# Hi! I'm a trainer using the Koehler Method, ask me your questions about it!



## SlabGizor117

I'm 17 studying dog training and I use the Koehler Method exclusively. I know there are a lot of misconceptions about the method, so I'd like to see what you guys think and answer anything you have to ask about the method. I assume most of it will be about the fairness of the method rather than any specific questions about the training itself, but that's fine. My biggest goal here is kinda to clear Bill Koehler's name from all of the misinformation that spreads around trainers, so discussing, as I said, the fairness of the method instead of the training itself is perfectly fine.

Ask away!


----------



## CptJack

...I don't have questions. I do want to warn you that this isn't going to go well. We're not, as a forum and whole, fans. Most of us have other methods we like and consider more appropriate, fair, and humane and that are based on science and more recent information than Koehler - and have had lots and lots of success with them. 

I mean, by all means leave this post up but be prepared for what you're going to get, which isn't a warm reception and more likely to be attempts to educate you than the reverse.


----------



## trainingjunkie

I believe that Koehler himself would no longer be using the "Koehler Method" if he was still with us. The best trainers in the world keep improving and updating and learning. Choosing a method that's over 50 years old seems like a waste of several decades of improvements.

I read and own all of his books. I was a big fan of his in the 80s. He gave me a great foundation that I then went and grew from. What I do today looks nothing like what I did in the 80s. I keep getting better and better as a trainer.


----------



## Hiraeth

trainingjunkie said:


> I believe that Koehler himself would no longer be using the "Koehler Method" if he was still with us. The best trainers in the world keep improving and updating and learning. Choosing a method that's over 50 years old seems like a waste of several decades of improvements.
> 
> I read and own all of his books. I was a big fan of his in the 80s. He gave me a great foundation that I then went and grew from. What I do today looks nothing like what I did in the 80s. I keep getting better and better as a trainer.


Happy 3,000th post! It was a great one


----------



## SlabGizor117

CptJack said:


> ...I don't have questions. I do want to warn you that this isn't going to go well. We're not, as a forum and whole, fans. Most of us have other methods we like and consider more appropriate, fair, and humane and that are based on science and more recent information than Koehler - and have had lots and lots of success with them.
> 
> I mean, by all means leave this post up but be prepared for what you're going to get, which isn't a warm reception and more likely to be attempts to educate you than the reverse.


Hmm, maybe I should have known better than to expect civilized questions then..


----------



## trainingjunkie

Hiraeth said:


> Happy 3,000th post! It was a great one


Ha! Thanks! Another milestone!


----------



## trainingjunkie

SlabGizor117 said:


> Hmm, maybe I should have known better than to expect civilized questions then..


Has any of this conversation seemed uncivilized? What motivated you to chose Koehler and not Ellis, Fenzi, Cleveland, or Carlsen?


----------



## Wirehairedvizslalove

Can someone give me a summary of what that training method is like? I've never heard of it.


----------



## Greater Swiss

SlabGizor117 said:


> Hmm, maybe I should have known better than to expect civilized questions then..


excuse me, you have been treated extremely civilly. 

Setting aside any opinion on the method itself, why on earth would someone wanting to be a trainer only adhere to one single method or approach? Using a "one size fits all" approach does not tend to make for a particularly innovative, or successful trainer. Not all dogs have the same problems, or respond the same way to stimuli. Before you become a trainer you should at least be sure to make yourself well versed in other methods so if your method doesn't work, you may still be able to find the solution.


----------



## CptJack

Greater Swiss said:


> excuse me, you have been treated extremely civilly.
> 
> Setting aside any opinion on the method itself, why on earth would someone wanting to be a trainer only adhere to one single method or approach? Using a "one size fits all" approach does not tend to make for a particularly innovative, or successful trainer. Not all dogs have the same problems, or respond the same way to stimuli. Before you become a trainer you should at least be sure to make yourself well versed in other methods so if your method doesn't work, you may still be able to find the solution.


This is so huge. 

I can tell you my #1 criteria for choosing a trainer is having successfully trained a lot of different dogs and types of dogs. I can tell you that, sure, Koehlr methods would be fine for Thud (or at least have no fall out) attempting those methods would result in me having NO DOG with Kylie. I can also tell you that while they'd work great for some things - like obedience - they'd fail miserably for teaching agility. 

You really, really, can't not be highly adaptable and able to adjust based on dog and desired end result.

And also I said nothing about people not being civil. I said they would attempt to educate you. There is a difference, and if you believe attempting to educate people isn't civil, you wouldn't have posted this.


----------



## SlabGizor117

trainingjunkie said:


> I believe that Koehler himself would no longer be using the "Koehler Method" if he was still with us. The best trainers in the world keep improving and updating and learning. Choosing a method that's over 50 years old seems like a waste of several decades of improvements.
> 
> I read and own all of his books. I was a big fan of his in the 80s. He gave me a great foundation that I then went and grew from. What I do today looks nothing like what I did in the 80s. I keep getting better and better as a trainer.


Well I would have to disagree with that, as there are many indications in stories and discussion I've heard of Mr. Koehler and his method that he was far ahead of his time in advances in training. You said you were a big fan of his in the 80s, but from the fact that you said he would have changed his methods by now, it sounds like you don't agree. Do you?


----------



## SlabGizor117

Greater Swiss said:


> excuse me, you have been treated extremely civilly.
> 
> Setting aside any opinion on the method itself, why on earth would someone wanting to be a trainer only adhere to one single method or approach? Using a "one size fits all" approach does not tend to make for a particularly innovative, or successful trainer. Not all dogs have the same problems, or respond the same way to stimuli. Before you become a trainer you should at least be sure to make yourself well versed in other methods so if your method doesn't work, you may still be able to find the solution.


I didn't mean at all that I wasn't being treated "civilly", just making a joke about how many people will start a YouTube comment argument over the Koehler method. As for one method, it's been proven that the Koehler method was designed for and works on any dog, and any problem, because it's based on the core concept that dogs will instinctively move from a state of discomfort, to comfort.


----------



## SlabGizor117

trainingjunkie said:


> Has any of this conversation seemed uncivilized? What motivated you to chose Koehler and not Ellis, Fenzi, Cleveland, or Carlsen?


I guess there's just gonna be like, 5 replies bunched together because the forum won't group multiple posts into one, and I'm a noob and don't know how to do it myself  But anyways, I didn't mean at all to say that it wasn't civilized, just making a joke how people get all riled up over the Koehler method. 

I chose the Koehler Method for many reasons. One was that its goal was not just to teach your dog a few tricks, like how to sit every once in a while(that's an exaggeration, I know many other methods do), but instead for a better relationship between master and dog. Secondly, it guarantees off leash reliability in as little as 10 weeks, and you can walk out of your class on the 10th week straight into the Novice Obedience Ring and title your dog. Third, the fact that it's all laid out in a specific method as explained in the book, makes it very easy to follow. There are a few other reasons that are smaller, but the summary of them is that when you look deep into each exercise and how it's taught, you realize how well planned out and designed the method was. For example, when teaching heel, instead of a simple correction that needs teaching for the dog to understand why he deserved it, you do a right about turn and run, so that the dog realizes for himself, "Oops, I didn't see him turn around, _I'll have to stay next to him so I can be warned if he does it again._

Hope that answers your question!



Wirehairedvizslalove said:


> Can someone give me a summary of what that training method is like? I've never heard of it.


There was a little explanation in my reply to trainingjunkie, but you can also go to koehlerdogtraining.com and look around to see how it all works.


----------



## sydneynicole

You say you made the thread to explain the method... someone above asked what it is and you haven't responded. I'd like to know too, never heard of it, so I'm guessing it isn't a positive reinforcement method. And judging by the comments would never use it, but I'm interested to hear what it is.

edit: was typing as you posted above. That still really doesn't help at all and I'm not going to go out of my way to research it.


----------



## taquitos

I just... I feel so sorry for your dog.

It's proven that it works for EVERY/ANY dog? Did he try it on EVERY/ANY dog? No? Then no, it's not proven to work in every single case.

Just out of curiousity, what drove you to choose the Koehler method out of all the methods out there? I don't mean that in a snarky way. Just genuinely curious as to what you think is so much better about this method compared to other modern-day science-based training techniques.


----------



## Hiraeth

SlabGizor117 said:


> I didn't mean at all that I wasn't being treated "civilly", just making a joke about how many people will start a YouTube comment argument over the Koehler method. As for one method, *it's been proven that the Koehler method was designed for and works on any dog, and any problem,* because it's based on the core concept that dogs will instinctively move from a state of discomfort, to comfort.


No. It doesn't. Expand your horizons. A singular method cannot be a cure-all for every dog temperament (from soft to hard) and for every dog problem (from simple problems like 'doesn't know how to sit' to big problems like reactivity or aggression).

I'm familiar with the Koehler method. Anyone who uses it would have had many struggles with the aggressive dogs I've worked with and would not have successfully rehabilitated any of them. And it would absolutely ruin my very soft Great Dane.

As many others have stated, part of being a great dog trainer is being able to use multiple methods in order to get the results you desire with a particularly tempered dog. Anyone who sticks with one method, and who claims that one method fixes all problems, is an amateur. And when they stick to one particular highly aversive method, they're a dangerous amateur.


----------



## Shell

SlabGizor117 said:


> I didn't mean at all that I wasn't being treated "civilly", just making a joke about how many people will start a YouTube comment argument over the Koehler method. As for one method, it's been proven that the Koehler method was designed for and works on any dog, and any problem, because it's based on the *core concept that dogs will instinctively move from a state of discomfort, to comfort.*


I think this is another key of why you are going to be getting some mildly confrontational posts.

Basically any animal will try to move from a state of discomfort to a state of comfort (or lack of discomfort). That doesn't imply that using that instinct is a good or the best method of training in general nor for all dog or all situations.

Positive reinforcement and negative punishment work pretty darn well for most dogs and most situations. I will fully admit to using negative reinforcement and positive punishment in limited uses with dogs that can handle it and when the situation calls for it. 

So my question to you would be, why restrict yourself to a method that can have bad fallout for some dogs? A method that has been improved upon over time?

There is nothing wrong with revisiting training/educational methods over time. Some parts are worth keeping, some not. I wouldn't be surprised if the methods we work with now are improved upon in 10 or 20 years. Just because something has been in use for a long time doesn't make it the gold standard though.


----------



## taquitos

Shell said:


> I think this is another key of why you are going to be getting some mildly confrontational posts.
> 
> Basically any animal will try to move from a state of discomfort to a state of comfort (or lack of discomfort). That doesn't imply that using that instinct is a good or the best method of training in general nor for all dog or all situations.
> 
> Positive reinforcement and negative punishment work pretty darn well for most dogs and most situations. I will fully admit to using negative reinforcement and positive punishment in limited uses with dogs that can handle it and when the situation calls for it.
> 
> So my question to you would be, why restrict yourself to a method that can have bad fallout for some dogs? A method that has been improved upon over time?
> 
> There is nothing wrong with revisiting training/educational methods over time. Some parts are worth keeping, some not. I wouldn't be surprised if the methods we work with now are improved upon in 10 or 20 years. Just because something has been in use for a long time doesn't make it the gold standard though.


*applause*

Well said.


----------



## SlabGizor117

sydneynicole said:


> You say you made the thread to explain the method... someone above asked what it is and you haven't responded. I'd like to know too, never heard of it, so I'm guessing it isn't a positive reinforcement method. And judging by the comments would never use it, but I'm interested to hear what it is.
> 
> edit: was typing as you posted above. That still really doesn't help at all and I'm not going to go out of my way to research it.


Well I suppose I did say that, didn't I? It's just hard to explain it all without writing a 4 page essay ._. I was expecting, as I said, mainly questions about the fairness, so that's why I didn't think to explain it. I guess there'll be a lot of people unfamiliar with the method, so I'll try to summarize it for those who don't want to do any research.

The Koehler method operates on the concept that Action leads to Memory which leads to Desire. I'm sure this can be translated into operant conditioning, but this is a simpler explanation:
A dog is in the back yard and digs under the fence to explore the neighborhood. That's his action. The resulting memory is that he had fun, which leads to his desire to do it again. So, he comes back home and the owner(not a knowledgeable dog trainer, for sake of illustration) sees him, and chews him out. Vocally, that is. So that's not too convincing to the dog, and he decides that he'd rather go explore again the next time the owners are away. This time, when he comes back the owners are waiting for him and(not recommending this, as I said the "owner" is not knowledgeable in training or anything) the owner drags him to the hole under the fence, yells at him, and gives him a few smacks on the butt. So the action of escaping the fence and the resulting punishment led to the unpleasant memory of the consequence, which lessened his desire to try to escape the back yard again.

Now, that scenario is not ideal as far as how the owners handled the situation, and certainly not how the Koehler Method would have you do it, but it illustrates the basic principle of it. The "punishment" side of it is not unfair, though. Any correction given... "correctly", will either be one that the dog knew he deserved because he chose not to do something he knew he should've, or it will be one where the dog figures out for himself why it happened, and it may not even occur to the dog that it happened because of you. A good example of that is the throw chain, used for off leash reliability. It's basically a choke chain, with each end connected by a ring, and another ring connecting the two middle links together. You throw it at the dog's rear, not hard, but not a lob shot. The effect is more psychological than anything because you make sure that he doesn't see you throwing it, he doesn't know that you did. You also don't want to miss the dog, as he will then take the bet and risk that you can't correct him when you need to. Then you don't let him see you pick it up, so he doesn't know that you can't correct him when there's a chain on the ground. Of course it's not very uncomfortable at all, because the chain is only long enough to spread the width of their body, and you don't baseball pitch it, but it has a very powerful psychological effect. 

That's one of the reasons that I use the method, because the book is full of ideas that you don't even need to try to know how smart they are. If you'd like, I would suggest buying the book, it will tell you a lot more about the "method behind the madness".

Something else I want to clear up is anyone who would count correction for behavioral problems such as the digging or biting corrections, is picking stuff out and acting like that's all the method is. The behavioral problem section is a last resort to save a dog from a one way trip to the vet, not a common practice.


----------



## trainingjunkie

SlabGizor117 said:


> Well I would have to disagree with that, as there are many indications in stories and discussion I've heard of Mr. Koehler and his method that he was far ahead of his time in advances in training. You said you were a big fan of his in the 80s, but from the fact that you said he would have changed his methods by now, it sounds like you don't agree. Do you?


Koehler was an outstanding dog trainer in his time. Great trainers are constantly improving. They never stand still. Based on Koehler's standing as a great trainer, I stand by my belief that he would have continued to evolve, improve, learn, and adapt. All of the great trainers keep learning and improving. What's the saying, "If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants." Sir Isaac Newton 

The trainers who have come after Koehler have been able to use his work as a springboard. Training is in a constant state of evolution. 

Curious: How many dogs have you taken to the Novice ring after 10 weeks?


----------



## mashlee08

But why would you want to intentionally put your dog in a state of discomfort in order to teach something, when there are other methods that make training a much more enjoyable experience for both the dog and handler?


----------



## ireth0

My question is how do you use this method to create or improve drive in a dog?


----------



## cookieface

Why not just set up situations where your dog will succeed and use positive reinforcement to teach them what you want? Why wait for them to make a mistake and punish them for what you haven't taught?


----------



## ireth0

mashlee08 said:


> But why would you want to intentionally put your dog in a state of discomfort in order to teach something, when there are other methods that make training a much more enjoyable experience for both the dog and handler?


This is also a good question.

Why make the dog feel uncomfortable/scared/anything else negative when you can accomplish the same things while keeping your dog happy, and excited to work with you?


----------



## SlabGizor117

taquitos said:


> I just... I feel so sorry for your dog.
> 
> It's proven that it works for EVERY/ANY dog? Did he try it on EVERY/ANY dog? No? Then no, it's not proven to work in every single case.
> 
> Just out of curiousity, what drove you to choose the Koehler method out of all the methods out there? I don't mean that in a snarky way. Just genuinely curious as to what you think is so much better about this method compared to other modern-day science-based training techniques.


Well don't feel sorry! Lucky for you, my parents are not dog people, so I don't own a dog. I am however working on opportunities to train peoples' dogs for them, sorry to rain on your parade.
It is in fact proven that the method works for any and every dog, in the aspects of personality and breed. I want to explain that the teaching of each exercise is not a one size fits all deal, but the method as a whole is. That is, for example with sit, you mechanically place the dog 100 times before applying any corrections, until the dog is melting under hand as you place him, and has his rear halfway to the ground before you can start the "S" in "Sit". Can you imagine how strong a correction, and how many corrections, there would need to be for an average dog? The only reason any dog would receive a correction for sitting is if he knew what he was told to do and chose not to do it.

As for why I chose the Koehler method, in summary, it's because I have seen the result of it, and that is a happy dog, a good relationship, and complete off leash control. In addition, the way that is taught is very, very impressive in Mr. Koehler's planning and design of the method. There's a bit more to it in my reply to trainingjunkie.


----------



## ireth0

cookieface said:


> Why not just set up situations where your dog will succeed and use positive reinforcement to teach them what you want? Why wait for them to make a mistake and punish them for what you haven't taught?


And even, why not just be a responsible owner and fix your fence if your dog keeps getting out?


----------



## ireth0

SlabGizor117 said:


> It is in fact proven that the method works for any and every dog, in the aspects of personality and breed.


Could you provide some evidence of that?


----------



## Shell

SlabGizor117 said:


> Well I suppose I did say that, didn't I? It's just hard to explain it all without writing a 4 page essay ._. I was expecting, as I said, mainly questions about the fairness, so that's why I didn't think to explain it. I guess there'll be a lot of people unfamiliar with the method, so I'll try to summarize it for those who don't want to do any research.
> 
> The Koehler method operates on the concept that Action leads to Memory which leads to Desire. I'm sure this can be translated into operant conditioning, but this is a simpler explanation:
> A dog is in the back yard and digs under the fence to explore the neighborhood. That's his action. The resulting memory is that he had fun, which leads to his desire to do it again. So, he comes back home and the owner(not a knowledgeable dog trainer, for sake of illustration) sees him, and chews him out. Vocally, that is. So that's not too convincing to the dog, and he decides that he'd rather go explore again the next time the owners are away. This time, when he comes back the owners are waiting for him and(not recommending this, as I said the "owner" is not knowledgeable in training or anything) the owner drags him to the hole under the fence, yells at him, and gives him a few smacks on the butt. So the action of escaping the fence and the resulting punishment led to the unpleasant memory of the consequence, which lessened his desire to try to escape the back yard again.
> 
> Now, that scenario is not ideal as far as how the owners handled the situation, and certainly not how the Koehler Method would have you do it, but it illustrates the basic principle of it. The "punishment" side of it is not unfair, though. Any correction given... "correctly", will either be one that the dog knew he deserved because he chose not to do something he knew he should've, or it will be one where the dog figures out for himself why it happened, and it may not even occur to the dog that it happened because of you. A good example of that is the throw chain, used for off leash reliability. It's basically a choke chain, with each end connected by a ring, and another ring connecting the two middle links together. You throw it at the dog's rear, not hard, but not a lob shot. The effect is more psychological than anything because you make sure that he doesn't see you throwing it, he doesn't know that you did. You also don't want to miss the dog, as he will then take the bet and risk that you can't correct him when you need to. Then you don't let him see you pick it up, so he doesn't know that you can't correct him when there's a chain on the ground. Of course it's not very uncomfortable at all, because the chain is only long enough to spread the width of their body, and you don't baseball pitch it, but it has a very powerful psychological effect.
> 
> That's one of the reasons that I use the method, because the book is full of ideas that you don't even need to try to know how smart they are. If you'd like, I would suggest buying the book, it will tell you a lot more about the "method behind the madness".
> 
> Something else I want to clear up is anyone who would count correction for behavioral problems such as the digging or biting corrections, is picking stuff out and acting like that's all the method is. The behavioral problem section is a last resort to save a dog from a one way trip to the vet, not a common practice.


Or, the owner could not leave the dog alone bored in a yard. Or secure the fencing. Or secure the fencing and provide more stimulus to the dog to lesson the desire to dig out. 

Dog didn't do anything wrong by digging out. 

Set the dog up for success instead

For a good number of dogs, the scary chain from nowhere would NOT be associated with whatever action they were doing that the time but rather generalized to maybe the location (as in, the yard becomes scary) or something else happening concurrently (as in, the dog next door becomes scary because he was running at the moment the chain hit your dog)

Heck, I could -- theoretically-- smack Eva upside the head with the door (cause she has no sense of space and she is always in a hurry) and she'd have no stress about it. If I threw a chain or any other startling object? Trauma. Major emotional trauma. 

Gotta know the dog you are dealing it.


----------



## taquitos

SlabGizor117 said:


> Well I suppose I did say that, didn't I? It's just hard to explain it all without writing a 4 page essay ._. I was expecting, as I said, mainly questions about the fairness, so that's why I didn't think to explain it. I guess there'll be a lot of people unfamiliar with the method, so I'll try to summarize it for those who don't want to do any research.
> 
> The Koehler method operates on the concept that Action leads to Memory which leads to Desire. I'm sure this can be translated into operant conditioning, but this is a simpler explanation:
> A dog is in the back yard and digs under the fence to explore the neighborhood. That's his action. The resulting memory is that he had fun, which leads to his desire to do it again. So, he comes back home and the owner(not a knowledgeable dog trainer, for sake of illustration) sees him, and chews him out. Vocally, that is. So that's not too convincing to the dog, and he decides that he'd rather go explore again the next time the owners are away. This time, when he comes back the owners are waiting for him and(not recommending this, as I said the "owner" is not knowledgeable in training or anything) the owner drags him to the hole under the fence, yells at him, and gives him a few smacks on the butt. So the action of escaping the fence and the resulting punishment led to the unpleasant memory of the consequence, which lessened his desire to try to escape the back yard again.
> 
> Now, that scenario is not ideal as far as how the owners handled the situation, and certainly not how the Koehler Method would have you do it, but it illustrates the basic principle of it. The "punishment" side of it is not unfair, though. Any correction given... "correctly", will either be one that the dog knew he deserved because he chose not to do something he knew he should've, or it will be one where the dog figures out for himself why it happened, and it may not even occur to the dog that it happened because of you. A good example of that is the throw chain, used for off leash reliability. It's basically a choke chain, with each end connected by a ring, and another ring connecting the two middle links together. You throw it at the dog's rear, not hard, but not a lob shot. The effect is more psychological than anything because you make sure that he doesn't see you throwing it, he doesn't know that you did. You also don't want to miss the dog, as he will then take the bet and risk that you can't correct him when you need to. Then you don't let him see you pick it up, so he doesn't know that you can't correct him when there's a chain on the ground. Of course it's not very uncomfortable at all, because the chain is only long enough to spread the width of their body, and you don't baseball pitch it, but it has a very powerful psychological effect.
> 
> That's one of the reasons that I use the method, because the book is full of ideas that you don't even need to try to know how smart they are. If you'd like, I would suggest buying the book, it will tell you a lot more about the "method behind the madness".
> 
> Something else I want to clear up is anyone who would count correction for behavioral problems such as the digging or biting corrections, is picking stuff out and acting like that's all the method is. The behavioral problem section is a last resort to save a dog from a one way trip to the vet, not a common practice.


But you can do all that using much less aversive methods. What your explaining is nothing drastically difficult to fix with a little management, and reward-focused training.

I will give you a similar example (the sequence of events is the same) that I often see as a trainer who has dealt with dogs/puppies who have been punished for bad behavior.

Scenario 1:
Dog chews on shoe. Owner catches dog chewing on shoe and grabs the dog, yells at him, and then swats/smacks him a few times (enough to scare the dog). – According to you, this should lessen their desire to chew the shoe... but you are assuming that the dog is the type of dog who will not simply go "screw it, I'm just going to chew this shoe and when my owner gets pissed I'll run away" OR "I'll chew the shoe in secret so that the owner doesn't know."

Scenario 2:
Dog who is leash reactive and dog aggressive was taught to suppress reactive behavior using a choke chain. Like the Koehler method, dog was given a choice: React or behave. When dog reacted, the "trainer" gave the dog a sharp tug, and when that wasn't enough, hung the dog off the chain so that the front paws lifted off the ground and swung the dog around to face the opposite way. After several sessions, dog no longer had the desire to walk and the dog was showing avoidance behavior when presented with choke chain.

Both scenarios follow your chain of events. See how things can go wrong? Btw these are two actual dogs I dealt with. It's true that dogs will do their best to go from a place of discomfort to a place of comfort... but it doesn't mean that they can't learn in a place of comfort. Why you need to PUT them in situations like that to teach a dog is beyond me..

And absolutely ridiculous that this would work on ALL dogs. GOOD LUCK TRYING THIS ON A DOG WHO IS ALREADY SHUT DOWN, INCREDIBLY SOFT, OR HAS VERY LITTLE DRIVE TO PLEASE PEOPLE.


----------



## parus

How many dogs, and of what breeds and ages, have you trained to a demonstrated* level of proficiency using Koehler's methods?

*field trials, obedience competition, service dog employment, etc.


----------



## taquitos

parus said:


> How many dogs, and of what breeds and ages, have you trained to a demonstrated* level of proficiency using Koehler's methods?
> 
> *field trials, obedience competition, service dog employment, etc.


This would be nice to know considering how OP keeps saying it's "proven" to work on all dogs.


----------



## BKaymuttleycrew

SlabGizor117 said:


> Well don't feel sorry! Lucky for you, my parents are not dog people, so I don't own a dog. I am however working on opportunities to train peoples' dogs for them, sorry to rain on your parade.
> It is in fact proven that the method works for any and every dog, in the aspects of personality and breed. I want to explain that the teaching of each exercise is not a one size fits all deal, but the method as a whole is. That is, for example with sit, you mechanically place the dog 100 times before applying any corrections, until the dog is melting under hand as you place him, and has his rear halfway to the ground before you can start the "S" in "Sit". Can you imagine how strong a correction, and how many corrections, there would need to be for an average dog? The only reason any dog would receive a correction for sitting is if he knew what he was told to do and chose not to do it.
> 
> As for why I chose the Koehler method, in summary, it's because I have seen the result of it, and that is a happy dog, a good relationship, and complete off leash control. In addition, the way that is taught is very, very impressive in Mr. Koehler's planning and design of the method. There's a bit more to it in my reply to trainingjunkie.




All I can say is this - "I weep for the dogs that you 'train'. I truly do" 

I am old enough to have seen the 'Koehler method' in action & place, when it was just about all there was to offer in the arena of 'training'. I now know better & I find it horrifically sad that a youngster (such as yourself, OP) would fall hook-line-&-sinker for this sort of nonsense. 

I also find it very telling, and must ask others to contemplate this: Why is it that it is generally the *Koehler* trainers that feel the compulsion to 'defend' and 'justify' their chosen methods of training. I can't recall any other (modern) trainers that suffer from such 'misinformation' that their followers feel the need to spend time trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear (training-wise, that is)


----------



## SlabGizor117

Hiraeth said:


> No. It doesn't. Expand your horizons. A singular method cannot be a cure-all for every dog temperament (from soft to hard) and for every dog problem (from simple problems like 'doesn't know how to sit' to big problems like reactivity or aggression).
> 
> I'm familiar with the Koehler method. Anyone who uses it would have had many struggles with the aggressive dogs I've worked with and would not have successfully rehabilitated any of them. And it would absolutely ruin my very soft Great Dane.
> 
> As many others have stated, part of being a great dog trainer is being able to use multiple methods in order to get the results you desire with a particularly tempered dog. Anyone who sticks with one method, and who claims that one method fixes all problems, is an amateur. And when they stick to one particular highly aversive method, they're a dangerous amateur.


I have explained how the method is applicable to any dog in my reply to taquitos, I'm trying to make things go faster with all these replies. A soft dog will be taught what sit means, and may require about 10 corrections from start to finish of teaching the exercise. A dog in rehabilitation may need more firm correction if he is harder to bring past the point of contention.

Thus, with all respect, I would encourage you to become more familiar with the method if you still hold that stance with it. Mr. Koehler had successfully trained 140,000 dogs himself in his career, and I can assure you there were plenty of dogs who may have even had worse problems than what you have dealt with, and it is stated in the book that he has never refused any dog the opportunity of rehabilitation. As I said above, the method as a whole is "one size fits all", but the specific teaching of each exercise is not. No Koehler trainer would use the same correction on your soft Great Dane as he would on an aggressive Pit Bull.

The Koehler method is not one method that works for some dogs, where one would have to find another method to train certain other dogs. The Koehler Method is a "package method", if you will, that has all the techniques you need to train any dog. That's why there are instructions for dealing with any dog, no matter what problems they may have, right along with instruction for teaching the average well mannered dog. I will agree with you that I am an amateur, but that is not the reason why. 

But, the method is not at all highly aversive. In fact I would say in almost all cases there is more praise than correction throughout the process of training even the toughest dog. The reason there's so much more content on the aversive side of it is because not one correction will solve all things the dog does wrong, but any praise will reinforce all the things the dog does right.


----------



## parus

CptJack said:


> This is so huge.
> 
> I can tell you my #1 criteria for choosing a trainer is having successfully trained a lot of different dogs and types of dogs. I can tell you that, sure, Koehlr methods would be fine for Thud (or at least have no fall out) attempting those methods would result in me having NO DOG with Kylie. I can also tell you that while they'd work great for some things - like obedience - they'd fail miserably for teaching agility.
> 
> You really, really, can't not be highly adaptable and able to adjust based on dog and desired end result.
> 
> And also I said nothing about people not being civil. I said they would attempt to educate you. There is a difference, and if you believe attempting to educate people isn't civil, you wouldn't have posted this.





taquitos said:


> This would be nice to know considering how OP keeps saying it's "proven" to work on all dogs.


Yeah. I'm genuinely asking, not going for a "gotcha" question. If the OP has had publicly proven successes with it, I would like to hear more about his process, as there might be something useful even if I don't believe in capital-M Methods.


----------



## chimunga

SlabGizor117 said:


> I have explained how the method is applicable to any dog in my reply to taquitos, I'm trying to make things go faster with all these replies. A soft dog will be taught what sit means, and may require about 10 corrections from start to finish of teaching the exercise. A dog in rehabilitation may need more firm correction if he is harder to bring past the point of contention.


Do you have studies, or even personal anecdotes, to illustrate how it works with all dogs?


----------



## cookieface

Why not make sitting enjoyable for the dog? Why not teach what you want and make it fun for the dog? I can't imagine building a relationship on fear and pain. Sounds a little 50 Shades.... if you ask me.

Proof - in the form of peer reviewed studies or actual examples of titling dogs using your methods - would be most welcome.


----------



## taquitos

SlabGizor117 said:


> Well don't feel sorry! Lucky for you, my parents are not dog people, so I don't own a dog. I am however working on opportunities to train peoples' dogs for them, sorry to rain on your parade.
> It is in fact proven that the method works for any and every dog, in the aspects of personality and breed. I want to explain that the teaching of each exercise is not a one size fits all deal, but the method as a whole is. That is, for example with sit, you mechanically place the dog 100 times before applying any corrections, until the dog is melting under hand as you place him, and has his rear halfway to the ground before you can start the "S" in "Sit". Can you imagine how strong a correction, and how many corrections, there would need to be for an average dog? The only reason any dog would receive a correction for sitting is if he knew what he was told to do and chose not to do it.
> 
> As for why I chose the Koehler method, in summary, it's because I have seen the result of it, and that is a happy dog, a good relationship, and complete off leash control. In addition, the way that is taught is very, very impressive in Mr. Koehler's planning and design of the method. There's a bit more to it in my reply to trainingjunkie.




You keep saying it's proven but you're really not citing anything. Sorry but the method is flawed. There's no way any method works on every single dog. Koehler could not have possibly tested it on every single breed and every single dog.

YES it's true that dogs, and all animals alike, operate on the same principles of learning. NO, it is not true that they can all be trained using the SAME method. Two very different things there.

So... you don't have a dog... have you ever dealt with one?

I have 5+ years in rescue, and I've been training for almost as long... Sorry to rain on your parade lol.

You literally don't need to even use corrections for things like "sit" lol it's one of the simplest things to teach a dog... if you need to physically punish your dog for something that simple then honestly you're not a good trainer...


----------



## ireth0

How would you teach sit to a dog who had been abused and got defensive or shut down (this means the dog refuses to move or engage with you at all) whenever you tried to reach for them to push the butt down?


