# "Old School" training



## 30Adog (Jun 23, 2013)

I hadn't had a dog for app. 40 years. Mostly what I remember is the Beagle (see my Signature) I grew up with. I got a Border Terrier at age 9 weeks two years ago. Things sure are different all these years later. Premium chow instead of Ken-L Biscuit, for one. Crate training. Worked pretty well. At about 18 - 20 months I decided he was (should be?) reliably housebroken. But I could still count on a dribble, piddle, puddle every once in a while. (Poo was never a problem.) Then it was back into the crate for a while. I got tired of that. So I went "old school". Many owners may not like it. Put his nose near it. NO NO NO. Couple whops on the behind. No more dribbles, piddles, puddles. :clap2:

Anyone else go "old school"?


----------



## Tuco (Jun 16, 2013)

Very few people do it here because its not the most effective method, it's harsh, and there are so many ways it can come back and bite you in the ass.


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

I guess I would fall into one of the many owners who may not like it. To me it doesn't at all seem productive, considering the harm it can do to the dog, and your relationship with it. Hitting a dog ever is just right out.


----------



## Tuco (Jun 16, 2013)

30Adog said:


> I hadn't had a dog for app. 40 years. Mostly what I remember is the Beagle (see my Signature) I grew up with. I got a Border Terrier at age 9 weeks two years ago. Things sure are different all these years later. Premium chow instead of Ken-L Biscuit, for one. Crate training. Worked pretty well. At about 18 - 20 months I decided he was (should be?) reliably housebroken. But I could still count on a dribble, piddle, puddle every once in a while. (Poo was never a problem.) Then it was back into the crate for a while. I got tired of that. So I went "old school". Many owners may not like it. Put his nose near it. NO NO NO. Couple whops on the behind. No more dribbles, piddles, puddles. :clap2:
> 
> Anyone else go "old school"?


Lets pretend your a slightly demented old man. You just accidentally tried to get into someone else's car, instead of saying that's my car, please get out, I start flipping shit yelling at you and wack you over the head lightly. That's essentially what your doing. Sound effective? Oh yea but lets pretend the demented old man is Dwayne Johnson, one day he gets annoyed and decides, "well screw this" and f---s you up, exept in a dog case you will just get mauled


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## 30Adog (Jun 23, 2013)

I was pretty sure it wouldn't be popular -- or even accepted. But after going back to crate a number of times . . . enough. Believe it or not -- we're still the best of friends. He still wants up in my lap to cuddle. Burke loves me and I love him. Just needed strong reprimand for that bad behavior.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

I couldn't consider myself friends with a dog that I hit. That's just me, physical abuse is wrong to me, always. More physical corrections are one thing, and I get that they can have their time and place, but that's not what you described.


----------



## Amaryllis (Dec 28, 2011)

I kidnap you, put you in a box and drop you off in the middle of Mongolia with a family. You can't leave, you don't know where you are, you don't speak the language or know any of the customs.

Which would you prefer I do?

1. Show you how to be polite, where the bathroom is, how and what to eat, what to play with, etc. Show you over and over again, until you get it. Give you prizes for getting it, gently redirecting you when you don't.

2. Scream at and hit you when you get it wrong. Ignore you when you get it right.

I bet you'd prefer option 1. Why does your dog deserve any less?


----------



## Tuco (Jun 16, 2013)

30Adog said:


> I was pretty sure it wouldn't be popular -- or even accepted. But after going back to crate a number of times . . . enough. Believe it or not -- we're still the best of friends. He still wants up in my lap to cuddle. Burke loves me and I love him. Just needed strong reprimand for that bad behavior.


Dogs love unconditionally, I could go ahead and beat the s%#t out of tuco right now and I guarantee you he would come right back and snuggle with me on the couch. 

Does it make it right? NO

does it make it more likely my dog will tick one day in a couple years and maul me? YES




Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## taquitos (Oct 18, 2012)

Amaryllis said:


> I kidnap you, put you in a box and drop you off in the middle of Mongolia with a family. You can't leave, you don't know where you are, you don't speak the language or know any of the customs.
> 
> Which would you prefer I do?
> 
> ...


+1

I see no reason in using forceful methods when there are more effective positive methods out there.


----------



## HollowHeaven (Feb 5, 2012)

Well, I guess if you're fine with whipping your dog and making them fear you.

I come from an "old school" family and even we didn't do that.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

Amaryllis said:


> I kidnap you, put you in a box and drop you off in the middle of Mongolia with a family. You can't leave, you don't know where you are, you don't speak the language or know any of the customs.
> 
> Which would you prefer I do?
> 
> ...


Nice analogy. I know I'd prefer the first option (and I am very glad that when I WAS in the middle of Mongolia with a family that, being friendly and kind people, they didn't hit me to explain their customs  )

Sometimes force teaches dogs what you want them to learn, rarely does it teach them any better than positive training. It may teach them more quickly, but rarely better. All too often it teaches them to fear you or that you are unpredictable so they do things like hide their pee spots (not because they understand that peeing in the house is bad but instead they understand that pee makes you angry)


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

Sometimes I think our dogs figure out what we want IN SPITE of how we try to tell them. For example, the old school way of housetraining. Sure, it often worked for a lot of dogs, but I think it was more because the dog was smart enough to decipher what we really meant, not because the techniques were any good. Dogs often are able to think around all the mixed signals we give them, but that doesn't mean we should intentionally make it any more difficult for them than we have to.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

So you got tired, and your dog pays for this? I'm pretty sure this is poor reasoning, no matter the era, and not worthy of celebration. Ya dig?


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

Hey I'm the oldest school aversive rascal here and I never saw any reason for the nose in/near and then swat program.

Puppies and babies can do no wrong.


----------



## Kayota (Aug 14, 2009)

I agree with all of the above... And your other mistake here is coming onto a dog forum full of people who are gentle and loving to their dogs and telling us that you've hit your dog. Not saying you don't love your dog... But you were right, your opinion isn't going to be very popular. There is never any excuse to lay a hand on your dog in that way.


----------



## GrinningDog (Mar 26, 2010)

You're lucky that you had no fallout with your puppy from manner of "training." Many do.

When Gyp was a puppy, she had a massive poo incident one day, at a point where I thought she was potty trained. I stepped in it and tracked it around the room before noticing, then totally flipped out. My yelling terrified Gyp, and she was too afraid to poop in front of me for two weeks. At all. Outside, she'd tuck her tail and try to drag me back to the house because she was afraid I'd yell at her for pooping. I had to have one of my siblings take her out. Very sad and totally my fault.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

30Adog said:


> Things sure are different all these years later.


And they're _better_, too.

Eight track tapes? Telegrams? Bias-ply tires? Public pay phones? Polio? .... some things are much better off when laid to rest.
Add aversive dog training techniques to the list.


----------



## Abbylynn (Jul 7, 2011)

wvasko said:


> Hey I'm the oldest school aversive rascal here and I never saw any reason for the nose in/near and then swat program.
> 
> Puppies and babies can do no wrong.


Agreed!!!!!! ..................

Good grief! .... it took me a full year to undo the damage done to Eddee because of his prior potty training .... which I am "assuming" was "Old School" ........ Poor guy ended up in a shelter because he was so broken.

EDIT: I am no spring chicken either.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

> I am no spring chicken either.


Hey compared to me you're a kid. Absolutely love saying that cause when I was a young squirt I use to hate it when I got called a kid, now it's payback. (course I wouldn't mind being called a kid now) (too late)


----------



## Abbylynn (Jul 7, 2011)

wvasko said:


> Hey compared to me you're a kid. Absolutely love saying that cause when I was a young squirt I use to hate it when I got called a kid, now it's payback. (course I wouldn't mind being called a kid now) (too late)



Lol!  .............


----------



## lil_fuzzy (Aug 16, 2010)

I actually know several trainers who still train old school, with rewards for the good stuff and corrections for the bad stuff. And even they say not to do what you have described.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

lil_fuzzy said:


> I actually know several trainers who still train old school, with rewards for the good stuff and corrections for the bad stuff. And even they say not to do what you have described.


Say it again, I stutter.


----------



## Tuco (Jun 16, 2013)

lil_fuzzy said:


> I actually know several trainers who still train old school, with rewards for the good stuff and corrections for the bad stuff. And even they say not to do what you have described.


As do I, I also know vets who encourage feeding pedigree, doesn't make them right though...


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

One puppy training book I read a long long time ago, recommended this technique (not sure about the hitting, but definitely the "put his nose near it and shame him" thing). BUT, that trainer only recommended it for puppies over 6 months old, because they can't properly control their bodies before then. So I guess, even if you're kickin' it old school, there are certain rules to follow. 

Plus, how old of an old school are we talking about? Apparently the Victorians were big on positive dog training. It looks like it was only about after 1915 or so that people got mean about dog training. So. . .medium-old school?


----------



## Tuco (Jun 16, 2013)

Willowy said:


> One puppy training book I read a long long time ago, recommended this technique (not sure about the hitting, but definitely the "put his nose near it and shame him" thing). BUT, that trainer only recommended it for puppies over 6 months old, because they can't properly control their bodies before then. So I guess, even if you're kickin' it old school, there are certain rules to follow.
> 
> Plus, how old of an old school are we talking about? Apparently the Victorians were big on positive dog training. It looks like it was only about after 1915 or so that people got mean about dog training. So. . .medium-old school?


