working them. You don't buy a sled dog, to get it certified in IPO.
> 
> A hound is also a WORKING dog. Its a hunting dog/sniffer.
> People are chosing them for looks and cuteness, not really for what they are bred to do. Work a hound in tracking (An IPO trainer will have experience in tracking). He will be very capable.
> ...


So people should just not train their 'off breeds' for these things? Is that what you're saying. (I am confused). 

If I have a beagle and it doesn't work like a border collie, I shouldn't even try agility because a lot of agility training is tailored to biddable, easily motivated dogs?


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Laurelin said:


> Wouldn't it be neat if we could give all trainers one of each type of dog and see what came out of it?


Well a lot of the gsd community is very unhappy with many all positives and behaviourist, who see a high drive GSD, and say its badly bred to owners, and you just bought an uncontrollable land shark. GSD's Mals, are not easier to train. It actually takes a better educated trainer to harness those drives.

The high drive dogs need good management skills, or they will rip your house appart. The lower drive 'normal' dogs are not that much of a challenge to most of those guys. They work everyday in utilising and taking advantage and promoting the dogs drives. So they know how to increase food drives, prey drives. Obviously what is possible in the end will be less. But you can teach any dog to sit, stay, come. Micheal ellis certainly can. They certainly take less work to be house 'compatible'.

The difference is a behaviourist, with no sport experience, will not fare so well with a high drive land shark, hard dog.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

This is essentially what a high drive Belgian Mal is. This is what those trainers, who some people believe is so easy have to deal with.

This is what comes into their home, and then moulded into the great dogs you see in the videos.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I disagree that it's easy to teach any dog to sit, stay, and come reliably. I also disagree that people that are very good at harnessing high drive dogs can successfully work lower drive dogs. If that were the case I wouldn't hear so many 'off breed' people in agility talk about how so and so's seminar they went to was useless because the trainer could not work with a dog with no toy drive. 

If you handed me something like a greyhound or a husky or a hound, I feel like I'd be totally lost. 

Natural focus may be the biggest part of the equation really. It goes a heck of a long ways. And along with drive then you've got a TON to work with.

Hank had a better sit, down, and stay in *2 days* after pulling him from the shelter than my other two dogs had in 6-7 years of me owning them. This is a dog I'm 99% sure had no training prior to me owning him. He is flashier. He sits on a dime in almost any situation with distractions. I AM a mildly better trainer than when I got my other two. But that is coming from mostly HIM and the type of dog he is. I've had him 8 months... he knows more tricks than the other two already. He learned how to do weave poles in a few weeks. Summer took almost 2 years and they're still nowhere near as good as his.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

...why do you think we don't know what high drive dogs are? No one is claiming that they don't need trained, but a dog with drive and the desire to work with people IS a simpler dog to train than an independent dog or one who is lot to no drive, especially as it relates to dog sports. Where, you know, we compete and already train.

You will get further id you stop trying to talk to us like we have dogs we do nothing with and no exposure to working, high drive dogs or 'advanced' training. We do. I don't need a video of a hgh drive dog. Sass lives with one. So do I. So does laurelin.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Laurelin said:


> I disagree that it's easy to teach any dog to sit, stay, and come reliably. I also disagree that people that are very good at harnessing high drive dogs can successfully work lower drive dogs. If that were the case I wouldn't hear so many 'off breed' people in agility talk about how so and so's seminar they went to was useless because the trainer could not work with a dog with no toy drive.
> 
> If you handed me something like a greyhound or a husky or a hound, I feel like I'd be totally lost.
> 
> ...


Often its genetic. Also food drive can be a problem. This girl is cool.
Phase 1.
https://vimeo.com/65617037

Most owners however dont nurture prey drives in their dogs from young. They dont do what this girl is doing, then they expect to be able to train a dog with toy rewards and positive methods. This is exactly the same thing, Ellis is doing. 

Phase 2.





Constant build of toy/prey drive. Constant build of food drive. Constantly building engagement. Its hard to train ANY dog without engagement and developing their drives.
Toy drive is prey drive essentially. But the toy is NOT a living prey item. You are creating a supernormal stimulus. That becomes what you call toy drive. 

"A supernormal stimulus or superstimulus is an exaggerated version of a stimulus to which there is an existing response tendency, or any stimulus that elicits a response more strongly than the stimulus for which it evolved." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernormal_stimulus

I dont know what to say. This has angled into that Ellis cant train small dogs. He certainly can. He will produce more in time. Again the agility guys are utilising the exact same methods here in development of drives.

What can say. If the dog cant be stimulated by food or toy drives or something else, only missing meals and aversives are left. Opperant conditioning has only 4 quadrants.
So i guess you just cant achieve much with such dogs. It is what it is. You can only bribe a dog with something it desires. You can nurture that desire however.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

WesS said:


> Often its genetic. Also food drive can be a problem. This girl is cool.
> https://vimeo.com/65617037
> 
> Most owners however dont nurture prey drives in their dogs from young. They dont do what this girl is doing, then they expect to be able to train a dog with rewards and positive methods.


... That's.... a sport bred BC puppy. Just saying. Probably came with a lot of drive to harness.

I didn't get Hank till he was around 10ish months and even though I doubt he had any drive building prior considering, it was very very easy to start getting that out of him and to really build upon _what was already there to work with._


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Yep. Can't quote but already there to work with is the thing.

I killed Kylie's toy drive, but it was easy to bring back. I couldn't kill Molly's toy or food drive if I tried.

JACK HAS NONE. He's got some prey drive, but it doesn't translate onto toys very well, and it's iffy even with actual prey. No food drive at all. Super, duper, soft, shuts down easily and can't take any correction at all. Not particularly biddable, either.

You want to tell me he isn't harder to train? Where's his motivation? What do you reward him with? How do you. Correct without him mentally checking out? I've done a lot with him, but nowhere near the bc who loves toys, loves food, and has tons of natural focus and a strong inherent desire to please me. Comparatively she is a cake walk to train. 

You want to impresss me, succeed with a dog like JACK.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

CptJack said:


> Yep. Can't quote but already there to work with is the thing.
> 
> I killed Kylie's toy drive, but it was easy to bring back. I couldn't kill Molly's toy or food drive if I tried.
> 
> ...


You want an honest answer? Don't feed the dog for a day, feed once a day, at end of day. Feed less. Make dog more hungry. Increase value of food reward. Steak pieces etc. Find what the dog likes, and responds to. Add movement to rewarding. You need a release/terminal marker for that. i.e. click, dog released from command, and make him run to get reward. Add sounds, add excitement. Let him bite at it. Dont correct snatching or bitting. Let him bite at you, until he gets the reward, Open palm feeding.

Some dogs however just are not interested. But most you can still work with. You either accept it, or you don't. There are always ways to train however. Its literally about how important it really is. Such a dog was never bred to train at a high level.

Its easy to own a chihauhau like Victoria Stillwell, and say, oh well its a chihauhau, cant do much anyways. She owns a lab too I think. Nothing special either from her. The top trainers, show their work. And their skills are transferable to many breeds.

At end of day no need to push a dog who is disinterested.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I think you're the only one bringing up small dogs and whether or not people can train them? I'm not talking SMALL dogs. Size is unimportant. Drives are important. 

Both the videos are sport border collies. Silvia Trkman also has pyrsheps. 

My first agility dog was actually afraid of toys. She hates playing, she's very soft and sensitive. She had food drive and was very biddable and if we had started younger (she was 8 when we started training) I think she could have done very well. She did pretty well all things considering! 

But it's still easier to train Hank to do tasks. Summer is easier to live with but Hank still is the easier dog to teach *agility* to. 

And I've been in classes with dogs that had way more challenges to overcome than Summer!


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Laurelin said:


> I think you're the only one bringing up small dogs and whether or not people can train them? I'm not talking SMALL dogs. Size is unimportant. Drives are important.
> 
> Both the videos are sport border collies. Silvia Trkman also has pyrsheps.
> 
> ...


At the end of the day you are absolutely right. There is a barrier. A dog cant achieve more than he was bred for. Pushing a dog is actually abusive. But that does not excuse some trainers hiding behind such breeds, type of dogs, and never showing any real work. A good trainer will always own at least one workable breed/dog and show it off at some point in their lives.

The lessons they learn with working with multiple dogs, and temperments, as well as their sport experience, is priceless.
Sometimes training is not even commands. Just correct socialisation to avoid fear, etc.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Who decides what is a 'workable breed'?


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Laurelin said:


> Who decides what is a 'workable breed'?


The trainer who is working them.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Yeah, size isn't important here. Kylie is half the size of Jack, but she has food drive, toy drive and a strong desire to please me. Ergo, I didn't bring her up as harder to train. Molly has more of all those things, but Kylie at 11ish pounds is pretty easy and is rocking it agility wise. 

Difficulties to overcome wise, Man, I don't know. I've seen a lot of dogs overcome a lot of issues. Da, fear aggression, all sorts of fear and timidity and reactivity, and lack of confidence and lack of drive. Are any of them going to nationals? Probably not, but neither are most of the Bcs.

(as an aside, our club has a woman who runs a beagle. It's awesome.)


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

WesS said:


> The trainer who is working them.


So we're back to "trainers are niche trainers and their methods don't necessarily work for all dogs, because they're working for easy to train dogs with inBorn handler focus, biddability and drives.". 

Awesome. That was Lauel's point three pages ago.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

CptJack said:


> Yeah, size isn't important here. Kylie is half the size of Jack, but she has food drive, toy drive and a strong desire to please me. Ergo, I didn't bring her up as harder to train. Molly has more of all those things, but Kylie at 11ish pounds is pretty easy and is rocking it agility wise.
> 
> Difficulties to overcome wise, Man, I don't know. I've seen a lot of dogs overcome a lot of issues. Da, fear aggression, all sorts of fear and timidity and reactivity, and lack of confidence and lack of drive. Are any of them going to nationals? Probably not, but neither are most of the Bcs.
> 
> (as an aside, our club has a woman who runs a beagle. It's awesome.)


Perfect post. We dont need to 'achieve' anything. Its about fun at end of day. Trainers however kind of do. Just my personal opinion. They have to show some working ability in their dog, or at least a clients dog, using their methods.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

CptJack said:


> So we're back to "trainers are niche trainers and their methods don't necessarily work for all dogs, because they're working for easy to train dogs with inorn handler focus, biddability and drives.".
> 
> Awesome. That was Lauel's point three pages ago.