----------



## SlabGizor117

Shell said:


> I think this is another key of why you are going to be getting some mildly confrontational posts.
> 
> Basically any animal will try to move from a state of discomfort to a state of comfort (or lack of discomfort). That doesn't imply that using that instinct is a good or the best method of training in general nor for all dog or all situations.
> 
> Positive reinforcement and negative punishment work pretty darn well for most dogs and most situations. I will fully admit to using negative reinforcement and positive punishment in limited uses with dogs that can handle it and when the situation calls for it.
> 
> So my question to you would be, why restrict yourself to a method that can have bad fallout for some dogs? A method that has been improved upon over time?
> 
> There is nothing wrong with revisiting training/educational methods over time. Some parts are worth keeping, some not. I wouldn't be surprised if the methods we work with now are improved upon in 10 or 20 years. Just because something has been in use for a long time doesn't make it the gold standard though.


I do not restrict myself to the Koehler Method only, although I do use the Koehler Method only for obedience training. The method is very well thought out and planned, which shows clearly that the more firm discipline a tough dog would need would of course not be used on an easy dog. I would also have to respectfully disagree that this method has been improved upon over time. Not to say that there aren't some things such as E-collars or even treats that would make the process go faster, but there are also downsides to each of those, which is why they are not used. Secondly, Mr. Koehler was far ahead of his time in the innovations and techniques he used in his method.


----------



## SlabGizor117

trainingjunkie said:


> Koehler was an outstanding dog trainer in his time. Great trainers are constantly improving. They never stand still. Based on Koehler's standing as a great trainer, I stand by my belief that he would have continued to evolve, improve, learn, and adapt. All of the great trainers keep learning and improving. What's the saying, "If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants." Sir Isaac Newton
> 
> The trainers who have come after Koehler have been able to use his work as a springboard. Training is in a constant state of evolution.
> 
> Curious: How many dogs have you taken to the Novice ring after 10 weeks?


I unfortunately have not been given the opportunity to take any dogs to a Novice ring, as my circumstances are complicating my interest in dog training, but there are many accounts of people who have taken their dog straight from the end of the class to a novice ring and titled their dog. I'm sure that the reason for that is probably because the method uses the Companion Dog test as its goal... That would make sense, wouldn't it?


----------



## Shell

SlabGizor117 said:


> I have explained how the method is applicable to any dog in my reply to taquitos, I'm trying to make things go faster with all these replies. A soft dog will be taught what sit means, and may require about 10 corrections from start to finish of teaching the exercise. A dog in rehabilitation may need more firm correction if he is harder to bring past the point of contention.
> 
> Thus, with all respect, I would encourage you to become more familiar with the method if you still hold that stance with it. Mr. Koehler had successfully trained 140,000 dogs himself in his career, and I can assure you there were plenty of dogs who may have even had worse problems than what you have dealt with, and it is stated in the book that he has never refused any dog the opportunity of rehabilitation. As I said above, the method as a whole is "one size fits all", but the specific teaching of each exercise is not. No Koehler trainer would use the same correction on *your soft Great Dane as he would on an aggressive Pit Bull.*
> 
> The Koehler method is not one method that works for some dogs, where one would have to find another method to train certain other dogs. The Koehler Method is a "package method", if you will, that has all the techniques you need to train any dog. That's why there are instructions for dealing with any dog, no matter what problems they may have, right along with instruction for teaching the average well mannered dog. I will agree with you that I am an amateur, but that is not the reason why.
> 
> But, the method is not at all highly aversive. In fact I would say in almost all cases there is more praise than correction throughout the process of training even the toughest dog. The reason there's so much more content on the aversive side of it is because not one correction will solve all things the dog does wrong, but any praise will reinforce all the things the dog does right.


I highlighted something in particular-- its a breed generalization that will get you into trouble

While there are exceptions, as with any living being, "pit types" or "pit bulls" tend to the emotionally soft. You can probably get away with physical corrections because they tend towards being forgiving, but on the whole, they are really receptive to reward based training and tend to shut down with overly corrected. A few will shut down with any correction harder than a verbal "ah ah" 

I also question the phrasing of "highly aversive" because it implies assuming what an individual dog finds aversive or not. 

Don't get caught up in the concept of "toughest dog" as there are many layers to dogs. Like an onion if you want to reference Shrek movies


----------



## ireth0

SlabGizor117 said:


> but there are also downsides to each of those, which is why they are not used.


Please do share the downsides to using rewards.


----------



## SlabGizor117

ireth0 said:


> And even, why not just be a responsible owner and fix your fence if your dog keeps getting out?


Because it is my belief that a responsible owner would, instead of "dogproofing" everything he owns, train the dog to complete obedience to save his own time, money, and dog's life. I mean, it is cheaper than paying $30,000 for a water pipe broken by a digger, a new fence, or a new dog, because your other one found one more loophole through your fortress of safety.


----------



## taquitos

Shell said:


> I highlighted something in particular-- its a breed generalization that will get you into trouble
> 
> While there are exceptions, as with any living being, "pit types" or "pit bulls" tend to the emotionally soft. You can probably get away with physical corrections because they tend towards being forgiving, but on the whole, they are really receptive to reward based training and tend to shut down with overly corrected. A few will shut down with any correction harder than a verbal "ah ah"
> 
> I also question the phrasing of "highly aversive" because it implies assuming what an individual dog finds aversive or not.
> 
> Don't get caught up in the concept of "toughest dog" as there are many layers to dogs. Like an onion if you want to reference Shrek movies


Just to add to this, like how what is aversive to a dog can depend on each temperament, what motivates them/what they consider a reward differs too. Praise is often also not at all rewarding for many dogs – especially dogs who are not naturally handler oriented. That means toy breeds, spitzes, etc.


----------



## ireth0

SlabGizor117 said:


> Because it is my belief that a responsible owner would, instead of "dogproofing" everything he owns, train the dog to complete obedience to save his own time, money, and dog's life. I mean, it is cheaper than paying $30,000 for a water pipe broken by a digger, a new fence, or a new dog, because your other one found one more loophole through your fortress of safety.


If you think training a dog to 'complete obedience' would take less time than fixing a fence, I have some news for you.


----------



## JohnnyBandit

SlabGizor117 said:


> Well I would have to disagree with that, as there are many indications in stories and discussion I've heard of Mr. Koehler and his method that he was far ahead of his time in advances in training. You said you were a big fan of his in the 80s, but from the fact that you said he would have changed his methods by now, it sounds like you don't agree. Do you?


I met Koehler in KC in 1984..... The man was a pompous jerk.... 

Frankly his methods were outdated well before his passing in 1993 (ish)

To say he was ahead of his times is an incorrect statement... He was a Dinosaur DURING his time. 

I am one of the few people on this forum that will readily admit to liking compulsion training in certain situations and with certain dogs... The other person seldom posts any longer and he readily admitted he was a Dinosaur....

I grew up training dogs, largely with compulsion methods in the 1970's..... But like most of us that strive to learn.... My methods evolved over time..... 

And while I will still use some compulsion methods at times... IT is more of a specific situation type thing.....

That being said.... I personally found Koehler's methods harsh back in the 1970's and 1980's..... If you asked me now I will tell you his methods can be brutal.... And in the hands of a novice they can be downright dangerous. To both dog and handler....


You said in your OP your biggest goal is to clear Koehler's name... It cannot be cleared.... Much of what is said about him is true..... 

As I said.... I have met the man... Spoke with him one on one and in a small group setting. I watch him train and work dogs.....

The man earned the legacy he has been left with...


----------



## sydneynicole

The more I read, the sadder I get. I wouldn't trade the relationship I've built with my dog for anything. He is eager and happy to work for me because it is fun. Because he likes to be near me and likes to learn new things because he gets treats and gets to play and it's a little party. I can't imagine ANY dog having drive to work using this method. Sounds like the perfect way to shut down your dog. But I know a lot of people think their meek, timid, 'obedient', shut down dog is just perfectly mannered and 'knows who is in charge'. It saddens me that people still use these out of date, disproved methods - but I am also happy to see a lot of people making the switch to more positive based methods.


----------



## taquitos

SlabGizor117 said:


> Because it is my belief that a responsible owner would, instead of "dogproofing" everything he owns, train the dog to complete obedience to save his own time, money, and dog's life. I mean, it is cheaper than paying $30,000 for a water pipe broken by a digger, a new fence, or a new dog, because your other one found one more loophole through your fortress of safety.


"Complete obedience"???? My, you have a lot to learn...


----------



## Effisia

From Koehler's book:
"When finally it is obvious that he is physically incapable of expressing his resentment and is lowered to the ground, he will probably stagger looplegged for a few steps, vomit once or twice, and roll over on his side. The sight of a dog lying, thick-tongued, on his side is not pleasant, but do not let it alarm you. I have dealt with hundreds of these" 

"Select a piece of the material he has chewed and place it well back, crossways, in his mouth. Use a strip of adhesive tape to wrap the muzzle securely in front of the chewed material, so that no amount of gagging and clawing can force it from his mouth. Perhaps you are wondering if these frantic efforts to rid himself of the material will cause the dog to scratch himself painfully. Yup. They surely will." 

"Equip yourself with a man's leather belt or strap heavy enough to give your particular dog a good tanning. Yup - we're going to strike him. Real hard…lay the strap vigorously against his thighs. Keep pouring it on him until he thinks it's the bitter end." 

"Fill the hole to its brim with water. . . . bring the dog to the hole and shove his nose into the water; hold him there until he is sure he's drowning. . . . fill the hole with water and repeat the experience the next day, whether the dog digs any more or not." 


*Why do you think this sort of training builds a better relationship with a dog than using force-free methods? 
*Why do you think this sort of thing is okay to do to an animal?
*Is there some updated version of his text that you use instead of the original that these quotes are taken from?
*How many dogs have you thus far used this method on?
*Do you know how to identify the difference between a well-trained dog and a dog that is emotionally shut-down?
*Have you used this method on soft or sensitive dogs and what has been the observable result?
*What have you studied in terms of understanding and reading canine body language?
*What other trainers and methods have you studied?


----------



## SlabGizor117

mashlee08 said:


> But why would you want to intentionally put your dog in a state of discomfort in order to teach something, when there are other methods that make training a much more enjoyable experience for both the dog and handler?


I would never make a dog uncomfortable to TEACH him to come, for example. I would make him VERY uncomfortable, however, if he knew already what come meant, and chose to run into the street instead of obey me, narrowly missing the garbage truck. Please don't tell me that you would sacrifice his life because you were afraid to ensure that he would obey you in any situation, no matter how distracting?


----------



## SlabGizor117

ireth0 said:


> My question is how do you use this method to create or improve drive in a dog?


That's a very good question, but one I am, unfortunately, not able to answer in my inexperience. However, if you would like, you can go to koehlerdogtraining.com and contact Tony Ancheta with your question. I haven't quite studied to that level, but I'm hoping I have enough knowledge to clear up some misconceptions about the Koehler Method.


----------



## parus

SlabGizor117 said:


> I would never make a dog uncomfortable to TEACH him to come, for example. I would make him VERY uncomfortable, however, if he knew already what come meant, and chose to run into the street instead of obey me, narrowly missing the garbage truck. Please don't tell me that you would sacrifice his life because you were afraid to ensure that he would obey you in any situation, no matter how distracting?


So you would make the dog associate being with you with discomfort, and you feel this would make him less likely to go in the street?


----------



## ireth0

SlabGizor117 said:


> Please don't tell me that you would sacrifice his life because you were afraid to ensure that he would obey you in any situation, no matter how distracting?


I have wonderful news for you. You can achieve this WITHOUT making your dog very uncomfortable. Or uncomfortable at all. Isn't that awesome?


----------



## SlabGizor117

cookieface said:


> Why not just set up situations where your dog will succeed and use positive reinforcement to teach them what you want? Why wait for them to make a mistake and punish them for what you haven't taught?


I mean no disrespect but I would encourage you to learn more about the method before accusing it of that unfairness. That is because, it is exactly what we do! For example with sit, you mechanically place the dog 100 times, saying the command right before his rear hits the ground, and immediately praise him to show him that that's what you wanted. Only after that 100 times would you correct him at all for disobedience. And how strong of a correction do you think the dog would require in that situation? How many would it take to bring him past the point of contention when it seems he could, "write his own book on the exercise"?


----------



## ireth0

SlabGizor117 said:


> I mean no disrespect but I would encourage you to learn more about the method before accusing it of that unfairness. That is because, it is exactly what we do! For example with sit, you mechanically place the dog 100 times, saying the command right before his rear hits the ground, and immediately praise him to show him that that's what you wanted. Only after that 100 times would you correct him at all for disobedience. And how strong of a correction do you think the dog would require in that situation? How many would it take to bring him past the point of contention when it seems he could, "write his own book on the exercise"?


Again, what about dogs who do not respond to being physically manipulated?


----------



## taquitos

SlabGizor117 said:


> I mean no disrespect but I would encourage you to learn more about the method before accusing it of that unfairness. That is because, it is exactly what we do! For example with sit, you mechanically place the dog 100 times, saying the command right before his rear hits the ground, and immediately praise him to show him that that's what you wanted. Only after that 100 times would you correct him at all for disobedience. And how strong of a correction do you think the dog would require in that situation? How many would it take to bring him past the point of contention when it seems he could, "write his own book on the exercise"?


Why would you assume the dog learned anything from you shoving its bum down on the ground after repeating the cue?


----------



## parus

SlabGizor117 said:


> For example with sit, you mechanically place the dog 100 times, saying the command right before his rear hits the ground, and immediately praise him to show him that that's what you wanted.


That sounds super boring.


----------



## SlabGizor117

ireth0 said:


> This is also a good question.
> 
> Why make the dog feel uncomfortable/scared/anything else negative when you can accomplish the same things while keeping your dog happy, and excited to work with you?


I answered that question in reply to mashlee08, if you'd like to dig that out of this mess of replies.


----------



## BKaymuttleycrew

SlabGizor117 said:


> I mean no disrespect but I would encourage you to learn more about the method before accusing it of that unfairness. That is because, it is exactly what we do! For example with sit, you mechanically place the dog 100 times, saying the command right before his rear hits the ground, and immediately praise him to show him that that's what you wanted. Only after that 100 times would you correct him at all for disobedience. And how strong of a correction do you think the dog would require in that situation? How many would it take to bring him past the point of contention when it seems he could, "write his own book on the exercise"?


Why in Heaven's name would you have to "mechanically place the dog 100 times"?????????????????? My dog's place *themselves*. Happily, willingly, with enthusiasm & total attention to the handler. No corrections are ever needed or warranted. 

You are so brain-washed with antiquated BS it scares me to death. And, once again, I must weep for the dogs that you have training contact with.


----------



## Hiraeth

SlabGizor117 said:


> Well don't feel sorry! Lucky for you, my parents are not dog people, so I don't own a dog.





ireth0 said:


> Could you provide some evidence of that?


No. No evidence can be provided here that is at all relevant to modern dog training, because the OP is a 17 year old who has never owned a dog who is worshiping an outdated training method from the 1960s. 

This is a waste of everyone's time.

ETA: Oh, and my 8 week old puppy learned how to sit within two very short training sessions without me laying a hand on him. And I have since continuously reinforced his sit. Without laying a hand on him. In fact, he has NEVER been corrected during a training session. And he is an incredibly well behaved 130 lb 9 month old dog who is happy, who actively engages is training, who is excited to learn and who excels when we do new things because I have turned him into that kind of dog. 

I encourage you to branch out from your old school methodology and do some reading. Because with the current method you employ, you will NEVER have a relationship with a dog like I have with my dog, and like many other people responding have with their dogs. And that is pretty sad.


----------



## ireth0

SlabGizor117 said:


> I answered that question in reply to mashlee08, if you'd like to dig that out of this mess of replies.


Yea, not that I saw.

So why choose to make the dog uncomfortable when you can achieve the same or better results without needing to do that?


----------



## SlabGizor117

ireth0 said:


> Could you provide some evidence of that?


Unfortunately, I can't, as I'm unable to find where it's said either in the book or the website, but I do know for a fact that it's been used on every dog breed, if that's not obvious already from the 140,000 dogs Bill Koehler trained himself. Sorry!


----------



## taquitos

Sooo... you're going by a book that was written like 50 years ago and just going by the book.... and not looking at other sources? And you assume it's 100% unbiased and true?


----------



## ireth0

SlabGizor117 said:


> Unfortunately, I can't, as I'm unable to find where it's said either in the book or the website, but I do know for a fact that it's been used on every dog breed, if that's not obvious already from the 140,000 dogs Bill Koehler trained himself. Sorry!


140k is a drop in the bucket of the dog population, I hate to burst your bubble. 

There is also TONS of personality variation within breeds, not to mention mixed breeds which can have any HUGE range of personalities. So, even presuming this was used successfully on one of every dog breed (also, are you talking AKC recognized breeds, or all breeds worldwide?) it does not make that representative of the dog population as a whole. 

It CERTAINLY isn't evidence to prove that this method works on every dog.


----------



## gingerkid

SlabGizor117 said:


> I mean no disrespect but I would encourage you to learn more about the method before accusing it of that unfairness. That is because, it is exactly what we do! For example with sit, you mechanically place the dog 100 times, saying the command right before his rear hits the ground, and immediately praise him to show him that that's what you wanted. Only after that 100 times would you correct him at all for disobedience. And how strong of a correction do you think the dog would require in that situation? How many would it take to bring him past the point of contention when it seems he could, "write his own book on the exercise"?


So, the problem I see with this is that it creates a dog that isn't capable of making decisions or solving problems on its own. Sure, that means "complete obedience" but it also means eliminating what is actually my favourite part of training a dog - watching them think and work things out for themselves.


----------



## Effisia

So you can't actually provide evidence for half the stuff we're asking. Why even start this thread? To spread your joy over outdated methods, many of which basically amount to torture? Yippee?


----------



## LittleFr0g

SlabGizor117 said:


> I mean no disrespect but I would encourage you to learn more about the method before accusing it of that unfairness. That is because, it is exactly what we do! For example with sit, you mechanically place the dog 100 times, saying the command right before his rear hits the ground, and immediately praise him to show him that that's what you wanted. Only after that 100 times would you correct him at all for disobedience. And how strong of a correction do you think the dog would require in that situation? How many would it take to bring him past the point of contention when it seems he could, "write his own book on the exercise"?


I taught my dog to sit in 10 minutes, without ever laying a finger on him. Do please educate me on how superior your method is to mine. I can promise you that if you try your method on a Pug, you'll get absolutely nowhere.


----------



## cookieface

SlabGizor117 said:


> I mean no disrespect but I would encourage you to learn more about the method before accusing it of that unfairness. That is because, it is exactly what we do! For example with sit, you mechanically place the dog 100 times, saying the command right before his rear hits the ground, and immediately praise him to show him that that's what you wanted. Only after that 100 times would you correct him at all for disobedience. And how strong of a correction do you think the dog would require in that situation? How many would it take to bring him past the point of contention when it seems he could, "write his own book on the exercise"?


How exactly would you teach a dog to sit? Would it be enjoyable for the dog? For you?


----------



## chimunga

I'm confused as to why you're volunteering as an ambassador for the method when you have no solid proof of it's efficacy and little to no personal experience with it.


----------



## Hiraeth

Kuma'sMom said:


> I taught my dog to sit in 10 minutes, without ever laying a finger on him. Do please educate me on how superior your method is to mine. I can promise you that if you try your method on a Pug, you'll get absolutely nowhere.


But Koehler trained over 140K dogs, Kuma'sMom! It works on every dog under every circumstance for every problem that could ever possibly exist!


----------



## taquitos

Kuma'sMom said:


> I taught my dog to sit in 10 minutes, without ever laying a finger on him. Do please educate me on how superior your method is to mine. I can promise you that if you try your method on a Pug, you'll get absolutely nowhere.


I was thinking the same thing...

Taught a dog who was mentally not all there to sit with treats in 10 mins. Pretty sure it was less effort than making her sit forcefully 100 times lol.


----------



## SlabGizor117

Shell said:


> Or, the owner could not leave the dog alone bored in a yard. Or secure the fencing. Or secure the fencing and provide more stimulus to the dog to lesson the desire to dig out.
> 
> Dog didn't do anything wrong by digging out.
> 
> Set the dog up for success instead
> 
> For a good number of dogs, the scary chain from nowhere would NOT be associated with whatever action they were doing that the time but rather generalized to maybe the location (as in, the yard becomes scary) or something else happening concurrently (as in, the dog next door becomes scary because he was running at the moment the chain hit your dog)
> 
> Heck, I could -- theoretically-- smack Eva upside the head with the door (cause she has no sense of space and she is always in a hurry) and she'd have no stress about it. If I threw a chain or any other startling object? Trauma. Major emotional trauma.
> 
> Gotta know the dog you are dealing it.


Firstly, I don't trust the fence. It's already been dug under. What I am willing to trust though, is the complete off leash control I have in a dog trained with the method. 
Secondly, I would edit that to say that the dog didn't know he did anything wrong. And again, that illustration is not how it should have been handled, it's just the most clear way to explain the Action-Memory-Desire concept. In practice the dog would be made aware that he did the wrong thing before any correction was used.

Third, I've seen this claim made about a dog who was corrected when he forged ahead to meet a dog walking across the street from him, and that the dog now thought that the one across the street was "bad news". That was a hypothetical scenario, as is yours, but in the heeling example, if it were real life, the dog would have been taught already what heel meant so that he knew why he was corrected. But in your scenario, you're missing something that I suppose I should have explained. That exercise is executed in this order: "Joe, come." Joe decides he doesn't need to come, but gets corrected with the chain and says "Whoa, where did that come from?! That wasn't worth it!" 

But regardless of that, the claim that he would associate the correction with his environment instead of the command that _had just been said previously, is, respectfully, the most degrading thing to a dog's intelligence I have ever heard._


----------



## cookieface

chimunga said:


> I'm confused as to why you're volunteering as an ambassador for the method when you have no solid proof of it's efficacy and little to no personal experience with it.


This ^^^ Why try to convince people your method of choice is the best when you have no proof and have never even owned a dog?


----------



## JohnnyBandit

SlabGizor117 said:


> I mean no disrespect


Yes you do mean or at least show disrespect.... Whether you realize it or not....

You read a book....That is it... Read a book.... Now you come to a training section on a high traffic dog forum...

To explain, teach, and defend the method of a man that has been dead 23 years and wrote the books you have read well before this..... 

But you do not own a dog... Have not put said methods into practice.... the fact that you do not have a dog, have not trained a dog, have not put the methods you have read about into practice.... This means quite frankly that you do not even understand what you read... You may THINK you understand.. But until you put them into practice...... You don't...

Here is an example that may help you understand.... Say you want to get a drivers license... You read and study the book from the DMV.... You go take a written test and get a learners permit.... You still do not know how to drive... The permit just means you know evnoug to start learning how to drive... Then with an experienced person you get behind the wheel... Start slow and very basic... over time, you work your way out to the hard road and then the highways..... THEN you go take and actual driving test.... IF you pass... Then you know how to drive...



Well when it comes to dogs.... You do not even have your learners permit yet.


----------



## LittleFr0g

Hiraeth said:


> But Koehler trained over 140K dogs, Kuma'sMom! It works on every dog under every circumstance for every problem that could ever possibly exist!


LOL!!! I can almost certainly guarantee that Koehler focused his efforts on dogs that would put up with his harsh methods and avoided the many dogs that wouldn't. Every Pug I've ever known would either shit down or give you the proverbial "middle finger" if you tried Koehler's methods on them.


----------



## ireth0

The fact that you even think complete control over another living, thinking, feeling being is possible just goes to show how little experience you really have. -That- is the most degrading thing to a dog's intelligence I have ever heard.


----------



## cookieface

You've mentioned that you don't own a dog. Have you ever trained a dog?


----------



## Hiraeth

SlabGizor117 said:


> But regardless of that, the claim that he would associate the correction with his environment instead of the command that _had just been said previously_, is, respectfully, the most degrading thing to a dog's intelligence I have ever heard.


Let's be clear. The amount of things you don't understand about dog training are monumental in scope.

Correcting a reactive dog while it is reacting is proven to make the dog more reactive, again and again. And unlike you, I can provide sources to prove that claim.


----------



## petpeeve

SlabGizor117 said:


> Secondly, it guarantees off leash reliability in as little as 10 weeks, and you can walk out of your class on the 10th week straight into the Novice Obedience Ring and title your dog.


THIS ^^^ is laughable. If you or anyone else can take a 'green' dog, apply Koehler's methods for a mere 10 weeks, and then achieve any more than a bunch of NQ's and a single, generous 171 score ... I'll promise to eat that dog's previous dinner.


----------



## taquitos

ireth0 said:


> The fact that you even think complete control over another living, thinking, feeling being is possible just goes to show how little experience you really have. -That- is the most degrading thing to a dog's intelligence I have ever heard.


This is honestly what gets me the most. It is extremely disturbing.


----------



## Hiraeth

ireth0 said:


> The fact that you even think complete control over another living, thinking, feeling being is possible just goes to show how little experience you really have. -That- is the most degrading thing to a dog's intelligence I have ever heard.


Even if it was possible.... Why would you want it?


----------



## Shell

SlabGizor117 said:


> Firstly, I don't trust the fence. It's already been dug under. What I am willing to trust though, is the complete off leash control I have in a dog trained with the method.
> Secondly, I would edit that to say that the dog didn't know he did anything wrong. And again, that illustration is not how it should have been handled, it's just the most clear way to explain the Action-Memory-Desire concept. In practice the dog would be made aware that he did the wrong thing before any correction was used.
> 
> Third, I've seen this claim made about a dog who was corrected when he forged ahead to meet a dog walking across the street from him, and that the dog now thought that the one across the street was "bad news". That was a hypothetical scenario, as is yours, but in the heeling example, if it were real life, the dog would have been taught already what heel meant so that he knew why he was corrected. But in your scenario, you're missing something that I suppose I should have explained. That exercise is executed in this order: "Joe, come." Joe decides he doesn't need to come, but gets corrected with the chain and says "Whoa, where did that come from?! That wasn't worth it!"
> 
> But regardless of that, the claim that he would associate the correction with his environment instead of the command that _had just been said previously, is, respectfully, the most degrading thing to a dog's intelligence I have ever heard._


_

If you don't think that dogs can't associate a correction with something other than what the human intends them to associate it with, then I think you need to delve a bit deeper into training. It isn't just dogs that can associate bad experiences with things that did not cause those bad experiences- humans do it too. As do other domestic animals like horses for example. 

Oh heck yeah I have seen a dog who is corrected about lunging towards another dog mean the other dog is "bad news" It is not in any way a hypothetical scenario. It is very clear to see the progression of antagonism towards other dogs if you watch a dog be physically corrected for the lunge.

You are also assuming that a dog has existing training about what a heel or such means. Take an adult dog with no existing training, probably a fair bit of mishandling and bad experiences and THEN try to say they know what a heel means and correct them for lunging at a dog. Watch the fallout that occurs and learn from it._


----------



## JohnnyBandit

SlabGizor117 said:


> I would never make a dog uncomfortable to TEACH him to come, for example. I would make him VERY uncomfortable, however, if he knew already what come meant, and chose to run into the street instead of obey me, narrowly missing the garbage truck. Please don't tell me that you would sacrifice his life because you were afraid to ensure that he would obey you in any situation, no matter how distracting?


Exactly how is making a dog that knows the recall command, but is refusingit, uncomfortable going to help you? 

Unless of course you do not want the dog to obey a recall ever..... 


Why would a dog come to you when it feels discomfort ?


----------



## petpeeve

SlabGizor117 said:


> I use the Koehler Method exclusively.





SlabGizor117 said:


> I do not restrict myself to the Koehler Method only


You, simply put, are ALL mixed up. It's people like you who give good trainers a bad name, and do a severe disservice to dogs. I would suggest either you apprise yourself thoroughly of more modern methods, or find a new vocation. Please.


----------



## Crantastic

I thought I knew everything when I was 17, too. I didn't have the Internet back then; I had a training book that was based on Koehler's stuff. I remember it said, among other things, that a dogs' nerve endings are buried deep under its skin, so you can hit a dog without worrying about hurting it. I trained my first dog, a 90+ lb malamute/collie mix, using aversive techniques. Luckily for me, that dog was both intelligent (which meant he learned very quickly and I rarely felt like I needed to "correct" him) and forgiving -- otherwise I would have been in trouble, as I didn't weigh a whole lot more than him.

In the past 18 years (and especially in the six years since I joined DF), I have read SO MUCH about dog training, and now I know that the book I treated as gospel was complete garbage. I've become much better at training, and I've helped my two current dogs become well-mannered, lovely companions without ever hurting them. My dogs have very different personalities and require different (but still positive) training styles, so I've had to adapt my techniques. But even after all that reading and success with these two, I still know very little in the grand scheme of things, and I'd have to train a hell of a lot more dogs before I'd ever call myself a trainer. And while I love reading tips and stories from all of the owners here on DF and trying out things they suggest, I'm not going to put even the _tiniest_ bit of stock into the opinion of a closed-minded teenager who has not trained even one dog.

I am always amused when new people come in here and try to educate the forum, though. Kid, there are people here who have been studying training techniques and working with dogs (many in a professional capacity) since well before you were born. You should be here to learn from _them_.


----------



## SlabGizor117

taquitos said:


> But you can do all that using much less aversive methods. What your explaining is nothing drastically difficult to fix with a little management, and reward-focused training.
> 
> I will give you a similar example (the sequence of events is the same) that I often see as a trainer who has dealt with dogs/puppies who have been punished for bad behavior.
> 
> Scenario 1:
> Dog chews on shoe. Owner catches dog chewing on shoe and grabs the dog, yells at him, and then swats/smacks him a few times (enough to scare the dog). – According to you, this should lessen their desire to chew the shoe... but you are assuming that the dog is the type of dog who will not simply go "screw it, I'm just going to chew this shoe and when my owner gets pissed I'll run away" OR "I'll chew the shoe in secret so that the owner doesn't know."
> 
> Scenario 2:
> Dog who is leash reactive and dog aggressive was taught to suppress reactive behavior using a choke chain. Like the Koehler method, dog was given a choice: React or behave. When dog reacted, the "trainer" gave the dog a sharp tug, and when that wasn't enough, hung the dog off the chain so that the front paws lifted off the ground and swung the dog around to face the opposite way. After several sessions, dog no longer had the desire to walk and the dog was showing avoidance behavior when presented with choke chain.
> 
> Both scenarios follow your chain of events. See how things can go wrong? Btw these are two actual dogs I dealt with. It's true that dogs will do their best to go from a place of discomfort to a place of comfort... but it doesn't mean that they can't learn in a place of comfort. Why you need to PUT them in situations like that to teach a dog is beyond me..
> 
> And absolutely ridiculous that this would work on ALL dogs. GOOD LUCK TRYING THIS ON A DOG WHO IS ALREADY SHUT DOWN, INCREDIBLY SOFT, OR HAS VERY LITTLE DRIVE TO PLEASE PEOPLE.


I wanna stress that the method applied to the average dog is 1/4 aversive to 3/4 praise, because you use praise so much to show the dog that it did what you wanted it to, as you teach a command and then reward correct response to it. Anyways, I could do... most of that with +R, but I just don't trust it to completely solve serious behavior problems like aggression.

In your first scenario, I would say that's where the "undercorrection is cruelty" rule comes into play. If you show the dog the first time that he is never to do so again, you won't have that problem. Now first of all, I would never apply such a firm correction if the dog's behavior didn't require that; that is, if general training had solved that problem. The correction for chewing in the problems section is also a last resort to fix that problem, although there is a lot of emphasis on differentiating from deliberate bad behavior to something like a mineral deficiency.

For the second scenario, I can't say that I have the experience to judge from the information given what really happened, unfortunately. I am still learning, of course.

I never said, either, that dogs couldn't learn in a place of comfort. That's clearly shown in mechanical placement of a dog where he is placed in the sit as gently and reasonably possible. I would never put a dog in a state of discomfort if he couldn't tell why it happened.

You're welcome to think whatever you want about the method. I'm trying to clear up misconception, not argue the method to you. If you want to throw my response down the drain and ignore it, go ahead.


----------



## Effisia

What misconception, exactly, are you trying to clear up?


----------



## JohnnyBandit

A few things I have noticed....


The thread title...


> Hi! I'm a trainer using the Koehler Method, ask me your questions about it!


That is incorrect..... No you are not a trainer.... No you do not use the Koehler Method....

You read a book.....


I currently have a dog that is about the same age as the OP.....


----------



## Hiraeth

SlabGizor117 said:


> I wanna stress that the method applied to the average dog is 1/4 aversive to 3/4 praise, because you use praise so much to show the dog that it did what you wanted it to, as you teach a command and then reward correct response to it. Anyways, I could do... most of that with +R, but I just don't trust it to completely solve serious behavior problems like aggression.