Lol, back in southern Calabria a whip and a fist is the chosen and most recommended method 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Kevin T (Apr 22, 2013)

packetsmom said:


> Sometimes I think our dogs figure out what we want IN SPITE of how we try to tell them. For example, the old school way of housetraining. Sure, it often worked for a lot of dogs, but I think it was more because the dog was smart enough to decipher what we really meant, not because the techniques were any good. Dogs often are able to think around all the mixed signals we give them, but that doesn't mean we should intentionally make it any more difficult for them than we have to.


Exactly. It's a very good thing that dogs are generally better at picking up on what their owners expect from them than the average owner is at training them. It's just sad that so many end up beaten or in shelters because they're not mind readers with an IQ of 120.


----------



## lil_fuzzy (Aug 16, 2010)

Tuco said:


> As do I, I also know vets who encourage feeding pedigree, doesn't make them right though...


I'm saying the trainers I know would NOT housetrain the way OP said, even though they train old school.


----------



## blenderpie (Oct 5, 2012)

My grama (yes, we spell it that way) took her late doxie away from a neighbor who no longer wanted it. He refused to walk into or even near the kitchen for TWO YEARS. When she asked the previous owner about it, he said he had accidents as a baby and they would shove his face in it and tell him he's a bad dog (on linoleum).

So, your dog might have not had any negative repercussions from your unnecessary bullying, but to say that it is an acceptable way of training is like saying it's okay for me to slap a baby for using it's diaper or spitting up. It's natural, and they have no way of understanding what they did wrong.


----------



## hueyeats (Apr 2, 2013)

wvasko said:


> Hey I'm the oldest school aversive rascal here and I never saw any reason for the nose in/near and then swat program.
> 
> Puppies and babies can do no wrong.


Agreed!!!

I grown up old school...
Even when I had Timothy (in the 80s)... he was never potty-trained with him shoved to smell his own pee.
Gosh... thats like saying... yah, you smell it, pee here!!!

You know like how you train kittens or even when changing kitty litters...
(Good to leave a little "smell" {pee/poop} in the litter so kitty knows to go there????)
Hello???
Dogs understand it that way too... they leave their markings so they go that same place????

So... I think shoving a dog to smell their own pee???
Thats very confusing & scary for the dog (especially after wacking the dog????)??? Yikes!!!

No good at all.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

> As do I, I also know vets who encourage feeding pedigree, doesn't make them right though...


Some people have the means to eat Lobster/Filets etc etc etc. Some people don't.


----------



## juliemule (Dec 10, 2011)

30Adog said:


> I hadn't had a dog for app. 40 years. Mostly what I remember is the Beagle (see my Signature) I grew up with. I got a Border Terrier at age 9 weeks two years ago. Things sure are different all these years later. Premium chow instead of Ken-L Biscuit, for one. Crate training. Worked pretty well. At about 18 - 20 months I decided he was (should be?) reliably housebroken. But I could still count on a dribble, piddle, puddle every once in a while. (Poo was never a problem.) Then it was back into the crate for a while. I got tired of that. So I went "old school". Many owners may not like it. Put his nose near it. NO NO NO. Couple whops on the behind. No more dribbles, piddles, puddles. :clap2:
> 
> Anyone else go "old school"?


Why not just take the dog out to use the bathroom before he peed or craps on the floor? Dog training isn't rocket science.


----------



## Capri142 (Jun 14, 2013)

Well, The last dogs that I trained were back in the 70's and were trained (gasp!) using the Kohler Dog training Method. I actually knew **** Kholer and my first dog, a Brittany Spaniel was trained with him. Some people believe that dogs are completely terrorized using his training methods. However, I never found that to be the case. It is mostly a matter of letting the dog make any corrections. I never hung, hit or threw anything at a dog yet had some of the best trained dogs. Nowadays, Dog training has gone completely opposite, trainers now believe that you should never correct you dog. that any and all training should be done with love, treats and a clicker. I was recently in a puppy class that taught the love, treat, clicker method. at the end of the class 80% of the dogs were not any better off than they were at the beginning of the class whereas I remember a class taught by **** Kohler. He told his students at the beginning of the class, "Read my book, follow my instructions and I GUARANTEE you at the end of 13 weeks, you will have a dog that obeys you off leash and will be your best friend." Well at the end of week 13, the 20 some dogs in the class were lined up in two rows facing each other, off leash and sitting next to their owners when a huge Horse was brought through a large door at the end of the large hall and walked between the row of dogs. Not one of the dogs moved, some whined and looked up at their owners but not one dog barked or moved off leash at an ultimate distraction. There was not one dog that was ever hurt during the class. 
I subsequently trained 3 more dogs this way and they were all excellent companions. Now that I have a new pup, I will still use some of Kohlers methods. I actually just dug his book out of the attic. However, I am also keeping an open mind to new positive training methods as well. I think that they may be compatible.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Capri142 said:


> Well, The last dogs that I trained were back in the 70's and were trained (gasp!) using the Kohler Dog training Method. I actually knew **** Kholer and my first dog, a Brittany Spaniel was trained with him. Some people believe that dogs are completely terrorized using his training methods. However, I never found that to be the case. It is mostly a matter of letting the dog make any corrections. I never hung, hit or threw anything at a dog yet had some of the best trained dogs. Nowadays, Dog training has gone completely opposite, trainers now believe that you should never correct you dog. that any and all training should be done with love, treats and a clicker. I was recently in a puppy class that taught the love, treat, clicker method. at the end of the class 80% of the dogs were not any better off than they were at the beginning of the class whereas I remember a class taught by **** Kohler. He told his students at the beginning of the class, "Read my book, follow my instructions and I GUARANTEE you at the end of 13 weeks, you will have a dog that obeys you off leash and will be your best friend." Well at the end of week 13, the 20 some dogs in the class were lined up in two rows facing each other, off leash and sitting next to their owners when a huge Horse was brought through a large door at the end of the large hall and walked between the row of dogs. Not one of the dogs moved, some whined and looked up at their owners but not one dog barked or moved off leash at an ultimate distraction. There was not one dog that was ever hurt during the class.
> I subsequently trained 3 more dogs this way and they were all excellent companions. Now that I have a new pup, I will still use some of Kohlers methods. I actually just dug his book out of the attic. However, I am also keeping an open mind to new positive training methods as well. I think that they may be compatible.


I'm not familiar with that method. Could you explain it and why you prefer it to the positive reinforcement method?


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

Just one quick question...is your border terrier intact or neutered? If he's still intact, he could be inappropriately marking. I consider that to be a training issue and (with my dogs) I would verbally correct that if they did it in front of me. My 18 month old intact male knows that marking anywhere inside any building is unacceptable behavior. If he is neutered and he's still peeing inside...maybe take him to a vet and make sure there's no urinary tract infections.


----------



## Effisia (Jun 20, 2013)

I get that accidents are frustrating. I came home the other day at lunch to take Annabel lout and she had peed in her crate because she couldn't hole it. Total mess and I didn't have a ton of time on my break. But I pushed aside the frustration, took her outside, and let her run through the sprinkler to clean off. When she peed again outside she got lots of praise and one of her favorite treats.

I just don't understand how people think smacking dogs or rubbing noses into accidents or using rolled newspaper or yelling your head off is a good idea. Would you like someone to do that to you every time you made a mistake?


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

I never understood the "stick their nose in/near it" method in the first place. Wouldn't that indicate to your dog that you wanted him to eat the poop? That method might work on a human who finds poop inherently disgusting, but dogs don't think of poop that way. 

And I'm with everyone else -- seems like common sense not to hit a dog for peeing or pooping inside. WAY too easy for that to backfire and the dog to think, "When this human sees poop, he gets really angry!" Then you've got a dog who poops in hidden places or won't go in front of you on a walk. I used to train with aversive methods -- I blindly followed some "old-school" training books as a teenager -- and even at 17 years old and with no Internet and no knowledge of positive training methods, I still thought it was stupid to hit a puppy for messing inside. Just goes to show that common sense doesn't depend on age.


----------



## Kevin T (Apr 22, 2013)

Crantastic said:


> I never understood the "stick their nose in/near it" method in the first place. Wouldn't that indicate to your dog that you wanted him to eat the poop? That method might work on a human who finds poop inherently disgusting, but dogs don't think of poop that way.
> 
> And I'm with everyone else -- seems like common sense not to hit a dog for peeing or pooping inside. WAY too easy for that to backfire and the dog to think, "When this human sees poop, he gets really angry!" Then you've got a dog who poops in hidden places or won't go in front of you on a walk. I used to train with aversive methods -- I blindly followed some "old-school" training books as a teenager -- and even at 17 years old and with no Internet and no knowledge of positive training methods, I still thought it was stupid to hit a puppy for messing inside. Just goes to show that common sense doesn't depend on age.


I wonder if that is why our friends' Border Collie won't do his business on lead. He always wants to find a secluded place to poop. This makes it a PITA to take care of him, because even when walking him in safe off-lead areas, it's often hard to locate the poop in order to scoop it. He won't poop in their fenced yard, either. Our friends adopted this dog from the shelter as a four or five year old. He had apparently been placed and returned several times. I wonder which former owner instilled this behavior in him?


----------



## Adjecyca1 (Jul 25, 2010)




----------



## Kayota (Aug 14, 2009)

Oh my god that video is HILARIOUS! And I think it has a practical use too--allowing people to put themselves in the dog's position.


----------



## juliemule (Dec 10, 2011)

Kevin T said:


> I wonder if that is why our friends' Border Collie won't do his business on lead. He always wants to find a secluded place to poop. This makes it a PITA to take care of him, because even when walking him in safe off-lead areas, it's often hard to locate the poop in order to scoop it. He won't poop in their fenced yard, either. Our friends adopted this dog from the shelter as a four or five year old. He had apparently been placed and returned several times. I wonder which former owner instilled this behavior in him?