Well... After explaining, a lot of dogs are not harnessed correctly, and we think they cant be trained, when they can, but due to the little work we put in, and expect the world. After saying that. Yes we can all agree on this.

Also I dont want to endorse this. But those same dogs could be trained of the bat will low level e-collar stims. Thats the honest truth.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

WesS said:


> At the end of the day you are absolutely right. There is a barrier. A dog cant achieve more than he was bred for. Pushing a dog is actually abusive. *But that does not excuse some trainers hiding behind such breeds, type of dogs, and never showing any real work*. A good trainer will always own at least one workable breed/dog and show it off at some point in their lives.
> 
> The lessons they learn with working with multiple dogs, and temperments, as well as their sport experience, is priceless.
> Sometimes training is not even commands. Just correct socialisation to avoid fear, etc.


Also who gets to decide what 'real work' is?

Is it someone who successfully titles 'off breeds' and shows them consistently well despite not being at the 'highest levels'. Or is 'real work' only reserved for those playing at the elite levels? In which, yes, most the time those are dominated by just a few breeds.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

CptJack said:


> So we're back to "trainers are niche trainers and their methods don't necessarily work for all dogs, because they're working for easy to train dogs with inBorn handler focus, biddability and drives.".
> 
> Awesome. That was Lauel's point three pages ago.


Hahah right?

I wonder what living with a high drive mali is like? LOL. He is absolutely easier to train than my lower drive husky mix. BUT he is also a fair sight harder to _live_ with.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

sassafras said:


> Hahah right?
> 
> I wonder what living with a high drive mali is like? LOL. He is absolutely easier to train than my lower drive husky mix. BUT he is also a fair sight harder to _live_ with.


Depends on how much work you put in. It also depends who owns the dog. A mal without pack structure is a nightmare. Just saying.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

My high drive mal is absolutely easier to train than my lower drive husky mix and is harder to live with. Why are you telling me what happens with my own dogs depends on?


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

sassafras said:


> My high drive mal is absolutely easier to train than my lower drive husky mix and is harder to live with. Why are you telling me what happens with my own dogs depends on?


Didn't say a word about your dogs. Ivan Balnaboav's dogs are a pleasure to live with. 






I would never critisize anybody's dogs. Mine certainly are not perfect, or anywhere close to perfect. But a well trained mal, can be a pleasure to live with. Arguably more than lower drive husky mix. It depends who has the each dog. Its different for each person.

Edit: missed the word 'my' in your previous post. So forgive me. But again your personal experience may be different to somebody else's with the same comparative type of dogs.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I almost want to circle Toast in your sig with a sign that says 'malinois'. 

(Pssst Sass has a malinois!)

Anyways I'm really confused. I do think it takes a lot of training skill (obviously) for people to compete at the highest level regardless of breed. I also imagine it takes a lot of training skill to MACH an afghan hound and just because the afghan hound isn't winning a national championship, that work shouldn't be discounted and that trainer shouldn't be discounted as an inferior trainer. It's two different and not always overlapping skill sets.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

sassafras said:


> My high drive mal is absolutely easier to train than my lower drive husky mix and is harder to live with. Why are you telling me what happens with my own dogs depends on?


Because he knows more.

Maybe next I can hear a out how to live with my high drive bc And the differences between trAining her and the x pyr?

Or what kind of behavior people find easy or hard to live with? Or even how 'hArd' doesn't mean unpleasant.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

sassafras said:


> My high drive mal is absolutely easier to train than my lower drive husky mix and is harder to live with. Why are you telling me what happens with my own dogs depends on?


But do you have pack structure in your house?


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

And gosh darnit, I should have videoed my first training session with Hank the day after I got him from the shelter! It was unbelievable to me how quickly he picked things up. In one session he learned to use a clicker, sit, down, and paw target. In just a few minutes. And he's just an adolescent mutt of unknown breeding!

I probably shouldn't admit he's very easy to live with....


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

WesS said:


> Edit: missed the word 'my' in your previous post. So forgive me. But again your personal experience may be different to somebody else's with the same comparative type of dogs.


I didn't say anything about anyone else, I was talking about my own dogs. 



cookieface said:


> But do you have pack structure in your house?


I don't know and I don't care. Honestly it's a term that has become so meaningless that I just tune it out and live my life.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

cookieface said:


> But do you have pack structure in your house?


Yep, every night we get together to howl to other packs, and then go bring down a deer for dinner. . .what do packs do again?


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

note to self: I'm not qualified to use sarcasm in text


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

cookieface said:


> note to self: I'm not qualified to use sarcasm in text


No, you did it right! I just veered off track.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

WesS said:


> There is a barrier. A dog cant achieve more than he was bred for.


Mmm, no. 

THIS, is the kind of stuff that separates the wheat from the one-trick ponies ... http://dianebauman.com/index.cfm?loc=awards

I'm not a huge Dianne Bauman fan, per se, but I'd be stupefied if you could give evidence of .. maybe Michael Ellis or another one of your heroes putting, say .. a draft dog title, herding title, or whatever on a Mal.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Also. I'm pretty sure that Karen Pryor put an OTCh on an afghan hound a few years back. And I'm *pretty sure* too, that she didn't use ie: collar corrections or anything of the sort during the proofing stage to add reliability.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

> There is a barrier. A dog cant achieve more than he was bred for.


This is an incorrect statement......


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

WesS said:


> But that does not excuse some trainers hiding behind such breeds, type of dogs, and never showing any real work. A good trainer will always own at least one workable breed/dog and show it off at some point in their lives.
> 
> The lessons they learn with working with multiple dogs, and temperments, as well as their sport experience, is priceless.
> Sometimes training is not even commands. Just correct socialisation to avoid fear, etc.


I don't have a problem with trainers working with "workable" breeds/dogs (which I'd consider high-drive dogs bred for the purpose that the training is putting them to); the issue I think is that many trainers only demonstrate their "best" work, which ends up being with those kinds of dogs. The problem is, it kind of comes across as "you can only be as good at this if you have X kind of dog", which is alienating and discouraging for people who may want to try it but DON'T have that kind of dog.

Also, if a dog can only achieve what it was bred to do, then how do you explain obedience titled huskies?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

sassafras said:


> I don't know and I don't care. Honestly it's a term that has become so meaningless that I just tune it out and live my life.


I have had a pack of dogs... When I had hounds and curs that I ran deer and feral hogs with...
They were a pack... They largely lived communally, were fed communally, worked as a unit, etc 

But since those are gone..... I do not have a pack and will never have a pack again....

I have dogs.... Four at the moment... But they are not a pack....
They are just our dogs.....

They play together, live together, etc But......
This whole "pack" thing was coined and became a media sensation.....
As you said it has become a meaningless word....

Just because dogs that live in the same house, may share motivations, and generally like each other.... It does NOT make them a pack....

Ironically when I did have a pack of dogs.... They were hardly ever called a pack....

Granddaddy just referred to them as my "mess of dogs" 
He would say, John, hogs are tearing hell out of that pasture we planted in tifton last year at Wauchula Road. They are coming out of the bay head on the south end.... I talked to the Wards (property owners to the south) they do not care if you run your dogs on to their land. They are having hog problems as well. Mr. Ward said he would be obliged if you killed every one of those nasty critters. 

So I want you to gather up a couple of boys and take your mess of dogs and run em out of there... 


But Sass.... Since you have a Bel Mal..... You BETTER get a pack..... Or the Toast Man is doomed....... Bahahahaa


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

mejohnst said:


> Good for you! Aren't they cool? I wish there was more publicity about the plight of these animals. It is very sad to see so many out there, I wished I could have taken them all with me...


I ADORE rez dogs. I live near the Navajo reservation, and my husband and I travel out there from time to time specifically to photograph and feed them  If it weren't for the fact that we're at our max, I'd have driven away with a bunch!


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

gingerkid said:


> I don't have a problem with trainers working with "workable" breeds/dogs (which I'd consider high-drive dogs bred for the purpose that the training is putting them to); the issue I think is that many trainers only demonstrate their "best" work, which ends up being with those kinds of dogs. The problem is, it kind of comes across as "you can only be as good at this if you have X kind of dog", which is alienating and discouraging for people who may want to try it but DON'T have that kind of dog.
> 
> Also, if a dog can only achieve what it was bred to do, then how do you explain obedience titled huskies?


Basic obedience is not neuroscience. I maintain any dog breed can do that with the right trainer. Other dogs/breeds based on genetics can achieve different levels of efficiency. But never discount the trainer. Also a good trainer has access and is logically training many people and many dogs. If its there trade, over several years there is no reason they cant do something above your average educated pet owner, in showing off their dog, or a clients dog.

People who are accomplished trainers, always get dogs they can engage to their potential. It would not make sense otherwise. This coversation is going in circles. You just read the last post, of a long conversation.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

This is a great thread.....

You gotta love it when someone is arguing Vet Protocol and bedside manner and then Bel Mals with a practicing Vet that owns a Bel Mal. ....

You cannot get this kind of entertainment on Netflix.....


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I say..... Dog is acting up...... Just dry hump the dog while biting its ear. That will show it who is boss......
> 
> That will cure it of all its issues....





petpeeve said:


> Mmm, no.
> 
> THIS, is the kind of stuff that separates the wheat from the one-trick ponies ... http://dianebauman.com/index.cfm?loc=awards
> 
> I'm not a huge Dianne Bauman fan, per se, but I'd be stupefied if you could give evidence of .. maybe Michael Ellis or another one of your heroes putting, say .. a draft dog title, herding title, or whatever on a Mal.


Why would he. Lets see Zack George put a title on anything for anything, or even perform a proper recall or down. (yet some of the same people here dont hesitate to recommend him, 'even though he is not their favourite apparently') Michael Ellis, has dabbled in multiple different sports, and titled the same dogs in multiple avenues. He has trained police/military service dogs, and given lectures around the world, to some of the most knowledgeable and respected dog trainers/behaviourists/psychologists of PhD level. He has trained thousands of pet dogs, and little dogs. He is training professional dog trainers around the world as we speak. Titles become meaningless at this point. He actively shows what his and his STUDENTS dogs can do. But thats not enough. To get your approval he needs to train a dog to climb everest? Or herd a school of fish?
Why do you people have to be hypocritical no matter how good somebody is?