Do yourself a favor. NEVER apply the Koehler method to an aggressive dog. Or you're going to end up in the ER. See that black dog in the middle of my signature? If you harshly corrected him while he was in a reactive and aggressive state, he would have gone for your throat.


----------



## Shell

Crantastic said:


> I thought I knew everything when I was 17, too.


 Yep

Oh, I totally knew everything when I was 17. And I really really hated it when someone said I would learn more as I got older, because danggit, I was smart and educated at 17 so even if there were stuff I could learn, it didn't mean I didn't know what I was doing. Which was both true and false-- teens are a far lot smarter and capable than adults often give them credit for IMO and on the flip side, I have learned so much in the years since. Age and experience with training dogs or horses or dolphins or whatever animal aren't always directly connected, at 17 I had a good decade of horse training and riding under my belt but zero dog training so I wouldn't jump to any conclusions based on age alone about someones ability.

I point this out only to show that the reason so many posters are disagreeing with the OP isn't due to jumping on someone for being young. We are (on the whole) commenting based strictly on your comments and declarations


----------



## SlabGizor117

parus said:


> How many dogs, and of what breeds and ages, have you trained to a demonstrated* level of proficiency using Koehler's methods?
> 
> *field trials, obedience competition, service dog employment, etc.


I said already that I'm 17 and still learning about training, and my circumstances have made the opportunity to train a dog difficult to get, but my intentions here are to clear up misconceptions, not tell you how good I am at dog training. I have not had the opportunity to see firsthand everything there is to see about the method through the training process, but the messenger doesn't need to be the president to send the president's message. Point being, my experience has given me enough knowledge to hopefully tell the truth that so many people miss, but unfortunately not enough to tell you all the details of it. I don't need to train a dog myself to know what I do or for that knowledge to be valid.


----------



## taquitos

SlabGizor117 said:


> I wanna stress that the method applied to the average dog is 1/4 aversive to 3/4 praise, because you use praise so much to show the dog that it did what you wanted it to, as you teach a command and then reward correct response to it. Anyways, I could do... most of that with +R, but I just don't trust it to completely solve serious behavior problems like aggression.
> 
> In your first scenario, I would say that's where the "undercorrection is cruelty" rule comes into play. If you show the dog the first time that he is never to do so again, you won't have that problem. Now first of all, I would never apply such a firm correction if the dog's behavior didn't require that; that is, if general training had solved that problem. The correction for chewing in the problems section is also a last resort to fix that problem, although there is a lot of emphasis on differentiating from deliberate bad behavior to something like a mineral deficiency.
> 
> For the second scenario, I can't say that I have the experience to judge from the information given what really happened, unfortunately. I am still learning, of course.
> 
> I never said, either, that dogs couldn't learn in a place of comfort. That's clearly shown in mechanical placement of a dog where he is placed in the sit as gently and reasonably possible. I would never put a dog in a state of discomfort if he couldn't tell why it happened.
> 
> You're welcome to think whatever you want about the method. I'm trying to clear up misconception, not argue the method to you. If you want to throw my response down the drain and ignore it, go ahead.


I want to stress that these scenarios happened IN REAL LIFE. TO REAL DOGS. TO DOGS I TRAINED AFTER KOEHLER-ESQUE TECHNIQUES WERE USED.

First scenario the owners came to me because the dog was pissing himself when he saw them. So no, it wasn't undercorrection. You scare a dog so much that it pisses when it sees you, you've been heavy handed enough. There was no mineral deficiency. There is no such thing as "deliberate" chewing – dogs chew because they're dogs. To add, how would you know whether it's a health problem VS a behavior "problem" in that moment?

Second scenario demonstrates exactly why you are absolutely not qualified to discuss dog training at all. There is no misconception. We all understand what the Koehler method entails.

What exactly is the misconception you're trying to address? How exactly do the above two scenarios not work based on the principle philosophies of the Koehler method?


----------



## Hiraeth

Here are a few resources if you want to expand your horizons. I have bolded particularly relevant quotes or portions of quotes.

1. Denise Fenzi, owner of Fenzi Dog Sports Academy, "Denise Fenzi Pet Dogs" - Thoughts on Punishment | Denise Fenzi



> "More often than not I don’t say much to the dog to let them know when they’ve made an error, and if I do punish I normally use a cheerful interrupter along with withholding reinforcement (-P). Whether I continue with an incorrectly performed chain depends on the dog. I consider temperament, hardness, experience level, and what I think caused the error. Lack of attention or effort is treated differently than a startle, which is treated differently than a proofing exercise that I set up on purpose, and each of those is considered within the context of the dog’s temperament."





> "I try hard not use intentional punishment very often because there are side effects. This includes punishment that is withholding an expected reinforcer or withdrawing my attention (-P) as well as punishment that is adding an unpleasant physical or mental correction (+P). In all cases punishers work because the dog wants to avoid them – that is the definition of punishment. *The more things your dog finds that they want to avoid, the less fun they’re going to have in training and dogs that aren’t having much fun with the training experience have a way of running into endless challenges as a result of their low confidence levels.*"


2. Susan Garrett, "Say Yes Dog Training" - The Possibilities in Dog Training | Susan Garretts Dog Training Blog



> "The better you are at controlling reinforcement, the less you will need punishment in training.
> 
> In order to train to a high level of success in dog training, reinforcement is a key requirement. Dogs learn through reinforcement. If the dog has been allowed to continuously find reinforcement in ways that builds undesirable behaviours, then you either have to find something more rewarding (which may not be possible) or punish. No other options really. So here is what excites me;
> 
> *The more creative you can become at developing, redirecting and controlling the reinforcement, the less you need punishment.*"





> "*By training [with punishment] you can be sloppy with your awareness of what reinforces a dog. It just isn’t that important because you can fall back on trying to control the dog (through punishment) rather than teach the dog self-control and to ignore all reinforcement that isn’t directed from you.*"


3. Patricia McConnell, Ph.D., Certified Applied Animal Behaviorist (CAAB), "The Other End of the Leash" - Confrontational Techniques Elicit Aggression



> "The most confrontational, and I would argue, aggressive, behaviors on the part of the owners resulted in the highest levels of aggressive responses from the dogs. 43% of dogs responded with aggression to being hit or kicked, 38% to having an owner grab their mouth and take out an object forcefully, 36% to having a muzzle put on (or attempted?), 29% to a “dominance down,” 26% to a jowl or scruff shake. You get the idea. Of course, these are all dogs who were seen by veterinary behaviorists for aggression-related problems, but it makes the data even more important. *Violence begets violence, aggression begets aggression.*"





> "Thus, the study is not so much about “reinforcement” and “punishment,” as about what happens when you threaten your dog, or forcefully and physically respond to misbehavior. Please be clear that I am not saying that if one of us occasionally raises our voice to our dog, or has a moment of humanity and loses our temper, we are going to destroy our dogs forever. Neither am I saying that aversives are always bad: aversive events are part and parcel of life, and we all need to know how to handle them, dogs included. *However, as many of us have observed for years, using force and confrontation as a primary method of dog training often backfires and creates some of the very problems it is trying to solve.*"


4. Ian Dunbar, DVM, Ph.D. in Animal Behavior, "Some Thoughts About Dogs" - Ian Dunbar on Punishment | Some Thoughts About Dogs



> "Firstly, the dog needs to be taught the appropriate behaviour (he can’t be punished for something he didn’t know to (not) do). Secondly, the punishment should be instructive and redirective (i.e. propose a solution to the dog...)"





> "Punishment has to be effective. Dunbar believes if a punishment needs to be delivered more than once, then the punishment isn’t effective and is more abusive. He suggests that leash jerks, ineffective yelling, and dogs ‘still wearing’ a shock collar are dogs that suffering ineffective, abusive punishment."


----------



## Effisia

I'm being honest here. I want to know what misconception you think we have on the method.

I'm also curious what other methods and trainers you've studied? What books have you read? I always like to read as much as possible, I'm a bibliophile. So I'd love to recommend some other books to you. It's actually why I ended up reading Koehler's book along with the other methods I'm studying.

ETA: Hiraeth beat me to a lot of recommendation. Haha. Though I would also put a lot of Jean Donaldson on there, but I'm a Jean groupie.  Oh! And Karen Pryor, too.


----------



## SlabGizor117

BKaymuttleycrew said:


> All I can say is this - "I weep for the dogs that you 'train'. I truly do"
> 
> I am old enough to have seen the 'Koehler method' in action & place, when it was just about all there was to offer in the arena of 'training'. I now know better & I find it horrifically sad that a youngster (such as yourself, OP) would fall hook-line-&-sinker for this sort of nonsense.
> 
> I also find it very telling, and must ask others to contemplate this: Why is it that it is generally the *Koehler* trainers that feel the compulsion to 'defend' and 'justify' their chosen methods of training. I can't recall any other (modern) trainers that suffer from such 'misinformation' that their followers feel the need to spend time trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear (training-wise, that is)


You can thank Bill Koehler for the sarcasm and emotionally charged language he used to write the book, as that's what led to so much misinformation. I was hoping to have a polite discussion about the misinformation spread around here with the Koehler method but all it's turned into is an attack on it. I'm sorry you take the lies that people spread about this method as truth, but there's no convincing you that what you believe isn't true.


----------



## chimunga

SlabGizor117 said:


> I don't need to train a dog myself to know what I do or for that knowledge to be valid.


I think this accurately sums up the tone of this thread. 

You have many experienced dog people, who have actually trained dogs, telling you that this method is unnecessary and harmful.


----------



## parus

SlabGizor117 said:


> I said already that I'm 17 and still learning about training, and my circumstances have made the opportunity to train a dog difficult to get, but my intentions here are to clear up misconceptions, not tell you how good I am at dog training. I have not had the opportunity to see firsthand everything there is to see about the method through the training process, but the messenger doesn't need to be the president to send the president's message. Point being, my experience has given me enough knowledge to hopefully tell the truth that so many people miss, but unfortunately not enough to tell you all the details of it. I don't need to train a dog myself to know what I do or for that knowledge to be valid.


Okay. In that case, you are probably not a very good source of information on this topic, of the many sources available, including the originator's own writings. 

Also, you should not identify yourself as a trainer. 

I recommend you explore the many interesting things the dog world has to offer before you consider setting yourself up as a trainer-of-trainers. Get some practical experience under your belt so you know what you're talking about, and get some accomplishments so people will take you seriously. In the meantime, this is an interesting forum full of people who have interesting experiences with a wide variety of dogs and disciplines. Why not explore?


----------



## Crantastic

Shell said:


> Yep
> 
> Oh, I totally knew everything when I was 17. And I really really hated it when someone said I would learn more as I got older, because danggit, I was smart and educated at 17 so even if there were stuff I could learn, it didn't mean I didn't know what I was doing. Which was both true and false-- teens are a far lot smarter and capable than adults often give them credit for IMO and on the flip side, I have learned so much in the years since. Age and experience with training dogs or horses or dolphins or whatever animal aren't always directly connected, at 17 I had a good decade of horse training and riding under my belt but zero dog training so I wouldn't jump to any conclusions based on age alone about someones ability.
> 
> I point this out only to show that the reason so many posters are disagreeing with the OP isn't due to jumping on someone for being young. We are (on the whole) commenting based strictly on your comments and declarations


Oh yeah, of course. I mean, look at Equinox. She was a teenager when she got Trent, a working line GSD, and she's done an amazing job with him and now has a couple of malinois that she's training without issue!

I mention the OP's age here mostly because they just haven't been _alive_ long enough to have trained enough dogs to say that any method works on 100% of them, so acting all superior and trying to educate a forum full of people who know their stuff just comes across as super immature. The difference between Equinox and this person? Equinox came here to learn, not to preach to a bunch of people who have already heard this sermon a hundred times.

(Also I think it's funny when any newbie jumps in and tries to educate this forum when they obviously haven't lurked enough to gauge the knowledge level, no matter their age.)


----------



## taquitos

SlabGizor117 said:


> You can thank Bill Koehler for the sarcasm and emotionally charged language he used to write the book, as that's what led to so much misinformation. I was hoping to have a polite discussion about the misinformation spread around here with the Koehler method but all it's turned into is an attack on it. I'm sorry you take the lies that people spread about this method as truth, but there's no convincing you that what you believe isn't true.


Yes all modern trainers are liars and we're all out to piss on Koehler's grave.

Seriously?? You need to read more books. If you're really interested in dog training, I really suggest you branch out and read some other books by other trainers and behaviorists.


----------



## Hiraeth

SlabGizor117 said:


> I don't need to train a dog myself to know what I do or for that knowledge to be valid.


This is like me saying that I read a book about brain surgery, therefore I don't need to actually perform brain surgery for my opinions on surgical methods to be valid.

It's a very teenager thing to say.


----------



## SlabGizor117

chimunga said:


> Do you have studies, or even personal anecdotes, to illustrate how it works with all dogs?


I do! With sit specifically, you mechanically place him 50 times without a command by slight leash pressure upwards and pushing his rear down(not with the force of a correction, but the clarity of instruction), and as soon as his butt hits the ground the leash pressure is released and you praise the dog to show that that's what you wanted. With the next 50 times, you add the command right before his butt is on the ground so that the immediate praise shows him that whatever "sit" means, he did it right. So he's done it 100 times, melting under your hand, before you would correct him. For a softer dog, it may only require 4 corrections before it could be said he knew sit well enough to go to the next exercise. For a tough dog, it may be as many as 40 to bring him past that contention. So you wouldn't treat a soft dog like many people accuse, that you would treat any dog like you would a tough one.


----------



## CptJack

parus said:


> In the meantime, this is an interesting forum full of people who have interesting experiences with a wide variety of dogs and disciplines. Why not explore?


Yep. 

There are many people here who have put many titles on dogs. Look around a little. We know what we're doing - okay, as a whole - and actually have both experience and some tangible proof of our dog's performances. Im' not big on "LOOK AT ME I HAVE TITLED DOGS" as some sort of evidence in most situations, but if you start promoting yourself as a trainer you need SOMETHING, and the gold standard (for me) is that you have dogs you have put titles on. Dogs that have been trained, by you, to a level of performance that means objective standards as determined by outside bodies and proven in front of a judge. 

We have those people here. 

OP is not one of them.


----------



## Hiraeth

SlabGizor117 said:


> I do! With sit specifically, you mechanically place him 50 times without a command by slight leash pressure upwards and pushing his rear down(not with the force of a correction, but the clarity of instruction), and as soon as his butt hits the ground the leash pressure is released and you praise the dog to show that that's what you wanted. With the next 50 times, you add the command right before his butt is on the ground so that the immediate praise shows him that whatever "sit" means, he did it right. So he's done it 100 times, melting under your hand, before you would correct him. For a softer dog, it may only require 4 corrections before it could be said he knew sit well enough to go to the next exercise. For a tough dog, it may be as many as 40 to bring him past that contention. So you wouldn't treat a soft dog like many people accuse, that you would treat any dog like you would a tough one.


And again. Why not just lure the sit with a treat and no physical touch whatsoever and end up with a dog who is excited to train with you and who sits perfectly well?

Also, what happens when you're not strong enough to push the dog into a sit? My 9 month old puppy is 33.5" tall and 130 lbs. If he doesn't sit when you push, what happens?


----------



## petpeeve

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7i9PI9W-Fc

Just for example. Fun WOW, when that dog steps into the ring.


----------



## Effisia

SlabGizor117 said:


> I do! With sit specifically, you mechanically place him 50 times without a command by slight leash pressure upwards and pushing his rear down(not with the force of a correction, but the clarity of instruction), and as soon as his butt hits the ground the leash pressure is released and you praise the dog to show that that's what you wanted. With the next 50 times, you add the command right before his butt is on the ground so that the immediate praise shows him that whatever "sit" means, he did it right. So he's done it 100 times, melting under your hand, before you would correct him. For a softer dog, it may only require 4 corrections before it could be said he knew sit well enough to go to the next exercise. For a tough dog, it may be as many as 40 to bring him past that contention. So you wouldn't treat a soft dog like many people accuse, that you would treat any dog like you would a tough one.


But why is this a better method than a lure, for example, which takes a fraction of the reps and you get a solid sit out of it? Just because you don't believe the sit could be "solid enough" without corrections? Have you ever tried the luring method? A no-reward mark? (R+ and P- instead of R+ and P+)


----------



## petpeeve

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7i9PI9W-Fc

Just for example. Fun WOW, when that dog steps into the ring


----------



## SlabGizor117

cookieface said:


> Why not make sitting enjoyable for the dog? Why not teach what you want and make it fun for the dog? I can't imagine building a relationship on fear and pain. Sounds a little 50 Shades.... if you ask me.
> 
> Proof - in the form of peer reviewed studies or actual examples of titling dogs using your methods - would be most welcome.


Because I don't trust a recall, for example, that the dog is doing because he thinks it's a game. If he decides he doesn't want to play the game and instead runs to the street, what good is my "enjoyable" recall? That doesn't mean that it builds your relationship on fear and pain, either.


----------



## Crantastic

I taught my dogs to sit without laying a hand on either one and in much fewer than 50 repetitions. "Mechanically" pushing a dog's butt down is such an amateur way to train something as simple as a sit.


----------



## Hiraeth

SlabGizor117 said:


> Because I don't trust a recall, for example, that the dog is doing because he thinks it's a game. If he decides he doesn't want to play the game and instead runs to the street, what good is my "enjoyable" recall? That doesn't mean that it builds your relationship on fear and pain, either.


A dog is far more likely to recall to you if it ENJOYS recalling to you than if it fears experiencing pain at your hands.


----------



## chimunga

taquitos said:


> Yes all modern trainers are liars and we're all out to piss on Koehler's grave.
> 
> Seriously?? You need to read more books. If you're really interested in dog training, I really suggest you branch out and read some other books by other trainers and behaviorists.


Yep. Any of these would be a good place to start. 

*Pat Miller 
*_The Power of Positive Dog Training 
Positive Perspectives: Love Your Dog, Train Your Dog 
Positive Perspectives 2: Know Your Dog, Train Your Dog 
Play with Your Dog 
Do over Dogs: Give Your Dog a Second Chance for a First Class Life _

*Sophia Yin *
_How to Behave So Your Dog Behaves 
Perfect Puppy in 7 Days: How to Start Your Puppy Off Right _

*Jean Donaldson *
_The Culture Clash 
Mine! A Practical Guide to Resource Guarding in Dogs 
Fight! A Practical Guide to the Treatment of Dog-dog Aggression 
Dogs Are from Neptune 
Oh Behave!: Dogs from Pavlov to Premack to Pinker _
*
John W. Pilley*
_Chaser: Unlocking the Genius of the Dog Who Knows a Thousand Words _

*Ian Dunbar*
_Before and After Getting Your Puppy 
How to Teach a New Dog Old Tricks: The Sirius Puppy Training Manual _ 

*Grisha Stewart*
_Behavior Adjustment Training: BAT for Fear, Frustration, and Aggression in Dogs 
The Official Ahimsa Dog Training Manual _

*Karen Pryor*
_Reaching the Animal Mind: Clicker Training 
Don't Shoot the Dog!: The New Art of Teaching and Training _

*Denise Fenzi*
_Beyond The Back Yard: Train Your Dog to Listen Anytime, Anywhere!_

*Patricia McConnell *
_The Other End of the Leash: Why We Do What We Do Around Dogs 
For the Love of a Dog: Understanding Emotion in You and Your Best Friend 
The Puppy Primer 
Family Friendly Dog Training: A Six Week Program for You and Your Dog 
Love Has No Age Limit-Welcoming an Adopted Dog into Your Home 
Tales of Two Species: Essays on Loving and Living with Dogs 
_
*Turgid Rugaas*
_On Talking Terms With Dogs: Calming Signals _

*Jane Killion*
_When Pigs Fly! Training Success with Impossible Dogs _

*Kathy Sdao*
_Plenty in Life Is Free: Reflections on Dogs, Training and Finding Grace _
*
Suzanne Clothier*
_Bones Would Rain from the Sky: Deepening Our Relationships with Dogs _

*Emma Parsons *
_Click to Calm: Healing the Aggressive Dog _

*Laura VanArendonk Baugh *
_Fired Up, Frantic, and Freaked Out: Training the Crazy Dog from Over the Top to Under Control 
_
*Leslie McDevitt*
_Control Unleashed 
_
*Alexandra Horowitz*
_Inside of a Dog: What Dogs See, Smell, and Know_


----------



## JohnnyBandit

SlabGizor117 said:


> I said already that I'm 17 and still learning about training, and my circumstances have made the opportunity to train a dog difficult to get, but my intentions here are to clear up misconceptions, not tell you how good I am at dog training. .


In other words... You read a book....



SlabGizor117 said:


> I have not had the opportunity to see firsthand everything there is to see about the method through the training process,.


So that book you read.... You do not know whether the stuff you read works or not....



SlabGizor117 said:


> but the messenger doesn't need to be the president to send the president's message. .


Problem is you are sending the message of an egotistical sociopath.. 



SlabGizor117 said:


> Point being, my experience has given me enough knowledge to hopefully tell the truth that so many people miss,.


You have no experience though.... and you do not know enough about what you read to even call it knowledge...



SlabGizor117 said:


> but unfortunately not enough to tell you all the details of it. .


If you cannot explain the details of something, you cannot defend it. 




SlabGizor117 said:


> I don't need to train a dog myself to know what I do or for that knowledge to be valid.


Actually you do..... You have not trained a dog.... don't possess knowledge that what you read actually works...


----------



## ForTheLoveOfDogs

First of all.. I am waiting on reading these misconceptions I keep hearing about.

Second.. I want to see this method used for agility and see how far you could get. (note: sarcasm.. please don't use this method to train agility..)

Third.. I'm not so sure I can take any of this seriously.


----------



## Effisia

Crantastic said:


> I taught my dogs to sit without laying a hand on either one and in much fewer than 50 repetitions. "Mechanically" pushing a dog's butt down is such an amateur way to train something as simple as a sit.


It's also really hard on the hips of larger breed dogs. Not something you really want to do over and over and over with a large breed pup AT ALL


----------



## ifyousleep

SlabGizor117 said:


> I do! With sit specifically, you mechanically place him 50 times without a command by slight leash pressure upwards and pushing his rear down(not with the force of a correction, but the clarity of instruction), and as soon as his butt hits the ground the leash pressure is released and you praise the dog to show that that's what you wanted. With the next 50 times, you add the command right before his butt is on the ground so that the immediate praise shows him that whatever "sit" means, he did it right. So he's done it 100 times, melting under your hand, before you would correct him. For a softer dog, it may only require 4 corrections before it could be said he knew sit well enough to go to the next exercise. For a tough dog, it may be as many as 40 to bring him past that contention. So you wouldn't treat a soft dog like many people accuse, that you would treat any dog like you would a tough one.


But that isn't needed to train 'sit'. You can lure an 8 week old puppy into sit with treats and the puppy will learn in 10 minutes. 

This forum is FILLED with experienced people who have spent a life time training dogs. Learn from them!


----------



## Shell

SlabGizor117 said:


> I do! With sit specifically, you mechanically place him 50 times without a command by slight leash pressure upwards and pushing his rear down(not with the force of a correction, but the clarity of instruction), and as soon as his butt hits the ground the leash pressure is released and you praise the dog to show that that's what you wanted. With the next 50 times, you add the command right before his butt is on the ground so that the immediate praise shows him that whatever "sit" means, he did it right. So he's done it 100 times, melting under your hand, before you would correct him. For a softer dog, it may only require 4 corrections before it could be said he knew sit well enough to go to the next exercise. For a tough dog, it may be as many as 40 to bring him past that contention. So you wouldn't treat a soft dog like many people accuse, that you would treat any dog like you would a tough one.


Or, the dog doesn't sit under slight pressure. So you force harder to make him sit. He resists because what the heck is shoving at his hips? So you press harder. Or you correct in some other fashion. He may sit at that point only because his legs buckle. It could be that he is resisting the sit command because he doesn't understand it, because he is stressed by your forcing him or because he has pain in his hips or knees.

Each time you try to force him to sit, there is more confusion or stress or potentially more pain even. Praise means little to many dogs. Even with a reward after a sit, the dog still had to be placed into that movement. 

Or, you could use shaping and capture a natural sitting movement with a quick reward so that the dog understands that freely choosing a given action is good and than action is then tied to a command so the dog chooses to both act on the command AND receive the reward. Rewards can then be randomized and mostly faded out for basic commands, reinforced when needed.


----------



## trainingjunkie

petpeeve said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7i9PI9W-Fc
> 
> Just for example. Fun WOW, when that dog steps into the ring


Even on fast forward, that hurt my eyes...


----------



## parus

chimunga said:


> Yep. Any of these would be a good place to start.
> 
> *Pat Miller
> *_The Power of Positive Dog Training
> Positive Perspectives: Love Your Dog, Train Your Dog
> Positive Perspectives 2: Know Your Dog, Train Your Dog
> Play with Your Dog
> Do over Dogs: Give Your Dog a Second Chance for a First Class Life _
> 
> *Sophia Yin *
> _How to Behave So Your Dog Behaves
> Perfect Puppy in 7 Days: How to Start Your Puppy Off Right _
> 
> *Jean Donaldson *
> _The Culture Clash
> Mine! A Practical Guide to Resource Guarding in Dogs
> Fight! A Practical Guide to the Treatment of Dog-dog Aggression
> Dogs Are from Neptune
> Oh Behave!: Dogs from Pavlov to Premack to Pinker _
> *
> John W. Pilley*
> _Chaser: Unlocking the Genius of the Dog Who Knows a Thousand Words _
> 
> *Ian Dunbar*
> _Before and After Getting Your Puppy
> How to Teach a New Dog Old Tricks: The Sirius Puppy Training Manual _
> 
> *Grisha Stewart*
> _Behavior Adjustment Training: BAT for Fear, Frustration, and Aggression in Dogs
> The Official Ahimsa Dog Training Manual _
> 
> *Karen Pryor*
> _Reaching the Animal Mind: Clicker Training
> Don't Shoot the Dog!: The New Art of Teaching and Training _
> 
> *Denise Fenzi*
> _Beyond The Back Yard: Train Your Dog to Listen Anytime, Anywhere!_
> 
> *Patricia McConnell *
> _The Other End of the Leash: Why We Do What We Do Around Dogs
> For the Love of a Dog: Understanding Emotion in You and Your Best Friend
> The Puppy Primer
> Family Friendly Dog Training: A Six Week Program for You and Your Dog
> Love Has No Age Limit-Welcoming an Adopted Dog into Your Home
> Tales of Two Species: Essays on Loving and Living with Dogs
> _
> *Turgid Rugaas*
> _On Talking Terms With Dogs: Calming Signals _
> 
> *Jane Killion*
> _When Pigs Fly! Training Success with Impossible Dogs _
> 
> *Kathy Sdao*
> _Plenty in Life Is Free: Reflections on Dogs, Training and Finding Grace _
> *
> Suzanne Clothier*
> _Bones Would Rain from the Sky: Deepening Our Relationships with Dogs _
> 
> *Emma Parsons *
> _Click to Calm: Healing the Aggressive Dog _
> 
> *Laura VanArendonk Baugh *
> _Fired Up, Frantic, and Freaked Out: Training the Crazy Dog from Over the Top to Under Control
> _
> *Leslie McDevitt*
> _Control Unleashed
> _
> *Alexandra Horowitz*
> _Inside of a Dog: What Dogs See, Smell, and Know_


You should read some of these so you can find what's wrong with them, compared to your preferred method. Then you should try earnestly using these authors' methods, to prove that they don't work!


----------



## Crantastic

One MAJOR sign of an amateur: They have only read one training book or website and adhere slavishly to its instructions. You need to read a lot of books and sites about different training techniques before you know enough to argue about the subject.


----------



## SlabGizor117

taquitos said:


> You keep saying it's proven but you're really not citing anything. Sorry but the method is flawed. There's no way any method works on every single dog. Koehler could not have possibly tested it on every single breed and every single dog.
> 
> YES it's true that dogs, and all animals alike, operate on the same principles of learning. NO, it is not true that they can all be trained using the SAME method. Two very different things there.
> 
> So... you don't have a dog... have you ever dealt with one?
> 
> I have 5+ years in rescue, and I've been training for almost as long... Sorry to rain on your parade lol.
> 
> You literally don't need to even use corrections for things like "sit" lol it's one of the simplest things to teach a dog... if you need to physically punish your dog for something that simple then honestly you're not a good trainer...


If you choose to completely ignore my explanation on sit and continue to accuse me, then I have little hope for trying to explain the truth, but I'll try one more time:
I don't teach sit using corrections. I teach sit using mechanical placement. It doesn't matter how simple something is, if your dog refuses to do what he knows he should, then yes he will get a correction. That doesn't mean lifting him off his front paws with a giant yank on the leash because he chose not to obey, it's only as firm as the dog is obstinate. Not too little, but not too much either. The idea that anyone who would enforce a command that could save his dog's life is a bad trainer is your opinion, and you're entitled to that. I told you the truth, take it or leave it.


----------



## Crantastic

You don't teach sit at all, because you don't have a dog.


----------



## SlabGizor117

Shell said:


> I highlighted something in particular-- its a breed generalization that will get you into trouble
> 
> While there are exceptions, as with any living being, "pit types" or "pit bulls" tend to the emotionally soft. You can probably get away with physical corrections because they tend towards being forgiving, but on the whole, they are really receptive to reward based training and tend to shut down with overly corrected. A few will shut down with any correction harder than a verbal "ah ah"
> 
> I also question the phrasing of "highly aversive" because it implies assuming what an individual dog finds aversive or not.
> 
> Don't get caught up in the concept of "toughest dog" as there are many layers to dogs. Like an onion if you want to reference Shrek movies


I don't mean to generalize, I only chose that breed for the sake of example.


----------



## Effisia

Crantastic said:


> One MAJOR sign of an amateur: They have only read one training book or website and adhere slavishly to its instructions. You need to read a lot of books and sites about different training techniques before you know enough to argue about the subject.


Man, I just got such a rush being able to check off most of the books on chimunga's awesome list.

And those books are SO GOOD. Seriously. Patricia McConnell's especially read more like novels than textbooks. And being exposed to as many viewpoints as awesome makes you a BETTER trainer.


----------



## SlabGizor117

ireth0 said:


> Please do share the downsides to using rewards.


Rewards? Who said I don't use rewards?? I don't use treats, because I can reinforce what I need to with praise only, so I can avoid the complication of weaning them off of treats.


----------



## chimunga

And we are saying that teaching sit is much easier than mechanical placement. Most dogs can learn sit in around 10 repetitions. Adding a cue might take 5-10 more repetitions. Sometimes more, sometimes less. Unless you have a really dense dog, teaching sit should never take 50-100 repetitions.


----------



## Shell

SlabGizor117 said:


> If you choose to completely ignore my explanation on sit and continue to accuse me, then I have little hope for trying to explain the truth, but I'll try one more time:
> I don't teach sit using corrections. I teach sit using mechanical placement. It doesn't matter how simple something is, if your dog refuses to do what he knows he should, then yes he will get a correction. That doesn't mean lifting him off his front paws with a giant yank on the leash because he chose not to obey, it's only as firm as the dog is obstinate. Not too little, but not too much either. The idea that anyone who would enforce a command that could save his dog's life is a bad trainer is your opinion, and you're entitled to that. I told you the truth, take it or leave it.


Or the dog is resisting mechanical placement because it hurts him.

Or because he has been punished in the past in a situation similar to what you are doing.

Or the mechanical placement isn't teaching the dog a voluntary "sit" action but only to follow the motion of your hand so when your hand is removed and you correct the dog for not following an action which isn't being cued to him, he is going to be quite confused.


----------



## JohnnyBandit

SlabGizor117 said:


> I don't teach sit using corrections. I teach sit using mechanical placement. .


The problem is.... You don't teach sit at all.... 
You do not have a dog, do not train dogs..... 

You read a book......


----------



## parus

SlabGizor117 said:


> Rewards? Who said I don't use rewards?? I don't use treats, because I can reinforce what I need to with praise only, so I can avoid the complication of weaning them off of treats.


Wait, I thought you said you don't have a dog and haven't trained anyone else's dogs.


----------



## SlabGizor117

ireth0 said:


> If you think training a dog to 'complete obedience' would take less time than fixing a fence, I have some news for you.


Sorry for the bad wording, the intent was that I would rather spend 10 weeks fixing problems that would cost me more money than is worth. That means not just fence digging, but anything else that would cause problems.


----------



## chimunga

SlabGizor117 said:


> Rewards? Who said I don't use rewards?? I don't use treats, because I can reinforce what I need to with praise only, so I can avoid the complication of weaning them off of treats.