Two of mine do this, and they have never been corrected. Actually ive had a few over the past couple years, whi, if given the option would go quite a ways out to the pasture or edge of the woods to poop. They don't want it close to where they eat. Even when we travel, they want to go far from the hotel to potty.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

juliemule said:


> Two of mine do this, and they have never been corrected. Actually ive had a few over the past couple years, whi, if given the option would go quite a ways out to the pasture or edge of the woods to poop. They don't want it close to where they eat. Even when we travel, they want to go far from the hotel to potty.


 I know a lot of dogs who won't go near their house. But will they go on lead?


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

Lars takes off and poops as far from the house as he possibly can...but he will poop on leash and when asked to. He's never been corrected for a poop accident in the house. He has been corrected for urine marking furniture when he was younger because that is deliberate and not an accident. Ocean poops where ever outside. Our first rottie who we brought home at a year old...wouldn't poop on leash in a place that wasn't familiar to him. He would poop on walk routes he knew...but never in places he hadn't been before or knew well. It was weird.


----------



## Abbylynn (Jul 7, 2011)

Mine are all wierd. Abbylynn will only go in her own yard way down in the woods .... never on a walk. Blu Boy will go but it has to be right in front of you ... like 10 inches by your feet. :/ Eddee after a year of being afraid to go in front of anyone and sneaking off to do it in front of the commode .... has to go in his own area on the side yard but will still go on his walks. Leah Lu goes in one area on the side of the house after she plays around for a half an hour! LOl! 

It is like each one has their own divided territories in the yard. None of them go in their crates or in each others potty areas.


----------



## juliemule (Dec 10, 2011)

Willowy said:


> I know a lot of dogs who won't go near their house. But will they go on lead?


Not unless they can't hold it any longer. One doesn't want to be in sight when she poops, and another wants to stare at me lol.
Weird dogs.


----------



## doxiemommy (Dec 18, 2009)

If your dog was having accidents at 18-20 months old it's likely you weren't using the "new school" methods correctly, and the problem was with you, not the dog. So, maybe someone should have shoved your nose in it and smacked you.

Some dogs are not negatively affected by old school methods, at least in ways we can see. That doesn't make it right.


----------



## hueyeats (Apr 2, 2013)

doxiemommy said:


> If your dog was having accidents at 18-20 months old it's likely you weren't using the "new school" methods correctly, and the problem was with you, not the dog. So, maybe someone should have shoved your nose in it and smacked you.
> 
> Some dogs are not negatively affected by old school methods, at least in ways we can see. That doesn't make it right.


Totally agree with.

---

Roman will also go "outside" than in...
Even while crate training during a hurricane (that big one in oct 2012)...
Would prefer doing it outside... Hence potty training was easy for Roman.

Like hubby would also tell you... Roman knows where to potty in 3 days (successfully potty trained).
But I do think this easy training we should credit his breeder and mostly Roman's dam.

And I don't think Roman's dam would shove her pup's nose in pee or poo...
Not even a dog's way... So why do humans think its a "good way"???

Some common sense plz.


----------



## BeerHunter (Sep 19, 2012)

We've been dog owners for over 40 years and have always had friendly , reliable , easy to get along with and trustworthy companions.

A few months ago we got a new puppy and were introduced to the newest fad.."clicker" training..at a puppy training class. What we ended up with was a pup that wouldn't do anything unless it got a treat and didn't really learn anything.

Went back to the old fashioned , tried and true "patience and persistence" method and advanced a lot further. They're still young (6 months) but already we can leave food on the coffee table knowing they wont grab it at the first opportunity.Of course , being dogs and young , we still keep an eye on them but all it takes is a "I don't think so" (they know they're being watched then) and they back off.

What I'm finding from the few experiences we've had with "professional" dog trainers is that they don't seem to be able to evaluate a dog very well and decide which training approach is best for that particular animal. Some are timid and require a more gentle , coaxing approach while others are much more aggressive and can therefore be handled in a more aggressive manner. By aggressive I DO NOT MEAN ROUGH..I mean knowing when the dog is being disobedient and needs correction (never punishment) vs when the dog is simply confused and you need to step back , take a break or go back a step in you training.

There's a lot of arguments against the "clicker" schooling method .. might be worth looking them up. Keep in mind the clicker works great for teaching tricks , an audible clue for the animal to do something , but IMO not all that well for teaching behavior patterns.


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

BeerHunter said:


> Some are timid and require a more gentle , coaxing approach while others are much more aggressive and can therefore be handled in a more aggressive manner. By aggressive I DO NOT MEAN ROUGH..I mean knowing when the dog is being disobedient and needs correction (never punishment) vs when the dog is simply confused and you need to step back , take a break or go back a step in you training.


I like this point, it very much depends on the dog. 

Something this thread made me think of is something I did with our foster Diesel that helped a bit with him going in the house. I didn't grab him and stick his nose in it (not that I could get away with that with him!), but what I did a few times, if I came in and saw that he had marked or peed I looked at him, looked at the "mess" looked back at him and said "Noooooo" in a low, fairly quiet voice, or just sigh heavily. I mean really, he knew it was pee, he knew he did it (even if he HAD forgotten, he could smell as much I am sure) and he certainly doesn't need his nose pushed into it to know that. I'd clean things up, grumble a bit along the way and he would sit back a ways looking a bit reprimanded while I ignored him and cleaned. Once I was done, and all of the paper towel thrown out I'd call him over smile and pet him, and play really nice. Watching his body language I could see at first it put him on the defensive a bit (I wonder if his previous owner had jammed his nose in it forcibly), but after a while I think he clued in that I was very dissatisfied with the situation and him actually being fairly eager to please it may have helped. This was of course after a fair bit of time giving him treats and praise when he did go outside....I continued that, but showing some displeasure seemed to help. Of course he was over 2 years old, which I'm sure makes a difference. He was kept outside for most of his previous life, so I have a feeling that he had never learned to hold it...towards the end of his stay with us there was not really an issue except occasionally the odd little dribble the times we were away from the house for a long period. 
So I guess I sort of shoved his nose in it without actually physically doing it. My opinion...there is nothing wrong with showing a little bit of displeasure over something like messing in the house, but there is NO need to get physical about it, especially with a puppy!


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

BeerHunter said:


> A few months ago we got a new puppy and were introduced to the newest fad.."clicker" training..at a puppy training class. What we ended up with was a pup that wouldn't do anything unless it got a treat and didn't really learn anything.


 Yawn. Once again, this is not a failure of the method but a failure of the_ application_ of the method. Simply put, it's not the clicker's fault - it's yours.





BeerHunter said:


> There's a lot of arguments against the "clicker" schooling method .. might be worth looking them up. Keep in mind the clicker works great for teaching tricks , an audible clue for the animal to do something , but IMO not all that well for teaching behavior patterns.


 I am unaware of any arguments against the clicker, other than potentially, inadvertently creating a "seven-second dog". And that can be very easily avoided by exercising due diligence and incorporating patience as part of the program.
Can you give an example of a 'behavior pattern' that is difficult to teach with a clicker?

EDIT: "an audible clue for the animal to do something" This too, is not appropriate application of the method.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

BeerHunter's comment reminds me of the comments that cisco guy was making a while back about how clicker training is only good for training sit and down and the like. It sparked a big discussion starting around this post: http://www.dogforums.com/general-dog-forum/141138-cesar-millan-victoria-stilwell-7.html#post1725633


----------



## GottaLuvMutts (Jun 1, 2009)

BeerHunter said:


> Keep in mind the clicker works great for teaching tricks , an audible clue for the animal to do something , but IMO not all that well for teaching behavior patterns.


Clearly you don't understand the proper use of a clicker. It does NOT provide an "audible clue for the animal to do something". The sound is a marker, telling the animal that they've ALREADY done something correctly. There's a huge difference.


----------



## Beagles (Jun 4, 2013)

I had a bad experience with clicker training similar to beerhunters. I don't blame the dog, or myself, but put the blame strictly on the trainer since she's the one who taught me to do it wrong. I had a bad attitude about clicker training for a long time after that experience! Since then I've learned a lot more about clicker training and now use my own version of it. Used correctly it's absolutely fantastic. Just a bad combination of poor trainer and new student imo...


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

I honestly thought people had grown beyond the rubbing a dogs nose in his mess. Even as a small child, I knew that wasn't the right thing to do. I remember watching my mother do that to our doxie that on occasion would leave a pile somewhere in the house. I am sure that my mother with 7 kids was likely just exhausted and what she didn't want to do was clean up yet another pile of dog poop. That said, I know that our dog didn't have a schedule and likely didn't get the attention he needed. Definitely not the training he needed. 

As an adult, I never found the need to rub my dogs/pups nose in their mess. Instead, I made certain I got them onto a routine, made sure they were outside enough and at the most had a 1/2 dozen messes total to deal with. Managing the pup when they are training is the key, not rubbing their nose in the mess when YOU have failed in your training duty.

I could still be considered "old school" in some ways as on occasion, I do "leash pop" but when I am dealing with a 110 + pound dog, I doubt that the little "pop" my dog gets is too damaging. I prefer positive methods of training and have found them far, far more effective.


----------



## NicoleIsStoked (Aug 31, 2012)

I'm going to go on the Internet and brag about how I'm too incompetent to properly train my dog and maybe everyone will be super impressed that I can abuse a puppy. -OP


----------



## BeerHunter (Sep 19, 2012)

Well we and our pups are quit comfortable with our tried and true "patience and perseverance" approach and they are coming along just fine. 7 dogs have turned out just great and in time (considering these are only 6 mos old) these 2 will as well.