Most normal people would be impressed. Here its:
Oh well.. its a Mal... So what... bet he cant do that with a bear, deer or a raccoon.... *SMIRK*

Lets all be funny, and laugh now... Because this guy actually backed up everything he is saying and we have no response. Lets make this thread, and his long posts, a joke, and talk about 'dry humping dogs', because we formed a closed group of thinking shielded by what is really happening, and is possible. 

We have become a species that hides behind mediocrity instead of being inspired by greatness. There are MANY Michael Ellis' in the world that most people here think are flawed or dont even know about. He is not popular, because of a TV show, or hollywood mechanisms. He worked through every inch of it. He has been training dogs, and its all he is done since childhood. He has been exposed, and utilised every system in the book. He has utilised others methods, and proofed his own. These people are doing absolutely amazing things. There is no greater evidence in dog training, than what is ACTIVELY happening in the dog world around us. We just need to open our eyes and take a look. Be inspired. Don't set boundaries. Accept that this guy, may just know something you don't. He certainly knows more about dogs than I could ammas in 10 lifetimes. 

*He is giving you an open seat, to a world that was closed to most normal pet owners. He is letting you in. He is sharing knowledge.
Take it.*


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

WesS said:


> Basic obedience is not neuroscience. I maintain any dog breed can do that with the right trainer. Other dogs/breeds based on genetics can achieve different levels of efficiency. But never discount the trainer. Also a good trainer has access and is logically training many people and many dogs. If its there trade, over several years there is no reason they cant do something above your average educated pet owner, in showing off their dog, or a clients dog.
> 
> People who are accomplished trainers, always get dogs they can engage to their potential. It would not make sense otherwise. This coversation is going in circles. You just read the last post, of a long conversation.


I read the entire conversation, right to JohnnyBandit's post above me, and none of your additional posts really answered any questions. I would appreciate it if you would not tell me what I did or did not do.

No one is saying that professional trainers should not have fun and try to excel with their dogs, or have dogs with which they can excel. But many of them seem to only ever demonstrate with what they know, or not be able to effectively train dogs that _don't_ have the traits with which they are used to working, as indicated by people going to agility workshops and basically being told to get a BC. That is not helpful, and it is a) kind of rude and dismissive of the owner and their dog who likely paid good money to be there and b) indicates to me that the trainer lacks creativity in problem solving. 

Or maybe I'm just way off base in the thinking that if a trainer is teaching a class or a workshop - any setting with multiple dogs/owners, really - it is more about teaching the owners how to be successful at training whatever it is than it is at training the dog in those few hours, and if the trainer can't come up with alternative ways to train something then maybe they're not as good as they think they are to start with.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

WesS said:


> Why would he. Lets see Zack George put a title on anything for anything, or even perform a proper recall or down. (yet some of the same people here dont hesitate to recommend him, 'even though he is not their favourite apparently') Michael Ellis, has dabbled in multiple different sports, and titled the same dogs in multiple avenues. He has trained police/military service dogs, and given lectures around the world, to some of the most knowledgeable and respected dog trainers. He has trained thousands of pet dogs, and little dogs. He is training professional dog trainers around the world as we speak. Titles become meaningless at this point. He actively shows what his and his STUDENTS dogs can do. But thats not enough. To get your approval he needs to train a dog to climb everest? Or herd a school of fish?
> Why do you people have to be hypocritical no matter how good somebody is?
> 
> Most normal people would be impressed. Here its:
> ...




Posting videos (some of which contradict each other) then trying to put your own spin and synopsis on them, is not backing up what you were saying... You are talking in circles without saying much of anything......

I did THOROUGHLY enjoy your discussion on protocol, Etiquette, and proper bedside manner of Vets with a practicing vet.... That was good.....

Your theories on Bel Mals and pack structure was enlightening as well......


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Posting videos (some of which contradict each other) then trying to put your own spin and synopsis on them, is not backing up what you were saying... You are talking in circles without saying much of anything......
> 
> I did THOROUGHLY enjoy your discussion on protocol, Etiquette, and proper bedside manner of Vets with a practicing vet.... That was good.....
> 
> Your theories on Bel Mals and pack structure was enlightening as well......


Which videos contradict each other? You called it. Back it up.

With a practicing vet? So its okay for] vet to judge another vets competencies he knows nothing about? I wasnt aware I was speaking to any vet. And that is a different thread. I was *FOR* the only vet I knew about in that thread. So dont turn things, by saying things out of context. Your posts are just attacking me. Bring this up in the relevant thread if you have something to say. I will reply there.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

WesS said:


> Don't set boundaries.


Aheheh. Except the barriers that prevent dogs from achieving more than they were bred for?


Nobody is saying these trainers aren't accomplished or knowledgeable. But I'm gonna break this down, what people are saying:

1. A lot of high level training videos only use certain breeds of dogs well known for their biddability
2.. Not everybody coming to dog sports has one of these breeds
3. Wouldn't it be nice if there were training videos/seminars featuring breeds that everyday people have?
4. It's frustrating when a trainer can't step outside of their own breed/sport experience and help everyday people problem solve with _their_ dogs


Not sure how that diminishes the accomplishments of someone like Ellis.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

WesS said:


> Which videos contradict each other? You called it. Back it up.
> 
> With a practicing vet? So its okay for] vet to judge another vets competencies he knows nothing about? I wasnt aware I was speaking to any vet. And that is a different thread. I was *FOR* the only vet I knew about in that thread. So dont turn things, by saying things out of context. Your posts are just attacking me. Bring this up in the relevant thread if you have something to say. I will reply there.


Well you posted the videos..... If you do not find contradiction in them, I cannot help you.


And the vet discussion was on this thread. All of my comments have been about things you said on this thread....

Examples.


> Quote Originally Posted by WesS View Post
> It's not the vets job to make the dog not scared of him and everything around him.
> 
> As long as the vet is not abrasive and a complete ****** I don't see what he can really do?
> ...


And yes who you were having this discussion with is a practicing vet.... Maybe you thought she was a proctologist... I don't know....


Same person also has a Bel Mal.. 

Nothing I have said, was taken out of context......


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Dr. Stewart Hilliard - PhD behaviourist - Testimonial on Ellis. More importantly he is describing the 3 important recent revolutions in dog training. Many here a stuck on the second. Great Post. Great read.

" The history of dog training is a chronicle of gradual evolution, interspersed with periods of revolutionary change in theory and method. The last revolution, with which much of the dog training world still has not caught up, was the introduction of reward-centric training techniques beginning in the 1980’s. Prior to this time, the bulk of training was accomplished through more or less forcing the dogs to comply. After 1980, however, the “operant conditioning” techniques pioneered by students of B.F. Skinner for the training of exotic animals, and brought to the level of high art by trainers employed in private animal parks in the U.S., began to penetrate into the dog training fancy.

In the first phase of this penetration, dog trainers began making extensive use of rewards like food and toys to not only motivate dogs to work, but also to teach them the necessary understandings. The first field to be extensively influenced was competitive obedience, but gradually through the influence of pioneers such as Gottfried Dildei, reward-centric methods assumed importance in Schutzhund/IPO as well. However, although many dog trainers were quick to adopt reward-based methods, they were slow to realize the importance of informational aspects of “operant” animal training methods.

This realization had to wait for the second phase of the penetration, during which trainers began to figure out how conditioned reinforcers, called “bridges,” or “markers,” could be developed for dogs, and used to teach the animals to better understand the relationships between their behavior and rewards. Again, the influence was first felt in the realm of competitive obedience. What we might call the “working dog” disciplines (Schutzhund/IPO, Ring Sport, and Police K9) lagged behind. Obedience trainers tended to take in one gulp all the methods and ideas that had been developed for exotic animal training. These methods and ideas sprang ultimately from the work of B.F. Skinner and other Radical Behaviorists, and included the axiom that the use in animal training of any aversive stimuli (or “corrections”) is somehow unethical and counter-productive. In contrast, “working dog” trainers have always relied on “corrections” to train their dogs, partly because they contend with a different set of problems -- their dogs are trained, and perform, in very intensely drive-motivated states such as profound aggression. And it must be remembered that, as a result of 100 years of development, systems of traditional “correction-based” training can accomplish amazing feats, such as 400-point performances in French Ring competition, and 300-point performances in Schutzhund/IPO. 

In the third phase of the dog training revolution that we are witnessing today, traditional systems of dog training are being integrated with “operant” methods, creating the most powerful and humane systems of working dog training ever in existence. In these elegant and tightly-integrated systems, corrections are exploited to rapidly establish strong control over powerfully-motivated behaviors; rewards are used to teach and motivate performance; and a sophisticated system of conditioned behavior markers is used to render it all clear to the dog. By the benefit of his extraordinary intelligence, his impressive teaching ability, and his raw talent with dogs of all shapes, sizes, and training disciplines, one of the most important figures is Michael Ellis, of San Francisco, California. In my 30 years in dog training, I have not seen anyone with Michael’s ability to tackle the most fundamental problems in dog training, innovating on the most subtle and sophisticated levels, yet still explain his methods in the clearest, most economical terms. Michael Ellis is a gigantic talent, who has the ability to teach others to do what he does, and I recommend him to all serious students of dog training art and science."


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

WesS said:


> Dr. Stewart Hilliard - PhD behaviourist - Testimonial on Ellis. More importantly he is describing the 3 important recent revolutions in dog training. Many here a stuck on the second. Great Post. Great read.
> 
> " The history of dog training is a chronicle of gradual evolution, interspersed with periods of revolutionary change in theory and method. The last revolution, with which much of the dog training world still has not caught up, was the introduction of reward-centric training techniques beginning in the 1980’s. Prior to this time, the bulk of training was accomplished through more or less forcing the dogs to comply. After 1980, however, the “operant conditioning” techniques pioneered by students of B.F. Skinner for the training of exotic animals, and brought to the level of high art by trainers employed in private animal parks in the U.S., began to penetrate into the dog training fancy.
> 
> ...


I understand now..... We all have to become disciples of Michael Ellis..... Got it....


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I understand now..... We all have to become disciples of Michael Ellis..... Got it....


Nope. Just dont fall behind with science based practise. The third Revolution is here. Dont use outdated methods .


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

I like science! I also like reading. Got any articles/studies about this third revolution?


----------



## Gally (Jan 11, 2012)

I'd love to read the scientific articles about this third phase of the dog training revolution. A google search only brings me more Ellis website pages.


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

It sounds like it is basically a mix of classical and operant conditioning, and knowing which one to use and when...?


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

gingerkid said:


> It sounds like it is basically a mix of classical and operant conditioning, and knowing which one to use and when...?