You've obviously never trained a dog who is not rewarded by play or praise. They are very common.


----------



## CptJack

ForTheLoveOfDogs said:


> Second.. I want to see this method used for agility and see how far you could get. (note: sarcasm.. please don't use this method to train agility..).


I thought about that and died. I mean it's terrible and awful and would be awful but can you even imagine trying to get a performance that way/ Keeping the dog in the ring? Even assuming you were allowed to TOUCH your dog in the ring? You'd have the slowest dog in the history of ever - and also the most miserable one.


----------



## LittleFr0g

SlabGizor117 said:


> You can thank Bill Koehler for the sarcasm and emotionally charged language he used to write the book, as that's what led to so much misinformation. I was hoping to have a polite discussion about the misinformation spread around here with the Koehler method but all it's turned into is an attack on it. I'm sorry you take the lies that people spread about this method as truth, but there's no convincing you that what you believe isn't true.


You need to go back and read JohnnyBandit's posts, because he actually MET Koehler. Doubt you can say that his experience is based on lies and misconceptions.


----------



## Shell

SlabGizor117 said:


> I don't mean to generalize, I only chose that breed for the sake of example.


And using that breed for the sake of example only highlights lack of experience with that breed and what might or might not tend to work for that type of dog/ dogs with similar temperaments. 



SlabGizor117 said:


> Rewards? Who said I don't use rewards?? I don't use treats, because I can reinforce what I need to with praise only, so I can avoid the complication of weaning them off of treats.


Praise works for a select few dogs, praise that has been combined with food or toy rewards works for a larger group of dogs but not all, and then there are the dogs that don't give a woot about praise or toys and will just look at you like you are the dumbest human on the planet because they have better things to do than deal with you

oh, and I will edit this to point out that I am NOT a dog trainer, I don't call myself a dog trainer, and I don't train other peoples' dogs for money. I have worked with my dogs, my foster dogs (who came to me mainly because they were "untrainable" or dog aggressive etc) and a bit of training with friends dogs. If I were to set myself up as a dog trainer, I would still have a lot more research and education to do, but its often pretty easy to learn what doesn't work....


----------



## Crantastic

Effisia said:


> Man, I just got such a rush being able to check off most of the books on chimunga's awesome list.
> 
> And those books are SO GOOD. Seriously. Patricia McConnell's especially read more like novels than textbooks. And being exposed to as many viewpoints as awesome makes you a BETTER trainer.


I think McConnell is my favorite, or at least her writing is.

Also, a person can't explain why they disagree with certain techniques if they don't know anything about them, which is why reading books from various trainers is so important. I can't stand Cesar Millan and I think Koehler was an abusive jerk, but I've still read some of their stuff because if I'm going to talk about how terrible they are, I sure as hell want to be able to explain why I've come to that conclusion.


----------



## taquitos

SlabGizor117 said:


> If you choose to completely ignore my explanation on sit and continue to accuse me, then I have little hope for trying to explain the truth, but I'll try one more time:
> I don't teach sit using corrections. I teach sit using mechanical placement. It doesn't matter how simple something is, if your dog refuses to do what he knows he should, then yes he will get a correction. That doesn't mean lifting him off his front paws with a giant yank on the leash because he chose not to obey, it's only as firm as the dog is obstinate. Not too little, but not too much either. The idea that anyone who would enforce a command that could save his dog's life is a bad trainer is your opinion, and you're entitled to that. I told you the truth, take it or leave it.


I actually read it. You correct once the dog doesn't sit after 50 mechannical "sits." That's still teaching with corrections LOL you do realize? By correcting you are technically trying to "proof" a learned behavior through P+ which IS a way to teach something.

It's really sad that you think that this is the shining beacon of dog training. Anyone who needs to even mechanically force a dog to sit 50 times to even get the point across is a complete amateur...

I taught my dog to sit using a clicker and treat. He sits even when he sees cats – his biggest distraction.

BUT DON'T TRUST THE COOKIE BECAUSE THE DOG DOESN'T FEAR IT.

You don't need a choke chain or physical correction to enforce a command. That is what you misunderstand.


----------



## JohnnyBandit

SlabGizor117 said:


> Rewards? Who said I don't use rewards?? I don't use treats, because I can reinforce what I need to with praise only, so I can avoid the complication of weaning them off of treats.


Of course you don't use treats.... You don't use praise either..... Because you don't train dogs...


----------



## Effisia

Could you please just take a moment to explain exactly what you see as a misconception people have with this method of training? What exactly are you trying to get across to us.


----------



## parus

chimunga said:


> And we are saying that teaching sit is much easier than mechanical placement. Most dogs can learn sit in around 10 repetitions. Adding a cue might take 5-10 more repetitions. Sometimes more, sometimes less. Unless you have a really dense dog, teaching sit should never take 50-100 repetitions.


I'll never say never, but...yeah. My dog Queenie was a)not handled by humans until she was over six months old, b)deeply dimwitted - sweet, but dimwitted, and c)oddly proportioned. She still learned sit on command faster than that, without being forced into position.


----------



## Cheetah

Did I just read "civilized" and "Koehler Method" on the same thread? One of these things is very different from the other...


----------



## JohnnyBandit

Cheetah said:


> Did I just read "civilized" and "Koehler Method" on the same thread? One of these things is very different from the other...


Hey Sociopaths can be quite civilized... Ted Bundy was......

Bundy Murdered college Co Eds.....

Koehler abused dogs.......


----------



## SlabGizor117

Effisia said:


> From Koehler's book:
> "When finally it is obvious that he is physically incapable of expressing his resentment and is lowered to the ground, he will probably stagger looplegged for a few steps, vomit once or twice, and roll over on his side. The sight of a dog lying, thick-tongued, on his side is not pleasant, but do not let it alarm you. I have dealt with hundreds of these"
> 
> "Select a piece of the material he has chewed and place it well back, crossways, in his mouth. Use a strip of adhesive tape to wrap the muzzle securely in front of the chewed material, so that no amount of gagging and clawing can force it from his mouth. Perhaps you are wondering if these frantic efforts to rid himself of the material will cause the dog to scratch himself painfully. Yup. They surely will."
> 
> "Equip yourself with a man's leather belt or strap heavy enough to give your particular dog a good tanning. Yup - we're going to strike him. Real hard…lay the strap vigorously against his thighs. Keep pouring it on him until he thinks it's the bitter end."
> 
> "Fill the hole to its brim with water. . . . bring the dog to the hole and shove his nose into the water; hold him there until he is sure he's drowning. . . . fill the hole with water and repeat the experience the next day, whether the dog digs any more or not."
> 
> 
> *Why do you think this sort of training builds a better relationship with a dog than using force-free methods?
> *Why do you think this sort of thing is okay to do to an animal?
> *Is there some updated version of his text that you use instead of the original that these quotes are taken from?
> *How many dogs have you thus far used this method on?
> *Do you know how to identify the difference between a well-trained dog and a dog that is emotionally shut-down?
> *Have you used this method on soft or sensitive dogs and what has been the observable result?
> *What have you studied in terms of understanding and reading canine body language?
> *What other trainers and methods have you studied?


Oh are we quoting now? You missed the best part! " I have dealt with hundreds of these protest biters, and can say under oath, that... I have never seen a dog which required even the maximum suspension, that was unable to continue his training within a few minutes of the correction. None have EVER been injured physically, nearly all have been helped mentally.
One thing you are also missing is that this correction was a last resort to deal with a dog whose next trip to the vet was gonna be one way. But sure, if you don't wanna be so "mean" to your dog, then say goodbye and call the vet.

The correction for chewing was also a last resort to deal with what all other attempts couldn't.

The barking correction was also a last resort for someone whose neighbors could've taken legal action against him.

As for digging, I'd much rather give my dog 10 seconds of discomfort instead of risking $30,000.

*Because it assures a solution for the behavioral problems that cause contention in a relationship between dog and master, and I trust it more than aversive free training.
*Why do you think that the alternative, euthanasia, is okay to do to an animal? If I love my dog, I will do everything I can to assure its good behavior, for his safety from euthanasia and any other accidents that may get him injured or killed.
*There is not, as he and Tony Ancheta who now leads the method felt that what needed to be told was best told as it was.
*I have not been given the opportunity to use the method fully on a dog but what I have used has produced amazing results. Regardless, the information I'm giving to try to clear up all this misinformation is not diminished by my lack of experience, as I have seen the results of this method before.
*The difference is in the relationship between the master and the dog.
*As I said before, as much as I would like to, I don't have the opportunity to train dogs because my parents are not pet lovers at all. That said, I do know that the method was designed to accomadate dogs of all breed and personality.
*I am currently studying that now, actually!
*I haven't deeply studied many other methods because I know that the Koehler Method is what I plan to use, but I do research other methods out of curiosity.


----------



## SlabGizor117

parus said:


> So you would make the dog associate being with you with discomfort, and you feel this would make him less likely to go in the street?


No, there is no reason that the Koehler Method, when applied correctly would make a dog feel that way.


----------



## Shell

So which of these methods have you tried with a dog? Or, what alternative methods have you studied?

What was the previous training that the dog has had before using the referenced last resort options?

Why are you set on the Koehler method if you haven't studied other methods?

What do you think about Mech's retraction of the concept of alpha/master?


----------



## Cheetah

JohnnyBandit said:


> Hey Sociopaths can be quite civilized... Ted Bundy was......
> 
> Bundy Murdered college Co Eds.....
> 
> Koehler abused dogs.......


Darn... you make a lot of sense there.


----------



## Effisia

SlabGizor117 said:


> *I haven't deeply studied many other methods because I know that the Koehler Method is what I plan to use, but I do research other methods out of curiosity.


Yeaaaah, that's kinda what I figured. You really ought to research more. Look into lots of the latest scientific studies. Read the books recommended already. If this is actually something you want to do for a living, you really owe it to your future clients to look into what's out there.


----------



## SlabGizor117

BKaymuttleycrew said:


> Why in Heaven's name would you have to "mechanically place the dog 100 times"?????????????????? My dog's place *themselves*. Happily, willingly, with enthusiasm & total attention to the handler. No corrections are ever needed or warranted.
> 
> You are so brain-washed with antiquated BS it scares me to death. And, once again, I must weep for the dogs that you have training contact with.


Because I want to make sure that there is no confusion between me or the dog as to what I want. I think we need to be careful who we called brainwashed though, because I feel like your closed-mindedness could be a form a brainwashing also. Sorry to hear that you feel so bad for the dogs I've trained, I'll go get a box of tissues.


----------



## Hiraeth

SlabGizor117 said:


> No, there is no reason that the Koehler Method, when applied correctly would make a dog feel that way.


But you don't apply the Koehler Method. Correctly or incorrectly. Because you don't have a dog.



SlabGizor117 said:


> Sorry to hear that you feel so bad for the dogs I've trained, I'll go get a box of tissues.


A box of common sense would be more helpful.


----------



## parus

SlabGizor117 said:


> Because I want to make sure that there is no confusion between me or the dog as to what I want. I think we need to be careful who we called brainwashed though, because I feel like your closed-mindedness could be a form a brainwashing also. Sorry to hear that you feel so bad for the dogs I've trained, I'll go get a box of tissues.


There aren't any dogs to feel sorry for, so a full box isn't necessary. Maybe just one of those little kleenex pocket packs.


----------



## Crantastic

Any potential clients with half a brain are going to laugh a "trainer" like this out of the park. The OP should read the books mentioned if for no other reason than to be able to explain to potential clients why they think Koehler is better. You can't argue against something if you don't understand it.


----------



## SlabGizor117

Hiraeth said:


> No. No evidence can be provided here that is at all relevant to modern dog training, because the OP is a 17 year old who has never owned a dog who is worshiping an outdated training method from the 1960s.
> 
> This is a waste of everyone's time.
> 
> ETA: Oh, and my 8 week old puppy learned how to sit within two very short training sessions without me laying a hand on him. And I have since continuously reinforced his sit. Without laying a hand on him. In fact, he has NEVER been corrected during a training session. And he is an incredibly well behaved 130 lb 9 month old dog who is happy, who actively engages is training, who is excited to learn and who excels when we do new things because I have turned him into that kind of dog.
> 
> I encourage you to branch out from your old school methodology and do some reading. Because with the current method you employ, you will NEVER have a relationship with a dog like I have with my dog, and like many other people responding have with their dogs. And that is pretty sad.


The only thing I care to reply about this is that your dog may sit willingly but I worry about whether they will sit every time reliably in any situation, no matter how distracting.


----------



## parus

SlabGizor117 said:


> No, there is no reason that the Koehler Method, when applied correctly would make a dog feel that way.


Other than the fact that you're physically directly inflicting discomfort on the dog? How unperceptive do you think a dog is?


----------



## taquitos

SlabGizor117 said:


> Because I want to make sure that there is no confusion between me or the dog as to what I want. I think we need to be careful who we called brainwashed though, because I feel like your closed-mindedness could be a form a brainwashing also. Sorry to hear that you feel so bad for the dogs I've trained, I'll go get a box of tissues.


So you're telling us we're close minded but you haven't even bothered to do your own research into other methods. You just decided one day "yup I'll go with this one" and now you're telling us that it's the best method.

Oooook.


----------



## Cheetah

I definitely cannot condone any method that involves half-drowning my dog in the hole he dug. And I can teach any dog a SOLID sit without even touching it at all.

Nothing annoys me more than when I'm working at a grooming salon trying to bathe/blow dry/brush a dog that sits constantly any time I touch its butt/hips during the grooming process. X.x

And any good trainer researches ALL methods. Every one they can find. u.u


----------



## parus

OP, I think you should consider going into robotics rather than dog training. You will probably be much happier. And you'll make more money!


----------



## Effisia

SlabGizor117 said:


> The only thing I care to reply about this is that your dog may sit willingly but I worry about whether they will sit every time reliably in any situation, no matter how distracting.


But if you've never used or studied any of these methods how could you even know the reliability of the training?


----------



## Hiraeth

SlabGizor117 said:


> The only thing I care to reply about this is that your dog may sit willingly but I worry about whether they will sit every time reliably in any situation, no matter how distracting.


Please, do not worry about my dog. He is far better off than any dog you will ever get your hands on. 

Speaking of - when are you going to transition from training imaginary dogs to real ones?


----------



## SlabGizor117

JohnnyBandit said:


> Yes you do mean or at least show disrespect.... Whether you realize it or not....
> 
> You read a book....That is it... Read a book.... Now you come to a training section on a high traffic dog forum...
> 
> To explain, teach, and defend the method of a man that has been dead 23 years and wrote the books you have read well before this.....
> 
> But you do not own a dog... Have not put said methods into practice.... the fact that you do not have a dog, have not trained a dog, have not put the methods you have read about into practice.... This means quite frankly that you do not even understand what you read... You may THINK you understand.. But until you put them into practice...... You don't...
> 
> Here is an example that may help you understand.... Say you want to get a drivers license... You read and study the book from the DMV.... You go take a written test and get a learners permit.... You still do not know how to drive... The permit just means you know evnoug to start learning how to drive... Then with an experienced person you get behind the wheel... Start slow and very basic... over time, you work your way out to the hard road and then the highways..... THEN you go take and actual driving test.... IF you pass... Then you know how to drive...
> 
> 
> 
> Well when it comes to dogs.... You do not even have your learners permit yet.


The disrespect you accuse me of is nothing compared to how many people are jumping on the bandwagon of "Ooh, Koehler! He's an idiot! Let's tell OP this a million times over!"


----------



## chimunga

> *Why do you think this sort of thing is okay to do to an animal?


*



*Why do you think that the alternative, euthanasia, is okay to do to an animal? If I love my dog, I will do everything I can to assure its good behavior, for his safety from euthanasia and any other accidents that may get him injured or killed.

Click to expand...

*It's not an either/or situation. My dog was not trained with these methods, and he's happily sitting at my feet, very much not euthanized. 



> *Why do you think this sort of training builds a better relationship with a dog than using force-free methods?


*



*Because it assures a solution for the behavioral problems that cause contention in a relationship between dog and master, and I trust it more than aversive free training.

Click to expand...

*And again, there are methods you can use to assure good behavior with much less of a chance of fallout. 



> *How many dogs have you thus far used this method on?


*



*I have not been given the opportunity to use the method fully on a dog but what I have used has produced amazing results. Regardless, the information I'm giving to try to clear up all this misinformation is not diminished by my lack of experience, as I have seen the results of this method before.

Click to expand...

*No comment



> *Do you know how to identify the difference between a well-trained dog and a dog that is emotionally shut-down?


*



*As I said before, as much as I would like to, I don't have the opportunity to train dogs because my parents are not pet lovers at all. That said, I do know that the method was designed to accomadate dogs of all breed and personality.

Click to expand...

*


> *What have you studied in terms of understanding and reading canine body language?


*



*I am currently studying that now, actually!

Click to expand...

*


> *What other trainers and methods have you studied?


*



*I haven't deeply studied many other methods because I know that the Koehler 
Method is what I plan to use, but I do research other methods out of curiosity.

Click to expand...

*Please come back when you have studied more. Refer to the list I posted previously. All the books on the list are excellent.


----------



## JohnnyBandit

SlabGizor117 said:


> No, there is no reason that the Koehler Method, when applied correctly would make a dog feel that way.


You said.... IF a dog understood the recall command and refused.... You would make the dog feel discomfort....



> Quote Originally Posted by parus View Post
> So you would make the dog associate being with you with discomfort, and you feel this would make him less likely to go in the street?


Dog training 101 page one.... In dog training kindergarten.... You NEVER.... EVER..... NEVER.... use aversives or any kind of physical correction when a dog refuses a recall.... 

the refusal is a sign that you have not proofed and built reliability enough....

If your dog refuses a recall and you feel you must give a physical correction...Got slam your thumb in a car door... Pour hot coffee down you pants... Stick a dime in an electrical outlet.....

But you NEVER EVER give the dog a physical correction..... At least if you hope to ever have a reliable recall.

Bottom line here.... You cause the dog discomfort ( and lets be real here.... Discomfort is a sugar coated way of saying pain) you just gave the dog a valid reason to disregard the next recall, and the next and the next...


----------



## SlabGizor117

ireth0 said:


> The fact that you even think complete control over another living, thinking, feeling being is possible just goes to show how little experience you really have. -That- is the most degrading thing to a dog's intelligence I have ever heard.


Is it degrading to a child's intelligence for him to sit in a chair and be quiet when he's misbehaving? You take my words literally with no effort to understand what I mean and so accuse me with something I never said.


----------



## taquitos

SlabGizor117 said:


> The disrespect you accuse me of is nothing compared to how many people are jumping on the bandwagon of "Ooh, Koehler! He's an idiot! Let's tell OP this a million times over!"


Yes we're all jumping on the bandwagon. It can't possibly be because the method is outdated. WE'RE ALL JUST OUT HERE TRYING TO MAKE YOU FEEL HORRIBLE.


----------



## CptJack

taquitos said:


> So you're telling us we're close minded but you haven't even bothered to do your own research into other methods. You just decided one day "yup I'll go with this one" and now you're telling us that it's the best method.
> 
> Oooook.


...a lot of us have read Koehler's books. 

You've read nothing else. 

A lot of us have trained actual dogs. 

You haven't. 

A lot of us have evolved in our traning through dogs and used several methods or methods from bunches of people or just plain changed over years. 

You *don't even have a single dog*.

We're close minded? 

Honestly, you're 17. I have a kid your age. This kind of stuff is normal. Obnoxious and annoying and kind of infuriating, but normal. I'd put more effort in here, but let's all be honest with ourselves: In order to get clients, you're going to have to apprentice with someone and/or do a certification program. Your chosen method is so far out of date with EVERYONE, including people who use corrections and compulsion or ecollars that no one is going to touch you. You're also highly undesirable in a society where we can sue for damage to property = ie: dogs, and I promise you the owner who is going to let you shove their dog's head in a hole filled with water rather than sue your pants off when it gets aspiration pneumonia are few and far between. Furthermore, the market is FLOODED with trainers right now, so none of these potential clients are l going to be lacking in choice - for people who are certified and/or have apprenticed. 

You're either going to learn better methods and look back on this post with extreme embarrassment, not get educated/learn better and somehow find a client and get sued, or not learn better and get no clients. 

Worst case scenario, and it's admittedly a bad one, you ruin your own dog. You're no risk to anyone who needs a trainer, because this crap won't fly. It's *THAT* outdated and full of crap. No one's touching it, and OP won't be responsible for bringing it back because of assorted legal issues and the fact that believing this stuff is going to keep you from getting a foot in the door in the industry.


----------



## taquitos

SlabGizor117 said:


> Is it degrading to a child's intelligence for him to sit in a chair and be quiet when he's misbehaving? You take my words literally with no effort to understand what I mean and so accuse me with something I never said.


I don't understand. There is no such thing as a child that behaves 100% of the time. 

It is IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to assume they can have full control over any living being.

What the heck kind of crazy person thinks that a parent has full control over their child?!?!


----------



## SlabGizor117

petpeeve said:


> THIS ^^^ is laughable. If you or anyone else can take a 'green' dog, apply Koehler's methods for a mere 10 weeks, and then achieve any more than a bunch of NQ's and a single, generous 171 score ... I'll promise to eat that dog's previous dinner.


Then why don't you test it? Actually do some research? Google around for Koehler trained dogs and see for yourself, or, do the unthinkable! Use the method for yourself, and tell me if you can't title your dog after.


----------



## Effisia

SlabGizor117 said:


> The disrespect you accuse me of is nothing compared to how many people are jumping on the bandwagon of "Ooh, Koehler! He's an idiot! Let's tell OP this a million times over!"


The thing is, no one is saying he's an idiot. We're just saying that there are now better and less aversive ways to train dogs. Just like how we all know now that the earth is round when people used to think it was flat, things evolve and grow and we find better ways of doing things. There's been plenty of reserach on animal learning and cognition and reserach on the effects of aversive stimulus and training methods (in humans and animals) And if you're going to be in this industry, it's your duty to keep up with the latest research.


----------



## Hiraeth

SlabGizor117 said:


> Is it degrading to a child's intelligence for him to sit in a chair and be quiet when he's misbehaving? You take my words literally with no effort to understand what I mean and so accuse me with something I never said.


Yes, it is, that's a surefire way to make a bored child even more troublesome. Modern educational theory advocates engagement and occupation of mental resources, not 'quiet time in the corner', as the appropriate way to deal with difficult children. 



SlabGizor117 said:


> The disrespect you accuse me of is nothing compared to how many people are jumping on the bandwagon of "Ooh, Koehler! He's an idiot! Let's tell OP this a million times over!"


You asked for disrespect the second you called yourself a dog trainer despite the fact that you have neither owned nor trained any dogs. 

Calling yourself a trainer and pushing harmful methods is disrespectful to every member of this forum who trains dogs, both non professionally and professionally, who work hard to convince the regular dog owning public that people like you and Koehler are full of crap every single day.


----------



## parus

SlabGizor117 said:


> The disrespect you accuse me of is nothing compared to how many people are jumping on the bandwagon of "Ooh, Koehler! He's an idiot! Let's tell OP this a million times over!"


Koehler wasn't an idiot, but I do think he was a brute. His methods were inefficient and inelegant, never mind the ethics of it. We have learned more since then about dog cognition and training approaches have adapted and continue to adapt. But the problem here isn't just Koehler, it's how vaguely you're describing what he prescribes, I assume because you've never actually used any of it. If your goal is to evangelize for the man, then might it be wise to forebear until you have some more breadth and depth of experience and knowledge on the subject?


----------



## SlabGizor117

Hiraeth said:


> Even if it was possible.... Why would you want it?


Why do you take my words literally? I don't mean that your dog should be a mindless drone, I mean that you should be able to have your dog Heel, Sit, Down, Stand, Come, and Stay in any situation no matter how distracting. Is that degrading to a dog's intelligence?


----------



## GrinningDog

OP, you're not a dog trainer. You're a young person with a piqued interest in one training methodology after reading a book. There's nothing wrong with that. Just realize the book you read, Koehler's method, it's one book in a LIBRARY of dog training books. People on this dog forum - myself included - train very successful using alternative methods. Because those alternative methods work GREAT. And the people on this forum actually have dogs, and work with dogs, and some even train dogs for a living. 

My suggestion is to get out there and expose yourself to different training methodologies. Read, ask questions, observe training classes. Maybe you'll grow to have more confidence in the Koehler method, but I have a feeling that won't be the case. I have a feeling that your stance on dog training will change drastically. And that's okay. We all start somewhere.


----------



## SlabGizor117

Shell said:


> If you don't think that dogs can't associate a correction with something other than what the human intends them to associate it with, then I think you need to delve a bit deeper into training. It isn't just dogs that can associate bad experiences with things that did not cause those bad experiences- humans do it too. As do other domestic animals like horses for example.
> 
> Oh heck yeah I have seen a dog who is corrected about lunging towards another dog mean the other dog is "bad news" It is not in any way a hypothetical scenario. It is very clear to see the progression of antagonism towards other dogs if you watch a dog be physically corrected for the lunge.
> 
> You are also assuming that a dog has existing training about what a heel or such means. Take an adult dog with no existing training, probably a fair bit of mishandling and bad experiences and THEN try to say they know what a heel means and correct them for lunging at a dog. Watch the fallout that occurs and learn from it.


My "assumption" was that if that hypothetical scenario were in real life, the trainer would have taught the dog the heel position before correcting him at all, making it impossible for him to associate that correction with anything but his responsibility to Heel.


----------



## JohnnyBandit

SlabGizor117 said:


> The disrespect you accuse me of is nothing compared to how many people are jumping on the bandwagon of "Ooh, Koehler! He's an idiot! Let's tell OP this a million times over!"


I did not accuse you of being disrespectful.... You are being disrespectful... End of story... 

It is no bandwagon..... Koehler and his methods are abusive.....

Straight up here.... 100 percent..... IF You really want to get into dog training.... Drop this Koehler nonsense... Drop it now and do not bring it up....

Because if you go around spouting the praises of Koehler.... No one is going to take you under your wing... No one is going to mentor you..... And no one is going to let you train their dogs... Well a few idiots might. But they will regret it....

You might get to train your own dog... But if you bring up Koehler to a breeder... Chances are good breeders (decent breeders) are going to refuse to sell you a dog....


I have a litter of nice ACDs coming up.... IF you started spouting off Koehler, you would get a flat refusal and don't call me back..... 

And this goes even for the IPO people that use mostly compulsion methods....


----------



## Hiraeth

Edited: I've decided this is pointless and any further posts just incite OP to spread misinformation and harmful methodologies. 

I'd like to point out CptJack's post here, as it got a bit buried and is incredibly relevant and absolutely true: http://www.dogforums.com/dog-training-forum/435617-hi-im-trainer-using-8.html#post4821785


----------



## parus

SlabGizor117 said:


> Then why don't you test it? Actually do some research? Google around for Koehler trained dogs and see for yourself, or, do the unthinkable! Use the method for yourself, and tell me if you can't title your dog after.


I'm titling dogs already (without 100 repetitions of butt-pushing), so why would I want to do this?


----------



## SlabGizor117

petpeeve said:


> You, simply put, are ALL mixed up. It's people like you who give good trainers a bad name, and do a severe disservice to dogs. I would suggest either you apprise yourself thoroughly of more modern methods, or find a new vocation. Please.


You're taking the second quote out of context, it was a minor play on words. For example, "I didn't train my dog to Heel, Sit, Down, Stand, Come, and Stay, I taught my dog to have a better relationship with me USING those exercises."


----------



## chimunga

parus said:


> I'm titling dogs already (without 100 repetitions of butt-pushing), so why would I want to do this?


*giggle-snort* Butt-pushing.


----------



## parus

SlabGizor117 said:


> My "assumption" was that if that hypothetical scenario were in real life, the trainer would have taught the dog the heel position before correcting him at all, making it impossible for him to associate that correction with anything but his responsibility to Heel.


That's not how dog brains work. You have some more research to do! Research is fun, though, so hooray!

Or you could just go into robotics like I suggested.


----------



## Shell

SlabGizor117 said:


> Why do you take my words literally? I don't mean that your dog should be a mindless drone, I mean that you should be able to have your dog Heel, Sit, Down, Stand, Come, and Stay in any situation no matter how distracting. Is that degrading to a dog's intelligence?


It can be a case of "pick your battles"

A reliable COME can be dang important, so I would reinforce the heck out of that. Not with punishment though, with the best darn rewards the dog can start to salivate for. Chicken, beef, etc. It should be freaking awesome for the dog to run back to his human.

Sit? It can be helpful for polite greetings of new people, helpful at vet visits, and helpful for putting on a collar or such. Rarely a big enough deal to either highly punish or highly reward.

Snake avoidance? CAREFULLY applied physically punishment. With the assistance of a real trainer. 

Down? Meh, like "sit" it has its uses but its rarely a huge deal. It can also be very uncomfortable for some dogs with thin fur on chests (cold or hard surfaces to touch) or dogs with hip, knee or elbow pain.



SlabGizor117 said:


> My "assumption" was that if that hypothetical scenario were in real life, the trainer would have taught the dog the heel position before correcting him at all, making it impossible for him to associate that correction with anything but his responsibility to Heel.


So how would the trainer have taught the dog to heel? What methods?


----------



## parus

chimunga said:


> *giggle-snort* Butt-pushing.


The OP may be 17, but I am 12.


----------



## SlabGizor117

Crantastic said:


> I thought I knew everything when I was 17, too. I didn't have the Internet back then; I had a training book that was based on Koehler's stuff. I remember it said, among other things, that a dogs' nerve endings are buried deep under its skin, so you can hit a dog without worrying about hurting it. I trained my first dog, a 90+ lb malamute/collie mix, using aversive techniques. Luckily for me, that dog was both intelligent (which meant he learned very quickly and I rarely felt like I needed to "correct" him) and forgiving -- otherwise I would have been in trouble, as I didn't weigh a whole lot more than him.
> 
> In the past 18 years (and especially in the six years since I joined DF), I have read SO MUCH about dog training, and now I know that the book I treated as gospel was complete garbage. I've become much better at training, and I've helped my two current dogs become well-mannered, lovely companions without ever hurting them. My dogs have very different personalities and require different (but still positive) training styles, so I've had to adapt my techniques. But even after all that reading and success with these two, I still know very little in the grand scheme of things, and I'd have to train a hell of a lot more dogs before I'd ever call myself a trainer. And while I love reading tips and stories from all of the owners here on DF and trying out things they suggest, I'm not going to put even the _tiniest_ bit of stock into the opinion of a closed-minded teenager who has not trained even one dog.
> 
> I am always amused when new people come in here and try to educate the forum, though. Kid, there are people here who have been studying training techniques and working with dogs (many in a professional capacity) since well before you were born. You should be here to learn from _them_.


That quote is not in the book that I recall, at all. Also, I didn't come here to educate a group of professional dog trainers, I came here in hopes of providing an insight to a method that many people incorrectly deem cruel.


----------



## CptJack

parus said:


> I'm titling dogs already (without 100 repetitions of butt-pushing), so why would I want to do this?


Yeah, this. 

I have a dog with a veritable alphabet soup after her name and we're just starting, without anything but positive, treat based, methods. Why would I want to try that? Especially since I know my dog and her response to unpleasantness isn't to do what I want, it's to turn flat and sluggish and slow and mistrust me. 

What's the point?


----------



## Cheetah

I also cannot condone training methods that would cause people to call the Humane Society on you if they ever witnessed you outside "training" a dog... there might be a reason...


----------



## SlabGizor117

JohnnyBandit said:


> A few things I have noticed....
> 
> 
> The thread title...
> 
> 
> That is incorrect..... No you are not a trainer.... No you do not use the Koehler Method....
> 
> You read a book.....
> 
> 
> I currently have a dog that is about the same age as the OP.....


Excuse me, you're right. Poor wording, my apologies. I'll see if I can't edit the post title.


----------



## taquitos

You can teach your dog and build a better relationship with other techniques too. In fact, your relationship is better off with the other techniques.

Punishment can have much dire consequences on you and your dog's relationship, as well as your dog. Sure, a mistimed treat might not be as effective... but the resulting fallout is much less problematic for the future.

Still can't get my head around WHY you are so adamant about sticking to this specific training method, especially considering even trainers who use P+ don't even really condone it anymore... but OP, if you're really serious about being a dog trainer, please go read other methods.

If you're going to be a expert on anything, the first thing you should know is what the critics will say and do. You can't defend what you want to promote if you don't know what the others are promoting inside out. Just a thought.