If you understand clicker training and it works for you..fine. We don't and don't have a plethora of trainers in this area to approach for assistance (other than those in PetSmart) so for us , the method we DO understand (and it worked for our horses as well) , and the method so many successful trainers have used over all the years will do us just fine.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

Katie had her first non-illness related accident today. We went post-modern on her and apologized for being out so long and gave her extra hugs and kisses for the indignity she experienced. 

Actually, we weren't gone that long, but I suspect she drank more than usual this morning because she was at the park running around. More water in, more urine out.


----------



## EdDTS (May 30, 2012)

BeerHunter said:


> Well we and our pups are quit comfortable with our tried and true "patience and perseverance" approach and they are coming along just fine. 7 dogs have turned out just great and in time (considering these are only 6 mos old) these 2 will as well.
> 
> If you understand clicker training and it works for you..fine. We don't and don't have a plethora of trainers in this area to approach for assistance (other than those in PetSmart) so for us , the method we DO understand (and it worked for our horses as well) , and the method so many successful trainers have used over all the years will do us just fine.


I taught my cat to sit, stay, come, leash walk, manners and a bunch of other tricks with a clicker.
It's really simple and no corrections needed. I would love to see someone try to leash jerk or "correct" a cat. Guaranteed all your going to get is a hissing, puffed up ball of fur trying to scratch and bite your leg into pieces.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

> If you understand clicker training and it works for you..fine. We don't and don't have a plethora of trainers in this area to approach for assistance (other than those in PetSmart) so for us , the method we DO understand (and it worked for our horses as well) , and the method so many successful trainers have used over all the years will do us just fine.


Gee, what a concept using a method that you can understand and apparently your dog does to. A dog and owner moving forward, sounds like a plan.



> I taught my cat to sit, stay, come, leash walk, manners and a bunch of other tricks with a clicker.


Gee, what a concept using a method that you can understand and apparently your cat does to. A cat and owner moving forward, sounds like a plan.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

BeerHunter said:


> A few months ago we got a new puppy and were introduced to the newest fad.."clicker" training..at a puppy training class. What we ended up with was a pup that wouldn't do anything unless it got a treat and didn't really learn anything.
> 
> There's a lot of arguments against the "clicker" schooling method .. might be worth looking them up. Keep in mind the clicker works great for teaching tricks , an audible clue for the animal to do something , but IMO not all that well for teaching behavior patterns.


Clicker training isn't a fad, it's here to stay and has been used for a long time with animals other than dogs. And it is used (well) to train dogs in complex behavior patterns.

The click is not an audible cue, it's a marker. It happens AFTER the behavior. I find it can motivate a dog who gets the game. My two get really excited when they hear the clicker and they do try harder when the clicker is around when it comes to LEARNING behavior. I think simply because it puts the learning game in terms they really understand. I've been messing up weave pole training so decided to start from the beginning and shape it and I found my dogs' motivation(because they were confused) was lacking. They were stressing. Add in the clicker and they picked up pace simply because they realized 'oh we're playing THAT game!'

The clicker is the exact same thing as saying 'good dog!' after every time the dog does something right. 

I really do not care what training method you use but I cannot stand when people decide clicker training does not work because they don't understand it.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Laurelin said:


> I really do not care what training method you use but I cannot stand when people decide clicker training does not work because they don't understand it.


Me, too, it's one of my hugest pet peeves to blame the method for operator error. If you think the click is a CUE then _you are doing it wrong_. 

And tricks are.... behavior patterns.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

OK, just to tie up a couple of loose ends here.




BeerHunter said:


> I mean knowing when the dog is being disobedient and needs correction (never punishment) vs when the dog is simply confused and you need to step back , take a break or go back a step in you training.


 Correction IS punishment. It may not consist of 30 days in the hole, or 50 lashes ... but ... if it ain't reinforcement, it certainly is punishment. Doll it up any way you like with with catchphrases like 'patience and persistence' or whatever. It still is what it is, regardless.




GottaLuvMutts said:


> The sound is a marker, telling the animal that they've ALREADY done something correctly.





Laurelin said:


> The click is not an audible cue, it's a marker. It happens AFTER the behavior.


Not to split hairs, actually it's a simultaneous sound that tells the animal they're precisely in the MIDST of doing something correctly.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

What I mean that it is simply not a command. The click is not saying 'hey you, do this!' It's saying 'that right there is what I want you to do!' I see a lot of people who try to click the clicker before the behavior and they often point it at the dog like a remote (lol). 

I use 'yes!' And 'good' he same way as the clicker. It marks the appropriate behavior.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Laurelin said:


> What I mean that it is simply not a command. The click is not saying 'hey you, do this!' It's saying 'that right there is what I want you to do!' I see a lot of people who try to click the clicker before the behavior and they often point it at the dog like a remote (lol).


Yea I've seen many, many people use the clicker as a cue to get their dog's attention.


----------



## Carlosoraibi (Jun 28, 2013)

I'm open to both new and old. I have a sometimes nervous-aggresive dog. I can try to calm her down with positivity but when she reaches the point of attacking, I give her a tug with a prong collar. That settles her right down. On the other hand when she is doing good I give her praise and the occasional treat. 

After about 1/2 year of this she is no longer nervous, and has become both mans and dogs best friend.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

sassafras said:


> Yea I've seen many, many people use the clicker as a cue to get their dog's attention.


Sometimes I see someone who shall remain nameless using it to get the dogs to come in from the yard.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

ThoseWordsAtBest said:


> Sometimes I see someone who shall remain nameless using it to get the dogs to come in from the yard.


I wonder who that could be.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

wvasko said:


> I wonder who that could be.


You dragged it out of me, it's Sham.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

ThoseWordsAtBest said:


> You dragged it out of me, it's Sham.


Poor Sham, you narced on him.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> The clicker is the exact same thing as saying 'good dog!' after every time the dog does something right.
> 
> I really do not care what training method you use but I cannot stand when people decide clicker training does not work because they don't understand it.


The biggest problem with 'clicker' training is the stupid name.

TOTALLY overlooks the whole concept of markers (which, like you said, exists in all training styles, which is why I find this kind of stuff amusing - as if there's training without reinforcing or punishing certain actions no matter if your "old school" or not). 

It's marker training. Has nothing to do with the clicker. ANYTHING can be a marker and it works just the same.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

petpeeve said:


> Correction IS punishment. It may not consist of 30 days in the hole, or 50 lashes ... but ... if it ain't reinforcement, it certainly is punishment. Doll it up any way you like with with catchphrases like 'patience and persistence' or whatever. It still is what it is, regardless.


Well...I do think there's a few more layers.

When I'm shaping - I give the "try again" signal - I'm not punishing what he did, I'm trying to get more out of him. Yet the response isn't what he wanted (not reinforcing), however, I'm not trying to lower the probability of him performing that behavior again (not punishment). 

I haven't seen where shaping completely fits on the OC quadrants for whatever reason. Maybe because of scenarios like this where the object isn't to get him to stop doing X, but doing it with an "adverb" (push the ball harder, paw the door more firmly) or a "preposition" (sit on the mat, not my foot, paw my foot, not the table leg, etc)


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

wvasko said:


> Poor Sham, you narced on him.


Like that guy wouldn't sell me up the river in a heart beat if the situations were reversed.


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

KBLover said:


> The biggest problem with 'clicker' training is the stupid name.
> 
> TOTALLY overlooks the whole concept of markers (which, like you said, exists in all training styles, which is why I find this kind of stuff amusing - as if there's training without reinforcing or punishing certain actions no matter if your "old school" or not).
> 
> It's marker training. Has nothing to do with the clicker. ANYTHING can be a marker and it works just the same.


^^^^Yep, that.

I switched to using a cue word rather than the clicker because I had a hard time keeping track of my clickers and also because one of the people I get some good training advice just has a thing about clickers...yet the guy uses a marker word all the time with his dogs. (He's probably more of a balanced trainer and sees clickers as almost this weird symbolic thing of people refusing to have control of their dogs...I know, right? But otherwise, he gives some good advice.)

I think some marker training ideas DID exist even back in the "crank and yank" days, even if the theory of it was not being explained as thoroughly or even if people stumbled upon it by mistake. Also, a lot of what is being referred to here as "old school" training really isn't. "Old School" trainers, for the most part, were still not doing some of these things...it was uneducated dog owners who were going off of conventional wisdom, not even Koehler method trainers.

I still think modern methods are better and that we've come a huge way in knowing how dogs learn and how best to train them, but I think attributing every old wive's tale as "Old school TRAINING" is a bit of a stretch and does the well-intentioned dog trainers of the past a disservice.

You do the best you can until you know better...then you do better.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

ThoseWordsAtBest said:


> Like that guy wouldn't sell me up the river in a heart beat if the situations were reversed.


Well sure sounds like somebody has a personal problem.


----------



## hueyeats (Apr 2, 2013)

I simply do not believe in any one solo school of methods (clicker or not, obiedience schools etc.) for all dogs...
Like I won't feed a single solo brand of food (love TOTW but... every brands have problems *you the owner* can't control).

Just like humans...
If we don't all learn the same way... dogs don't either.

Like "sit" for a greyhound could be more difficult than for a heavy bottom dog like mine...
Or some dogs have harder time doing / performing a training than others due to breed traits.
Activity levels are different for all dogs...
(Cattle dogs' activity levels may be tiring for a pom)
Not to mention even intelligence levels...
(Some dogs gets it, some don't... may never will to the cues of humans).