They are not mutually exclusive. Clicker training is a mix of both.


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

WesS said:


> They are not mutually exclusive. Never were, never have been. Clicker training is a mix of both.


Right. My confusion is why this "third phase" of training is some kind of revelation, if that is what it is...


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

gingerkid said:


> Right. My confusion is why this "third phase" of training is some kind of revelation, if that is what it is...


Dont ignore what is foreign it works. The results are there. Email this guy, and ask him. Im done. He wrote it not me.

"Stewart Hilliard has better than 30 years experience in training companion and working dogs. He began training working dogs in 1980 in Denver, Colorado, when he became involved in German-style sport training and joined the Rocky Mountain Schutzhund Club, where he soon became the Training Director. Shortly thereafter he became a professional dog trainer, and established a reputation as an authority on canine aggression and man-work for both sport dogs and police service dogs. In the mid-1980's he was one of the first Americans to import working-bred Belgian Malinois to the United States, and he traveled widely in Western Europe studying Malinois breeding and the training disciplines of French Ring, Belgian Ring, and KNPV. He was the founder and first president of the American Ring Federation, the first F.C.I.-sanctioned organization for French Ring Sport in the U.S., and he was the first American to receive his Selection (certification) in France as a French Ring Trial Decoy.

He has taught working dog training seminars for sport clubs and law enforcement agencies all over the United States, and also been invited to teach in Melbourne and Brisbane, Australia, Sao Paulo, Brazil, Montreal, Canada, and Beijing, China. He is the co-author, with Susan Barwig, of the very successful training manual Schutzhund: Theory and Training Methods, and has also written and directed many well-received videotapes about sport and service dog training produced by Canine Training Systems®. In 1983, Stewart Hilliard received his B.A. in psychology, and in 1990 he moved to Austin, Texas to enter Graduate School at the University of Texas at Austin, where he studied animal behavior and learning.

He is the author of a number of scientific papers in reputable psychological journals, and in 1997 he received his Ph.D in Behavioral Neuroscience. Dr. Hilliard has worked in various research & development and operational capacities for the Department of Defense Military Working Dog program since 1997, including Chief of the Military Working Dog Course at the 341st Training Squadron, Lackland Air Force Base, Texas. In this role, he managed the basic training of most of the patrol and substance detector dogs supplied to all branches of the U. S. armed forces. Dr. Hilliard also served as Chief of Military Working Dog Logistics and Procurement at the 341st. He directed the testing and procurement of all the dogs purchased for the Military Working Dog Course and the Specialized Search Dog Course. Dr. Hilliard is currently Chief of the Military Working Dog Breeding Program at the 341st Training Squadron.

- See more at: http://www.caninetrainingsystems.com/people/stewart-hilliard#sthash.x06A8v7W.dpuf"


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

So no links to these scientific papers, then? Aw.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

WesS said:


> Dont ignore what is foreign it works. "


Do you even read what people say? She wasn't ignoring it for being foreign, she's wondering why it's a revolution when it's an idea most people here are familiar with.

You are so intent on making some kind of point that you are responding to things you THINK people are saying. Slow down, read, and have the conversation that is happening here in this forum instead of the one that is happening in your head.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

WesS said:


> Nope. Just dont fall behind with science based practise. The third Revolution is here. Dont use outdated methods .



Ahh..... Thank you for that advice...... Third Revolution...... Or would it not be evolution?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Revolution, Revelation, Evolution....... I am confused now......

But a word does come to mind...... Starts with a B


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

sassafras said:


> Do you even read what people say? She wasn't ignoring it for being foreign, she's wondering why it's a revolution when it's an idea most people here are familiar with.
> 
> You are so intent on making some kind of point that you are responding to things you THINK people are saying. Slow down, read, and have the conversation that is happening here in this forum instead of the one that is happening in your head.


I just sent you one of the most impressive biographies of any dog trainer/behaviourist with degrees in psychology and a PhD in behavioural neuroscience and working both companion and working dogs for over 30 years in some of the most elite applications. Again he said it not me.

I don't need to send you anything. Not one of you have presented any studies. Seriously catch a hint. 
You sent a bunch of articles loosly misquoted from Mech, which i disproved, and some opinions of lesser sources.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

sassafras said:


> Do you even read what people say?
> .



No he does not...... But he does have MAD cut and paste skills..... I am impressed.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

WesS said:


> I just sent you one of the most impressive biographies of any dog trainer/behaviourist with degrees in psychology and behavioural neuroscience and working both companion and working dogs for over 30 years.
> 
> I don't need to send you anything. Not one of you have presented any studies. Seriously catch a hint.
> You sent a bunch of articles loosly quoted from Mech, and some opinions of lesser sources.


I didn't ask you to send me anything, but thanks for making my point that you aren't even reading what people say.

We're trying to have a conversation, you're giving a sermon.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

WesS said:


> I just sent you one of the most impressive biographies of any dog trainer/behaviourist with degrees in psychology and a PhD in behavioural neuroscience and working both companion and working dogs for over 30 years. Again he said it not me.


That is not a biography...... That is a press release....


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

Wait... I get it now! It's all about Zak George and his Dog Training rEvolution! 

and we've come full circle...


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

WesS said:


> I just sent you one of the most impressive biographies of any dog trainer/behaviourist with degrees in psychology and a PhD in behavioural neuroscience and working both companion and working dogs for over 30 years in some of the most elite applications. Again he said it not me.


Do you have a link to a CV? I couldn't find one.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

cookieface said:


> Wait... I get it now! It's all about Zak George and his Dog Training rEvolution!
> 
> and we've come full circle...


If you spam this thread, which is quickly becoming a big hit. on this forum with enough spam. You will hide all the important posts and discussion. You are succeeding. This is my last post. I have never given so much of my time on a forum before in a single day. All to be group attacked. For those willing to read, and are not part of the +possie thinking one way, I say read it and make your own minds. 

To the rest of you. Have a good day.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

WesS said:


> If you spam this thread,.


Which is exactly what you did..... Pages and pages of cut and pastes.....


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Well if the sermon's over it must be time to go out for pie. Yay!


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

...We're a posse?

Dude, you posted monologues, failed to respond to questions and content actually being posted, and generally carried on flailing around without making a single, solitary, point. You didn't RESPOND to a single point. OF COURSE we're going to go off and talk amongst ourselves and scratch our heads. You're ranting and raving without saying ANYTHING. It's like you're in the middle of a crowd of people, but carrying on a (loud) conversation with your invisible friend.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

sassafras said:


> Well if the sermon's over it must be time to go out for pie. Yay!


I am partial to blueberry pie


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I am partial to blueberry pie


Cherry, dang it. ...actually, it's memorial day weekend. I want a burger.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

CptJack said:


> ...We're a posse?
> 
> .


For a brief time around 1984 I was the bass player in a Southern Rock Band called the Posse...... WE did not last long.... We pretty much sucked.


Maybe that is what he is talking about..... We did do a demo tape.... Maybe it found its way on to the internet


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I am partial to blueberry pie


Can I have chocolate cream? Or banana? 



JohnnyBandit said:


> For a brief time around 1984 I was the bass player in a Southern Rock Band called the Posse...... WE did not last long.... We pretty much sucked.
> 
> 
> Maybe that is what he is talking about..... We did do a demo tape.... Maybe it found its way on to the internet


Must be! I'd very much love to hear this demo tape, I'm sure you guys ROCKED!!


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

Kuma'sMom said:


> Can I have chocolate cream? Or banana?
> 
> 
> 
> Must be! I'd very much love to hear this demo tape, I'm sure you guys ROCKED!!


I'm in! load it to youtube for us!


----------



## parus (Apr 10, 2014)

Laurelin said:


> But I'd just like to see trainers demoing with a basset hound or a saluki or a husky sometime.


Yes, lol. It's one of the reasons I really like Rally - at least around here, since it's considered a friendlier sport, there a lot of goofy mutts participating in it. It's fun to see all the different approaches people use with their different dogs. One of the best competitors at the show today was a big hound mix; the lady who beat me in my RA class today did so with a rescue husky.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

I'm thinking about my last agilty trial.

Lots of labs, BCs, ACDs, goldens, a sheltie or two, poodles, and small terriers as well as mixes of all of them. There were also a couple of cairn terriers, a cocker spaniel, a beagle, a newfie, and some kind of sight hound or another, though I didn't get close enough to figure out if it was a whippet or greyhound). Not endless variety, but it's neat to see dogs who *aren't* the expected in the mix. 

And honestly, this last go around in foundations, Molly was the only BC. We had two acds, two pit mixes (one with acd), a chi, and a couple of terriers. And some hound/setter thing.


----------



## Effisia (Jun 20, 2013)

I do so love watching the Newfs that run agility!


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Effisia said:


> I do so love watching the Newfs that run agility!


Man, I just wanted to take that dog home. He was SO sweet and good - and did well, too, but mostly just a really, really, comforting presence. Like I wanted to nap with that dog. A lot.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

I posted one link _directly to_ Mech, and a bunch of other links to people like Yin, Donaldson, McConnell, and Dunbar, which you ignored because you're not familiar with their work. You get familiar with people's work by reading it.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

I know a shiba with his CGN and RN. Even though those aren't "big" titles, that impresses me.


----------



## titiaamor (Nov 17, 2011)

Another new age person quoting unscientific things and putting human qualities in a dog. This trainer and WesS don't understand science and prefer superstitions. Sheesh, can't we just let dogs be dogs and not personify them?


WesS said:


> Respect of home is vital when you have a dog expected to follow human rules.
> 
> Eating on command. (Positive reinforcement- I.e. Withholding rewards, and giving on desired behaviors) Controlling a desired food source, is the ultimate show of dominance, and goes a long way. Crate training. All of this is establishing resepect. All of this is establishing pack structure. Controlling environment so dog does not make and is reinforced on those behaviors also establishes pack structure.
> 
> Controlling access to certain furniture. Or interactions or undesired behaviors to certain family members. Maybe a 4 yr old child. Through good management at start is also enforcing pack structure and respect to the pack leader. Which is something you earn. It is not simply a natural occurrence.


----------



## NicoleIsStoked (Aug 31, 2012)

BTW I'm quite certain that Zak George's dogs do have titles. 
They are disc dog champions if I'm not mistaken.