----------



## Crantastic

Sometimes, when every single person in a nine-page thread disagrees with you... you have to take a good hard look at yourself and think about how maybe, just _maybe_, you have no clue what you're talking about.


----------



## SlabGizor117

taquitos said:


> I want to stress that these scenarios happened IN REAL LIFE. TO REAL DOGS. TO DOGS I TRAINED AFTER KOEHLER-ESQUE TECHNIQUES WERE USED.
> 
> First scenario the owners came to me because the dog was pissing himself when he saw them. So no, it wasn't undercorrection. You scare a dog so much that it pisses when it sees you, you've been heavy handed enough. There was no mineral deficiency. There is no such thing as "deliberate" chewing – dogs chew because they're dogs. To add, how would you know whether it's a health problem VS a behavior "problem" in that moment?
> 
> Second scenario demonstrates exactly why you are absolutely not qualified to discuss dog training at all. There is no misconception. We all understand what the Koehler method entails.
> 
> What exactly is the misconception you're trying to address? How exactly do the above two scenarios not work based on the principle philosophies of the Koehler method?


If you read the book and came to that conclusion, it is obvious to me that you made no attempt to understand it.


----------



## Shell

CptJack said:


> Yeah, this.
> 
> I have a dog with a veritable alphabet soup after her name and we're just starting, without anything but positive, treat based, methods. Why would I want to try that? Especially since I know my dog and her response to unpleasantness isn't to do what I want, it's to turn flat and sluggish and slow and mistrust me.
> 
> What's the point?












that noddles are yummy


----------



## Hiraeth

SlabGizor117 said:


> That quote is not in the book that I recall, at all. Also, I didn't come here to educate a group of professional dog trainers, I came here in hopes of providing an insight to a method that many people incorrectly deem cruel.


It is absolutely cruel. Did you watch that video posted earlier in this thread? The woman in the video was physically forcing her dog to lay down on concrete when the dog clearly didn't feel comfortable doing so by grabbing the dog and putting her weight on top of it. That is cruelty.

ETA: If you want to get some hands on experience, I'll lend you any one of my very large dogs. Good luck physically manipulating them to do *anything* they don't want to. You know how I get dogs who could kill me if they felt like it to do what I want? I positively reinforce wanted behaviors with praise and rewards and never punish them.


----------



## chimunga

SlabGizor117 said:


> That quote is not in the book that I recall, at all. Also, I didn't come here to educate a group of professional dog trainers, I came here in hopes of providing an insight to a method that many people incorrectly deem cruel.


Then please explain to me why it *isn't* cruel? What are the perks of this method, when there are methods out there that are more effective, quicker, and do not have as much possibility of damage to your dog?


----------



## CptJack

taquitos said:


> Still can't get my head around WHY you are so adamant about sticking to this specific training method, especially considering even trainers who use P+ don't even really condone it anymore.


17. 

I mean I know I wasn't quite this bad, but they're online, they made a statement, they felt good about what they thought they knew, got told otherwise and started digging. They are now in so deep they can't get out gracefully, pride and ego are tied up in it and it is now a hill they'll die on. 

I'd bet a whole heck of a lot, though, that they'll go off, sulk, and eventually (days, weeks, years) look back on this and feel like an idiot.



Shell said:


> that noddles are yummy


She'd have been an okay Noodle. 

And now I want real soup.


----------



## taquitos

SlabGizor117 said:


> If you read the book and came to that conclusion, it is obvious to me that you made no attempt to understand it.


I'm very sad that a person who has come to dispel myths can't even apply these "methods" to two very common scenarios most pet trainers will come across.

If you have to tell me to go refer to the book then you have no business answering questions on the method. Just sayin'.


----------



## SlabGizor117

parus said:


> Okay. In that case, you are probably not a very good source of information on this topic, of the many sources available, including the originator's own writings.
> 
> Also, you should not identify yourself as a trainer.
> 
> I recommend you explore the many interesting things the dog world has to offer before you consider setting yourself up as a trainer-of-trainers. Get some practical experience under your belt so you know what you're talking about, and get some accomplishments so people will take you seriously. In the meantime, this is an interesting forum full of people who have interesting experiences with a wide variety of dogs and disciplines. Why not explore?


Who said I was training trainers? Is that what the title said? I'll change it if so.


----------



## taquitos

CptJack said:


> 17.
> 
> I mean I know I wasn't quite this bad, but they're online, they made a statement, they felt good about what they thought they knew, got told otherwise and started digging. They are now in so deep they can't get out gracefully, pride and ego are tied up in it and it is now a hill they'll die on.
> 
> I'd bet a whole heck of a lot, though, that they'll go off, sulk, and eventually (days, weeks, years) look back on this and feel like an idiot.
> 
> 
> 
> She'd have been an okay Noodle.
> 
> And now I want real soup.


I hope this happens.

And I want soup now too... Fun fact: I've never had Alphabits. DON'T KILL ME.


----------



## parus

Shell said:


> A reliable COME can be dang important, so I would reinforce the heck out of that. Not with punishment though, with the best darn rewards the dog can start to salivate for. Chicken, beef, etc. It should be freaking awesome for the dog to run back to his human.


Yep. On a serious note, my old girl is either starting to lose vision/hearing, getting senile, or both. But she definitely remembers that she loooooooooooooves me and I am the giver of all things wonderful. So if I get her attention she comes barreling for me enthusiastically. Polish can rub off training over time, and dogs can lose physical or mental abilities, but relationships are more enduring.


----------



## Hiraeth

CptJack said:


> 17.
> 
> I mean I know I wasn't quite this bad, but they're online, they made a statement, they felt good about what they thought they knew, got told otherwise and started digging. They are now in so deep they can't get out gracefully, pride and ego are tied up in it and it is now a hill they'll die on.
> 
> I'd bet a whole heck of a lot, though, that they'll go off, sulk, and eventually (days, weeks, years) look back on this and feel like an idiot.


Everything you have posted tonight has been genius.


----------



## CptJack

taquitos said:


> I hope this happens.
> 
> And I want soup now too... Fun fact: I've never had Alphabits. DON'T KILL ME.


It's really strange. Something about tomato soup with noodles. Probably closer to spaghetti os than real soup, but I barely remember so I may be misremebering. 

And seriously, I'd be surprised if she doesn't. I know SO MANY PEOPLE who have made complete fools of themselves online (mostly teenagers, but also just people) - myself included - KNOWN IT and just been stupidly incapable of walking away/admitting it.


----------



## Shell

CptJack said:


> 17.
> 
> I mean I know I wasn't quite this bad, but they're online, they made a statement, they felt good about what they thought they knew, got told otherwise and started digging. They are now in so deep they can't get out gracefully, pride and ego are tied up in it and it is now a hill they'll die on.
> 
> I'd bet a whole heck of a lot, though, that they'll go off, sulk, and eventually (days, weeks, years) look back on this and feel like an idiot.
> 
> 
> 
> She'd have been an okay Noodle.
> 
> And now I want real soup.


First, you just made me feel old for looking back at being 17 (Not that long, was it?) Or, maybe, thank goodness I had the internet but not in its modern form at that time.

Then, there are some really good soup recipes on Serious Eats if you haven't checked them out before.


----------



## CptJack

Hiraeth said:


> Everything you have posted tonight has been genius.


----------



## SlabGizor117

petpeeve said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7i9PI9W-Fc
> 
> Just for example. Fun WOW, when that dog steps into the ring


I'm not sure the point you're making, but I do wanna say that this is not even the end result of the Koehler method, it's probably about week 4-5 or so. I'm not sure what the equivalent is but the point I wanna make is that you can tell this dog isn't having any problems with what so many of you call abusive.


----------



## taquitos

CptJack said:


> It's really strange. Something about tomato soup with noodles. Probably closer to spaghetti os than real soup, but I barely remember so I may be misremebering.
> 
> And seriously, I'd be surprised if she doesn't. I know SO MANY PEOPLE who have made complete fools of themselves online (mostly teenagers, but also just people) - myself included - KNOWN IT and just been stupidly incapable of walking away/admitting it.


You know what... we've all probably done it. I actually very clearly remember something similar happening to me on this very forum LOL. I learned from it (although I can't say that it changed my opinion – but I still learned!).

All I have in this house that can be comparable to this soup is cup-a-soup right now... sad.


----------



## Effisia

Alphabet soup after a dog's name is all well and good, but I want a dog with boozy cupcakes after their name. Or maybe just a dog that pulls a cart behind them that's filled with boozy cupcakes. A behavior I can teach them with positive reinforcement...


----------



## Shell

http://www.seriouseats.com/2012/02/15-minute-creamy-tomato-soup-vegan.html



Effisia said:


> Alphabet soup after a dog's name is all well and good, but I want a dog with boozy cupcakes after their name. Or maybe just a dog that pulls a cart behind them that's filled with boozy cupcakes. A behavior I can teach them with positive reinforcement...


I've heard of people teaching their dogs to fetch beers from the fridge but really, isn't teaching the dog to open the fridge and get items just asking for trouble? Chester already can reach the back of the counter tops, so I am resigned to fetching my own adult beverages.


----------



## taquitos

Shell said:


> http://www.seriouseats.com/2012/02/15-minute-creamy-tomato-soup-vegan.html


Making this tomorrow night. Thank you!


----------



## Hiraeth

SlabGizor117 said:


> I'm not sure the point you're making, but I do wanna say that this is not even the end result of the Koehler method, it's probably about week 4-5 or so. I'm not sure what the equivalent is but the point I wanna make is that you can tell this dog isn't having any problems with what so many of you call abusive.


You'd probably need to own or train a real dog in order to figure out what problems dogs have with certain training methods.


----------



## CptJack

taquitos said:


> You know what... we've all probably done it. I actually very clearly remember something similar happening to me on this very forum LOL. I learned from it (although I can't say that it changed my opinion – but I still learned!).
> 
> All I have in this house that can be comparable to this soup is cup-a-soup right now... sad.


I remember having some pretty embarrassing 'discussions' here, too. Sometimes I've changed my mind, sometimes I haven't, but you're probably right in all of us having done it - here, there, somewhere else. It usually works out okay, if not in the short term, with most peple. Even if we don't see it.



Effisia said:


> Alphabet soup after a dog's name is all well and good, but I want a dog with boozy cupcakes after their name. Or maybe just a dog that pulls a cart behind them that's filled with boozy cupcakes. A behavior I can teach them with positive reinforcement...


Man, now I'm all soup and some kind of alcoholic cupcake. 

Serious Eats, here I come (thanks shell!)


----------



## Crantastic

Oh, have we reached the gif portion of the evening?

...yep, 10 pages, right on schedule.


----------



## chimunga

parus said:


> Polish can rub off training over time, and dogs can lose physical or mental abilities, but relationships are more enduring.


10/10 favorite quote of this thread.


----------



## CptJack




----------



## Crantastic

Here are those boozy cupcake recipes again. I made my go-to, the Coffee Chocolate Cupcakes with Bailey's Irish Cream Frosting (number 24), for a get-together last month, and people absolutely devoured them and praised them to the high heavens.


----------



## cookieface

SlabGizor117 said:


> I'm not sure the point you're making, but I do wanna say that this is not even the end result of the Koehler method, it's probably about week 4-5 or so. I'm not sure what the equivalent is but the point I wanna make is that you can tell this dog isn't having any problems with what so many of you call abusive.


Very Machiavellian perspective. Not an approach I'd take with my dogs, especially if I were interested in a good relationship with them.


----------



## CptJack

I think I'm going to make 32 this weekend. I meant to do it last time and lost the page.


----------



## Shell

CptJack said:


> Serious Eats, here I come (thanks shell!)


You're welcome! I'm a foodie of sorts, I don't like everything SE does but they are generally on point

Got a few other food blogs I like if you're interested


----------



## Crantastic

I have made number 32, and they are also amazing. Only ones I haven't liked so far were 6 (they just tasted like banana bread).


----------



## CptJack

Shell said:


> You're welcome! I'm a foodie of sorts, I don't like everything SE does but they are generally on point
> 
> Got a few other food blogs I like if you're interested


GIVE ME. I love food.


----------



## Cheetah

SlabGizor117 said:


> I'm not sure the point you're making, but I do wanna say that this is not even the end result of the Koehler method, it's probably about week 4-5 or so. I'm not sure what the equivalent is but the point I wanna make is that you can tell this dog isn't having any problems with what so many of you call abusive.


That dog looks stressed to me. How do you explain the very pronounced lip-licking, head-darting, flattened ears, and the way the dog's gait is?


----------



## Crantastic

Cheetah said:


> That dog looks stressed to me. How do you explain the very pronounced lip-licking, head-darting, flattened ears, and the way the dog's gait is?


They don't, because they haven't learned anything about dog body language yet. I'm sure they'll be back to educate us once they've read a couple of websites from the mid 1990s or something.


----------



## Effisia

One of my diploma/degree things is in baking and pastry arts. Boozy cupcakes are my great weakness. As is chocolate covered bacon. Or anything chocolate, really. Sweet... anything sweet and I'm totally down...


----------



## CptJack

Wait, I'm still browsing that list. 
PARSNIP cupcakes?


----------



## Crantastic

Oooh, pastry arts! I worked as a baker for a few years, but I didn't get to do pastry at that job and I'm not good at it. That makes me sad, because I love pie.


----------



## chimunga

CptJack said:


> Wait, I'm still browsing that list.
> PARSNIP cupcakes?


... And beet cupcakes?


----------



## Shell

CptJack said:


> GIVE ME. I love food.


Korean food-
http://kimchimari.com/
http://www.maangchi.com/

Testing magazine recipes and similar
http://www.thebittenword.com/

A caterer so there is some commercialization here but the blog has good ideas and tests also
http://sweetsavant.com/blog/


----------



## cookieface

Shell said:


> You're welcome! I'm a foodie of sorts, I don't like everything SE does but they are generally on point
> 
> Got a few other food blogs I like if you're interested


Serious Eats - especially Kenji - is great (just not his mashed potatoes).


----------



## CptJack

chimunga said:


> ... And beet cupcakes?


I've seen beet with chocolate before and wasn't too thrown. Parsnips is mind blowing here, especially with pineapple!


----------



## Effisia

Crantastic said:


> Oooh, pastry arts! I worked as a baker for a few years, but I didn't get to do pastry at that job and I'm not good at it. That makes me sad, because I love pie.


I love it! Unless I'm actually doing it for a living. The hours were killing me and really, my heart just wasn't in being a professional baker. I still do it all the time for family and friends (plenty of baking today and tomorrow for Passover!), just not for a paycheck. I did get to spend some time working at a shop here that sells THE BEST cupcakes I've ever had, though. Super yum.


----------



## Crantastic

Also pretty good: Number 30, the Coconut Rum ones. I haven't tried any of the weird ones yet. Next one I do will probably be 16 or 1.

I will not try 4, though. Here's how I feel about that:


----------



## CptJack

Crantastic said:


> Also pretty good: Number 30, the Coconut Rum ones. I haven't tried any of the weird ones yet. Next one I do will probably be 16 or 1.
> 
> I will not try 4, though. Here's how I feel about that:


I. Hate. Red. Velvet. 

I feel like weirdo for that but just. No.


----------



## Crantastic

Effisia said:


> I love it! Unless I'm actually doing it for a living. The hours were killing me and really, my heart just wasn't in being a professional baker. I still do it all the time for family and friends (plenty of baking today and tomorrow for Passover!), just not for a paycheck. I did get to spend some time working at a shop here that sells THE BEST cupcakes I've ever had, though. Super yum.


Yeah, I liked my baking job, but the hours sucked (sometimes I did sweets during the day, sometimes I did bread overnight) and it was really hard on my wrists (scooping 3000 cookies in an afternoon will do that to you) and my back. I'm a computer programmer now. Not great exercise like constantly moving around the bakery was, but much easier on my body!


----------



## Effisia

I've always thought the food coloring made red velvet taste a bit like plastic. But I also don't expect that bit of buttermilk and bit of chocolate together in a cupcake, I think. It's a strange recipe.


----------



## CptJack

I'm southern. By rights I should love it but the 'kind of vaguely chocolate but not really with buttermilk' is just not my thing (and lots of redvelvet recipes I've seen have that) and just. No thank you please.


----------



## taquitos

I only like Magnolia Bakery's Red Velvet Cupcakes.

YOU HAVEN'T LIVED UNLESS YOU'VE HAD ONE.


----------



## Shell

CptJack said:


> GIVE ME. I love food.


And I don't know if they are available online, but these cookbooks are great (not promoting any specific source, just linking to an example source)

http://www.amazon.com/Vietnamese-Food-Cooking-Ghillie-Basan/dp/0681375841

http://www.amazon.com/Food-Cooking-Thailand-Judy-Bastyra/dp/0681280115
(I think this is an updated and maybe "westernized" version of the hardcopy that I have but for 5 bucks on kindle, could be good)


----------



## CptJack

Shell said:


> And I don't know if they are available online, but these cookbooks are great (not promoting any specific source, just linking to an example source)
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Vietnamese-Food-Cooking-Ghillie-Basan/dp/0681375841
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Food-Cooking-Thailand-Judy-Bastyra/dp/0681280115
> (I think this is an updated and maybe "westernized" version of the hardcopy that I have but for 5 bucks on kindle, could be good)


You are my hero tonight. 

'm going to be in those blogs and/or books forever.


----------



## Shell

CptJack said:


> You are my hero tonight.
> 
> 'm going to be in those blogs and/or books forever.




I've been eating and cooking East and South East Asian food types since I was 17 (huh, its like I knew everything about food then too....) but I've found so many new recipes and tweeks in the past couple years that its dang near all I eat at home (plus pizza). I even made braised tofu for my mother from Maangchi's recipe and my mom who has NEVER eaten tofu willingly in her 6 decades of life not just ate the tofu but liked it to ask for seconds.


----------



## JohnnyBandit

As I mentioned on page three.... I met Koehler in 1984... I was at sort of a combined nationals competition....of 4H and other young competitive obedience organizations.... It was held in Kansas City. I was about to turn 17 when I was there... So close to your age....

This was an invitee only event.... The day between semi finals and finals (the top ten in the three age groups) they had training and seminars for us.... A chance to meet nationally known trainers.... Koehler was there... And frankly the ONLY trainer I remember by name... The experience was that bad... 
So my group... Seniors... 15-18 years old... Went to the Koehler seminar.... First thing I noticed.. his dogs... They were shut down... Obedient... But... IF you have seen dogs trained by harsh trainers... You watch the dog.. It is afraid to do anything.. Body language shows fear or at least apprehension.... .Dog does NOTHING until the owner gives a command... Because it is afraid to...... It does not want the correction.... Some call it obedience... Most of us call that fear... 
And you get an extremely vanilla dog... Sure it will do some commands and do them great... But you see no creativity from the dog... No growth.... The dog will never make a decision because it does not want the correction... 

Koehler had a young dog and a trained dog... Did demonstrations with both.... All I saw was shut down dogs going through the motions. 

Basically he told us... ten kids ages 15-18.... That we did not know squat... That everything we had ever done with dogs were wrong.... We are talking kids... That had competed to the national level with their dogs.... Most of us had multiple dogs that we had trained, titled and had great success with..... All he tried to do was belittle us....

Then he was going to do a demonstration with one of our dogs..... I was standing far on the left.... He approached me... IT should have been an honor.... There were reporters, cameras etc there.... But I had seen enough.. The dog I had with me.... Was nearly ten years old... He had been my constant friend and companion since I was seven years old... The summer before, he was one of two dogs that had without question saved my life from a Santa Gertrudis Bull. 

I had seen enough that I knew there was no way I was putting my dog in this man's hands... When he reached for the leash... I said no thank you and pulled the leash away.... He reached again... And I stepped back and said I would rather not.... I was polite..... Because my Grandfather was sitting in the stands at the arena about 50 feet behind us.... If I had been rude to an adult, he would have used the Koehler method on me.... But I would have done whatever I had to to keep my dog out of this man's hands...

He picked another dog... And I truly felt bad.... But I was a kid and it was not my place to say anything.. 

I will never forget Granddaddy's words on the matter.... When it was over and we were walking to get something to eat... Granddaddy said, what was that Fella's deal.... I said he trains dogs and writes books.... Granddaddy responded.... Well I hope the book thing works out because he done trained all the heart right out of them dogs of his..... This is a comment from a pure compulsion trainer that never gave a dog a treat or food reward... 

Koehler had a huge impact on me.... More than any other famous trainer or local trainer... Or even my father and grandfather..... All in a two hour seminar..... I almost immediately started moving away from the compulsion methods I had cut my training teeth on... And started looking for other methods... Not because I thought my father and grandfather were bad trainers.. They were not.... They were both great trainers and had working dogs that proved it... But I did not want to evolve from the compulsion trainer I had been taught to be by my family members... Into a Koehler..... 
I still use compulsion methods at times... It is situation specific and dog specific... MOST things... And a lot of dogs.... there are better and easier methods...

Believe what you want.... You read the book and have put the man on a pedestal.... But that pedestal is made of cow manure... And the man was made of the same thing as that pedestal... He was a mean abusive piece of crap.....



As a side note.... If I was standing in front of Koehler now... With some of the dogs I own now... And he wanted to use it in a demo.... I would hand him the leash and say.... Yea sure.... Here you go sport..... Merlin, Betty, and the Hell Bitch in particular.... They would have shown the Koehler Method what Koehler had for lunch. Those three in particular are strong tempered enough and stoic enough, he would have not got what he wanted and would not shut them down...



And on that... In Koehler's day... the GSD was THE dog... for police and military work... Some dobermans... A few Rotties.... The modern Trend is Bel Mals and Dutchies... Completely different dogs... The common breeds in his day.... Were easier... Softer.... 

Some of the stunts he pulled with those dogs back in his day... Would send him to the hospital with Some of the favored breeds now..


----------



## trainingjunkie

Imagine my whippets...


----------



## Willowy

OK, everyone else said everything worth saying so I won't. 

But I saw that 140,000 figure and my brain just loves silly math tricks. So. . .William Koehler lived to be 82. Let's say he started training dogs at age 17 and trained at the same rate his entire life up to the end. So 65 years. If he trained 140,000 dogs, that would be 6 dogs a day. Let's say it only took him 4 weeks to train a dog. That would mean he'd be training 168 dogs at a time. If he worked dogs all day long, 7 days a week, 12 hours a day, for that entire 65 years, that would be 4 1/4 minutes per dog per day. Um. Where did that 140,000 figure come from anyway?


----------



## Bentwings

Skipping foods, my dog and I already ate dinner, back to the OP.
So, I commend you for reading either on line or the real book, (Koehler). Also you write commendable for 17.

Generating 12 pages of responses in one day is probably a record for this forum. Nice going.

Now, I'd suggest you drop in on this site. 

http://leerburg.com/corrections.htm


Ed Frawley is the author. He readily admits that his early training was based on a "force method" and that this was wrong.. He now promotes a "balanced method" of dog training.

Most of his training is with very strong high drive dogs. Police service dogs, narc dogs, bomb dogs, Schutzhund, IPO and protection dogs. He recognizes that there are soft dogs that simply don't need a heavy hand and he like happy dogs that love to work.

Applying Koehler to these high powered dogs will surely get you a painful trip to E.R. that you will not forget. There are many more logical, productive, easier and safer methods of dealing with these dogs. I've worked with these dogs and I've trained my own working dogs. I have an Australian Shepherd (Aussie) that is over the top drive. She doesn't need a heavy hand to achieve our goals. When I say " let's go work" or " let's go to dog school" or " let's go do sheep" she just can't wait to get her harness and collar on and get moving. Her sit, stand, and down are done with simple finger and hand movement. It took no force to teach this and the only hand that touched her was for praise. I use a prong but never more than two finger light tug or a rattle of the connecting chain for a reminder. By the way I don't even own a chain collar.

So, what I'm saying is further your education before you jump on a worn out bandwagon. Read some modern dog research and see what we're doing now. It's easier and more effective. An extra plus is that some of it even applies to raising kids .....when you get to that level.


----------



## JohnnyBandit

Willowy said:


> OK, everyone else said everything worth saying so I won't.
> 
> But I saw that 140,000 figure and my brain just loves silly math tricks. So. . .William Koehler lived to be 82. Let's say he started training dogs at age 17 and trained at the same rate his entire life up to the end. So 65 years. If he trained 140,000 dogs, that would be 6 dogs a day. Let's say it only took him 4 weeks to train a dog. That would mean he'd be training 168 dogs at a time. If he worked dogs all day long, 7 days a week, 12 hours a day, for that entire 65 years, that would be 4 1/4 minutes per dog per day. Um. Where did that 140,000 figure come from anyway?


Who knows where the 140k figure came from... It was SO absurd I was not going to respond to... 

At the time of his death, several sources said he trained around 25 thousand dogs...


----------



## Willowy

I Googled it and it's actually all over his fan pages! I guess nobody has done the math, lol. I did find this on a Disney page, it makes slightly more sense: "Over 140,000 dogs had been trained under his supervision since 1946", and "under his supervision" is a lot different than him personally training that many dogs, but it's still not possible for him to have personally supervised the training of that many dogs. Unless he could bend space/time to his will! Which is a lot more impressive than his dog training, his fans should brag on that instead .

25,000 is still more than one dog a day.


----------



## lil_fuzzy

SlabGizor117 said:


> Rewards? Who said I don't use rewards?? I don't use treats, because I can reinforce what I need to with praise only, so I can avoid the complication of weaning them off of treats.


You would still have to wean the dog off the leash and hand pressure, which I dare say is harder than weaning off a treat lure.


----------



## Inga

Cheetah said:


> That dog looks stressed to me. How do you explain the very pronounced lip-licking, head-darting, flattened ears, and the way the dog's gait is?


Having only read a book and not having any real dog experience she probably doesn't understand stress signals. That is another problem with thinking the sun rises and sets on one method of training. Training should be designed with each individual dog in mind. If a "trainer" only has one tool in her toolbox, she isn't going to go very far in the long run. Thank god that the majority of people have evolved over the past 20+ years. I hate to think of any aspiring new trainer digging in the dirt to find the oldest, outdated methods and starting with those, not to mention unwilling to see the upside of newer methods which have been proved to work better in the long run.


----------



## Inga

JohnnyBandit said:


> Who knows where the 140k figure came from... It was SO absurd I was not going to respond to...
> 
> At the time of his death, several sources said he trained around 25 thousand dogs...


That is probably counting all the book readers who claim to have trained dogs using his methods.


----------



## cookieface

You read a book and connected with the message; that's great, I've done the same thing. Still, I'd encourage you to read more books by more authors and learn about different training methods and philosophies, research modern approaches, read about learning theory and the science of training. Chimunga posted an extensive list of titles and there's a "recommended reading" sticky with additional resources. Those would be good places to start.

If you truly want to be a dog trainer - read, question, learn, observe, question, and, most of all, get real experience with real dogs.


----------



## ireth0

JohnnyBandit said:


> As I mentioned on page three.... I met Koehler in 1984... I was at sort of a combined nationals competition....of 4H and other young competitive obedience organizations.... It was held in Kansas City. I was about to turn 17 when I was there... So close to your age....
> 
> This was an invitee only event.... The day between semi finals and finals (the top ten in the three age groups) they had training and seminars for us.... A chance to meet nationally known trainers.... Koehler was there... And frankly the ONLY trainer I remember by name... The experience was that bad...
> So my group... Seniors... 15-18 years old... Went to the Koehler seminar.... First thing I noticed.. his dogs... They were shut down... Obedient... But... IF you have seen dogs trained by harsh trainers... You watch the dog.. It is afraid to do anything.. Body language shows fear or at least apprehension.... .Dog does NOTHING until the owner gives a command... Because it is afraid to...... It does not want the correction.... Some call it obedience... Most of us call that fear...
> And you get an extremely vanilla dog... Sure it will do some commands and do them great... But you see no creativity from the dog... No growth.... The dog will never make a decision because it does not want the correction...
> 
> Koehler had a young dog and a trained dog... Did demonstrations with both.... All I saw was shut down dogs going through the motions.
> 
> Basically he told us... ten kids ages 15-18.... That we did not know squat... That everything we had ever done with dogs were wrong.... We are talking kids... That had competed to the national level with their dogs.... Most of us had multiple dogs that we had trained, titled and had great success with..... All he tried to do was belittle us....
> 
> Then he was going to do a demonstration with one of our dogs..... I was standing far on the left.... He approached me... IT should have been an honor.... There were reporters, cameras etc there.... But I had seen enough.. The dog I had with me.... Was nearly ten years old... He had been my constant friend and companion since I was seven years old... The summer before, he was one of two dogs that had without question saved my life from a Santa Gertrudis Bull.
> 
> I had seen enough that I knew there was no way I was putting my dog in this man's hands... When he reached for the leash... I said no thank you and pulled the leash away.... He reached again... And I stepped back and said I would rather not.... I was polite..... Because my Grandfather was sitting in the stands at the arena about 50 feet behind us.... If I had been rude to an adult, he would have used the Koehler method on me.... But I would have done whatever I had to to keep my dog out of this man's hands...
> 
> He picked another dog... And I truly felt bad.... But I was a kid and it was not my place to say anything..
> 
> I will never forget Granddaddy's words on the matter.... When it was over and we were walking to get something to eat... Granddaddy said, what was that Fella's deal.... I said he trains dogs and writes books.... Granddaddy responded.... Well I hope the book thing works out because he done trained all the heart right out of them dogs of his..... This is a comment from a pure compulsion trainer that never gave a dog a treat or food reward...
> 
> Koehler had a huge impact on me.... More than any other famous trainer or local trainer... Or even my father and grandfather..... All in a two hour seminar..... I almost immediately started moving away from the compulsion methods I had cut my training teeth on... And started looking for other methods... Not because I thought my father and grandfather were bad trainers.. They were not.... They were both great trainers and had working dogs that proved it... But I did not want to evolve from the compulsion trainer I had been taught to be by my family members... Into a Koehler.....
> I still use compulsion methods at times... It is situation specific and dog specific... MOST things... And a lot of dogs.... there are better and easier methods...
> 
> Believe what you want.... You read the book and have put the man on a pedestal.... But that pedestal is made of cow manure... And the man was made of the same thing as that pedestal... He was a mean abusive piece of crap.....
> 
> 
> 
> As a side note.... If I was standing in front of Koehler now... With some of the dogs I own now... And he wanted to use it in a demo.... I would hand him the leash and say.... Yea sure.... Here you go sport..... Merlin, Betty, and the Hell Bitch in particular.... They would have shown the Koehler Method what Koehler had for lunch. Those three in particular are strong tempered enough and stoic enough, he would have not got what he wanted and would not shut them down...
> 
> 
> 
> And on that... In Koehler's day... the GSD was THE dog... for police and military work... Some dobermans... A few Rotties.... The modern Trend is Bel Mals and Dutchies... Completely different dogs... The common breeds in his day.... Were easier... Softer....
> 
> Some of the stunts he pulled with those dogs back in his day... Would send him to the hospital with Some of the favored breeds now..


Thank you for sharing this John. Struck a cord with me.


----------



## fourdogs

My questions? Why do Koeler trainers feel it's necessary to hang dogs wearing a choke collar by their necks, feet dangling in the air until they poop/pee themselves to show "dominance?" Why do they feel the need to jerk/pull/punish the dogs when the dogs clearly have NO clue what is being asked of them. 

control through fear. 

Doesn't make much of a dog/human partnership, and completely unnecessary if you ask me! 

I went to a trainer in GA who was a proud "Koeler" trainer, who told me unless I brought my bichon puppy to her class, she would end up in the dog pound in the next year with behavioral issues. I went to ONE class, and witnesses all of the above, promptly TOLD HER OFF and that was the last time I ever went to her class. 

And my bichon lived a long, happy life with POSITIVE training, as have all my other dogs. 
My question to you is, why don't you try another method that fosters a healthy, happy PARTNERSHIP? ? ?


----------



## Bentwings

Haha! Being a life long mechanical engineer I did the math too using a bit more generous assumptions. It still comes out eat, living and sleeping an entire lifetime with a prong, chain, and leash in both hands. Even males have to either sit or squat to relieve themselves. In most countries a person needs one hand to finish the job so having all three in one hand and using the other to finish the job leads one to wonder how he was able simplly write his books let alone train stubborn dogs........maybe his students (dogs ) had a class champion tutoring like we did in college. Haha

One of the automotive forums that I haunt has a thread called "Come on, man....." This is for posts of unbelievable things that people claim are true. Training 140k dogs in a life time......Come on,man. HaHa. I think even Ceasar would say "Come on,man".