I say if a certain methods works for your dog & your lifestyle for you to have that dream dog you want (and is non-abusive)... what is wrong in that method???

After all...
All training is to try to achieve that "good dog"... that *you* can be happy with.
(Non-abusive of course)

Its the end game / destination that counts... (again, non-abusive please).

So long the *dog* & *its owners* are happy... who are we to judge???








Happi Dawg, happi visitor, happi owners...:rockon:


----------



## Jellyfish55 (Jul 6, 2013)

I was talking to a vet about house training puppies and she said its like having a 1 or 2 year old child in the house without a nappy and when they go toilet in a corner yelling and screaming at them even though they are too young to know any better.


----------



## Trevian96 (Jul 11, 2013)

Ineffective, dumb method, "old school" or not. At 18-20 months you decided he "should be" housebroken. A puppy can easily be housebroken at 8-9 weeks. If your 18-20 month old dog still goes in the house, that is your fault 100% of the time because you have FAILED to properly train the dog. Putting a dog's nose near its mess and/or hitting it is not only cruel, it's ineffective. You should not own a dog.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Trevian96 said:


> Ineffective, dumb method, "old school" or not. At 18-20 months you decided he "should be" housebroken. A puppy can easily be housebroken at 8-9 weeks. If your 18-20 month old dog still goes in the house, that is your fault 100% of the time because you have FAILED to properly train the dog. Putting a dog's nose near its mess and/or hitting it is not only cruel, it's ineffective. You should not own a dog.


Okay, I agree that an 18-20 month old puppy going in the house is completely the owner's fault.

However, there is no way a 8-9 week old puppy could be housetrained, they don't have the physical capability to control their bladder, nor to be aware that they have to go. I guess if you were extra super vigilant you could prevent them from going in the house by taking them outside every 15 minutes or less, but that, in my opinion, isn't the same thing as the puppy being housetrained.


----------



## Trevian96 (Jul 11, 2013)

ireth0 said:


> Okay, I agree that an 18-20 month old puppy going in the house is completely the owner's fault.
> 
> However, there is no way a 8-9 week old puppy could be housetrained, they don't have the physical capability to control their bladder, nor to be aware that they have to go. I guess if you were extra super vigilant you could prevent them from going in the house by taking them outside every 15 minutes or less, but that, in my opinion, isn't the same thing as the puppy being housetrained.


My male German shepherd dog was house trained at 8 weeks. Never pooped in the house. EVER. Not once. Peed in the house ONE TIME the first week I had him. Caught him in the act, picked him up a couple inches off the ground by the scruff, gave him a firm "NO" and took him outside to finish going. Praised the heck of him. NEVER HAPPENED AGAIN. My female German shepherd dog was house trained at 9 weeks. She also never pooped in my house. NEVER. Not once. She peed in the house about 3 times the first couple weeks I had her. Was corrected the same way when I caught her in the act, praised the heck out of her when going outside, and she never had another accident. It can be done, and was done. Twice.


----------



## Trevian96 (Jul 11, 2013)

In fairness, I will admit the puppies were taken out every 3-4 hours since someone was home to be able to do that...but not "every 15 minutes or less" - that is silly


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

If you'd pick up a baby puppy by the scruff as punishment, you're not much better than the OP.


----------



## Trevian96 (Jul 11, 2013)

Crantastic said:


> If you'd pick up a baby puppy by the scruff as punishment, you're not much better than the OP.


Everyone who has ever owned a dog has an opinion about how to raise and train them. Few of those people actually have the experience to support what they say. Picking up a puppy by the scruff of its neck and giving it a "no" (assuming you catch the puppy in the act and not later) is advice coming from trainers with over 100+ years of combined experience breeding, raising and training working dogs. If you ask a Petsmart trainer they will probably tell you this is wrong. Then again, they will probably also try to help you pick a cute Halloween costume for your dog. Gimme a break. Using his technique is NOTHING like smacking, hitting, or otherwise striking a dog (or rubbing its nose in it), all of which are ineffective and inhumane. When a mother disciplines her pups she grabs them by their scruff and shakes them gently. Being held by the scruff is not a foreign experience to them.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Trevian96 said:


> Everyone who has ever owned a dog has an opinion about how to raise and train them. Few of those people actually have the experience to support what they say. Picking up a puppy by the scruff of its neck and giving it a "no" (assuming you catch the puppy in the act and not later) is advice coming from trainers with over 100+ years of combined experience breeding, raising and training working dogs. If you ask a Petsmart trainer they will probably tell you this is wrong. Then again, they will probably also try to help you pick a cute Halloween costume for your dog. Gimme a break. Using his technique is NOTHING like smacking, hitting, or otherwise striking a dog (or rubbing its nose in it), all of which are ineffective and inhumane. When a mother disciplines her pups she grabs them by their scruff and shakes them gently. Being held by the scruff is not a foreign experience to them.


Wow... so are you saying that the trainers on here who have trained dogs for years and don't use this technique are wrong? What about the experienced breeders? The majority of people on this forum are very experienced dog owners, and quite a few are also experienced in many other dog related fields. 

There are lots of techniques that have been used for 100s of years that have since been proven false, or there have been developments in new techniques that work better. Heck, the guy who came up with dominance theory himself admitted his findings were inaccurate. That's part of science, what we know changes all the time as we find new information and develop better techniques. Basically, just because it's been done for a long time doesn't make it the best way, or even correct at all.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Trevian96 said:


> Using his technique is NOTHING like smacking, hitting, or otherwise striking a dog (or rubbing its nose in it), all of which are ineffective and inhumane.


And yet ... the OP claims rubbing the dog's nose in it WAS effective, exact same as your claim of scruffing.
Seems like a classic case of pot, meet kettle.


----------



## Trevian96 (Jul 11, 2013)

ireth0 said:


> Wow... so are you saying that the trainers on here who have trained dogs for years and don't use this technique are wrong? What about the experienced breeders? The majority of people on this forum are very experienced dog owners, and quite a few are also experienced in many other dog related fields.
> 
> There are lots of techniques that have been used for 100s of years that have since been proven false, or there have been developments in new techniques that work better. Heck, the guy who came up with dominance theory himself admitted his findings were inaccurate. That's part of science, what we know changes all the time as we find new information and develop better techniques. Basically, just because it's been done for a long time doesn't make it the best way, or even correct at all.


My point is that to compare the technique I explained with hitting or smacking a dog is silly. Pups are accustomed to being picked up by the scruff of the neck. This is how a mother carries them, disciplines them, and this is not a foreign or unnatural feeling to them. Smacking them is unnatural, ineffective, and cruel. As is using a crate as punishment. We can probably all agree that the ideal way to house train a pup is to control its environment so that it can only go outside. BUT, if it goes inside, and you see it, what is your progressive, positive way to address this? I'd love to hear it.


----------



## Trevian96 (Jul 11, 2013)

petpeeve said:


> And yet ... the OP claims rubbing the dog's nose in it WAS effective, exact same as your claim of scruffing.
> Seems like a classic case of pot, meet kettle.


No petpeeve, pups aren't used to having their noses rubbed in feces. Pups are accustomed to being carried or held by the scruff of the neck.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Trevian96 said:


> No petpeeve, pups aren't used to having their noses rubbed in feces. *Pups are accustomed to being carried or held by the scruff of the neck*.


By their mother. Another dog. Not a human person. Dogs communicate that way, people don't. Dogs don't presume that people will communicate with them like dogs would.

Moreover, if scruffing is done incorrectly it can hurt the dog, why would you recommend that to a stranger you don't know? How could you know they'd do it the 'right' way?


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Trevian96 said:


> BUT, if it goes inside, and you see it, what is your progressive, positive way to address this?


This can't be a serious question, lol.

If it is, then I suspect we are doomed as stewards of the canine world. Uh oh.


----------



## Trevian96 (Jul 11, 2013)

ireth0 said:


> By their mother. Another dog. Not a human person. Dogs communicate that way, people don't. Dogs don't presume that people will communicate with them like dogs would.
> 
> Moreover, if scruffing is done incorrectly it can hurt the dog, why would you recommend that to a stranger you don't know? How could you know they'd do it the 'right' way?


The point is that being held by the scruff is not an unnatural feeling for them. I realize people aren't dogs. I realize the dog won't mistake you for its mother. And yes, if scruffing is done incorrectly it can hurt the dog. If ANYTHING is done incorrectly it can hurt the dog. If I was explaining it to a stranger I don't think there's a lot of room to misunderstand. It's a very simple technique that requires HOLDING the scruff, lifting slightly so that the pup's front paws are an inch or two off the ground, and giving a "no." It's not any more complicated than that. It's not violent. It's not terrifying. You don't run over, grab the scruff and shake violently. It's very simple. There are many many posters on here who fall into that politically correct camp who will not ever, under any circumstances, touch the dog in any possible negative way. I disagree with them. The original post here described smacking, hitting, and tossing in a crate. No trainer anywhere will validate that technique.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Trevian96 said:


> The point is that being held by the scruff is not an unnatural feeling for them. I realize people aren't dogs. I realize the dog won't mistake you for its mother. And yes, if scruffing is done incorrectly it can hurt the dog. *If ANYTHING is done incorrectly it can hurt the dog*. If I was explaining it to a stranger I don't think there's a lot of room to misunderstand. It's a very simple technique that requires HOLDING the scruff, lifting slightly so that the pup's front paws are an inch or two off the ground, and giving a "no." It's not any more complicated than that. It's not violent. It's not terrifying. You don't run over, grab the scruff and shake violently. It's very simple. There are many many posters on here who fall into that politically correct camp who will not ever, under any circumstances, touch the dog in any possible negative way. I disagree with them. The original post here described smacking, hitting, and tossing in a crate. No trainer anywhere will validate that technique.