----------



## ormommy (Mar 30, 2015)

Laurelin said:


> I involved in agility already.
> 
> There's some that do choose small breeds but it's generally the same handful of breeds over and over. Shelties mostly. Sometimes JRTs, poodles, and papillons. Poodles, paps, and shelties tend to be moderately drivey and most often very biddable. JRTs can be extremely high drive. And there are many trainers who work solely with border collies. And not just any border collies, ones bred specifically for the sport and traits the trainers want to deal with. High drive, highly biddable. There's not many people out there really working dogs that are very far from 'ideal'... low drive and/or highly independent. I have had friends go to big name people for seminars with hounds, sporting breeds, etc only to be told their dog would never be able to compete and they should get a BC or that the trainer teaching the seminar can't work with a dog with no toy drive.
> 
> ...


This. :clap2:

I thought it was just me. You never see hunting dogs (except maybe retrievers), non working dogs, etc.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

WesS said:


> If you spam this thread, which is quickly becoming a big hit. on this forum with enough spam. You will hide all the important posts and discussion. You are succeeding. This is my last post. I have never given so much of my time on a forum before in a single day. All to be group attacked. For those willing to read, and are not part of the +possie thinking one way, I say read it and make your own minds.
> 
> To the rest of you. Have a good day.


He may be gone from the thread..... But he is not done with the subject or spamming....

Now he is spamming my viistors message box. 

check it out.
http://www.dogforums.com/members/johnnybandit.html


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

NicoleIsStoked said:


> BTW I'm quite certain that Zak George's dogs do have titles.
> They are disc dog champions if I'm not mistaken.


He lately has also been doing videos with random viewers' dogs. Also kikopup has some sort of sighthounds... I forget which. And muttly mutts.

In our copy class the instructor was talking about the types of dogs that picked it up best in previous classes. One was a beagle and the other a doxie. In our class I'd say the best students were a tie between Luna and another mystery mutt. (they both excelled in different applications of the technique)


----------



## Pia (Dec 17, 2014)

WesS said:


> Lets see Zack George put a title on anything for anything, or even perform a proper recall or down.


Zak has performed a proper down in one of his videos, of himself on all four and with a client's dog jumping on his back, which high pitch proved the dog is no longer afraid of a doggy park when 50 feet away.
And kikkopup has thought me how to achieve a recall of a 10 weeks old puppy from a table to a drawer in an overly cluttered room with 5 sq.f. floor space partially covered with treats.

Wonder how those dogs are doing now.

Jokes aside (although the clips are real), it may be hard to admire an E-collar work and it's like not an art anymore.
Humans would be willingly waving ears on command as well if not doing so got us every time toasted just a bit. It's like circus in town and dancing elephants wearing skirt, while the trainer is waving with a whip just for the show and all the kids are amused - we are grown enough to know the whip is not just for the show.

It just plain hurts me thinking of putting an E-collar on my dog in order to make her obedient. That is Pavlov's experiment abused... "Now it's just the bell and they produce saliva, man that's awesome..."

The hypocrisy that I have a problem with, is that too many of so called family dogs, are spending most of their lives in cages and it is being implemented and encouraged as a part of ALL POSITIVE training. I find it really disturbing.

As for the pack structure, no need of getting stuck in semantics. Call it what you want people, a family structure, a group structure, whatever feels like a PC term, but if you are not the leaders, and the dogs aren't, then who is? Are you taking commands from your dog? Are you best buddies and share a napkin around the table?

Don't kid yourself, you wouldn't be talking about training dogs if you didn't feel entitled to make the animal submissive, nor would you feel entitled to shove your dog into a cage whenever YOU decide he should be out of the way. 

_My dog is very obedient. I know that, because when I ask her "Are you coming or aren't you?", then she is coming or she isn't._

Right


----------



## JazzyTheSiberian (Feb 4, 2013)

DF has been...Very interesting lately. It just entertains me what other come up with.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Pia said:


> Zak has performed a proper down in one of his videos, of himself on all four and with a client's dog jumping on his back, which high pitch proved the dog is no longer afraid of a doggy park when 50 feet away.
> And kikkopup has thought me how to achieve a recall of a 10 weeks old puppy from a table to a drawer in an overly cluttered room with 5 sq.f. floor space partially covered with treats.
> 
> Wonder how those dogs are doing now.
> ...


Um, no. Respectfully, that is not the relationship I have with my dog, nor the relationship I desire. We are a team of two individuals working together. It is not an alpha/submissive relationship. And I am reasonably sure if I tried to force her to submit to my will she would tell me to eff right the heck off.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

I have one dog who... droops, for lack of a better word, if I even raise my voice. Ears go down, tail goes down, even if I'm growling at the computer or something she thinks I'm mad at her and slinks away. (I've never hurt this dog or trained using aversives; she's just really soft.) I kinda hate it. She's very well-behaved and learns new things in a flash, but I wish she were a little harder and that she didn't care quite so much about pleasing and appeasing me. I don't ever want to intentionally train a dog to obey me because I'm the "dominant" "alpha" and they should do what I want or else. I want a dog to be happy to work with me.

I also don't think that "dominance" has a single thing to do with manners. I train my dogs using NILIF (this version, not any of the harsher versions I've heard of) and it works great. The dog does what I want to get what he or she wants. We both win.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

JohnnyBandit said:


> For a brief time around 1984 I was the bass player in a Southern Rock Band called the Posse...... WE did not last long.... We pretty much sucked.
> 
> 
> Maybe that is what he is talking about..... We did do a demo tape.... Maybe it found its way on to the internet


You *have* to share with us!


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Crantastic said:


> I have one dog who... droops, for lack of a better word, if I even raise my voice. Ears go down, tail goes down, even if I'm growling at the computer or something she thinks I'm mad at her and slinks away. (I've never hurt this dog or trained using aversives; she's just really soft.) I kinda hate it. She's very well-behaved and learns new things in a flash, but I wish she were a little harder and that she didn't care quite so much about pleasing and appeasing me. I don't ever want to intentionally train a dog to obey me because I'm the "dominant" "alpha" and they should do what I want or else. I want a dog to be happy to work with me.
> 
> I also don't think that "dominance" has a single thing to do with manners. I train my dogs using NILIF (this version, not any of the harsher versions I've heard of) and it works great. The dog does what I want to get what he or she wants. We both win.


No no, this time it's -pack structure-, not dominance. Your dog listens because you have established yourself as the leader in the pack.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

ireth0 said:


> No no, this time it's -pack structure-, not dominance. Your dog listens because you have established yourself as the leader in the pack.


Oh, right. Silly me, I thought it was because I give them food and toss their toys for them and take them on walks and all that other stuff they like.


----------



## Pia (Dec 17, 2014)

ireth0 said:


> Um, no. Respectfully, that is not the relationship I have with my dog, nor the relationship I desire. We are a team of two individuals working together. It is not an alpha/submissive relationship. And I am reasonably sure if I tried to force her to submit to my will she would tell me to eff right the heck off.


And here is the misunderstanding of the term in itself. Its synonym is "first", not "forceful"
It's just been connected to forceful training for too long.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Crantastic said:


> I have one dog who... droops, for lack of a better word, if I even raise my voice..


We had one like that.... I am loud and can sound gruff. Even when I am not... 

My wife's Lab Buc was a soft soul and if I sounded the least bit gruff he would hide... He eventually got use to him.


----------



## parus (Apr 10, 2014)

I'm always a little bemused when people act like leaving the dog locked in an appropriately sized and bedded crate or pen while one is out is somehow more unkind than leaving the dog locked in, say, the kitchen while one is out. I think it's a pretty anthropomorphic view based on how we think of cages. Dogs can't be safely allowed to range freely in the vast majority of circumstances. So they're going to be contained. I don't think it really matters to the dog what the containment looks like, as long as it's physically comfortable and the dog is conditioned to like the place.


----------



## Pia (Dec 17, 2014)

Crantastic said:


> Oh, right. Silly me, I thought it was because I give them food and toss their toys for them and take them on walks and all that other stuff they like.


Dogs are not stuffed teddy bears. It may and should be a two ways relationship, but it is a one way dependence relation, in which the dogs depend on us for food, shelter, safety and so forth, and they know that pretty well. Of course it would be nice to believe they are with us out of pure love, same as it is nice to think there is no dominance from the owner, just a happy team working together... but then what should we use the leash for, or teach a recall in the first place? Why are we afraid they won't come back when called, and why do they have to come back if they wish otherwise? Moreover, why do they have to do anything for us?
Isn't that so that the one who is in charge, is the leader? Where is the problem, we can still have a great relationship with our dogs though, without lolling ourselves in some human idealistic idee fixe that goes against the reality of it.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

parus said:


> I'm always a little bemused when people act like leaving the dog locked in an appropriately sized and *bedded* crate or pen while one is out is somehow more unkind than leaving the dog locked in, say, the kitchen while one is out. I think it's a pretty anthropomorphic view based on how we think of cages. Dogs can't be safely allowed to range freely in the vast majority of circumstances. So they're going to be contained. I don't think it really matters to the dog what the containment looks like, as long as it's physically comfortable and the dog is conditioned to like the place.


 LOL, Suri is crated when I'm not home, and she a very nice bad/crate mat in there. She always wads it all up on one end and sleeps on the plastic. Cooler maybe? But it's been pretty cool out and she's a single-coated shorthair. I don't know. She's a weirdo. And she learned my routine so quickly that now when I open the drawer to get my keys, she goes right in her crate . I don't think she dislikes it, at least.

Somewhere back there, WesS said something about how dogs nowadays have more/worse behavioral problems. LOL. I don't think that's true at all. I mean, this is purely anecdotal, but remembering the dogs I knew when I was a kid. . .no way. I think people make a bigger deal about badly behaved dogs nowadays, though.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

parus said:


> I'm always a little bemused when people act like leaving the dog locked in an appropriately sized and bedded crate or pen while one is out is somehow more unkind than leaving the dog locked in, say, the kitchen while one is out. I think it's a pretty anthropomorphic view based on how we think of cages. Dogs can't be safely allowed to range freely in the vast majority of circumstances. So they're going to be contained. I don't think it really matters to the dog what the containment looks like, as long as it's physically comfortable and the dog is conditioned to like the place.





Willowy said:


> LOL, Suri is crated when I'm not home, and she a very nice bad/crate mat in there. She always wads it all up on one end and sleeps on the plastic. Cooler maybe? But it's been pretty cool out and she's a single-coated shorthair. I don't know. She's a weirdo. And she learned my routine so quickly that now when I open the drawer to get my keys, she goes right in her crate . I don't think she dislikes it, at least.