----------



## fourdogs

Also, want to add, that my cousin sent his lively, happy, secure Farm Collie to a 2 week board and train with a Koeler method trainer. Dog returned back petrified of collars and leashes, was a shaking blob pretty much in a fetal position when a leash was put on him. I saw my cousin do a "demo" with his dog and I said, that dog has been abused, terribly. 

Dog now has many emotional issues that were never there before, and no matter how much he is worked with, will never be the same. 
I will never agree with you! You need FAR more life experience. reading a book does not make you an expert. 

Go see the difference between a force/fear trained dog, and a dog who has been trained in a method that is both FUN for the dog, and effective!

As far as a dog not being obedient who has not had corrections? My echo got her CD and RN in a 3 day weekend!! She had near perfect scores and had an ABSOLUTE BLAST working WITH me to earn her titles.

Her recall? Without punishment, is PERFECT. she comes running from anywhere on our 5 acres with her recall word with JOY, because she knows coming to her human is a good, wonderful thing.

Kindness. Always.


----------



## petpeeve

I think what I find even more alarming than the method, is the fact that this particular young person - not even old enough to vote yet - can be so easily brainwashed and indoctrinated into such a perverse set of beliefs that lie on the outer fringes of sensibility, at best. And then go on to loudly proclaim their allegiance on a public forum comprised mostly of people who know better from years and years of actual life experience..


----------



## Na-Tasha

I couldn't believe this thread made 13 pages in a day, that's amazing. 

I was reading through this thread and some of the talk about training a reliable recall reminded me of a recent event that happened to me and my dog. I have to say I'm a lousy 'trainer'(my dog knows bare bones basic training), I don't follow any of the trainers listed here, good or bad, I don't read training books, and if I have an issue I come to a forum and ask. I choose a suggestion I think might work with my dog and go from there until my problem is solved, and I've tried and tossed various methods out the window. I've watched a few tv trainers but don't anymore because it's just not reality. 

However. One thing I did want to learn was to make sure my dog had a good recall because I wanted her to be off leash as much as possible. I tried treats, toys, and praise. The ONLY thing that worked with her was praise, basically I was her reward. For the last 3 and a half years she has been an off leash dog and I've not had any issue with recall, but also never had to put it to the test in a life or death situation. Until recently. My front door is made of two sliding glass doors, and if I want to run to the store at the end of the block I just shut the doors without locking them and either walk or ride my bike to the store. This day was no different, I needed to run to the store and decided to take my bike. I left my dog inside, shut the doors, and took off. Apparently my dog taught herself how to open the doors and wanted to follow me to the store, but the road is extremely busy with major traffic and she went into panic mode. I didn't know she was out until I was on my way back home and saw my dog in the distance darting among traffic in the middle of the road being honked at by a bus! Talk about heart stopping. As soon as I was in shouting distance, I hollered at her to come...... and she immediately came! She even focused herself out of her panic, ran to my right side and we safely got home together. I learned two things: 1. Her recall is wonderful and worked when it really mattered. 2. I need to lock my front door even if I'm not going to be gone long.

Maybe I just have a really easily trainable dog that anyone could train. Or maybe I just found a good method that worked for both of us. Over the years I have tried many different suggested methods of training on my various dogs. Some things worked. Some things failed so hard it was laughable (I'm looking at you, clicker training). But the thing is, I had a variety of methods at my disposal to try if one didn't work out. And that's kind of the point I wanted to make. There is not a one-size-fits-all method when it comes to training dogs. I found what works for me, but who's to say it'll work for my neighbors dogs? Or your dogs? I think anyone who is going to call themselves a dog trainer needs to be well versed in many methods, whether they agree with them or not, just so they are knowledgeable about it.


----------



## InkedMarie

Wow, long thread. I'm no trainer, that's for sure but if I was looking for a trainer, it wouldn't be a 17yr old without a dog. Even if you were a positive trainer, I'd disregard you.

Cupcakes? I love red velvet but I'm on WW & not having one. Thanks alot, guys for making me crave one now.


----------



## Laurelin

Is the OP still around? In case they read it: OP: get a dog. Train it. Struggle through it. Learn what your dog is teaching you. Test your training and have objective proof of your training. Do it again and again with many dogs. Come back then and talk to us about your superior training. Mmmk? Anyone can read a book.


----------



## ireth0

I think the main issue is that the OP seems to think you can't get the same quality results with +R that you can with punishment (or in this case extreme punishment/abuse).

Which is a bad thing to base your opinions on, because it simply isn't true. I'd really encourage the OP to look more into the kind of results you can get with +R. It absolutely is not a lesser approach with inferior results, in fact most of the time it's quite the opposite.

I mean, yea, if the options were 'scare the poop out of your dog' or 'let them get hit by a car', I'd probably be inclined to choose the poop scaring option.

Fortunately, there are a myriad of other things that can be done to achieve the same thing.


----------



## ireth0

SlabGizor117 said:


> As for digging, I'd much rather give my dog 10 seconds of discomfort instead of risking $30,000.


As someone who is currently heavily into researching the cost of home repairs/improvements, I'm honestly curious where you are pulling this $30,000 figure from.


----------



## hanksimon

To the Op, Not sure if you are still around, but I commend you for your persistence.

1. Take a look at some of the other methods: Clicker training, positive training, Calming Signals, Luring, etc. and you may discover some methods that have evolved as much as the Smart Phone has evolved beyond tube-based computers. One suggestion is Ian Dunbar: dogstardaily.com/free-downloads These books are free downloads, based on books that Dunbar's methods form 30 years ago. Since you said that you like the Koehler Method, because it was clear and straightforward, I believe that you'll like Dunbar, because he is also clear and straightforward, using some methods that are a little simpler and faster.

2. Go to the Pound or a Rescue (or maybe a local Vet), and volunteer over the summer, learning their methods for training. After you learn their methods, see if some of the Koehler Methods provide additional tweaks, and ask the trainers about that. But, you have to be good with their methods first, so that they'll know that you are trying to be curious and intelligent about training. 

3. As some folks have commented, you can use Dunbar's Luring method (or a more recent variation) to teach a 9 week puppy to sit on cue, in only one or two 10 min. sessions; following up with continued reinforcement. This is not theory or something that we read in a book or watched someone else do. This is a real experience that many of us have achieved. That statement should make you very curious to learn about Dunbar's Luring method (as well as capture training), because it works quickly, painlessly, and effectively. It will NOT work with ALL dogs, but it will work with most puppies that you come in contact with.

4. Try to experience a variety of methods, because research is growing quickly. When Koehler was writing his books, dogs were believed to be black boxes and not to feel emotions like we do. Today, university professors are showing that dogs are very intelligent, feel some emotions similar to people, and are very clearly thinking all the time. Positive methods give you a companion that you can have a better connection with, better communications, and a better relationship. And, rather than giving the dog a treat, he will behave for you (after a few years of training), because it makes him feel good internally to do so.


----------



## PatriciafromCO

petpeeve said:


> I think what I find even more alarming than the method, is the fact that this particular young person - not even old enough to vote yet - can be so easily brainwashed and indoctrinated into such a perverse set of beliefs that lie on the outer fringes of sensibility, at best. And then go on to loudly proclaim their allegiance on a public forum comprised mostly of people who know better from years and years of actual life experience..


I'm not surprised... not sure if it's the write word, but think lacking " empathy " causing the lack of ability to have a natural reaction to what is read no matter how famous or well advertised for the best of the best.. JB is a perfect example.. even as a younger child he knew what he was seeing was wrong, and that awareness didn't allow him to change his position no matter who the man said he was........ See it all the time, people not understanding animals are living feeling creatures... so disconnected to animals as living feeling creatures... some how they are a thing like a video game to punch buttons on to obey respond... and then so frustrated when the animal doesn't and has a will on its own..


----------



## Inga

petpeeve said:


> I think what I find even more alarming than the method, is the fact that this particular young person - not even old enough to vote yet - can be so easily brainwashed and indoctrinated into such a perverse set of beliefs that lie on the outer fringes of sensibility, at best. And then go on to loudly proclaim their allegiance on a public forum comprised mostly of people who know better from years and years of actual life experience..


I see this same story repeating over and over again with many young people I find it very sad. One book or one seminar does not a trainer make. I hope for the sake of any dog this person comes across that she finds a better way to do things. There are so many better ways to get the same job done. I prefer a happy working dog that is enjoying life to a fearful, programed dog.


----------



## chimunga

Inga said:


> I see this same story repeating over and over again with many young people I find it very sad. One book or one seminar does not a trainer make. I hope for the sake of any dog this person comes across that she finds a better way to do things. There are so many better ways to get the same job done. I prefer a happy working dog that is enjoying life to a fearful, programed dog.


When I first decided I wanted a dog when I was 22, I got hardcore into Cesar Millan. Watched his show, read all his books, the works. Then I found something on the internet about the little tift between him and Ian Dunbar. So, because I was curious, I read Dunbar's book. Don't get me wrong. I hate Dunbar's book. It's way too black and white and structured for my taste (which is why you may like it OP. Seriously. It does have some great structure to it). But even though I didn't like the book, it gave me the curiosity bug. The next thing I was was Pat Miller's _the Power of Positive Dog Training._ And After that, Jean Donaldson's _the Culture Clash_. And then Patricia McConnell's _the Other End of the Leash._ And the rest is history. Two years in, I still don't have a specific training method or person I ascribe to. 

My point, OP, is don't bog yourself down after one book. Read more. Explore. Work to find what really suits you. If you've read all the books, and trained some dogs, and found that you genuinely do like Koehler's methods best then *shrug* fine. I doubt it. But that's still fine. 

Like hanksimon said, check out Ian Dunbar. You'll probably really like his books. And heck. They're free online. Nothing to loose.


----------



## SlabGizor117

Hiraeth said:


> A dog is far more likely to recall to you if it ENJOYS recalling to you than if it fears experiencing pain at your hands.


The dog doesn't fear a correction any more than you fear a red light. In fact, a malfunctioning red light could get you killed. But does that stop you from driving? Furthermore, does that stop you from running that light from time to time? And don't tell me I don't use positive reinforcement. I said earlier that the Koehler method is already 3/4 positive reinforcement, from the praise he gets from being shown what you want when teaching an exercise, and when he does the right thing, to the slack leash itself. Tony Ancheta, who leads the method himself, has said that the slack leash is the dog's primary reinforcer.


----------



## SlabGizor117

trainingjunkie said:


> Even on fast forward, that hurt my eyes...


What did?! You think that video was cruel, too?! There was nothing there to pick at!


----------



## SlabGizor117

chimunga said:


> And we are saying that teaching sit is much easier than mechanical placement. Most dogs can learn sit in around 10 repetitions. Adding a cue might take 5-10 more repetitions. Sometimes more, sometimes less. Unless you have a really dense dog, teaching sit should never take 50-100 repetitions.


I never said that the dog doesn't know what sit means until 100 repetitions, he may pick it up after 10 also. But, the point of doing it 100 times is to make sure that there is no doubt in the dog's mind what sit means.


----------



## SlabGizor117

JohnnyBandit said:


> The problem is.... You don't teach sit at all....
> You do not have a dog, do not train dogs.....
> 
> You read a book......


I have trained neighbor's dogs before, but not exactly by the book.


----------



## SlabGizor117

Shell said:


> Or the dog is resisting mechanical placement because it hurts him.
> 
> Or because he has been punished in the past in a situation similar to what you are doing.
> 
> Or the mechanical placement isn't teaching the dog a voluntary "sit" action but only to follow the motion of your hand so when your hand is removed and you correct the dog for not following an action which isn't being cued to him, he is going to be quite confused.


If it hurt him then of course you would adapt the way you teach it.

If that was the case, you would keep working as your praise shows the dog that you're not gonna do the same thing

Who said I would correct him for getting up? I'm teaching sit, not stay. If the dog chose to get up after, that's fine, he did what I wanted to him, which was to sit. Who told you I would correct a dog for that? You need to read the book yourself before you can make any accusation like that.


----------



## Wirehairedvizslalove

My dog and I have so much fun training together, we actually treat it more as a game. Never ever would I instill fear into him and he is a stellar off leash dog. It's a game I'm smiling he's bouncing around and we got 3rd place at our last competition. There is no reason to install fear into a dog, none. If you both aren't having fun you shouldn't being doing it plain and simple


----------



## SlabGizor117

taquitos said:


> I actually read it. You correct once the dog doesn't sit after 50 mechannical "sits." That's still teaching with corrections LOL you do realize? By correcting you are technically trying to "proof" a learned behavior through P+ which IS a way to teach something.
> 
> It's really sad that you think that this is the shining beacon of dog training. Anyone who needs to even mechanically force a dog to sit 50 times to even get the point across is a complete amateur...
> 
> I taught my dog to sit using a clicker and treat. He sits even when he sees cats – his biggest distraction.
> 
> BUT DON'T TRUST THE COOKIE BECAUSE THE DOG DOESN'T FEAR IT.
> 
> You don't need a choke chain or physical correction to enforce a command. That is what you misunderstand.


Then you read it wrong. The mechanical placement of sit is done 100 times before any corrections are used. That is to say, you are teaching the dog the meaning of the word sit with mechanical placement, but never with corrections. Yes, you are proofing the sit against contention and disobedience once the dog knows what to do. 

If you'd like to know why specifically the dog is placed mechanically 100 times, you can contact Tony Ancheta at koehlerdogtraining.com, although I very much doubt you'll bother.

That's good that you taught your dog to sit even around distractions like that, but I personally use the Koehler method because I feel that it creates more reliability than just +R.

Who said anything about fear? The Koehler method never uses fear.

If you tell a dog who knows the meaning of the word "sit", to do just that, and he refuses to, how will you effectively correct that without showing the(fair) consequences of it?



Effisia said:


> Could you please just take a moment to explain exactly what you see as a misconception people have with this method of training? What exactly are you trying to get across to us.


The fact that the Koehler Method is not unfair, that it is not abusive, and that it is not based on fear.


----------



## SlabGizor117

Cheetah said:


> Did I just read "civilized" and "Koehler Method" on the same thread? One of these things is very different from the other...


ooh, good one!


----------



## Shell

SlabGizor117 said:


> The dog doesn't fear a correction any more than you fear a red light. In fact, a malfunctioning red light could get you killed. But does that stop you from driving? Furthermore, does that stop you from running that light from time to time? And don't tell me I don't use positive reinforcement. I said earlier that the Koehler method is already 3/4 positive reinforcement, from the praise he gets from being shown what you want when teaching an exercise, and when he does the right thing, to the slack leash itself. Tony Ancheta, who leads the method himself, has said that the slack leash is the dog's primary reinforcer.


Wouldn't the red light be more comparative to a command rather than the correction which follows the failure to obey the command? A human might obey a red light because they are sensible enough to know that its there for a reason or they might obey it because they fear a traffic citation. A dog obeying recall isn't doing it because he is sensible enough to know that he is being asked to avoid something problematic, he is doing it because he either wants to return because it is a good thing for him or because he fears the consequences if he doesn't.

A slack leash isn't positive reinforcement per se. More likely, closer to negative reinforcement as it would be the removal of a tight leash/choking leash where the removal of the aversive increases the behavior which came before it.


----------



## parus

SlabGizor117 said:


> I never said that the dog doesn't know what sit means until 100 repetitions, he may pick it up after 10 also. But, the point of doing it 100 times is to make sure that there is no doubt in the dog's mind what sit means.


You've made a lot of blatantly incorrect statements in the last, like, five minutes, but this one is one of the more illustrative of your inexperience. Just for starters: if the dog has it after ten, and you do it ninety more, you're potentially telling the dog that he DIDN'T have it - after all, why else would you keep asking for it? It's also counterproductive to ask for it by pushing on the butt 100 times, because that's not how you're going to cue it in the future (in comparison, the luring method actually can be made to look a lot like a sit hand signal). Additionally, if your dog has half a brain in its head, or is young, or is of a more independent-minded lineage, it's going to be soured by this repetition such that you're liable to produce some really undesirable outcomes.

Every dog I've ever owned (and i've had dogs all my life, and I'm old) has mastered a rock-solid sit without all this foolishness.


----------



## SlabGizor117

JohnnyBandit said:


> Hey Sociopaths can be quite civilized... Ted Bundy was......
> 
> Bundy Murdered college Co Eds.....
> 
> Koehler abused dogs.......


The definition of abuse is to treat (a person or an animal) with cruelty or violence, especially regularly or repeatedly. The definition of cruelty is 

adjective: cruel; comparative adjective: crueller; superlative adjective: cruellest; comparative adjective: crueler; superlative adjective: cruelest willfully causing pain or suffering to others, or feeling no concern about it. The Koehler method does NOT use "pain and suffering" to teach dogs. It uses the instinctive desire for a dog to move from discomfort to comfort to allow the dog to fairly experience the consequences of his wrong actions. Here's a good quote:
"[The internet] has dignified the prattle of 'dog psychologists' who would rob a dog of the birthright he shares with all of God's creatures: the right to the consequences of his actions. ...So let's not deprive the dog of his privilege of experiencing the consequences of [both] right and wrong behavior." Here's a good example. Would it not be cruel to deprive your child of the consequences of disobeying you and running into the street? Would you rather he die than be punished for disobeying you?


----------



## SlabGizor117

Cheetah said:


> I definitely cannot condone any method that involves half-drowning my dog in the hole he dug. And I can teach any dog a SOLID sit without even touching it at all.
> 
> Nothing annoys me more than when I'm working at a grooming salon trying to bathe/blow dry/brush a dog that sits constantly any time I touch its butt/hips during the grooming process. X.x
> 
> And any good trainer researches ALL methods. Every one they can find. u.u


It's my understanding that Bill Koehler expected very, VERY few people to EVER need to resort to a correction like that, as it is a last resort to save the dog from legal action by neighbors, or at least the $30,000 in damage to a water pipe.


----------



## SlabGizor117

Effisia said:


> But if you've never used or studied any of these methods how could you even know the reliability of the training?


Because I've seen the results that it produces and that is not a fearful dog who only does what he's told because he's afraid to "suffer". It is a happy dog who has a relationship without contention.


----------



## JohnnyBandit

SlabGizor117 said:


> The dog doesn't fear a correction any more than you fear a red light. .


This is not even a logical statement.... A red light is a command... Not a correction.....

A speeding ticket, and accident, etc.. Those would be corrections....



> And don't tell me I don't use positive reinforcement.


But you don't use positive reinforcement.... You don't train dogs.... So we can all tell you that with certainty...



> I said earlier that the Koehler method is already 3/4 positive reinforcement, from the praise he gets from being shown what you want when teaching an exercise, and when he does the right thing, to the slack leash itself. Tony Ancheta, who leads the method himself, has said that the slack leash is the dog's primary reinforcer.


No... Just no... It has been over 30 years since I have read Koehler's drivel..... So I cannot say what is in his books...

I can tell you having watched him train personally.... That is NOT the case....


----------



## SlabGizor117

JohnnyBandit said:


> You said.... IF a dog understood the recall command and refused.... You would make the dog feel discomfort....
> 
> 
> 
> Dog training 101 page one.... In dog training kindergarten.... You NEVER.... EVER..... NEVER.... use aversives or any kind of physical correction when a dog refuses a recall....
> 
> the refusal is a sign that you have not proofed and built reliability enough....
> 
> If your dog refuses a recall and you feel you must give a physical correction...Got slam your thumb in a car door... Pour hot coffee down you pants... Stick a dime in an electrical outlet.....
> 
> But you NEVER EVER give the dog a physical correction..... At least if you hope to ever have a reliable recall.
> 
> Bottom line here.... You cause the dog discomfort ( and lets be real here.... Discomfort is a sugar coated way of saying pain) you just gave the dog a valid reason to disregard the next recall, and the next and the next...


Corrections don't cause "pain and suffering and fear". They are uncomfortable only for the sake of showing the dog the consequences of his actions. If I were teaching a dog the recall, I would do everything in my power to make sure he will be 100% reliable in case of an emergency, and that includes proofing it against distraction. If I need to make the consequences firm enough to overcome the lure of the distraction. 

Discomfort is not the same as pain.


----------



## SlabGizor117

taquitos said:


> I don't understand. There is no such thing as a child that behaves 100% of the time.
> 
> It is IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to assume they can have full control over any living being.
> 
> What the heck kind of crazy person thinks that a parent has full control over their child?!?!


I'm saying that a parent would have the authority to make sure their child will obey them because they know better than their kid, and it's the same thing in dog training.


----------



## Shell

SlabGizor117 said:


> Corrections don't cause "pain and suffering and fear". They are uncomfortable only for the sake of showing the dog the consequences of his actions. If I were teaching a dog the recall, I would do everything in my power to make sure he will be 100% reliable in case of an emergency, and that includes proofing it against distraction. If I need to make the consequences firm enough to overcome the lure of the distraction.
> 
> Discomfort is not the same as pain.


Discomfort from physical corrections is pain. Don't fool yourself. It is word to describe a lower level of pain generally but its a physical pain nonetheless.


----------



## JohnnyBandit

SlabGizor117 said:


> I have trained neighbor's dogs before, but not exactly by the book.


Was this today? No mention of the neighbors dogs yesterday....


But you know what..... I have been on NAS Miramar and sat in the cockpit of an FA -18 Super Hornet.....

So that makes me a Naval Aviator, Top Gun and Tom Cruise.... You can call me Maverick from here on out....


----------



## JohnnyBandit

SlabGizor117 said:


> The definition of abuse is to treat (a person or an animal) with cruelty or violence, especially regularly or repeatedly. The definition of cruelty is
> 
> adjective: cruel; comparative adjective: crueller; superlative adjective: cruellest; comparative adjective: crueler; superlative adjective: cruelest willfully causing pain or suffering to others, or feeling no concern about it. The Koehler method does NOT use "pain and suffering" to teach dogs. It uses the instinctive desire for a dog to move from discomfort to comfort to allow the dog to fairly experience the consequences of his wrong actions. Here's a good quote:
> "[The internet] has dignified the prattle of 'dog psychologists' who would rob a dog of the birthright he shares with all of God's creatures: the right to the consequences of his actions. ...So let's not deprive the dog of his privilege of experiencing the consequences of [both] right and wrong behavior." Here's a good example. Would it not be cruel to deprive your child of the consequences of disobeying you and running into the street? Would you rather he die than be punished for disobeying you?


EXACTLY!!! now you are getting it.... You will be there as soon as you realize that Koehlers methods are abusive, violent, harmful and cruel...


----------



## Shell

JohnnyBandit said:


> Was this today? No mention of the neighbors dogs yesterday....
> 
> 
> But you know what..... I have been on NAS Miramar and sat in the cockpit of an FA -18 Super Hornet.....
> 
> So that makes me a Naval Aviator, Top Gun and Tom Cruise.... You can call me Maverick from here on out....


Is that like staying at a Holiday Inn Express?


----------



## BKaymuttleycrew

SlabGizor117 said:


> Because I've seen the results that it produces and that is not a fearful dog who only does what he's told because he's afraid to "suffer". It is a happy dog who has a relationship without contention.


If you think that video that was posted earlier is one that shows a "happy dog who has a relationship without contention" then you really, really, really don't know how to read dogs. I couldn't even make it through the entire thing. I saw a terrified dog who cringed *away* from his handler every chance he could get (and at pretty much every physical move the handler made) Entire package of canine body language just **screamed** STRESS! Was he 'snappy' in his responses? Was he looking at his handler? Well, yes to both - but NOT with 'happiness', I assure you. 

That was absolutely & positively an example of a dog that was doing as he was told because he was afraid to suffer the consequences. Sad. Sad. Sad. You simply have no clue as to what you are talking about.


----------



## SlabGizor117

Hiraeth said:


> Yes, it is, that's a surefire way to make a bored child even more troublesome. Modern educational theory advocates engagement and occupation of mental resources, not 'quiet time in the corner', as the appropriate way to deal with difficult children.
> 
> 
> 
> You asked for disrespect the second you called yourself a dog trainer despite the fact that you have neither owned nor trained any dogs.
> 
> Calling yourself a trainer and pushing harmful methods is disrespectful to every member of this forum who trains dogs, both non professionally and professionally, who work hard to convince the regular dog owning public that people like you and Koehler are full of crap every single day.


The Koehler method is not harmful. The most physically uncomfortable correction in the book was to suspend a dog in the air until he gave up fighting with you, as a last resort for aggressive dogs that were close to being euthanized, and there is no record anywhere of any dog being injured. In fact, all dogs who required such an emphatic correction were able to get up and walk at heel when they were asked to minutes after the correction. That doesn't sound like an injury to me, does it?


----------



## parus

SlabGizor117 said:


> Corrections don't cause "pain and suffering and fear". They are uncomfortable only for the sake of showing the dog the consequences of his actions. If I were teaching a dog the recall, I would do everything in my power to make sure he will be 100% reliable in case of an emergency, and that includes proofing it against distraction. If I need to make the consequences firm enough to overcome the lure of the distraction.
> 
> Discomfort is not the same as pain.


This is flat ignorance. Again, just to scratch the surface: picking up a dog off the ground by the neck with a choke chain causes pain and fear. Etc. Dogs are mammals with nervous systems not dissimilar to ours. That is a painful, frightening thing to do, ditto for several of Koehler's other suggested "corrections." 

Secondly, you keep asserting that ~*The Koehler Method*~ will work on any dog. However, even many of the less intense corrections you suggest have the potential to cause pain and distress in certain individual dogs, such as dogs that have tracheal issues, and to cause fear in certain individual dogs, such as those that have had negative experiences in the past. Even something like your butt-pushing method, which is not intended as a punishment, may cause pain in dogs that are prone to orthopedic issues. A dog that is flooded with stress hormones is not in a state to efficiently absorb and retain training.

I realize at this point Koehler is apparently your own personal Jesus and nothing anyone says will dissuade you right now from your messianic fervor, but DogForums threads often come up in internet searches, so I hope these corrections will be useful for anyone who stumbles across this.


----------



## LittleFr0g

JohnnyBandit said:


> Was this today? No mention of the neighbors dogs yesterday....
> 
> 
> But you know what..... I have been on NAS Miramar and sat in the cockpit of an FA -18 Super Hornet.....
> 
> So that makes me a Naval Aviator, Top Gun and Tom Cruise.... You can call me Maverick from here on out....


I took an intro flight lesson once and actually flew a plane, so I'm totally qualified to train pilots now, right?


----------



## SlabGizor117

Hiraeth said:


> It is absolutely cruel. Did you watch that video posted earlier in this thread? The woman in the video was physically forcing her dog to lay down on concrete when the dog clearly didn't feel comfortable doing so by grabbing the dog and putting her weight on top of it. That is cruelty.
> 
> ETA: If you want to get some hands on experience, I'll lend you any one of my very large dogs. Good luck physically manipulating them to do *anything* they don't want to. You know how I get dogs who could kill me if they felt like it to do what I want? I positively reinforce wanted behaviors with praise and rewards and never punish them.


Is it cruel for you to pick a small dog up and put him on your couch with you? Is it cruel to hold his paw while you clip his nails? How then, can it be cruel to pick his front feet up and lay him down on them?


----------



## Shell

SlabGizor117 said:


> The Koehler method is not harmful. The most physically uncomfortable correction in the book was to suspend a dog in the air until he gave up fighting with you, as a last resort for aggressive dogs that were close to being euthanized, and there is no record anywhere of any dog being injured. In fact, all dogs who required such an emphatic correction were able to get up and walk at heel when they were asked to minutes after the correction. That doesn't sound like an injury to me, does it?


How in the world do you think that strangling a dog by HANGING isn't harmful? Lasting trachea damage is a possibility for example, damage to blood vessels, tendon injury etc.

IMO there is a world of difference between using such action as a last-ditch measure to control a dog during a dog attack (as in, save the life of the other dog) and using it as training.


----------



## CptJack

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJoDkAluji0

This is my dog performing. Can you not see the difference in her demeanor and the dog in that other video? 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghEtu1rUCvI Or this - with a ball obsessed BC leaving a ball until told otherwise?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMF3f80smdI Few basic commands? (And yeah, I had to give the first one twice - but she was a 6 month old puppy so meh)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFT1OIsBTLo Terrier and a puppy recalling happily?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atLpst5crkU Another happy puppy recall?

Jesus Christ, I know other people have videos and I know you don't have dogs but even a total dog ignorant person can recognize the lack of engagement, enthusiasm and happiness in that video you're defending. If you want obedience runs with happy dogs I am SURE people here can provide to compare/contrast for you.


----------



## CptJack

Kuma'sMom said:


> I took an intro flight lesson once and actually flew a plane, so I'm totally qualified to train pilots now, right?


hey, can you approve my last post? I forgot the link thing.

nd yeah, sure, I'll sign right up for lessons with you. Absolutely.


----------



## ireth0

SlabGizor117 said:


> Is it cruel to hold his paw while you clip his nails? How then, can it be cruel to pick his front feet up and lay him down on them?


How about teaching the dog to offer you their paw voluntarily for nail trims?


----------



## CptJack

ireth0 said:


> How about teaching the dog to offer you their paw voluntarily for nail trims?


Yeah, I pretty much don't grab and pull mly dogs to trim nails. They lay down on their sides and wag while I do them. Or the little ones flip themselves upside down in my lap and doze while I do.


----------



## Greater Swiss

SlabGizor117 said:


> The Koehler method is not harmful. The most physically uncomfortable correction in the book was to suspend a dog in the air until he gave up fighting with you, as a last resort for aggressive dogs that were close to being euthanized, and there is no record anywhere of any dog being injured. In fact, all dogs who required such an emphatic correction were able to get up and walk at heel when they were asked to minutes after the correction. That doesn't sound like an injury to me, does it?


Do you not understand that harm can be caused by things other than the physical bruises and cuts? Are you truly blind to this?

Here is a quote from a report on a neuroimaging study done on dogs, a functional MRI to determine how they react and relate to their owners:
"Behavior research supports the recent neuroscience too. According to Andics, dogs interact with their human caregivers in the same way babies do their parents. When dogs are scared or worried, they run to their owners, just as distressed toddlers make a beeline for their parents. This is in stark contrast to other domesticated animals: Petrified cats, as well as horses, will run away."

Here is the article: http://mic.com/articles/104474/brain-scans-reveal-what-dogs-really-think-of-us#.r6XdlEOAg
If you would like the peer reviewed journal article I will try to get the time to find it for you (though I'm not sure the time would be worth it) because I assure you, you are NOT using scholarly peer-reviewed information in your so called "research" on your decided end-all be-all method. 

Now, given that quote (and the rest of the research it is representing), they are drawing analogies between the emotional reactions of a dog with the emotional reactions of a toddler (and I believe there is also an article that states that the emotional capacity had by dogs is similar to that of a toddler). Yes, I am aware they are a different species, no, they are not humans, no they are not truly "our babies", but they are still thinking, feeling beings, this HAS been proven (real proof, not speculative.......fluff that you are calling proof), so, really, "The most physically uncomfortable correction in the book was to suspend a dog in the air until he gave up fighting "....are you going tell me you condone doing that with a cranky toddler that doesn't want to go to bed. It isn't going to harm the kid.....not according to you. 
Seriously, put some thought into this.......SMH


----------



## Laurelin

So.... you don't have a dog and don't train dogs?


----------



## SlabGizor117

JohnnyBandit said:


> Who knows where the 140k figure came from... It was SO absurd I was not going to respond to...
> 
> At the time of his death, several sources said he trained around 25 thousand dogs...


Oops, there are a few different quote going around about how many he trained himself and how many had been trained through the method. I didn't stop to think about how much time 140,000 dogs take to train, haha


----------



## parus

ireth0 said:


> How about teaching the dog to offer you their paw voluntarily for nail trims?


Only if you do it by manually extending their leg 100 times to teach it?


----------



## SlabGizor117

fourdogs said:


> My questions? Why do Koeler trainers feel it's necessary to hang dogs wearing a choke collar by their necks, feet dangling in the air until they poop/pee themselves to show "dominance?" Why do they feel the need to jerk/pull/punish the dogs when the dogs clearly have NO clue what is being asked of them.
> 
> control through fear.
> 
> Doesn't make much of a dog/human partnership, and completely unnecessary if you ask me!
> 
> I went to a trainer in GA who was a proud "Koeler" trainer, who told me unless I brought my bichon puppy to her class, she would end up in the dog pound in the next year with behavioral issues. I went to ONE class, and witnesses all of the above, promptly TOLD HER OFF and that was the last time I ever went to her class.
> 
> And my bichon lived a long, happy life with POSITIVE training, as have all my other dogs.
> My question to you is, why don't you try another method that fosters a healthy, happy PARTNERSHIP? ? ?


There was no "peeing or pooping", and there was no dominance. That correction was a last resort for aggressive dogs who were about to be euthanized.