How can preventing accidents hurt the dog? How can letting it out at regular intervals hurt the dog? How can using an interrupting word hurt the dog?

Edit: Also, you were explaining it to strangers and according to you, we did misunderstand.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Trevian96 said:


> Pups are accustomed to being picked up by the scruff of the neck. This is how a mother carries them, disciplines them, and this is not a foreign or unnatural feeling to them.


In all of my years, I have never seen a dam discipline her pups this way for peeing in an inappropriate spot of the puppy pen. It just doesn't happen.

And then there's that old saying about 'opposable thumbs', which I hasten to point out, dogs don't have.


----------



## Trevian96 (Jul 11, 2013)

petpeeve said:


> In all of my years, I have never seen a dam discipline her pups this way for peeing in an inappropriate spot of the puppy pen. It just doesn't happen.
> 
> And then there's that old saying about 'opposable thumbs', which I hasten to point out, dogs don't have.


I'm losing IQ points reading the posts on this forum. When they're picked up by the scruff as pups by their mother has nothing to do with peeing.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Trevian96 said:


> I'm losing IQ points reading the posts on this forum. When they're picked up by the scruff as pups by their mother has nothing to do with peeing.


You said she uses the technique to discipline the pups in a conversation about correcting inappropriate potty behaviour.


----------



## Trevian96 (Jul 11, 2013)

ireth0 said:


> You said she uses the technique to discipline the pups in a conversation about correcting inappropriate potty behaviour.


She uses the technique to discipline the pups in general. Has nothing to do with peeing. The technique is effective when properly used by humans when witnessing the pup go in the house.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Trevian96 said:


> I'm losing IQ points reading the posts on this forum.


 Did you mean reading, or _composing_ ? Considering the skill level and knowledge of the majority of posters here, IMO the only thing being lost, really, is your credibility. And it's not as a result of your reading. 



Trevian96 said:


> When they're picked up by the scruff as pups by their mother has nothing to do with peeing.


 Then why on earth would YOU adopt this as a viable technique to address housetraining ?


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Trevian96 said:


> The technique is effective when properly used by humans when witnessing the pup go in the house.


In other words, the proper use by humans is to be more dog-like? How about, proper technique by humans is to be more humane.


----------



## zhaor (Jul 2, 2009)

Trevian96 said:


> I'm losing IQ points reading the posts on this forum.


You might want to stop reading then. Doesn't sound like you have many points left to spare.


----------



## Trevian96 (Jul 11, 2013)

The assertion you made was that since the dam doesn't pick up pups by the scruff specifically for peeing somewhere, then that should not be done by a human.
I'm saying your assertion is flawed.
A dam picks up pups by the scruff for x, y, and z. It's irrelevant what the behaviors are. The relevant point is that pups are accustomed to being held this way.
As part of a house breaking program, a pup can be corrected for going in front of you in the house using this technique.
If you disagree then don't do it that way.
The people who attack this technique as some awful, dangerous, cruel, horrible thing are misguided.


----------



## Trevian96 (Jul 11, 2013)

zhaor said:


> You might want to stop reading then. Doesn't sound like you have many points left to spare.


You can attack me personally if you'd like. You've added nothing to this thread.
I can promise you, and I'd bet my life on it, I am more experienced and more educated than you. So attack away.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Well, the whole point of scruffing the puppy is to create a negative association. How do you ensure the pup makes the negative association to peeing _indoors_, versus peeing in front of humans anywhere? It's a real pain when you have a dog that won't potty in front of humans.

Picking the pup up and rushing him outside will be an effective interrupter, without creating negative associations.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Trevian96 said:


> The people who attack this technique as some awful, dangerous, cruel, horrible thing are misguided.


The technique is discouraged because, as you inferred, this is to do as mama dog does. Well, news flash!, humans don't do dog well. To suggest this is NOT misguided at all, it's practical, and more humane.


----------



## Trevian96 (Jul 11, 2013)

Willowy said:


> Well, the whole point of scruffing the puppy is to create a negative association. How do you ensure the pup makes the negative association to peeing _indoors_, versus peeing in front of humans anywhere? It's a real pain when you have a dog that won't potty in front of humans.
> 
> Picking the pup up and rushing him outside will be an effective interrupter, without creating negative associations.


If done properly it's quick, followed by rushing outside.
I think some of the people on this forum would cringe at the notion of even rushing the dog outside. Oh no! What if you pick him up to rush him outside and he gets scared! He'll never pee again! What a joke.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

Trevian96 said:


> The assertion you made was that since the dam doesn't pick up pups by the scruff specifically for peeing somewhere, then that should not be done by a human.
> I'm saying your assertion is flawed.
> A dam picks up pups by the scruff for x, y, and z. It's irrelevant what the behaviors are. The relevant point is that pups are accustomed to being held this way.
> As part of a house breaking program, a pup can be corrected for going in front of you in the house using this technique.
> ...


Well, it is potentially dangerous. Cruel would be the judgement of the DOG. No, I don't think it is in the same class as beating a dog or something like that, but the point remains that it is an unnecessary negative action. 

Just because a dog does something to another dog, even an appropriate dog to dog correction, doesn't mean that a human should use a similar technique or that it is the safest and most effective option for a human.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Trevian96 said:


> We can probably all agree that the ideal way to house train a pup is to control its environment so that it can only go outside. BUT, if it goes inside, and you see it, what is your progressive, positive way to address this? I'd love to hear it.


http://www.dogstardaily.com/training/errorless-housetraining

Worked perfectly for me. I have never disciplined a dog for eliminating inside, yet I have had VERY little trouble housebreaking any of my dogs. My AKK is only three, so it wasn't long ago that I worked with him. He knew what I expected within a week, and because I made sure to get him out frequently, he had very few accidents (and those were due to him just not having the ability to hold it past a certain point and were my fault for not getting him out). On those few occasions I caught him in the act, I gave a firm but _not_ harsh "no," immediately scooped him up, and took him outside to finish, praising when he did.

Also, do you have a source proving that mother dogs grab and shake their pups by the scruff as discipline? (I know they carry them this way, but only when they are quite small.) I was under the impression that this was a myth from those "old school" trainers, so I'd be happy to read whatever literature you want to throw my way.

After a bit of Googling, I found this:



> A subordinate wolf offers his muzzle, and when the higher-ranking wolf “pins” it, the
> subordinate rolls over and presents his belly. There is no force. Canine behaviorist Jean
> Donaldson, author of the award-winning book The Culture Clash, says, “The truth is, there is not
> one documented case of a wolf forcefully rolling another wolf to the ground. Nor is there one
> ...


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Trevian96 said:


> If done properly it's quick, followed by rushing outside.
> I think some of the people on this forum would cringe at the notion of even rushing the dog outside. Oh no! What if you pick him up to rush him outside and he gets scared! He'll never pee again! What a joke.


 I was asking how you ensure the puppy makes the appropriate negative association. Indoors vs outdoors re pottying is a complicated concept for a baby.


----------



## zhaor (Jul 2, 2009)

Trevian96 said:


> I can promise you, and I'd bet my life on it, I am more experienced and more educated than you. So attack away.


You shouldn't bet your life away so casually.


----------



## Trevian96 (Jul 11, 2013)

Willowy said:


> I was asking how you ensure the puppy makes the appropriate negative association. Indoors vs outdoors re pottying is a complicated concept for a baby.


You praise for going outdoors, that's how.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Trevian96 said:


> If done properly it's quick, followed by rushing outside.
> I think some of the people on this forum would cringe at the notion of even rushing the dog outside. Oh no! What if you pick him up to rush him outside and he gets scared! He'll never pee again! What a joke.


If a technique must be prefaced by, "if done properly", there is a concern that's real. I suppose this is a joke only until you own that dog, and I take from your experience you have not.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

Curbside Prophet said:


> If a technique must be prefaced by, "if done properly", there is a concern that's real. I suppose this is a joke only until you own that dog, and I take from your experience you have not.


Agreed.

When I got the foster puppy Cupcake directly from the shelter, she was terrified of most people. She'd obviously been neglected since she was a skinny mange puppy that was owner surrendered. TRUST was the most important thing I could teach her, everything else would follow. No scruffing for a dog like that for sure.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Kylie never, ever, had an accident in the house and I got her at 4 weeks old (abandoned in a dumpster). 

Know how I accomplished that? By TAKING HER OUTSIDE EVERY TEN MINUTES. 

I've never had a dog take longer than 4 months to be reliably housebroken (within the limits of their physical abilities - they'd ask to go out, if I didn't take them before their bladders gave, they'd go - my fault, not theirs). Know how I accomplished that? Taking them outside frequently. 

You don't *PUNISH* them going somewhere inappropriate. It's not necessary. There needs to be no negative association. It's redundant. All housebreaking is, is making ' we potty outside' a habit, and then reenforcing and ingraining the heck out of it, while not allowing 'we go inside' to become a habit. 

Why do people complicate this? It's not rocket science. You're patient, consistent, prevent accidents inside, and get them outside more often than you possibly think they need to go. There is no TRAINING in this, regardless of what's said, except maybe putting it on cue. It's habit formation. Correction NOT NEEDED.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Trevian96 said:


> I think some of the people on this forum would cringe at the notion of even rushing the dog outside. Oh no! What if you pick him up to rush him outside and he gets scared! He'll never pee again! What a joke.