My dog mostly sleeps when I'm gone either way. He's usually in the same place when a get back as he was when I left.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Willowy said:


> Somewhere back there, WesS said something about how dogs nowadays have more/worse behavioral problems. LOL. I don't think that's true at all. I mean, this is purely anecdotal, but remembering the dogs I knew when I was a kid. . .no way. I think people make a bigger deal about badly behaved dogs nowadays, though.


Agreed. Back in the stone ages when I was a kid, everybody knew which dogs (and it was dogS) in the neighborhood would bite and to stay away from them.


----------



## parus (Apr 10, 2014)

Pia said:


> Dogs are not stuffed teddy bears. It may and should be a two ways relationship, but it is a one way dependence relation, in which the dogs depend on us for food, shelter, safety and so forth, and they know that pretty well. Of course it would be nice to believe they are with us out of pure love, same as it is nice to think there is no dominance from the owner, just a happy team working together... but then what should we use the leash for, or teach a recall in the first place? Why are we afraid they won't come back when called, and why do they have to come back if they wish otherwise? Moreover, why do they have to do anything for us?
> Isn't that so that the one who is in charge, is the leader? Where is the problem, we can still have a great relationship with our dogs though, without lolling ourselves in some human idealistic idee fixe that goes against the reality of it.


I think you're arguing with a strawman here. Basically no one believes that dogs and humans are equals in terms of intellect or responsibility. You don't have to be equals to have a respectful partnership. The entire basis of the human-canine relationship is that dogs are superior to us in some ways (senses, speed, etc.) and we are superior to them in other ways (planning, tool use, etc.) so when we work together we are able to accomplish certain tasks better than either would do alone. 

No one says a human is establishing dominance over a toddler if they don't let it run free off into the forest. They're just keeping a little human who doesn't understand consequences safe. We keep dogs contained for the same reason. It can be reciprocal; we protect dogs with our superior minds and planning, they protect us with their superior senses and reflexes. If my dog could work a GPS and call a taxi to find its way home after wandering off, I'd let it wander. But it can't.


----------



## parus (Apr 10, 2014)

Willowy said:


> LOL, Suri is crated when I'm not home, and she a very nice bad/crate mat in there. She always wads it all up on one end and sleeps on the plastic. Cooler maybe? But it's been pretty cool out and she's a single-coated shorthair. I don't know. She's a weirdo. And she learned my routine so quickly that now when I open the drawer to get my keys, she goes right in her crate . I don't think she dislikes it, at least.


Cas does exactly the opposite. When left home alone he takes the pillows and blankets off furniture and makes a nest to sleep on. I could put them away to stop him, but I think it's kind of nice for him to have a hobby, lol. He doesn't chew on them, just piles them up.


----------



## parus (Apr 10, 2014)

I actually watched him make this one...usually he only does it when home alone. He took three bed pillows and neatly put them side-by-side in the corner there (his preferred spot, a vantage point from which he can watch everything), then laid down atop them. 










I guess the mattress wasn't soft enough for him by itself, he needed pillows too, lol.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Pia said:


> Dogs are not stuffed teddy bears. It may and should be a two ways relationship, but it is a one way dependence relation, in which the dogs depend on us for food, shelter, safety and so forth, and they know that pretty well. Of course it would be nice to believe they are with us out of pure love, same as it is nice to think there is no dominance from the owner, just a happy team working together... but then what should we use the leash for, or teach a recall in the first place? Why are we afraid they won't come back when called, and why do they have to come back if they wish otherwise? Moreover, why do they have to do anything for us?
> Isn't that so that the one who is in charge, is the leader? Where is the problem, we can still have a great relationship with our dogs though, without lolling ourselves in some human idealistic idee fixe that goes against the reality of it.


Maybe you missed the part of my post where I said that I manage my dogs using NILIF. In that case: I manage my dogs using NILIF. My dogs behave because behaving gets them what they want. Yes, they know I control the resources, and they do what I ask when they want those things. That's not "dominance," at least not in the way 90% of people use it when discussing dog training. In my opinion (and in the opinion of pros like Patricia McConnell), the word "dominance" is poisoned and I'm not going to bother arguing semantics when I can just use another word that won't be misunderstood.

Also, are you just throwing out the "teddy bear" line because my dogs are little? I expect the same manners from my dogs regardless of size (my former dogs were around 60lbs and 90lbs). I'm very happy with my dogs' manners.

Basically: 

What dominance means to ethologists: Priority access to a preferred, limited resource.
What dominance means to most people in the context of dog training: Physically and mentally controlling a dog, usually through physical force and intimidation.
It's just not worth it to me to try to rehabilitate a poisoned word... so I don't use it at all. Like McConnell says:



> I'll start with the bottom line. I don't use the word "dominance" when talking to people about training their dogs. There's just no profit in it. Even given that dominance is about "priority access" and "social freedom," but not about how to get it, I still see nothing but the potential for confusion and misuse. Given that in general parlance dominance means "total control," and that it is so often it is equated with force (completely inappropriately), I avoid the term as if it were toxic. Which is exactly what I think it can be in this context.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Oh man was at an agility trial all afternoon and missed out.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Btw there was the funniest husky today at the trial! Crazypants happy bouncy zoomies and going to say hi to all the ring crew. Did most the obstacles twice. No Q obviously but happiest dog I saw!


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Laurelin said:


> Oh man was at an agility trial all afternoon and missed out.


That's what you get for actually doing things with your teddy bears.


----------



## Pia (Dec 17, 2014)

parus said:


> I think you're arguing with a strawman here.


You see, the thing is I do not argue with anything. Trying to understand this rather passionate aversion to the words "dominance" and "alpha", thus the debate.

Been reading some more this morning (thanks for the reminder of Patricia McConnell, looked again in the books I have of hers) and finally got it I think.

It is the misconceptions, the physical force, harassment, alpha rolls, bullying and all that violent crap done to dogs over long time in the name of alpha and dominance that have got the terms themselves such a bad rap that people chose now to stir away from the words all together, do I understand it right?

Like certain names in the history that no one wants to carry because of the associations...?

The genuine meaning of the word dominance (Lat. dominari) is to rule, ergo to make rules, and Alpha - the first, is the one in control of resources.

The words do not imply violence or force, it is making the rules and controlling the resources, and in this regard they are perfectly plausible in a human - dog relationship. It is the guardian that makes the rules, and the guardian is in control of resources.
NILIF is practicing Alpha, training is dominance and practicing Alpha, time outs are dominance, the relation as whole is Alpha dominance in the right meaning of terminology.
An Alpha in its true meaning has nothing to do with force or harassment, rather the opposite - it is a balanced, compassionate and fair leader, one to trust and to rely on, not a threat or a nervous wreck.
I myself could never think of imposing any threat or harassment on my dog. Besides, any kind of physical or psychological violence is forbidden by law where I come from, towards both people and animals. I have raised my child without ever using any kind of physical punishment or force and am an avid advocate against violence. But I have always had it clear for me that I am the one who makes the rules and also controls the resources (with children it's not the basic need like food, but things like sweets, pc-gaming, pocket money etc.), which is actually a great responsibility. And one says the word "No" when it seems to be appropriate. Same with my dog, I don't withhold her food or mess with her basic needs in any way, but I am fully aware of my role as the one who is making the rules (Alpha). Likewise I have formed a group structure for the two species that live with me. They didn't work it out by themselves. If it's good or bad I don't know, it works for us. And it has not been done by any form of force, just a consistent order when delivering the most valuable resource: food.

I have also looked up English definitions of the term "boss" in various contexts, and come to learn it has a negative meaning in English, so this one is my poor understanding of language in culture context. My bad, sorry, I work as a language teacher and translator within several languages (not English, don't worry) so I should have remembered that a word meaning in culture context may vary immensely. 

Is it the ugly misuse of all these terms over long time in the context of treating dogs, that makes you tick by the sound of them, have I got it right?


----------



## Pia (Dec 17, 2014)

parus said:


> I'm always a little bemused when people act like leaving the dog locked in an appropriately sized and bedded crate or pen while one is out is somehow more unkind than leaving the dog locked in, say, the kitchen while one is out. I think it's a pretty anthropomorphic view based on how we think of cages. Dogs can't be safely allowed to range freely in the vast majority of circumstances. So they're going to be contained. I don't think it really matters to the dog what the containment looks like, as long as it's physically comfortable and the dog is conditioned to like the place.


Don't know how it is leaving the dog locked in the kitchen or any other room, and thinking of caging a dog only in comparison to not caging.
Don't like caging dogs in general. What is wrong about it? I feel like everything is wrong about it. Tina was being caged for a couple months after strong recommendation from her trainer and by observing her, it felt just plain wrong to me from the day one to the day when I finally went with my gut and removed the cage all together. Not planing on using it ever again. She has had free run of the house before she was fully house trained. My impression was that the house training actually went much faster after removing the cage. 

When I am not at home, from what I can tell, she is playing with her toys on both floors of the house, taking naps in my bed, and greeting me lounging on a bench in the hallway. She is not messing with any of my stuff, though shoes, clothes and things on countertops are easily available for her. The cats are not afraid of her either, which tells me she is not harassing them either when I am gone. Maybe I've just been lucky with her temperament and personality.

On the other side, in the context of all positive training, I can not find how caging can be a positive experience for a dog.
Honestly, I didn't see my dog settling in her cage - what I saw was my dog shutting down in her cage.


----------



## Pia (Dec 17, 2014)

Crantastic said:


> Also, are you just throwing out the "teddy bear" line because my dogs are little?


No.




Crantastic said:


> What dominance means to most people in the context of dog training: Physically and mentally controlling a dog, usually through physical force and intimidation.
> It's just not worth it to me to try to rehabilitate a poisoned word... so I don't use it at all.


This information has got me on the right track of further search of the terms. Thanks.


----------



## Pia (Dec 17, 2014)

Crantastic said:


> That's what you get for actually doing things with your teddy bears.


The second one of The five master suppression techniques: Ridicule (In a manipulative way to portray the arguments of, or their opponents themselves, in a ridiculing fashion).

It is actually a framework popularized by Norwegian social psychologist Berit Ås in the late 1970s.

The techniques are widely used also in all kind of internet groups, like i.e. discussion boards, a very common phenomenon.


----------



## Bentwings (Mar 30, 2015)

I started reading this thread and got interrupted by my own dog training. As most threads , this has drifted from the original start so I'd like to step back. 