----------



## LittleFr0g

CptJack said:


> hey, can you approve my last post? I forgot the link thing.
> 
> nd yeah, sure, I'll sign right up for lessons with you. Absolutely.


Done! And I'll be setting up my brand new flight school shortly. Oh, I do use some fairly harsh corrections if you make a mistake, but only after I've forced you to do the same exercise over and over at least 100 times in a row. You're fine with that, right?


----------



## SlabGizor117

parus said:


> You've made a lot of blatantly incorrect statements in the last, like, five minutes, but this one is one of the more illustrative of your inexperience. Just for starters: if the dog has it after ten, and you do it ninety more, you're potentially telling the dog that he DIDN'T have it - after all, why else would you keep asking for it? It's also counterproductive to ask for it by pushing on the butt 100 times, because that's not how you're going to cue it in the future (in comparison, the luring method actually can be made to look a lot like a sit hand signal). Additionally, if your dog has half a brain in its head, or is young, or is of a more independent-minded lineage, it's going to be soured by this repetition such that you're liable to produce some really undesirable outcomes.
> 
> Every dog I've ever owned (and i've had dogs all my life, and I'm old) has mastered a rock-solid sit without all this foolishness.


The dog is continually reinforced throughout the other 90 times by the praise you give him to show he did the right thing.


----------



## JohnnyBandit

You will not listen to this... .But I am going to say it anyway......

In Koehlers day.... The working dogs in the United States were much softer than they are today.... They did a good job for their time..... 

But times have changed... The streets got more violent, the world got more dangerous.... Starting in the late 1980's through the late 1990's there was a mad dash to get harder dogs with more drives... Here in the US we reached out to Europe... The Soviet Union had recently fallen... Now there were bloodlines of GSD that had remained pure hard core working lines... The Czech and East German Lines that had been unaccessible were suddenly available... And the breeders of the former soviet union were thrilled to cash in on these dogs.. .

I saw my first Czech dogs in the early 1990's... I had never seen anything like them... When we discovered a new word... OR phrase.... Belgian Malinois..... There were a FEW here before the late 1980's.... But there was a HUGE migration.... These dogs were smaller, faster, more drivey, More intense... etc.... Every agency and department with any sort of funding was pulling dogs out of German, Denmark, Belgium, etc. Later came the Dutch Shepherd in smaller numbers...

These dogs starting with the Soviet Block GSDs and especially the Bel Mals, were nothing like the dogs trainers were used to working with... And nothing like the dogs Koehler worked with... 

The old methods did not work as well... And Koehlers abusive methods especially did not work well.....

I knew an old school trainer... That lost most the use in his right hand and arm over being too dumb to change.... And it took the dog all of ten seconds to do so.... 

The guy was on a Bel Mal fresh out of the crate from Europe... Cocky young male... You could almost smell the napalm when they pulled him out of the crate... Dog was being a jerk. This trainer tried to string the dog up, like he had done so many times before...
Do you remember the scene from the movie Jaws, where the shark eats his way up the rope back to the boat.. Well it was much like that. But in lightning quick speed. Before this guy could get enough lift to render the dog helpless.. The dog launched. In a single hard bite and a bunch of twisting and spinning... The dog removed the muscle on his forearm... All te way from the wrist to the elbow..... 

You probably will never get the chance to test out your reading material on a hard working dog.... You might get a chance to bully some pets.. But it is doubtful you will get to try Koehlerology out on a true working dog... But if you do get a chance.... The dog is going to hurt you....


----------



## ireth0

CptJack said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJoDkAluji0
> 
> This is my dog performing. Can you not see the difference in her demeanor and the dog in that other video?
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghEtu1rUCvI Or this - with a ball obsessed BC leaving a ball until told otherwise?
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMF3f80smdI Few basic commands? (And yeah, I had to give the first one twice - but she was a 6 month old puppy so meh)
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFT1OIsBTLo Terrier and a puppy recalling happily?
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atLpst5crkU Another happy puppy recall?
> 
> Jesus Christ, I know other people have videos and I know you don't have dogs but even a total dog ignorant person can recognize the lack of engagement in that video posted and if you want obedience runs with happy dogs I am SURE people here can provide to compare/contrast for you.


I mean, I can provide videos, but I kind of doubt the OP cares to watch them. 

But if you're interested, OP, I have been told over and over again how HAPPY (in tonight's class alone I heard it like min 3 times) and engaged my dog is, and hear people commenting to other people how well behaved she is.


----------



## parus

SlabGizor117 said:


> The dog is continually reinforced throughout the other 90 times by the praise you give him to show he did the right thing.


The only reason you say something like this is that you've literally never trained a dog.


----------



## CptJack

ireth0 said:


> I mean, I can provide videos, but I kind of doubt the OP cares to watch them.
> 
> But if you're interested, OP, I have been told over and over again how HAPPY (in tonight's class alone I heard it like min 3 times) and engaged my dog is, and hear people commenting to other people how well behaved she is.


I doubt OP will too but I'm pretty sure it being the internet someone's reading who isn't posting - or is going to read some point in the future and might accidentally learn something. (Post).


----------



## Shell

Kuma'sMom said:


> Done! And I'll be setting up my brand new flight school shortly. Oh, I do use some fairly harsh corrections if you make a mistake, but only after I've forced you to do the same exercise over and over at least 100 times in a row. You're fine with that, right?


I once flew on a plane where the seats weren't all bolted to the floor and the cabin filled with smoke/fog before take-off and the in-flight meal was undercooked chicken and, despite the plane being a jet, the pilots were only rated for a visual landing so thankfully there were no clouds at the destination.

You might be a step up from that as a flight instructor.

Somehow, I think the comparison of that flight to the OPs approach to dog training might be a little too apt.


----------



## BostonBullMama

I weep for the dogs you will "train" with these methods... those families will end up spending more money hiring new trainers to fix the new problems created by this method of training OR the dog won't stand a chance and will eventually lose their home or be euthanized. 

It's really sad to see someone who wants to follow this career path, close their mind to options that lead to the same result quicker and without using force or aversives to achieve the goal. 

As a dog trainer, I find your post saddening and horrifying... why on earth would you idolize a man who trains a dog not to dig by holding their nose underwater??? 

If I were a potential client, you'd never be given the opportunity to "train" my dog.


----------



## parus

I will say that it'd be pretty entertaining to watch someone try to make a typical LGD sit one hundred times in a row.


----------



## CptJack

parus said:


> I will say that it'd be pretty entertaining to watch someone try to make a typical LGD sit one hundred times in a row.


I've got 100ish pound LGDXGSD they can try it with if they want.... but I want a non-liability waiver signed first (for me, mind, not being liable when he breaks the 'trainer')


----------



## JohnnyBandit

Ghost Rider to Tower..... This is Maverick.... Requesting a Fly By.....

Negative Ghost Rider..... The Pattern is Full........

Goose: Mav Noo Noo No.... This is not a good idea...

Maverick: Hold on to your goose, Goose...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjpikTn2qAk


----------



## Laurelin

In order to be a dog trainer you need to train dogs. Simple as that.


----------



## ireth0

Laurelin said:


> In order to be a dog trainer you need to train dogs. Simple as that.


Word.

I have worked with probably hundreds of dogs at this point, I would never consider myself a trainer.


----------



## CptJack

ireth0 said:


> Word.
> 
> I have worked with probably hundreds of dogs at this point, I would never consider myself a trainer.


Honestly, for me a 'Dog Trainer' as opposed to someone training dogs is basically 'are people willing to pay you to do it'. I know people training their own dogs or in shelters actually ARE trainers, but the real dividing line for me is in having clients, you know?


----------



## JohnnyBandit

Laurelin said:


> In order to be a dog trainer you need to train dogs. Simple as that.


You cannot be a dog trainer by simply reading a book?


What about the neighbor's dog?


----------



## ireth0

CptJack said:


> Honestly, for me a 'Dog Trainer' as opposed to someone training dogs is basically 'are people willing to pay you to do it'. I know people training their own dogs or in shelters actually ARE trainers, but the real dividing line for me is in having clients, you know?


Yea I feel you.

Also I always feel like even though I do know some things, I am also always learning new things and in awe of the wonderful people I've had the privilege of working with and learning from. I know things... and I also know nothing, it feels like sometimes.


----------



## CptJack

ireth0 said:


> Yea I feel you.
> 
> Also I always feel like even though I do know some things, I am also always learning new things and in awe of the wonderful people I've had the privilege of working with and learning from. I know things... and I also know nothing, it feels like sometimes.


Yep. My training has changed SO MUCH in this past year and gotten so much better.

I've had peopel try to hire me? I ... refer them to people who know more, but even those people are always learning and evolving. That's why I admire them! That's... what makes a trainer worth paying for. They have so much STUFF in their heads! and it's always growing and improving and you get the benefit of all of their experiences and seminars and learning processes to add to yours. It's beautiful.


----------



## Laurelin

It is too easy to call yourself a dog trainer these days. That's about all I'll say on that. You need zero zip experience. There's no regulation which is a shame. There's so many that teach their pet to do a few things then are suddenly taking clients. Drives me batty to be honest.

But that's probably a different topic LOL. 

I can train MY dogs. The more I train the more I realize training is complicated and hard. You'll find a dog that'll break your 'hard and fast rules'. Nothing is ever 'always' in dog training.


----------



## parus

JohnnyBandit said:


> You cannot be a dog trainer by simply reading a book?
> 
> 
> What about the neighbor's dog?


Well, yesterday the OP hadn't trained any dogs, and today the OP is saying she (she?) trained the neighbor's dog, so I guess that happened overnight? OP, can you make a video of this dog's performance?


----------



## Laurelin

There's so many dogs that if you handed them to me I'd be totally horribly lost. Heck Hank was (IS) a humbling, totally redefining my ideas type of dog. 

Every dog has a lesson. Good trainers listen to their dogs and are students of their dogs. 

I'm skeptical of anyone who claims to know everything. Especially if there's nothing concrete to back it up. Work on getting some accomplishments. Get back to me once you do that. That's a good start.


----------



## CptJack

Yeah. That's the thing for me. I choose my trainers based on what they have accomplished with their dogs *and* what their students have accomplished with theirs. Not on certification, not even really on philosophy though I'd walk from anything that wasn't appropriate for my dog or made me uncomfortable, not on years in the 'industry'-

but what they've done with their dogs and what people they've taught have done with their dogs. 

I do know some people who are 'trainers' that I wouldn't give a dime to, both big names and unknowns who basically did a program, and then started taking clients and money. The second kind is ALL OVER. 

Also yes. Every dog is a learning experience. Every one. The second I started caring about more than a dog who was decent pet, my training has changed with every. single. dog. Some are pretty similar and the changes were minor, some were not, but I've had to go 'off script' with all of them. It's wonderful. Every dog's a journey.


----------



## Laurelin

Good things don't come easy! 

I can't tell you if any trainer I've gone to has a certification. And there's some horrible training chain type places where you pay a bunch then voila! Trainer!


----------



## Remaru

I started training dogs when I was a child. I read every book I could get my hands on from the library (I cleaned out the public library). I can't remember the names at this point, it has been more than two decades and I have memory issues. It was the mid-late 80's so most of the books were from the 60's and 70's. Really they were all variations on the same theme and horribly outdated even at the time. So I trained my first dog with a some outdated ideas but also a good bit of trial and error. If something didn't work for us or just didn't feel right I tossed it to the side. She was one of those dogs that worked wonderfully for praise, she was forgiving and not overly soft. 

I was also very lucky to begin volunteering with a humane society and working under a couple of wonderful trainers and a behaviorist. I was able to work with them for several years during my formative years. They had different training styles but they helped me learn that your style as a trainer should evolve as you learn more, you shouldn't be too stubborn to ask for help, and training should not be one size fits all. I was able to work with many different dogs. I'm sure I thought I knew everything as a 17-18year old. I am not the same trainer now as I was then (I can remember reading about clicker training when I was 17 and being anxious to try it out). I'm not the same trainer now as I was a year ago. 

I have taken a couple of courses that interested me. I have no interest in actually calling myself a trainer, you have to work with people for that and I don't like people. I do enjoy working with dogs and have enjoyed working with dogs in rescues and foster dogs. 

For the OP, my dogs have reliable recalls trained with positive reinforcement. I have had to test those recalls in real world scenarios far too often. I am disabled, I fall frequently. I probably fall twice a week while walking a dog. When I fall it is not uncommon for me to drop my dog's leash. Lad doesn't even walk away, he is trained to sit by my feet or head when I fall. He does so every single time without fail. He does this no matter what is happening around us. He does this without my ever using a correction on him. Just two days ago I was walking my husky x GSD and her leash came loose, I had failed to connect her leash properly and when she shook her head it came off. She did not notice and kept walking. I called her and she happily walked right back to me. There were kids down the street and she loves kids more than anything. There was a squirrel in the park and common wisdom would hold that she would want to chase that squirrel but I called her so she came. She has never failed a recall, something I trained with treats. Being next to me is what my dogs want most because I trained them to want it most.


----------



## petpeeve

JohnnyBandit said:


> Ghost Rider to Tower..... This is Maverick.... Requesting a Fly By.....
> 
> Negative Ghost Rider..... The Pattern is Full........
> 
> Goose: Mav Noo Noo No.... This is not a good idea...
> 
> Maverick: Hold on to your goose, Goose...
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjpikTn2qAk


"come to think of it ... I've never landed a plane in my life"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnoPZqC6Bfs


----------



## TheDarkestMinds

You're 4poor neighbors dogs. I definitely would not trust a 17 year old neighbor to try some out dated method out my dogs. 

Also. I am pretty positive that if you regularly beat/correct a dog for running away it will often end up with a dog with a completely unreliable recall.

The dog runs for traffic. The owner yells for the dog to come. That said owner harshly corrected said dog in previous situations when the dog did not come when called. Said dog was scarred by it's harsh correction. So Fido is heading for traffic and that human is calling his name. Well the last time that happened the dog received a beating. So why would the dog want to come? Nope that dog is going to avoid and possibly run into incoming traffic and be killed....Yeah sounds good!

I have a 7 year old Labrador/Hound mix he has been trained with positive reinforcement to come, stay, and know the boundaries of the yard. Never ONCE in his life with me in 5 years has he ever left the yard/ran out into the street (same also comes for my smaller younger dogs as well) . Never has he not responded to a stop/down/stay command and his recall is rock solid.


----------



## Crantastic

CptJack said:


> I doubt OP will too but I'm pretty sure it being the internet someone's reading who isn't posting - or is going to read some point in the future and might accidentally learn something. (Post).


Yeah, I never post in these threads because I think I'll change the OP's mind. I post because DF gets _so many_ lurkers (there are _4594_ non-registered people reading DF _right now_) and I hope that at least a few of them will see the thread and learn something. I know we've had people register before who said they'd been reading the forums for months and learned a lot. (Those people, the ones who lurk before posting and who know the general knowledge level and tone of the forum, those are the people I like. Although threads like this, where the OP horribly misread the room and dug themself into a major hole they refuse to climb out of, are fun in their own way!)


----------



## JohnnyBandit

Okay.... Lets review.... Since the OP does not seem to get it...



> Hi! I'm a trainer using the Koehler Method, ask me your questions about it!


...........



> Hi!


Hi back at ya!!!!



> I'm a trainer


No you read a book....

And since you have not trained dogs, and have not seem the practical applications of what you read, you don't understand it....



> using the Koehler Method


No... You are not using anything..... You read a book or maybe books by a guy named Koehler..



> ask me your questions about it!


Why ask you questions? you ignored most of those that did ask questions.... The few questions to did attempt to answer..... You were all over the place... It was clear that you neither understood the question nor had the knowledge to answer the question...


And why would anyone here ask you a question about dogs, training, or Koehler... You do not have a dog, do not train dogs, etc... You read a book...

You are talking to people with five, ten, twenty, even over 40 years of actual bonafide dog training experience... With... Get this novel idea.... LIVE dogs.... You know... Bark bark, pant, sniff, drool, scratch scratch.....
Peopler with titles on their dogs.. In some cases multiple titles.... And in some cases multiple titles on multiple dogs over years and years..... And years.... 

You read a book by a guy that no credible trainer.... No dog owner follows... A guy, no one, at least no one decent, has followed in your lifetime...


And with that...

Ghostrider to Tower... This is Maverick.... I am going Vertical supersonic at Mach plus point 2.


Tower this is Maverick.... Pyro is in the rear seat hanging five and I think he just peed on the radar and weapons controls....

Tower... Tower Maverick again..... I think Pyro flipped off Jester as we were going ballistic.... Is that bad? Tower... It it bad that Pyro Flipped off Jester? Tower? Tower? Ghostrider to Tower? Tower are you there? 

Dog training is not about books... It never was... You can learn theory in books... You can also, as in your case, learn some really really bad ideas.... 

Dog training is an art... EVERY dog is different... Every situation is different... Reading a book does not make you a dog trainer.... It takes actually working with dogs.....


----------



## Crantastic

I gotta say, I can't remember the last time we had a thread this long where _absolutely no one_ agreed with the OP! That should tell you something right there... because many of the people posting in this thread enjoy arguing with each other much of the time, and we all use different training techniques. Is Koehler disdain our one unifier? 

(Even Cesar Millan threads have one or two stans who come in to argue!)


----------



## Effisia

Crantastic said:


> I gotta say, I can't remember the last time we had a thread this long where _absolutely no one_ agreed with the OP! That should tell you something right there... because many of the people posting in this thread enjoy arguing with each other much of the time, and we all use different training techniques. Is Koehler disdain our one unifier?
> 
> (Even Cesar Millan threads have one or two stans who come in to argue!)


It's actually really impressive.

Here's a question I've been pondering. What gives the impression (besides Koehler's book and pro-Koehler forums) that the other methods we described don't work? I've heard a lot of talk from the OP about how Koehler is the only method for solid recalls and solid behaviors - where is that opinion coming from? Is it just other Koehler trainers telling you this? Did you read a peer-reviewed study on the differences between let's say Koehler and Premack? Did you just decide this was the case because you're already decided that you think Koehler is just the best ever?


----------



## BarnesDobies

Shell said:


> Or, the owner could not leave the dog alone bored in a yard. Or secure the fencing. Or secure the fencing and provide more stimulus to the dog to lesson the desire to dig out.
> 
> Dog didn't do anything wrong by digging out.
> 
> Set the dog up for success instead
> 
> For a good number of dogs, the scary chain from nowhere would NOT be associated with whatever action they were doing that the time but rather generalized to maybe the location (as in, the yard becomes scary) or something else happening concurrently (as in, the dog next door becomes scary because he was running at the moment the chain hit your dog)
> 
> Heck, I could -- theoretically-- smack Eva upside the head with the door (cause she has no sense of space and she is always in a hurry) and she'd have no stress about it. If I threw a chain or any other startling object? Trauma. Major emotional trauma.
> 
> Gotta know the dog you are dealing it.


I agree with all of this. You have to know the dog you are working with first of all. And second. It's 2016. If someone wants to train associating something negative with an action or location we now have e-collars. While I hate e-collars I have a doberman that that's the only way I could correct him from chasing geese into the river (and trying to swim down it) but if you put an e-collar on my dobie mix he'd be paranoid and skittish and if you zapped him with it he'd take off running for his life while the goose chasing dog just stops like "well I guess I'm not supposed to do that. That being said at least an e-collar is controlled and I'm not throwing a metal object at my dog! What happens when the dog turns his head while said chain is in the air and I hit him in the eye? What really bothers me about the original post in this is that a 17 year old read a book and is now an expert open for q&a. There are people in this forum that have been training dogs longer than he's been alive. Perhaps the q&a should be the other way around


----------



## fourdogs

Greater Swiss said:


> Do you not understand that harm can be caused by things other than the physical bruises and cuts? Are you truly blind to this?
> 
> Here is a quote from a report on a neuroimaging study done on dogs, a functional MRI to determine how they react and relate to their owners:
> "Behavior research supports the recent neuroscience too. According to Andics, dogs interact with their human caregivers in the same way babies do their parents. When dogs are scared or worried, they run to their owners, just as distressed toddlers make a beeline for their parents. This is in stark contrast to other domesticated animals: Petrified cats, as well as horses, will run away."
> ....SMH


I have a very nervous poodle. HE started out petrified of most people and other dogs. Initially I was told by a "positive" trainer to ignore him, or put him in a sit/stay or down/stay. His stress levels skyrocketed, his phobias worsened. I finally stopped listening to my "trainer" and listened to my dog instead. 

I held him up/away from anything that was scary to him for as long as he needed/wanted. Eventually he began asking to be put down and would very cautiously investigate. 

Now, at 3 years old, he might temporarily 'check in' with me, a little lap time, or just leaning against my leg with his foot on my foot, observe, and then partake of the human or dog visitors. He knows I have his back, and I'm happy to have his back. It's what a partnership should be.


----------



## CptJack

fourdogs said:


> I have a very nervous poodle. HE started out petrified of most people and other dogs. Initially I was told by a "positive" trainer to ignore him, or put him in a sit/stay or down/stay. His stress levels skyrocketed, his phobias worsened. I finally stopped listening to my "trainer" and listened to my dog instead.
> 
> I held him up/away from anything that was scary to him for as long as he needed/wanted. Eventually he began asking to be put down and would very cautiously investigate.
> 
> Now, at 3 years old, he might temporarily 'check in' with me, a little lap time, or just leaning against my leg with his foot on my foot, observe, and then partake of the human or dog visitors. He knows I have his back, and I'm happy to have his back. It's what a partnership should be.


The prevailing theory used to be that comforting dogs would make things worse. I threw that out the window slightly before theory did. 

I do a lot of things that aren't necessarily by the book though (for instance I discovered that using treats to deal with Molly's reactivity didn't work well, but just talking to her and using praise did). That's where the art aspect Johnny was talking about comes into play. Know your dog, love your dog, respect them as living creatures and be compassionate toward them and you will USUALLY not go wrong. May not land where you want to be, but you won't destroy your dog and your relationship.


----------



## trainingjunkie

SlabGizor117 said:


> What did?! You think that video was cruel, too?! There was nothing there to pick at!


Honestly, did you watch it? Did you see the dog leaning away from its handler. Did you see the shut down body language? Is that what you think a happy dog looks like? Did you see any place in the video where the intelligence of the dog is acknowledged? It looks to me like the dog is just trying to ride out the session, eager for it to end. If that dog was off leash, do you really think it would have still been there? Would the dog have "chosen" that "lesson?" 

I suppose those things don't bother you. 

I want a different picture. I want a happy and engaged dog. I want a dog who is actively trying to figure out what we're doing. I love it when my dogs pester me for more training. I like actually connecting with my dog. I consider my performance dogs to be my team-mates, not tools of the trade, not putty to be molded.

If that video represents your goal, then I can't imagine that we'll see eye to eye on much of anything when it comes to dog training.


----------



## parus

BarnesDobies said:


> There are people in this forum that have been training dogs longer than he's been alive.


I just realized one of my dogs is almost as old as the OP :\


----------



## Cheetah

OP needs to finish high school. And then I STRONGLY advise taking some animal behavior courses, before further attempting to interpret canine body language. Period. u.u

One should not diss other training methods, before thoroughly exploring them first. 

And seeing as how EVERY SINGLE PERSON on this thread disagrees with you (which doesn't often happen)... I think you should take a step back and think about that.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest

This was a good pop back in for me on a lazy Saturday. 

Every thing is great in theory, ain't it, OP? Koehler aside, you can't preach any thing you haven't experienced. I've seen some recommendations that you get a dog and go through the training struggles, but I don't recommend that at all. I agree with Cheetah. In order to understand why these methods are heavily disagreed with, stop reading a book on training and start learning about dog behavior. If you don't first understand what a dog is telling you in all their means of communication, you don't really understand what your training method is actually doing to the dog. The end doesn't justify the means. 

This reminds me of the 19 year old employee at my center, hired before I took over. No experience, but very, very sure of how things should be done. Very, very sure until she put an extremely leash reactive, very sensitive to frustration and correction dog on a leash in the middle of a group environment as a "time out" and he bit her when she attempted to correct him.


----------



## Flaming

Effisia said:


> Alphabet soup after a dog's name is all well and good, but I want a dog with boozy cupcakes after their name. Or maybe just a dog that pulls a cart behind them that's filled with boozy cupcakes. A behavior I can teach them with positive reinforcement...


Manna does this! but I need a new cart now...I was using a makeshift trash piece before, I'm now looking to get a child wagon and modifying it so I can get Manna to pull my weight in boozy cupcakes!



Shell said:


> http://www.seriouseats.com/2012/02/15-minute-creamy-tomato-soup-vegan.html
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard of people teaching their dogs to fetch beers from the fridge but really, isn't teaching the dog to open the fridge and get items just asking for trouble? Chester already can reach the back of the counter tops, so I am resigned to fetching my own adult beverages.


My dad did this, or attempted to do this while dog sitting one weekend when I had to leave town.
I came back to a dog who will never go hungry if abandoned in a house with a stocked fridge lol. 




----------- Now to the OP and anyone else who goes by the Koehler Method------------

On a training note. 
one of my dogs outweighs myself by 50lbs and I have physical limitations that make it so that an accurate comparison would be twice that difficulty. There is no way that I would ever be able to force physical manipulation on her. 

That being said I have trained her to do a great many things without much force (I admit to being a bit rough when proofing a few things because in the trained application of those maneuvers she would be under physical strain and/or stress.)

Using the Koehler Method you suggest that it's going to take 50-100 repetitions to teach sit with using physical manipulation. 
I think we have 10 reps before I could start to toss the treats in the cupboard and get a reliable sit.
With my younger dog...no treats at all as she doesn't care for treats. 

Just today I taught a dog (not my own) to sit in a bathtub for a shower, stay in the bathtub while I left the room to get the dryer and on top of all that the bathroom stayed dry as did myself (with the exception of my arms because I used them to wash the dog.)
No treats or toys involved. This dog has a history of positive reinforcement training to the point that we don't need the treats to start behaviors anymore, though treats do help. 
Could I do this using the Koehler Method? yes. But this dog, despite hating water, was happy to do as I asked! and a happy dog is more likely going to want to please and work with you than an unhappy dog and a happy dog is more likely to be reliable. My dogs don't think of these things as a game, they do these things because it makes me happy and they get things that they want out of it. It's a great mutual benefit and they are more likely to learn other more complicated behaviors that I aim for. 


I HAVE to trust my older dog with my life and well being daily. She stabilizes me when my legs want to give out, she picks me up off the ground when I fall because my legs have given out and she maintains space for me when I just need to sit on the ground to regain use of my legs. 
She does this happily and eagerly on top of a few more motions that I require and a few tricks that I will need as my body slowly fails more and more. 
But she is also up and willing for a lot of fun and hilarious times as well. 

A shut down dog is unlikely to know what to do to stop someone from committing self harm due to depression and anxiety. That is something only a dog that isn't afraid of it's life can explore and learn how to do. 

If I used the Koehler Method with Manna I do not think that we would have the relationship today that has resulted in her literally saving my life from myself and others over a dozen times in the last 3 years.


----------



## Cheetah

This reminds me of me when I first entered the online dog community... I came out of a very heavy handed family, and as a result, started out that way myself... and made my way onto my first dog forum as a cocky 19-year-old and spouted off the crappy training methods I was using on Eevee (which weren't working, and were why I was there in the first place). Everyone jumped all over me, I was stubborn and defensive and refused to take criticism at the time, because I was a teenager and knew everything.

Man, this takes me back... lol

I guess the only difference is that after I got jumped on, I took a step back and re-evaluated my methods lol.

And now I just got back from showing my dog how to do Barn Hunt, without marking on the hay bales (a problem he had during our first attempt, which DQ'd us). He was ON TASK today. He was after those critters! He was so excited to work! And not one single inappropriate leg-lift from him. AND GUESS WHAT? I got him to work WITHOUT instilling fear in him... without jerking him around, alpha rolling him, hanging him up by his leash and collar, or even touching him at all (except to praise and pet for every time he found the correct tube containing the rat). I had to once again take a step back, and see what *I* (NOT HE) was doing wrong. I had to think and brainstorm on the best way to motivate him to search, and I feel that I have strengthened my relationship with my dog today even further, by correctly reading him/knowing how he thinks and using that to get him to "switch on" for working - And we both had a great time! I am so proud of him, and I see great things in our future together. <3 <--- THIS is the kind of thing that you want. Even if you argue with all of us here, even if you think we're narrow-minded jerks, I hope you will come away from this with AT LEAST a curiosity for other methods, and a desire to learn some serious canine behavior. It's worth it, it really is. For you, and any future dog you own or train.


----------



## MrsBoats

OMG...ROFLMAO!!! This kid hasn't even trained a dog in their life and says: 



> Secondly, it guarantees off leash reliability in as little as 10 weeks, and you can walk out of your class on the 10th week straight into the Novice Obedience Ring and title your dog.


Yeah...okay. 10 weeks in a novice obedience class..and you can walk right into a novice obedience ring and title your dog! BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Oh kiddo...you have a ton to learn... BWAHAHAHAH!!!!


----------



## Lillith

Effisia said:


> From Koehler's book:
> "When finally it is obvious that he is physically incapable of expressing his resentment and is lowered to the ground, he will probably stagger looplegged for a few steps, vomit once or twice, and roll over on his side. The sight of a dog lying, thick-tongued, on his side is not pleasant, but do not let it alarm you. I have dealt with hundreds of these"
> 
> "Select a piece of the material he has chewed and place it well back, crossways, in his mouth. Use a strip of adhesive tape to wrap the muzzle securely in front of the chewed material, so that no amount of gagging and clawing can force it from his mouth. Perhaps you are wondering if these frantic efforts to rid himself of the material will cause the dog to scratch himself painfully. Yup. They surely will."
> 
> "Equip yourself with a man's leather belt or strap heavy enough to give your particular dog a good tanning. Yup - we're going to strike him. Real hard…lay the strap vigorously against his thighs. Keep pouring it on him until he thinks it's the bitter end."
> 
> "Fill the hole to its brim with water. . . . bring the dog to the hole and shove his nose into the water; hold him there until he is sure he's drowning. . . . fill the hole with water and repeat the experience the next day, whether the dog digs any more or not."


Oh my goodness....That's horrifying. I grew up with dog training methods that were...less than positive. You know, slapped for biting, rubbing nose in pee, things that are not considered the most effective method anymore. Those excerpts are just...sickening. I could never bring myself to do that to my dog, and I don't think my "old fashioned" parents could either. I would destroy him. I was a sensitive kid and I couldn't correct our dogs the "normal" way, which is one of the reasons I started learning about positive dog training methods when we finally got decent Internet on the farm.

It boggles my mind that anyone could accept this as an effective training method that builds a relationship with a dog that's foundation isn't in fear. And what the heck is a throw chain? Do you throw a chain at your dog as its running away? What on earth is that supposed to accomplish? It almost sounds like as this guy was writing his book he just thought of every possible scenario of behavioral issues and pulled bogus correction methods from his nether regions. Some of these are almost comical until you realize he's serious.


----------



## JohnnyBandit

This is truly and historic thread.... I do not believe there has been another thread like it.

For close to 30 years, I have said that the quickest way to start World War III is to put ten people that train dogs in a room and ask them the best way to teach a dog to sit....

The OP though... Has somehow found a way to unit people on this forum that never agree on subjects. 


On a personal level I would like to thank the OP for opening my eyes and allowing to realize that I am in fact a Top Gun Pilot. 

I am going to take up playing beach volleyball in no shirt and jeans.... Then later I am going to take a shower in the house of a woman I am on a first date with....


----------



## PatriciafromCO

am still curious about the red velvet cake..... I've never had it... and I'm from the south...


----------



## JohnnyBandit

Effisia said:


> From Koehler's book:
> "When finally it is obvious that he is physically incapable of expressing his resentment and is lowered to the ground, he will probably stagger looplegged for a few steps, vomit once or twice, and roll over on his side. The sight of a dog lying, thick-tongued, on his side is not pleasant, but do not let it alarm you. I have dealt with hundreds of these"
> 
> "Select a piece of the material he has chewed and place it well back, crossways, in his mouth. Use a strip of adhesive tape to wrap the muzzle securely in front of the chewed material, so that no amount of gagging and clawing can force it from his mouth. Perhaps you are wondering if these frantic efforts to rid himself of the material will cause the dog to scratch himself painfully. Yup. They surely will."
> 
> "Equip yourself with a man's leather belt or strap heavy enough to give your particular dog a good tanning. Yup - we're going to strike him. Real hard…lay the strap vigorously against his thighs. Keep pouring it on him until he thinks it's the bitter end."
> 
> "Fill the hole to its brim with water. . . . bring the dog to the hole and shove his nose into the water; hold him there until he is sure he's drowning. . . . fill the hole with water and repeat the experience the next day, whether the dog digs any more or not."
> 
> 
> *Why do you think this sort of training builds a better relationship with a dog than using force-free methods?
> *Why do you think this sort of thing is okay to do to an animal?
> *Is there some updated version of his text that you use instead of the original that these quotes are taken from?
> *How many dogs have you thus far used this method on?
> *Do you know how to identify the difference between a well-trained dog and a dog that is emotionally shut-down?
> *Have you used this method on soft or sensitive dogs and what has been the observable result?
> *What have you studied in terms of understanding and reading canine body language?
> *What other trainers and methods have you studied?