Well, that might be me. The joker, lol. 
Frankly I don't see much difference between cleaning up 2 oz of pee vs 4 oz of pee. 
So in most circumstances I'll wait for the dog to finish. Then I'll smack myself in the head with a rolled-up newspaper, and take the whole she-bang back to the proverbial drawing board with blame and guilt set in the right places.

I find it incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to reprimand / startle / even interrupt a pup's natural functions to compensate for my own shortcomings. More diligence on my behalf next time, is what I say.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

petpeeve said:


> I find it incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to reprimand / startle / even interrupt a pup's natural functions to compensate for my own shortcomings. More diligence on my behalf next time, is what I say.


The one time I picked a puppy up to take them outside when I caught them peeing resulted in a pee trail from where they'd started to the door. 

Yeah, that was effective.


----------



## kcomstoc (Mar 9, 2013)

CptJack said:


> The one time I picked a puppy up to take them outside when I caught them peeing resulted in a pee trail from where they'd started to the door.
> 
> Yeah, that was effective.


 It was effective, it was effective of spreading pee through your house  anyway I feel like if you missed the cues on when the puppy is telling you that it has to go out it's your fault and the puppy shouldn't have to be punished in any way (especially with the scruff of the neck thing).


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

Just getting a good lololol out of scruffing Shambles, even as a puppy.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

CptJack said:


> The one time I picked a puppy up to take them outside when I caught them peeing resulted in a pee trail from where they'd started to the door.
> 
> Yeah, that was effective.


 Well, yeah . But if someone wanted to interrupt and all. . .


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

For those not following the other thread where the same poster is making the same argument...



> I offered a technique that is effective and IMO does not harm the dog when the handler screws up and you witness the dog go in the house. If the other techniques work for you, that is great. The posters, however, who have attacked my technique as this awful, violent, "old school" hurtful punishment, are misguided, and my beef is with them. These are the politically correct Petsmart trainers who cringe at the notion of touching your dog. These are the people who swear by head halters. These are the people you see on Dog Whisperer with poorly behaved dogs. These are the people who go to dog parks and have coffee with their friends while their pushy, dominant dogs practice being pushy and dominant.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Trevian96 said:


> You praise for going outdoors, that's how.


So why is creating the negative association necessary?


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

ireth0 said:


> For those not following the other thread where the same poster is making the same argument...



That's cute. No, seriously, it's just cute. I love it when people come in and say that you must either manhandle your dog or they're badly behaved. Sort of like parents claiming you must spank your children or they're out of control. Know what that says to me? "If the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." 

Learn more. Get more tools. Because bashing at everything with a hammer doesn't work. Or get back to me when you put 3 titles, even trick dog ones, on a dog by a year old. Or can hike with 5 dogs off leash, at the same time. Or leash walk 5 with all the leashes held on one finger. Or just, in general, have more than a dog who doesn't pee in your house and are happy to work, rather than stoically enduring. Do those dogs exist? YES! Do I believe most people who come spouting off crap about how badly behaved dogs are if they're not subjected to positive punishment, especially for things as fundamental as housebreaking have them? NOPE. People who punish two months old? No way. 



Willowy said:


> Well, yeah . But if someone wanted to interrupt and all. . .


Yeah, I gave up that piece of advice, fast. Puppies don't have great bladder control. If they're going, they're going.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

Trevian96 said:


> I think some of the people on this forum would cringe at the notion of even rushing the dog outside. Oh no! What if you pick him up to rush him outside and he gets scared! He'll never pee again! What a joke.


If I did that to Wally when he first arrived, he'd be running around the house in mortal terror of this strange person "chasing" him trying to "get" him and and probably would have pee and poop coming out along the way.

This was a dog that made a puddle under him because I wanted to pet him. He just flattened out on the ground like he was trying to sink through the floor and peed.

Yeah, I really want to rush up to a dog like this and grab him and scare him. That would have been real effective...


----------



## PatriciafromCO (Oct 7, 2012)

everything is about consistency and adjusting to the variables from the results.. of what a dog takes away from any of our actions... It always crosses my mind in my behavior of what a dog will take away from the experience and bring to the next experience. Some will say never let a pup out of a crate if they are fussing or like pawing at the gate of a crate.. I do, especially if we are potty training at the start of a new pup or dog. (always in the back of my mind creating the monster lol) but I want them to tell me things, and know that it works.... teaching wait, rest is also on the burner in teaching so it could be applied during crate time so never created any crate monsters.. adjusting to variables with consistency 

And yes I had one of those pups, first environment was litter raised in the basement during the winter, they were never taken out for the 7 weeks my pup was there, female taken away at 4wks all self authority pups ruling that basement (my monster was well established before he entered my home lol ).. Pooping indoors at will was normal for him and what he brought to my home. Just consistency in the approach I chose (it's my life daily so easy to apply non stop) Been exposed to many different people who were good at what they did they just understood not only the moment but the direction they were building on, got long term results with out creating poor behaviors that they would have to back track to undo... you either have a knack for an approach of your choice and understand where your going with it for positive learning and are successful presenting the point to build on , or your failing to mimic what is not natural to you and create more problems as the point is lost.


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

Trevian96 said:


> The assertion you made was that since the dam doesn't pick up pups by the scruff specifically for peeing somewhere, then that should not be done by a human.
> I'm saying your assertion is flawed.
> A dam picks up pups by the scruff for x, y, and z. It's irrelevant what the behaviors are. The relevant point is that pups are accustomed to being held this way.
> As part of a house breaking program, a pup can be corrected for going in front of you in the house using this technique.
> ...


How can you say the behaviors are irrelevant when the behaviors frame the situation the dogs are trying to communicate in and thus when, how and with what apparent meaning a scrub grab is used? 

And since I'm not a dog, and don't have a dog's form and functional body parts, and don't have a dog's instinctive intelligence to know when to do and not to do these things and how to do them as a dam to her pups, then I shouldn't be trying to "imitate a dog". It would be like me trying to do the greeting ritual when I can just say "Hey, Wally!" pat my legs and rub him up to greet him. Not to mention my hands don't have the same meaning as a dog's mouth. I can "snap" at Wally with my hands and he'll try paw them or think I'm about to play. If another dog snapped at him with his mouth, there wouldn't be any play going on. 

So my hands picking him up by the scruff may not have the same meaning as a dam doing it since my hands are not a mouth.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

KBLover said:


> How can you say the behaviors are irrelevant when the behaviors frame the situation the dogs are trying to communicate in and thus when, how and with what apparent meaning a scrub grab is used?
> 
> And since I'm not a dog, and don't have a dog's form and functional body parts, and don't have a dog's instinctive intelligence to know when to do and not to do these things and how to do them as a dam to her pups, then I shouldn't be trying to "imitate a dog". It would be like me trying to do the greeting ritual when I can just say "Hey, Wally!" pat my legs and rub him up to greet him.


I really want to see someone go up to a dog and sniff their butt as a greeting. I really do. 

Because it makes exactly as much sense as the rest to me.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Not to mention that mother dogs DON'T actually lift their pups by the scruff and shake as punishment, so it makes even less sense for a human to do that.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Crantastic said:


> Not to mention that mother dogs DON'T actually lift their pups by the scruff and shake as punishment, so it makes even less sense for a human to do that.


Actually, this is a good point and one I was missing - and is huge. 

Grab and shake is PREY-DRIVE or SERIOUS fight behavior and actually communicates 'you're going to die'. 

That's a bit extreme for peeing inside, don't you think?


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Yep.



> A subordinate wolf offers his muzzle, and when the higher-ranking wolf “pins” it, the
> subordinate rolls over and presents his belly. There is no force. Canine behaviorist Jean
> Donaldson, author of the award-winning book The Culture Clash, says, “The truth is, there is not
> one documented case of a wolf forcefully rolling another wolf to the ground. Nor is there one
> ...


From this article by Carmen Buitrago, CPDT, CTC.

I think that if one is going to base their training methods on "what mother dogs do," they should make sure that mother dogs actually do those things.


----------



## packetsmom (Mar 21, 2013)

Crantastic said:


> If you'd pick up a baby puppy by the scruff as punishment, you're not much better than the OP.


Yep...you lost the right to be smug right there. In the smugness olympics, that was a DQ.

I think a lot of people think their young puppies are housetrained simply because they have gotten a good schedule going and the dog is getting outside often enough that it doesn't need to go inside. That's the way it should be, really, but it doesn't necessarily mean the dog itself is housetrained.

However, as far as the carpets are concerned...the end result is the same.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Trevian96 said:


> I said mothers HOLD (and carry) their pups by the scruff and carry them in that manner. Never said shake. Never said TO shake. Said hold, and slight lift.
> The rude comments came from posters who essentially accused me of being a horrible, cruel monster for suggesting a simple technique used by top notch trainers with more years of experience than you all have combined, that I am sure of.
> 
> Reading the threads on this forum is an exercise in futility. I will do you all a favor and disappear, and you can continue to give bad advice to people who have all sorts of serious problems that they created with their dogs. Read the posts on this forum - major behavioral and aggression issues, followed by just awful, awful advice. In the end, I feel sorry for the dogs. These are the dogs that end up biting someone and get turned into shelters.


Just wow...