I had to look up Catahoula dog even though I lived in the south for many years. It's the Louisana state dog. I always thought they were "good ole boy" dogs, some kind of Austilian Cattle dog plus something. Turns out they are a good herding dog, plenty big enough for cattle, strong protector, family capable and only slightly smaller than German Shepherd. I love herding dogs and didn't know this, so I learned something today. Somewhere in various descriptions they can be hard headed with the inate ability to think for themselves. They can require a "firm hand" in training. What a "firm hand" means to us as trainers is really a good debate. The yank and jerk with a few jolts of volts from days of old are definitely out. Lots of research here. 

So, my opinion of the described trainer is he has a "shake and bake" style one method fits all. I see this a lot, even in the popular training centers. 8 dog per classes, 8 different dogs from couch potato to " mad dog". There is a lot of "yak yak" then this how we are going to train. It doesn't take eng degree to see that a couple dogs do pretty well the rest....well you can repeat the class....just bring another and full of cash.,

So to the original poster, I think you are on your own here being in a small town unless you want to travel some. Were I you, I'd search this dog breed out very thoroughly. Get to know them. Get to know herding dogs. Some can be very high drive. They need strenuous exercise, something to do. I like to use back packs on the dog. Add a couple water bottles for weight. THe purpose is to get the dog in shape and to be able to wear him down to the point where he has a difficult time getting into "overdrive". It's really hard to do anything in "overdrive" . Its easy to create problems you are not expecting. The bottom line here you are going to have to learn some training technics suitable to your dog. 

I'm sure you are looking for how to do this, ok? I like to say forget all this dominance stuff, leave it for another day, our language doesn't really have a good term for it. We're training dogs here, what its called doesn't matter, what does is your inter reaction with the dog.
Sit, stand, down, recall, and extended time to remain in place can be done right at home. Proofed outside later. I use high value food treats. I don't like hotdogs but they do work cut into small pieces. "How to..." Slice them about 1/8 inch thick. slices, no bigger. I like boiled and dried liver pieces, same size. Use the broth as a food adder. Might as well teach the dog he gets tasty food for only a "give me 5" paw shake. 
I start with a sit, stay command. As soon as the dog learns sit, I begin dropping the stay. Sit means sit until I give another command. The dog breaks, don't make a big deal just reposition him and start the exercise over. 

Now I like to use these as a realease object, a ball on a line, a tug on a line. These are given at the completion of a correct exercise. It's a release from tension for the dog. You can pick up the line and bring the dogto you. Might as well teach an "out" here too. At first a food treat to redirect but stop as soon as the dog gets the idea there is more work to do. The more you work this release the less food you need and this will make other exercises easier.

So, hopefully you get the idea. You are going to have to create your program, maybe ask specific how to questions. Yeah it's a lot of work but I think it's part of owning a dog.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Pia said:


> The second one of The five master suppression techniques: Ridicule (In a manipulative way to portray the arguments of, or their opponents themselves, in a ridiculing fashion).
> 
> It is actually a framework popularized by Norwegian social psychologist Berit Ås in the late 1970s.
> 
> The techniques are widely used also in all kind of internet groups, like i.e. discussion boards, a very common phenomenon.


You have a lot of knowledge Pia. You give yourself less credit than you should. Its amazing how people always complain about how they have 'this conversation' weekly and very often, which is why its a 'copy paste of ideas'. And argue about it. Yet None of 'these people' they are arguing with exist here? I wonder, what happened to them? Why are they not here?
Pia my only advice is to keep an inquiring mind. It just goes to show, time on a forum, and number of posts is not correlative to knowledge. Ive been called many times a newbie here, because I am new on this forum. 



chimunga said:


> The reason we copy/paste is because we have this argument ALL THE TIME. We're tired. We get into this argument on this forum atleast once a week, if not more. We're all pretty reasonably open-minded people. I change my mind on aspects of dog training constantly as new information is given to me.


So again where are these people who apparently agree with what I am saying? I know they exist. And I know there are a lot of them? Where are they?

Forums will always be swayed in a certain direction by internet forces and communal people with similar views flocking together. You will see very different ways of thinking in various forums. GSD forum is very different. Very different indeed. Have a look there. (You will find I am actually a complete +possie liberal compared to what you see there , yet here, despised, ridiculed and made out to be some sort of Nazi because I believe in pack structure.) 

My dogs are actually not very high drive dogs or hard. Despite what everything thinks. The methods I use work perfectly on them. There is nothing HARD or TOUGH about what I am talking about. Structure and being clear and coherent can be as important for little yorkie as it can be for a GSD. Also I have owned many dogs. And not only GSD's. In fact I have owned some small dogs too .


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Apparently all the people who apparently agree with what you are saying are on the GSD forum. Which... the GSD forum is GSD forum and here is here. Not sure why things being different there has anything to do with this conversation taking place here. 

So much angst over not using a couple of poisoned words. Maybe because there is less projection and an actual attempt to learn what people are saying. Pia understood it in a minute.


----------



## NicoleIsStoked (Aug 31, 2012)

I think the mods should lock this thread. This is getting out of hand and is completely pointless.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I am just confused why it keeps coming back to small dogs. lol

As far as 'dominance' or 'being alpha' goes, it's not something I think about at all. *shrug* I'm pretty happy with where my dog training is going and I'm sure it will further improve.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

NicoleIsStoked said:


> I think the mods should lock this thread. This is getting out of hand and is completely pointless.


The forum would be boring if everyone agreed all the time.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Laurelin said:


> As far as 'dominance' or 'being alpha' goes, it's not something I think about at all. *shrug* I'm pretty happy with where my dog training is going and I'm sure it will further improve.


Right... dominance, alpha, pack. They're just not things I think about when I'm training or living with my dogs. I don't really think about quadrants, P/R, or +/- either, to be honest. I think about "is this technique something I'm comfortable using with the dog in front of me and I think will will work with the dog in front of me."


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

sassafras said:


> Right... dominance, alpha, pack. They're just not things I think about when I'm training or living with my dogs. I don't really think about quadrants, P/R, or +/- either, to be honest. I think about "is this technique something I'm comfortable using with the dog in front of me and I think will will work with the dog in front of me."


50 some odd years training, 90 different breeds and assorted sizes and the above quote is what dog training "*in my opinion*" is what it's all about. Of course you know what they say about opinions.


----------



## Shep (May 16, 2013)

sassafras said:


> Right... dominance, alpha, pack. They're just not things I think about when I'm training or living with my dogs. I don't really think about quadrants, P/R, or +/- either, to be honest. I think about "is this technique something I'm comfortable using with the dog in front of me and I think will will work with the dog in front of me."


I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one who feels this way. I get very impatient with jargon and theory. I'm sure these terms are useful to many people. But not one time have I ever been in the middle of a training session with my dog and thought, "OK, I'm going to use classical conditioning now" or "Uh-oh, was what I just did R+ or P-?" or "Gee, I sure hope my methods are science-based!" I couldn't care less. I just train my dogs.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Shep said:


> I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one who feels this way. I get very impatient with jargon and theory. I'm sure these terms are useful to many people. But not one time have I ever been in the middle of a training session with my dog and thought, "OK, I'm going to use classical conditioning now" or "Uh-oh, was what I just did R+ or P-?" or "Gee, I sure hope my methods are science-based!" I couldn't care less. I just train my dogs.


Me too.


----------



## CrimsonAccent (Feb 17, 2012)

Pia said:


> Don't know how it is leaving the dog locked in the kitchen or any other room, and thinking of caging a dog only in comparison to not caging.
> Don't like caging dogs in general. What is wrong about it? I feel like everything is wrong about it. Tina was being caged for a couple months after strong recommendation from her trainer and by observing her, it felt just plain wrong to me from the day one to the day when I finally went with my gut and removed the cage all together. Not planing on using it ever again. She has had free run of the house before she was fully house trained. My impression was that the house training actually went much faster after removing the cage.
> 
> When I am not at home, from what I can tell, she is playing with her toys on both floors of the house, taking naps in my bed, and greeting me lounging on a bench in the hallway. She is not messing with any of my stuff, though shoes, clothes and things on countertops are easily available for her. The cats are not afraid of her either, which tells me she is not harassing them either when I am gone. *Maybe I've just been lucky with her temperament and personality.*
> ...


Each and every dog is an individual, I'm sure we all agree on that. I really think you've just gotten lucky with your dog. Does using a cage (in general) make you uncomfortable because the dog is confined to a small space vs being confined in an empty room with more space? Because I'm not really sure there is any other difference aside from how much space the dog has?

My own dogs enter their crates voluntarily when they want to take a nap, so I don't think they see it as a negative space. And unless my individual dog was hurting themselves trying to escape their crate/cage/enclosure (whatever term you prefer) I would rather have the puppy contained when we leave rather than hurt themselves*

*As in chew on a wire and electrocute themselves, or eat a rope toy and get impacted, etc. I can always clean up a potty training accident.

The other two dogs are left loose when we leave, as they have proven themselves "trustworthy" as it were. 

Does your own dog really hate being in a small space, or could you just be projecting your own human ideas onto a dog? (Not meant maliciously, genuinely curious).


----------



## Gally (Jan 11, 2012)

99% of dogs are confined/contained in some way for their own safety or for the safety of the community. What is the difference between a dog who is in a crate, pen, room, house or yard? Space available and amount of potential risks/dangers. How does an owner decide the type of confinement that is most suitable? It depends on the personality of the individual dog, its maturity level, the amount of training done and the amount the dangers in the environment can be managed. 

For a lot people making their homes or even a single room completely puppy proof can be very difficult especially in a small home/apartment where every room is being lived in fully. For these people a crate or pen will often be the safest and most responsible choice for confinement. Even in big homes where you can set up a puppy room there are some puppies that will eat through drywall or tear up floors when left alone. A puppy room would not be a safe choice for these dogs.

My dog enjoyed his crate as a puppy. He would run to get in it when we were leaving because he knew good things happened in the crate. He was completely relaxed both when we left and when we returned. As he grew, matured and became trustworthy in his trained skills he was allowed to stay out in a room and now has full roam of the apartment at all times.

My dog is now trustworthy alone in the house but that doesn't mean I would risk removing all confinement when I'm away. My neighbours wouldn't be happy if I left him running loose in the halls or on the street and it wouldn't be safe for him either. Confinement allows me to keep my dog safe.


----------



## sydneynicole (Apr 2, 2015)

Reading through the testimonials, I saw one that claims she had tried a positive reinforcement trainer, liked his style but it just didn't work with her dog so she went to this guy.