----------



## PatriciafromCO (Oct 7, 2012)

8 years of experience of one or two litters a year totally devoted to my mentors dams and her litters living down the hall in a basement room to prepare them to be ready for their new homes .. No dam ever picked up her pups for correction,, they never picked them up at all. They in a safe place so they never had to move them anywhere else. Confident dam with healthy well fed , well eliminated pups are not whinny cranky pups... totally different experience when Mary leased a dam that was a nervous wreck and not caring for the pups keeping them eliminated and fed since she didn't want to be with them... she was the only one to bite their heads (neck) to apply pressure to quiet them... Most I have seen for a dam is knocking them off her teets because they were biting and clawing on her, and they learned quickly to control their little bodies if they wanted to eat and that is before they even opened their eyes... Dams don't care that they doing puppy things away from her, they highly tolerant when they apply pressure bitting, chewing , voice, poke, and older pups get muzzle grab tilt down.. Same with space issue jumping on her, getting in her face,, tolerant for the most part of interacting with them,, but will end it abruptly if it becomes something intolerable verbally with pressure touch, they like the muzzle grab tilt down. scruff Shaking I see a behavior for dams killing other dams puppies, and dams killing their own not natural..... Just a dam that has established her self with her litter from birth needs very little exertion as they mature..


----------



## zhaor (Jul 2, 2009)

CptJack said:


> That's a bit extreme for peeing inside, don't you think?


You mean your parents never threatened to kill you during potty training?


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

zhaor said:


> You mean your parents never threatened to kill you during potty training?


 Well. . .my grandma says she potty-trained her 2 oldest by "beating their little butts" every time they went in their diapers from the time they were 3 months old. She says they were potty-trained by 9 months (which I believe is physiologically impossible), and I don't doubt that multiple daily beatings for 6 months straight could have easily proven fatal for an infant. So I guess some people do. Fun times.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Willowy said:


> Well. . .my grandma says she potty-trained her 2 oldest by "beating their little butts" every time they went in their diapers from the time they were 3 months old. She says they were potty-trained by 9 months (which I believe is physiologically impossible), and I don't doubt that multiple daily beatings for 6 months straight could have easily proven fatal for an infant. So I guess some people do. Fun times.


Well this poster claimed they had house trained puppies by 8-9 weeks so...


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

CptJack said:


> I really want to see someone go up to a dog and sniff their butt as a greeting. I really do.
> 
> Because it makes exactly as much sense as the rest to me.


When someone says they lick their dog's butt to encourage elimination, then I might listen to what they have to say about emulating a mother dog.


----------



## PatriciafromCO (Oct 7, 2012)

ireth0 said:


> Well this poster claimed they had house trained puppies by 8-9 weeks so...


why wouldn't they be, if some one took the time to expose them to learning... why shouldn't you expect a pup by the time he gets a new home to have several skills from exposure to them already under their belt. Every pup who ever went to a new home was already house trained because that is what we did every day after they started walking. consistency


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

PatriciafromCO said:


> why wouldn't they be, if some one took the time to expose them to learning... why shouldn't you expect a pup by the time he gets a new home to have several skills from exposure to them already under their belt. Every pup who ever went to a new home was already house trained because that is what we did every day after they started walking. consistency


I think some of it's definitions of house-training. Kylie would alert that she needed to go out, by 8 weeks, or just walk herself outside. She was sort of aware she needed to go, always needed to go, anyway, and knew that going outside and peeing got her a treat. She'd had four weeks of practice at that point. 

HOWEVER, she could in NO WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM, hold it. If she needed to go, you either opened that door and got her out, or you were going to have a puddle. She never HAD an accident but she had some near misses.

That's not housebroken for a lot of people. Housebroken means 'hold it until your next scheduled trip/I'm available to take you'. Not alerting at the door that they need to pee.


----------



## PatriciafromCO (Oct 7, 2012)

lol CptJack all good points... never thought of the different definitions detail requirements of what House trained is to many different people... Always very pleased how well Mary's pups did from day one in their new homes from having just a small constructive learning environment from 2 to 9 wks with me. Grant it they could use some tightening up, but they knew everything to easily go get their CD.... The pups are so smart and learning from the day they are born. My favorite story especially after going for a puppy home visit when the pup was older and saw that their entire house was all (white carpet) people came and got their pup, got home had the crate ready but decided not to put the pup in the crate and let him stay loose in their bedroom. When the guy woke up to find the pup gone from the room he thought for sure he would find a mess to clean up.. He went searching for the pup and the mess on his carpet... He found the pup at the door sitting, the door that they brought the pup in the house the night before and had brought him out to go potty in the yard before they went to bed... just waiting at the door,, he opened it the pup went out off lead pottied/ pooped and came right back in...

yes you could eventually break that pup to have to go on the floor in the house by not letting him out, but you would have to really neglect Mary's pups from their first learning..


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

PatriciafromCO said:


> lol CptJack all good points... never thought of the different definitions detail requirements of what House trained is to many different people... Always very pleased how well Mary's pups did from day one in their new homes from having just a small constructive learning environment from 2 to 9 wks with me. Grant it they could use some tightening up, but they knew everything to easily go get their CD.... The pups are so smart and learning from the day they are born. My favorite story especially after going for a puppy home visit when the pup was older and saw that their entire house was all (white carpet) people came and got their pup, got home had the crate ready but decided not to put the pup in the crate and let him stay loose in their bedroom. When the guy woke up to find the pup gone from the room he thought for sure he would find a mess to clean up.. He went searching for the pup and the mess on his carpet... He found the pup at the door sitting, the door that they brought the pup in the house the night before and had brought him out to go potty in the yard before they went to bed... just waiting at the door,, he opened it the pup went out off lead pottied/ pooped and came right back in...
> 
> yes you could eventually break that pup to have to go on the floor in the house by not letting him out, but you would have to really neglect Mary's pups from their first learning..



Yeah for sure. I would never advocate anyone getting a puppy younger than 8 weeks, but I firmly believe that a lot of Kylie's love of learning (and probably her social issues on the negative end of the spectrum) come from the exposure to learning she had starting at 4 weeks old. A good breeder should be doing that for you, and it makes a world of difference.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

Crate/House Break Pups
1st week in crate was that, a whole week the pup lived strictly in crate, only time out was for eating/water and doing duty outside. Hourly the crate gate opened up and pup scooped up as he/she stepped out of crate and then carried outside to area picked for the job. This started at 5:00 morning and usually ended between 10 and 11:00 at night so it was at least 15 times a day the pup was dutying in same area and the habit was being formed as to where the pup should go, the work was very easy as a 7 or 8 week old pup weighed nothing. Proper verbal encouragement words uttered while carrying the dog out and while dog dutied. Actually it was not brain surgery just common sense to build the "when and where to dump at" habit.

Picking up the pup absolutely eliminated any accidents in home as a rubber mat was in front of crate just in case of a partial accident while picking pup up and this could be cleaned immediately and smell eliminated from home. I also had a 6 to 10 ft square piece of heavy plastic that was on floor during the feed/water stage in case of a quick accident which also kept odor off floor. This was also used for 15 minute quality play sessions started 2nd week but that's another story.

This method is by no means the very best way to accomplish housebreaking/crate work it's just the way I used and it worked.


I have 50 years of dog training and I never needed the pup scruff program as I've said many times pups do no wrong just as babies do no wrong.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

CptJack said:


> HOWEVER, she could in NO WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM, hold it. If she needed to go, you either opened that door and got her out, or you were going to have a puddle. She never HAD an accident but she had some near misses.


Oh god when Squash was wee and busy, he'd occasionally suddenly leap up and make a beeline for the back door... dribbling pee all the way. GOTTA GO RIGHT NOWWWW... ooohh, look at that. I already did.

Does laughing count as a verbal correction? It must, because somehow he got house trained anyway.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

> Oh god when Squash was wee and busy, he'd occasionally suddenly leap up and make a beeline for the back door... dribbling pee all the way. GOTTA GO RIGHT NOWWWW... ooohh, look at that. I already did.


Aside from the entertainment, what a nice piece of work by the pup, mind was on right program his body was not cooperating. Imagine now how confusing pup would get if when he's at back door he gets picked up by scruff of neck by somebody who is brand new owner and has never lifted a pup before along with an angry no. If I'm the pup it's a possibility next time I would not try to make it to door. 

There are many pups who have been roughly treated for many problems and it worked but down the road there's a chance that something was taken from pup with those programs. Something that you never get back.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

I was looking through my library this morning, found this, and thought it might be of some interest. It's a small excerpt from the book "_This is the German Shepherd_" written by Capt. Wm. Goldbecker and E. H. Hart in 1955, so by most people's standards it would likely qualify as 'old school'.



> Directly after eating or waking a puppy almost inevitably has to relieve himself. If he is in the house and makes a mistake it is generally your fault, as you should have recognized these facts and removed him in time to avert disaster. If, after you have taken him out, he comes in and soils the floor or rug, he must be made to realize that he has done wrong. Scold him with "Shame! Shame!" and rush him outside. Praise him extravagantly when he has taken advantage of the great outdoors. Sometimes if you catch him preparing to void in the house, a quick, sharp "No" will stop the proceedings and allow you time to usher him out. *Never rub his nose in his excreta*. Never indulge in the common practice of striking the puppy with a rolled up newspaper or with your hand. If you do, you may be training your dog to be hand shy, to be shy of paper or to bite the newsboy. *Your hand should only be used in such a way that your dog recognizes it as that part of you which implements your voice, to pet and give pleasure.* In housebreaking, a "No" or "Shame" appropriately used and delivered in an admonishing tone is punishment enough."


Statements with the greatest pertinence here are in bold.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

> Never indulge in the common practice of striking the puppy with a rolled up newspaper or with your hand.


Yes indeed the above was an Oldie but not a Goodie, A rolled up newspaper used properly can break a person's nose. Sad to say it was definitely an old school weapon and I wonder how many young pups had the fear of doG instilled in their little heads.


----------