I agree that a behaviorist would be a good idea, and start doing some research on positive training. There's tons to be read. If you don't have enough knowledge or aren't confident enough to try it out yourself, search for a good trainer with credentials. 

If he is a higher energy/tightly wound dog it may help to give him a 'job'. Like agility, teaching him some more complicated tricks, etc, something to work him both physically and mentally each day. I have a high strung dog prone to anxiety (but not aggression so I can't say much about it) and it helps her out with the anxiety.


----------



## Pia (Dec 17, 2014)

CrimsonAccent said:


> Does your own dog really hate being in a small space, or could you just be projecting your own human ideas onto a dog? (Not meant maliciously, genuinely curious).


I wouldn't say showed any hate once she was inside. "Shutting down" describes it better I think. She would just lie down and stare in front of her with empty, glossy eyes. Wouldn't want stuffed Kongs or play with toys, wouldn't follow movements around with her eyes, would just shut down.
She would also put her head low and walk to her crate very slowly when asked to, and after trying first on going to her bed and staying frozen in hope of not having to go to the crate. 
Then one day she stopped at the crate door and didn't want to go in, just standing there and looking at me. Sad. The sadness is not a projection, it's easy to see when she is sad, happy, curious, smiling etc., she is very "cartoony" in her face. That was short after her one week boot camp which I regret, but that's another story. 

When I got her, she was only 8 weeks and already had calluses on her elbows and bad skin condition. 
Not from the shelter cage, she was there only for a week or so.
No idea how her life looked like before that, don't know if she got to be together with her mother, nothing, only the calluses from some hard surface.

My aversion to caging is not only about Tina, but in general though. I am just not for it, can't see it as a good experience for a dog.
It restricts the dog's movement, and if it 's for many hours a day + the night, many dogs end up not being able to exercise their bodies, sniff around, explore and being a dog in general for about 20 hours each day, like 3/4 of their lives. Can't see how this can be a good thing for a dog, even if he goes in there freely due to training - dogs do many things for us when trained to, not necessary enjoying every each of them.

Most of Zoo parks around the world have got to similar conclusions and have done or are in the process of increasing the animals' space as much as possible.
At the same time people are buying into the idea of dogs not needing space for their physical and mental health, without asking the basic question: WHY?
What did people do before the invention of cages at home, and isn't taking a dog out of a shelter connected to among other things an urge to get it out of the cage? 

My family has never been caging, nor did my friends and the dogs got house broken and house manners trained and did/do just fine.
I myself was shocked over the cage concept when I got Tina, but as a first time dog guardian I did what the trainer told me to, just took the divider out each time he left, which he put back on the next visit. also did a lot of research on my own on caging, but one has to dig to page 20 and further as search engines will spit out all the cage promoting and sale pages/documents as default with any key words combinations.

To be honest, I have never heard of so many cases of separation anxiety before the cage-age. Didn't hear many dogs howling inside homes when walking the streets in my country in Europe. Here I can hear the howling and barking from all over the places when on our morning walks. There is something that doesn't add up...

Don't know of any studies showing that dogs roaming wild tend to look for a cage like environment to spend most of their time. Don't see how the caging idea can be backed up with dogs' natural needs, but can see how caging dogs can relate to our needs and solve our inconveniences.
Meanwhile there are billions running a year into pockets of those who profit on the idea.

From what I have seen in others' and my dog, there is a clear difference between a dog that has settled in his confinement and a dog that is enjoying his freedom in the home.
Caged dogs do just that: settle.

edit:



> My own dogs enter their crates voluntarily when they want to take a nap, so I don't think they see it as a negative space.


Yes, that is the widest spread statement to back up the use of cages.

However, there are 2 things to consider:

1. An open door is not restricting a dog; caging is locking the door and denying the dog a choice.

2. Where is her bed placed, does she have a bed next to the cage as well? If not, you could try and experiment to see where she will prefer to rest once the cage conditioning fades off.


----------



## Pia (Dec 17, 2014)

Gally said:


> What is the difference between a dog who is in a crate, pen, room, house or yard?


The amount of space. The possibility or lack of such to walk, run and play actively using both body and mind.

If you set up a camera for the 8-10 hours away from home, you can see what the dog is doing in her crate. Mostly nothing.


----------



## parus (Apr 10, 2014)

Pia said:


> You see, the thing is I do not argue with anything. Trying to understand this rather passionate aversion to the words "dominance" and "alpha", thus the debate.
> 
> Been reading some more this morning (thanks for the reminder of Patricia McConnell, looked again in the books I have of hers) and finally got it I think.
> 
> ...


Are we dominant over dogs in the sense that we are currently the dominant species on the planet? Obviously. But using the "dictionary definition" of the term in a specialized context (here, dog training and animal behavior) is often incorrect or imprecise. In ethology describing an animal as dominant over another has a specific meaning and is used in specific contexts. 

Let's say we argue that a triangle with a 100 degree angle is a right triangle because it's a perfectly good correct triangle and "right" means "correct," doesn't it, hmmmmm? That's the kind of goofiness that comes from arguing using the dictionary.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Pia said:


> If you set up a camera for the 8-10 hours away from home, you can see what the dog is doing in her crate. Mostly nothing.


If you set up a camera on your dogs who are loose in the house, they do mostly nothing too . I don't think my mom's dogs even bother to bark at passersby when she's not home. 

I mean, I do feel a bit iffy about crating, but if the dog is not scared/shut down about it I don't think it's terrible.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Man, I work from home and can see eyes on what my dogs do all day - 

They either lie down on the bed and sleep, or they go into their (open) crates and sleep. All day. They literally get up only when it is lunch time/my husband comes home for lunch to eat, and go to the bathroom then go back to doing that same thing after he leaves and I restart my work. They don't do ANYTHING until about 5:30 p.m That is with access to the entire house and back yard to move all they want.

My BORDER COLLIE picked up this schedule when she was *six months old* and has maintained it since. 

So, yeah. They have space, for all the good it does them. Most days, they don't even move from wherever they flop in the morning until, again, lunch time or evening.

They don't look out windows, they don't bark, they don't play with toys on their own. Molly watches some tv and might occasionally pick up a bone to chew and once in a really blue moon Thud will sleep outside, but honestly? They're out. They've 
learned when entertainment happens and being the animals they are are choosing to not waste their energy when nothing fun is available to do. They save it up for when the fun stuff DOES happen.

(My dogs have crates but at their ages I rarely crate them - no point, they're trained - even when I'm not home I mostly just close doors. I don't have any guilt about crating when I do though. I'm familiar with my dogs enough to know that if there are no people home, they're... sleeping somewhere, so when people are around they can have all the energy ever to be nutballs.)


----------



## CrimsonAccent (Feb 17, 2012)

I should add, my dogs would go into their crates voluntarily. Even before we started crate training ...formally (?) they would go in.

My dogs don't have a phobia of containment. They don't shut down. It would be more cruel to let them hurt themselves. I'm not sure how to make this any more understandable. My dogs don't do anything when loose but sleep all day (days I've stayed home). They don't need an entire house to sleep.


----------



## Pia (Dec 17, 2014)

CrimsonAccent said:


> I'm not sure how to make this any more understandable.


There is no need, I get it.

I am not on a mission here, just sharing my feelings and thoughts about caging.


----------



## parus (Apr 10, 2014)

Which is totally valid, but you really should bear in mind that not every dog is "broken" by having movement restricted, either thanks to a solid temperament, a lifetime of positive experiences, or some combination thereof.


----------



## Pia (Dec 17, 2014)

parus said:


> Which is totally valid, but you really should bear in mind that not every dog is "broken" by having movement restricted, either thanks to a solid temperament, a lifetime of positive experiences, or some combination thereof.


Yeah, I've been thinking a lot about it today. Still don't like caging and get a yucky feeling when thinking of crates, but realized that my opinion is based only on my experience with Tina, some written material found on the internet, my own perception of confinement, and the book "Dogs hate crates" - have actually not seen with my own eyes any other dogs in a crate in the dog's home.

The _phobia of containment_ mentioned by CrimsonAccent made me think of various situations... no, don't think she has phobia of containment, but there is something about craving acceptance and fear for rejection with Tina.
She is happy in the car, in the shower, even in the small room at the vet while being handled. It's never a problem handling her, "wanna see my ears? you're welcome. my butt? here it is. wanna dremel my nails? how wonderful and by the way I love you". She will gladly lay down on her side to get her paws treated with cream, I can open her jaws and pick out any "snack" she finds during walks, she is fine with anything as long as it goes along with praise and love. 
Cats coming on her bed - "welcome darling. lemme kiss your head, taste my treat bone, it's yummy", pulling on leash like crazy to all people and animals all happy "Love me love me!" (that's the one we are training on with no great results so far), and I've even seen her doing play bow to a frog. That's why I say I've been lucky cos she is not giving me hard time with anything except trying to hug and jump on everybody on our walks.

On the other hand if she feels I am not happy with her behavior, or one of the cats gets annoyed with her, she goes immediately to her place, hurt level 10 and I am not projecting, the dog is miserable: eyes hanging down, won't eat, won't play till I call on her and pet her or one of the cats snuggles. Same if I randomly chose to get our stuff into the house first and she has to wait in the car in the driveway for a moment - sad and shut down in a switch, so I try to get her in first, then the things.

She had this thing from the first moment at the shelter, just glued herself to me and stayed on my shoulder without moving an inch, that's how we ended up together while I was there to meet a black lab.
In this context, since she has this huge love confirmation need, the crating might have been like the ultimate rejection I am guessing, though I had it standing next to my desk. Maybe it wasn't as much the crate itself as it was to be restricted access to the rest of us here. In fact she still walks far away from the cage when we are in the garage. Sniffs and runs away from it. 
Well, then I'll have to always remember my dog is emotionally soft, so that I don't accidentally do anything stupid.
Had a cat like this for 13 years, but he went through lots of really bad crap first year of his life. We chose to see it as a charming quirk of his.

Sorry to the OP for hijacking this thread.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

sassafras said:


> Ah god, not this crap again.


Reported....


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

WesS said:


> Reported....


You already reported that post a few weeks ago. Reporting the same post multiple times is only going to irritate the moderators. 

Quoting a post that you've reported is going to irritate the moderators. 

And if you find yourself reporting multiple posts every day, you might consider that the problem is with you and not with the members you're reporting.


----------