Normally I am not one to favor law enforcement intervention when it comes to training methods..

But it is worth mentioning that some of the methods Koehler described.... Will garner a person a felony charge.. And prison time.... It will affect your career, ability to vote, ability to buy firearms, And you will go to prison... Not county jail.. Prison.... And criminals do not tend to like dog abusers any more than child abusers.... A person in on felony animal cruelty will not have a good experience in General Population once the inmates find out they are an animal abuser...



> "When finally it is obvious that he is physically incapable of expressing his resentment and is lowered to the ground, he will probably stagger looplegged for a few steps, vomit once or twice, and roll over on his side. The sight of a dog lying, thick-tongued, on his side is not pleasant, but do not let it alarm you. I have dealt with hundreds of these"


 This will get you a felony charge in many states...



> "Select a piece of the material he has chewed and place it well back, crossways, in his mouth. Use a strip of adhesive tape to wrap the muzzle securely in front of the chewed material, so that no amount of gagging and clawing can force it from his mouth. Perhaps you are wondering if these frantic efforts to rid himself of the material will cause the dog to scratch himself painfully. Yup. They surely will."


We have recently had two cases of folks taping dog mouths in our area.... One was sentenced to five years in state prison and sent to Raiford.... With the murderers, rapists, kidnappers, robbers, etc... I say good... There are all types of justice in the world... The other is awaiting sentencing....




> "Equip yourself with a man's leather belt or strap heavy enough to give your particular dog a good tanning. Yup - we're going to strike him. Real hard…lay the strap vigorously against his thighs. Keep pouring it on him until he thinks it's the bitter end."


If not a felony this is just plain mean hearted...

I would invite anyone that wants to use a leather strap on a dog, come meet my Merlin.... You can swing that leather at him all you want... You are not going to hit him.... He has faced a stinger many times... And if you got lucky and smacked him one time.... Well you will be sorry.... And at the end, you are going to wish you had never thought of hitting a dog with a strap.... You are also going to hope I am feeling very forgiving that day and the word OUT comes out of my mouth...



> "Fill the hole to its brim with water. . . . bring the dog to the hole and shove his nose into the water; hold him there until he is sure he's drowning. . . . fill the hole with water and repeat the experience the next day, whether the dog digs any more or not."


 Another felony charge.... Prison...



PatriciafromCO said:


> am still curious about the red velvet cake..... I've never had it... and I'm from the south...


Maverick does not eat red velvet cake...


----------



## Remaru

I love red velvet cake, maybe it is just the way I make it? Adjusting to gluten free baking has been tricky but I've managed.


----------



## cookieface

I was searching for something this morning and came across this comment. Seem to fit here.



> There is an inverse correlation between trainer skill and intensity of corrections: the better the trainer, the fewer and less harsh the corrections. Trainers who use harsh physical corrections simply do not have enough experience or knowledge to do better.


Nicole Wilde, https://wildewmn.wordpress.com/2013/01/29/the-inverse-correlation/


----------



## Sandakat

I'm saddened that the OP can't see that punishment is not a good motivator for learning. 

Try thinking of it this way... think of a class that you had in high school where you had a really good teacher who praised the students and challenged them to think. Now remember a class where the teacher was boring, and did everything by rote, and maybe had some disdain or belittled or punished the students. In which class did you learn more? In which one were you happy and excited to learn? The dogs are going to feel the same way. Positive, interesting training is much more motivating that endless repetition and punishment.


----------



## fourdogs

I agree the dog in the video is stressed. Panting, wide eyes, leaning away, glancing away. He's doing it because he HAS to, because if he doesn't there's "correction." 

My PWD is joyously glued to my leg for heeling. Fast, slow, turns, backing up. GLUE. And smiling. Staring up at me, wagging tail the whole time. When I release her from the exercise, she joyously barks and bounces and asks to do more. 

I suppose both dogs in this case are "well trained." But which team would you want to be part of? Master and slave? Or a couple of friends having a great time?


----------



## ireth0

Alright. So videos. 

Here is a video of my dog heeling;





Here is a video of recall with distractions;





Here is a video of us doing random things, including heeling, some tricks, and new behaviours;





Here is a video of my dog -copying what I do-;





Do note that in all videos, my dog's tail is wagging off the hook, she has overall loose body language, and is fully engaged and wanting to work with me.


----------



## JeJo

I remember when I was 17, and when my children and many nieces and nephews and their friends were 17... and one thing that can be said, is that given enough food for thought, let alone 17 patient pages of it, some will have had to sink in to be mulled over later. -Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but given time to truly reflect, maturity to process, and more life's experience, the DF's sage sharings just may make a difference in the OP's future life with dogs. That it was given, for the most part, in a positive non-forceful manner, makes it more likely... and makes me proud to be a DF member. There is hope.


----------



## LittleFr0g

I just saw this video posted by a friend on FB, and the partnership between not only human and dog, but human, dog, AND horse is just amazing! Look how happy, focused, and relaxed both animals are. I would dearly love to see someone accomplish this using harsh methods like Koehler's.

https://www.facebook.com/jutta.brinkhoff/videos/vb.100002898837000/729059757200645/?type=2&theater


----------



## TGKvr

Well and I just went and tripped down this rabbit hole! Rather than debate the merits of this method, which has been pretty well beaten to death, I'm just going to put out there what my observation of this entire discussion leads me to conclude.

A person with a desire to become a dog trainer will, indeed, research any and all methods available to them, and develop their own way of incorporating various said methods.
A person with a desire to become a SUCCESSFUL dog trainer will ASK QUESTIONS, solicit advice, and legitimately take a step back from the ego and understand that there is knowledge to be gained by discussing these various methods with professionals and recreational/casual trainers alike.

I'm frankly astonished at the level of defensiveness and stubborn intent on the part of the OP. I can totally understand why a person would read a book, decide that the method works for them, and pursue it. I can NOT understand why a person would then completely disregard any and all comments, suggestions, and advice that happen to be at odds with the person's original intent. The very fact that there is no trace of humility, respect, or curiosity on the part of the OP says a lot about his/her personality and honestly, why this person would choose aversive training methods in the first place.

I'm by no means a trainer, but I have trained dogs. I've been in the show ring. I'm constantly researching and seeking to improve and I enjoy hearing all sides and opinions on specific methods, whether or not I agree with them. Instead of being so defensive, why not ask some questions of your own? Why not step back and say "Hmm... all these people seem to agree on this, maybe there's something I'm really missing here". There is no shame in acknowledging that perhaps you are hasty in your determination of the "right" way to train. I personally have used a variety of techniques, and like so many others here that are older, my earlier training days included methods I would never use now. And you know what? Having used these different methods, I can say with certainty that the +R method is, IN MY PERSONAL OBSERVATION AND EXPERIENCE, proven to be much more stable and effective. I think there is a time and a place for physical corrections, sometimes though (unlike many forum members here), but it has to be a very extenuating and specific circumstance, with a very specific type of dog personality, and not an overall "method".

I beseech you, OP, to do more research and to really take some of this advice to heart - I know it can feel like a personal attack but the one thing we all have in common here is a love of dogs. Everyone wants what's best for the dog, so when you come in here with a chip on your shoulder and refuse to even have a level-headed discussion about the negative parts of your chosen path, we worry for your future dogs. I have a young dog that is in her formative training years right now... I don't know it all. I don't even pretend to, and I don't pretend that one method in particular is the best, though I can see right now, with my *hard* bully dog, that positive training makes for a better dog and a better relationship, end of story. I know it seems like everyone here is being really harsh, but truly we want to help open your eyes to other, more positive methods of training, and to encourage you to simply research research research.

All knowledge is worth having.


----------



## Kudzu

Oh boy, this is quite a thread.....I couldn't quite get through all 17 pages, but here is what I would like to say to the OP, just as a layperson, who has trained only her own two dogs and has never expected perfection from them.

You cannot even begin to work on becoming a dog trainer until you experience the amazing relationship that develops between a dog and human when interaction is based on mutual love, trust, and respect. This is where understanding is born....you won't find it in any training book, although there are a number of excellent books that can help to facilitate empathy of humans towards dogs and other animals. My favorite is 'The Other End of The Leash', which I think has already been suggested. There are many ways to keep a dog safe from being hit by a car or euthanized. Positive training, secure fencing, leashes, management of environment, keeping them occupied....many, many alternatives to using force. Dogs are highly social, intelligent creatures. Force isn't needed, motivation and relationship is the key. You need to realize that dogs are sentient beings that humans are incredibly fortunate to share the world with.....not our slaves. My advice is to set your training aspirations aside for the moment and go volunteer at a local shelter caring for dogs in need. I hope you will work to develop your sense of empathy and understanding before you settle on one very unkind way of teaching.


----------



## TSTrainer

Woah, what a thread!

OP, when I started training dogs, just about a year ago, I did not have one of my own. I did, however, have shelves full of those books you've been recommended over the course of this thread. SHELVES. And I am constantly getting more, I have a Jean Donaldson book in my bad right this second, as a matter of fact. I've been reading these books since I was a CHILD, never subscribing to any one trainer as the be-all-end-all of dog training. I remember the first books I ever read on dog training, one by Barbara Woodhouse and one by Brian Kilcommons. I took those books EVERYWHERE, memorized them, and I still remember those lessons I learned. Now, though, I also have new favorite trainers, and stacks of books to refer to when I have a question or need to brush up on something. It is impossible to be a successful trainer without broadening your scope of knowledge. And it is very hard to become a trainer... sure anyone can say they are one but to be taken seriously you need to build a reputation, have connections, and experience. Right now, you have no experience, you have no connections, and your reputation is getting worse with every post you make. When I became a trainer, I had already been shadowing other trainers, spending time at shelters, and working with my roommate's two dogs. I quit my full time job with benefits for a part time dog training job with a pay cut at a pet supply chain. You think that was easy too? No, they take their training program VERY seriously. I had to do more months of shadowing other trainers, hours and hours of book study, and in the end I had to take a massive, difficult test (even for me, and I knew all the material through research and practice before I was hired!). I could only take that test one time, and passing was a 95%. You are nowhere near prepared for this job and you won't be until you read more books, talk to more people, spend more time around dogs. DO NOT take the intelligence and companionship of a dog for granted. It is a dog trainer's responsibility to bring those things to light, show people the potential of their companions. Dogs are far more misunderstood that the average person would like to believe, an it pains me that there are still people out there who think causing a dog "discomfort" is a smart way to train a dog. 

Koehler's method cannot possibly have been proven to work on every dog breed. Not only for the reasons others have given you, but because some breeds haven't even existed since his death! Think about it... I have three VERY different dogs in my home right now. A very hard dog who can probably take being smacked around a little (though it is not necessary, he is extremely smart and learns lessons WITH TREATS in a matter of minutes), a very soft dog who is SO SENSITIVE to body language that before, when you would lean over him to put his collar on he would stress-pee. We have had him since he was a puppy, he had never had a bad experience with a collar before and yet there we were. How have I managed that? By using treats and really fun long walks! Now, with a combination of positively desensitizing him to the collar with TREATS and fun activities, AND paying attention to how I am presenting myself to him when I put it on, he couldn't be happier to go for a walk! Can you imagine.... if he voids his bladder from stress simply from the thought of the completely pain free process of putting a collar on, it hurts me to imagine what stringing him up from a choker would do. And finally, I have a six month old poodle puppy, who is fearless and wild and so much fun! She is curious and can be troublesome but ALWAYS wants to be close to me and her recall is excellent. Why do you think that is? Perhaps it's because she does not associate me with discomfort. I have taught her everything she knows without laying a hand on her. I have taught her to stand nicely for me after a bath so I can blow dry her without a fight, she willingly gives me her paws when she sees my clippers so that I can shave the hair out of the pads of her feet and from the tops of her toes. She lays in my lap while I do her back feet and shave her belly and sanitary area. Not because I have been forceful, but because I have been kind and firm but gentle and she recognizes it as part of our routine, but most of all, because she ENJOYS the time with me.

I would never want to use the Koehler method, or any real forceful method, on any of my dogs dogs because I LIKE their flaws. As a trainer, I have to say my favorite dogs are the ones who misbehave. Those are the creative, intelligent, problem-solvers that have me in love with them as a species. When training misbehaved dogs, I enjoy harnessing that spirit and teaching them how to use it in a more human-compatible way. Punishing a dog like that is going to completely ruin it. Listen, I am SO passionate about dogs, I can appreciate everything about them. Their body language is nuanced, their thoughts and feelings can be mysterious, their intelligence blows my mind! They are completely innocent byproducts of the growth of humanity. Without them we wouldn't be where we are today. They have protected us, helped us, comforted us, HEALED us... why should we treat them any differently than they have treated us for thousands of years?


----------



## Bentwings

OP, since you are into reading, try Monks of New Skete original release vs. new release. Note that they even retracted much of the heavy hand training. The retraction is widely noted. 
Try some of Leerburg' lastest training. He too has radically changed their methods. 

Get with the program,man.


----------



## Artikk

SlabGizor117 said:


> A dog is in the back yard and digs under the fence to explore the neighborhood. That's his action. The resulting memory is that he had fun, which leads to his desire to do it again. So, he comes back home and the owner(not a knowledgeable dog trainer, for sake of illustration) sees him, and chews him out. Vocally, that is. So that's not too convincing to the dog, and he decides that he'd rather go explore again the next time the owners are away. This time, when he comes back the owners are waiting for him and(not recommending this, as I said the "owner" is not knowledgeable in training or anything) the owner drags him to the hole under the fence, yells at him, and gives him a few smacks on the butt. So the action of escaping the fence and the resulting punishment led to the unpleasant memory of the consequence, which lessened his desire to try to escape the back yard again.


i know you said that this hypothetical person is not well versed in training, but even as an example this doesn't really work for some dogs, i would even say most. Rather than the dog associating the punishment received with digging under the fence and having a good time, he would associate coming home after running away with being punished, that dog isnt going to know why you brought him to that hole, all he knows is you brought him home and he is now being punished.

I am not a well versed trainer, but that does seem like the more logical conclusion rather than the former.


----------



## TSTrainer

Artikk said:


> i know you said that this hypothetical person is not well versed in training, but even as an example this doesn't really work for some dogs, i would even say most. Rather than the dog associating the punishment received with digging under the fence and having a good time, he would associate coming home after running away with being punished, that dog isnt going to know why you brought him to that hole, all he knows is you brought him home and he is now being punished.
> 
> I am not a well versed trainer, but that does seem like the more logical conclusion rather than the former.


Yes, dogs live in the moment so while you might think bringing him to the hole he dug is showing him he did something bad, all he is thinking is "oh no I came home after a really fun time and now I'm being dragged around the yard and my owner is really scary!!" And they will be less likely to return next time in order to avoid a similar fate. 

I always teach people to CELEBRATE every time their dog comes to them, even if they are livid with their dog. I also teach responsible ownership, so always supervising their dog outdoors, keeping them engaged so that they don't look for entertainment on their own, and controlling their environment so that the dog is best protected. It's really not that hard, and it doesn't result in a terrified and traumatized dog.


----------



## Crantastic

Relevant to this discussion: Introducing "The Classics"


----------



## petpeeve

Wirehairedvizslalove said:


> Can someone give me a summary of what that training method is like? I've never heard of it.


 Well, it's not a summary, but it's a pretty graphic depiction typical of the method. The following videos are from a certified and endorsed Koehler Method trainer, and apparently one of her students ...

[WARNING: anyone with even a shred of compassion and kindness will likely find this disturbing]

1) Take special note of the JRT/mix in the foreground. And for those who may not realize, this dog is displaying a severe stress wag, not a happy wag. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZK5Aaez-sIA

2) Same dog, Figure 8 practice. Note the outside loop of the F8 pattern, with the leash held in the right hand/draped across the front of the handler, 'automatically' correcting the dog every time it lags. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1niFlTMIQqg

3) Same dog again, learning the down position. Note how at every halt the dog is already willing to offer the down voluntarily, yet the handler insists on not capitalizing on that in favour of physical manipulation each and every time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VXqSbHuPL4

For further reference, here is the youtuibe channel these videos were taken from. https://www.youtube.com/user/giftwrap/videos 

Also. Odd that the handler appears to be about 17 yrs old or so, but she has actual dogs. In my opinion, this is not the type of handler we want to groom our up and coming competitors to become. And for that matter, nor is it an efficient method overall.


----------



## Artikk

petpeeve said:


> Well, it's not a summary, but it's a pretty graphic depiction typical of the method. The following videos are from a certified and endorsed Koehler Method trainer, and apparently one of her students ...
> 
> [WARNING: anyone with even a shred of compassion and kindness will likely find this disturbing]
> 
> 1) Take special note of the JRT/mix in the foreground. And for those who may not realize, this dog is displaying a severe stress wag, not a happy wag. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZK5Aaez-sIA
> 
> 2) Same dog, Figure 8 practice. Note the outside loop of the F8 pattern, with the leash held in the right hand/draped across the front of the handler, 'automatically' correcting the dog every time it lags. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1niFlTMIQqg
> 
> 3) Same dog again, learning the down position. Note how at every halt the dog is already willing to offer the down voluntarily, yet the handler insists on not capitalizing on that in favour of physical manipulation each and every time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VXqSbHuPL4
> 
> For further reference, here is the youtuibe channel these videos were taken from. https://www.youtube.com/user/giftwrap/videos
> 
> Also. Odd that the handler appears to be about 17 yrs old or so, but she has actual dogs. In my opinion, this is not the type of handler we want to groom our up and coming competitors to become. And for that matter, nor is it an efficient method overall.


OMG, Honestly it seems effective for them as the dogs are listening. but that little pup looks so terrified and she is the furthest thing from loving and gentle.


----------



## Luxorien

petpeeve said:


> Well, it's not a summary, but it's a pretty graphic depiction typical of the method. The following videos are from a certified and endorsed Koehler Method trainer, and apparently one of her students ...
> 
> [WARNING: anyone with even a shred of compassion and kindness will likely find this disturbing]
> 
> 1) Take special note of the JRT/mix in the foreground. And for those who may not realize, this dog is displaying a severe stress wag, not a happy wag. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZK5Aaez-sIA
> 
> 2) Same dog, Figure 8 practice. Note the outside loop of the F8 pattern, with the leash held in the right hand/draped across the front of the handler, 'automatically' correcting the dog every time it lags. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1niFlTMIQqg
> 
> 3) Same dog again, learning the down position. Note how at every halt the dog is already willing to offer the down voluntarily, yet the handler insists on not capitalizing on that in favour of physical manipulation each and every time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VXqSbHuPL4
> 
> For further reference, here is the youtuibe channel these videos were taken from. https://www.youtube.com/user/giftwrap/videos
> 
> Also. Odd that the handler appears to be about 17 yrs old or so, but she has actual dogs. In my opinion, this is not the type of handler we want to groom our up and coming competitors to become. And for that matter, nor is it an efficient method overall.


What is most disturbing about this is that I would have found it completely unobjectionable ten years ago. :3


----------



## voodookitten

I got 3 mins in. That was just awful. How the heck can anyone think that is ok is beyond me  and she smiles continually. Like what she is doing is a GOOD thing. Poor dog. And poor handler, I do feel sorry for her in a way as she is missing out on so much by training her dog like that  Hopefully she will look back one day and realize how wrong she was.


----------



## hanksimon

I believe the Op may have left the building.


----------



## Bentwings

Well after 18 pages of getting one's ears pasted back we can't blame him. Hopefully all this has caused him to take at least a second look before telling his " disciples " how messed up we are. In a way maybe we "Koehlered" him with bruising text. I hope he didn't take it that way. All of us are well meaning and try not to bruise egos.....but sometimes the egg just breaks.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs

TSTrainer said:


> Yes, dogs live in the moment so while you might think bringing him to the hole he dug is showing him he did something bad, all he is thinking is "oh no I came home after a really fun time and now I'm being dragged around the yard and my owner is really scary!!" And they will be less likely to return next time in order to avoid a similar fate.
> 
> I always teach people to CELEBRATE every time their dog comes to them, even if they are livid with their dog. I also teach responsible ownership, so always supervising their dog outdoors, keeping them engaged so that they don't look for entertainment on their own, and controlling their environment so that the dog is best protected. It's really not that hard, and it doesn't result in a terrified and traumatized dog.


Okay I havent read through this entire thread because halfway through, my eyes started to cross ... LOL. I think I have read enough to get the gist, though, so here it goes.

I used to use many of the methods discussed here, because 10-20 years ago they were the status quo and sure I COULD use them now, but why? Those methods suppress drive and free thinking in a dog, and why the heck would i want to do that? LOL. I shake my head at people who expect their dogs to work for nothing, I mean people don't work for no pay, why would dogs? Dogs like to get paid, too. Now as they advance in their training I will get more stingy with my pay, but I always pay them.


----------



## Bentwings

> . Now as they advance in their training I will get more stingy with my pay, but I always pay them.


Haha, sounds like a bunch of former bosses.


----------



## DogtorWho15

Um...... well wow....... I didnt read all 18 pages but I did read about half. And I wanted to cry. 
Ive never heard of the koehler method until now but my first thoughts is he a sociopath?? That is so cruel........ I wont even hook the leash to my dogs collar because I am scared she will go run towards a rabbit I didnt see all of a sudden, and hurt her neck, and this is just to go do a quick thing, its always with a harness. How in the world can people even stand there hanging their dog?
I feel bad for not only the dogs but for the people who he infected in his time as well....

Im gonna share my story real quick.
I am a first time dog owner, never trained anything a day in my life. I got Nova unexpectedly, I didnt want her but she wanted me, I was also unlucky enough to get a dog that is a VERY difficult dog to train, she doesnt have much drive for anything and is certainly not a people pleaser. Shes ornery, and a brat and so smart it is always getting her in trouble not to mention she is active as hell, seriously so much that people comment on how hard she is. But I have never loved an animal more. Ive only been a dog owner for a year, and in that amount of time, I have already grown so so much. I look back on my first post here and it makes me so sad and embarrassed to think I did the things that I did to my beautiful girl. I used slip leashes and jerked it to teach her how to walk. I spanked and used negative reinforcement (nothing as cruel as koehler but it still wasnt right) 
I have made a complete turn in 6 months, not only is our training going better than I couldve ever hoped for, but I have a real actual relationship with my dog, she does things because she wants to!! Not because she is so scared to do anything else and think for herself that she does what I ask.
Im still very very young and I know for a fact that I dont know it all, and ive barely gotten anything down, but I am growing everyday. And one thing I do know for sure is if I used the koehler method on my dog, she WOULD NOT be a dog...... She would be broken. She is close to my heart, not to my feet to be trampled on.
She makes me so happy and has helped me through so many things, how could anyone repay a dog like THAT? 

The fact that youre so stuck on this method and closed minded to anything else as well, is sick. Not only do You watch videos of him doing this to dogs you go and do them yourself, how on earth do you even sleep?? I really hope that you can grow as much as I am and that this thread and all these conversations will get you to at least open your mind and let something in. I guarantee you and all dogs will benefit greatly.

Also I dont even see how most of the methods work! If a dog is digging out of the fence, and having fun while he is out, and the second he comes back he gets beat, that dog would just dig out again, and not come back. I know for a fact mine would do that if I wouldve used those methods on her. She is smart enough to know "home is where bad people are, and being out is where everything good is" Which one would you choose?? 

I have so so much more to say on this subject, but I am done. Its as simple as his methods suck and no one in their sane mind would use them. And it makes me scared to leave my dog with anyone now that I know there are a few people who still adore this method......


----------



## Willowy

There are some child raising gurus out there who are very similar to Koehler, and they have similarly rabid supporters. I'm not sure how anyone can justify that kind of behavior, I think some people are just waiting for someone to tell them it's OK to act like that :/. 



> my first thoughts is he a sociopath??


Haha, I was reading a blog speaking out against that kind of behavior against children, and someone said something like that, and one of the commenters said "Hey now! I'm a diagnosed sociopath and I would never treat a kid like that!"


----------



## hanksimon

@DogtorWho15 - Is your dog a greyhound mix, or a Lab mix, or ??? I can't tell from the photos.


----------



## DogtorWho15

Willowy said:


> There are some child raising gurus out there who are very similar to Koehler, and they have similarly rabid supporters. I'm not sure how anyone can justify that kind of behavior, I think some people are just waiting for someone to tell them it's OK to act like that :/.
> 
> 
> 
> Haha, I was reading a blog speaking out against that kind of behavior against children, and someone said something like that, and one of the commenters said "Hey now! I'm a diagnosed sociopath and I would never treat a kid like that!"


Ive seen some pretty crazy stuff about how to raise kids as well, its sad. 
Hahaha!! Well if these methods are what normal is, then I definitely wanna be a sociopath  



hanksimon said:


> @DogtorWho15 - Is your dog a greyhound mix, or a Lab mix, or ??? I can't tell from the photos.


Im not 100% sure. But she has been dubbed a whippet x catahoula x lab


----------



## TSTrainer

OwnedbyACDs said:


> Okay I havent read through this entire thread because halfway through, my eyes started to cross ... LOL. I think I have read enough to get the gist, though, so here it goes.
> 
> I used to use many of the methods discussed here, because 10-20 years ago they were the status quo and sure I COULD use them now, but why? Those methods suppress drive and free thinking in a dog, and why the heck would i want to do that? LOL. I shake my head at people who expect their dogs to work for nothing, I mean people don't work for no pay, why would dogs? Dogs like to get paid, too. Now as they advance in their training I will get more stingy with my pay, but I always pay them.


Yep, I use the "dogs don't work for free, either" analogy in my classes, especially with the older folks. That usually gets the message across.


----------



## DogtorWho15

At TSTrainer 

This is just something totally off subject, but I think we are due for a Coraline pupdate ;P


----------



## TSTrainer

DogtorWho15 said:


> At TSTrainer
> 
> This is just something totally off subject, but I think we are due for a Coraline pupdate ;P


Done! Check the photos forum


----------



## DogtorWho15

heading there now!!


----------



## OwnedbyACDs

YAY poodle photos!


----------



## SlabGizor117

MrsBoats said:


> OMG...ROFLMAO!!! This kid hasn't even trained a dog in their life and says:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah...okay. 10 weeks in a novice obedience class..and you can walk right into a novice obedience ring and title your dog! BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Oh kiddo...you have a ton to learn... BWAHAHAHAH!!!!


You want proof? Call Tony Ancheta at koehlerdogtraining.com.


----------



## Hiraeth

SlabGizor117 said:


> You want proof? Call Tony Ancheta at koehlerdogtraining.com.


I'm pretty sure we're all good and would rather not speak to Tony. Thanks, though.


----------



## ireth0

SlabGizor117 said:


> You want proof? Call Tony Ancheta at koehlerdogtraining.com.


Just out of curiosity... do you even know what half the acronyms after her dogs' names mean? Mrs Boats is an incredibly accomplished trainer with a hell of a lot more than novice obedience titles.


----------



## Crantastic

I won't be calling anyone. If I wanted to talk to a know-nothing "trainer," I could visit my local dog park.


----------



## Hiraeth

Crantastic said:


> I won't be calling anyone. If I wanted to talk to a know-nothing "trainer," I could visit my local dog park.


Why even leave the house? They pop up here with alarming frequency.


----------



## JohnnyBandit

SlabGizor117 said:


> You want proof? Call Tony Ancheta at koehlerdogtraining.com.


Your response to someone that has titled numerous dogs, trained dogs, heck even has videos out.... Is to call Tony?


Maybe you should call Tony.... You can ask him why he has bounced around California for years with Bill Koehler's Ex Daughter in Law (that kept the Koehler name for business purposes) trying to capitalize on Bill's work. It has never worked out because the entire dog world knows Bill's methods are flawed.


----------



## JohnnyBandit

And while you are talking to Tony.... Maybe ask him the circumstances as to how **** Koehler (Bill's son) separated from his wife and moved to Washington to be with his parents. While ****'s wife (Rochelle) and Tony played house in California......


----------



## JohnnyBandit

SlabGizor117 said:


> You want proof? Call Tony Ancheta at koehlerdogtraining.com.



And while we are at it..... Post up some of the titles Tony has put on his dogs..... I have NEVER seen his name associated with a titled dog....


Ms Boats on the other hand..... 

URO2 UCD UCH Lars UD GN RAE NJP NAP NFP C-CD OCC OJC TG-E EAC O-WV-E S-TN-E APDT RL2 AOE-L1, L2 HIC TT CGC TDI 
Multi High in Obedience Trial Winner; American Rottweiler Club Top 10: Agility, Rally, Obedience 

Ocean RE NAP NJP OFP PD SPS SPJ APG SPR NJC TN-O APDT RL1 AOE-L1 HIC CGC
American Rottweiler Club Top 10: Agility & Rally


It is fair to say MsBoats is far more credentialed than Tony....


----------



## TSTrainer

If I become half the trainer that MrsBoats is, I'll be lucky. She is someone to be admired, not disrespected.


----------



## cookieface

I noticed on his web site, Tony says very little about actual dog training - success or otherwise - in his bio. 



> She is someone to be admired, not disrespected.


Very true!


----------



## OwnedbyACDs

MrsBoats said:


> OMG...ROFLMAO!!! This kid hasn't even trained a dog in their life and says:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah...okay. 10 weeks in a novice obedience class..and you can walk right into a novice obedience ring and title your dog! BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Oh kiddo...you have a ton to learn... BWAHAHAHAH!!!!


Yeah ... I dont even know anything and I even know this to be bunk. I just got done with an introductory class for rally freestyle ... which I am turning around and taking again because my dog is NOT ready for the novice class, not when we are still luring for behaviors and such.


----------



## Amaryllis

TSTrainer said:


> If I become half the trainer that MrsBoats is, I'll be lucky. She is someone to be admired, not disrespected.


I don't even know what half those letters mean, let alone know how to get them! When MrsBoats chooses to speak (write), I listen. I'm not 100% in lockstep with her, but I respect her opinion and will always take what she has to say into consideration.


----------



## trainingjunkie

I can't find any entries for Tony or Anthony Ancheta in the dogshowscores database. Could his dogs be under another name or has he not titled a dog in the last decade?


----------



## Bentwings

Come on, OP let's hear how you are doing. You should be ready for your first high in event by now. Hahahaha


----------



## Shell

Amaryllis said:


> I don't even know what half those letters mean, let alone know how to get them! When MrsBoats chooses to speak (write), I listen. I'm not 100% in lockstep with her, but I respect her opinion and will always take what she has to say into consideration.


Yep. Agreed. The most letters I have put on a dog are "CGC" but I still want to have as broad and useful of knowledge of training as possible.


----------



## CptJack

I've been thinking about this thread lately and it's making me realize that there are basically two approaches to dog training.

One assumes that the dog is A Problem, and that means shutting down the dog and ending behaviors is actually fine for the folks coming at it from this pov, because they're not actually interested in teaching the dog anything. They don't want the dog to DO things, really, it's all about stopping negative behavior. Everything the dog does is either neutral or negative. Accepted or not. If accepted, ignore. If not, FIX IT.

Then there are people like most of us here, where it is very much about *communicating* with the dog, and let's be real - that's how I see training. It's building an actual working relationship with the dog, teaching them, and the ultimate result of anything trained - regardless of behavior, even if it's something as silly as spin - is about being able to communicate with your dog. You build from one to the other, the relationship gets deeper and richer and the language you can use and have be understood by the dog becomes a little more varied and complex. It's not that problems don't occur, but it isn't about STOPPING a behavior. It isn't "OH MY GOD MY DOG JUMPS ON PEOPLE" it's about teaching the dog how to sit down to get attention. And to do that you have to be able to, at minimum, communicate both 'yes' and 'sit' to your dog and THEN how to communicate 'when you see someone you do that sit thing'. 

And really? I find that first attitude pretty freaking sad. You're missing EVERYTHING good about having a dog, at least everything I find rewarding about dogs and working with them.


----------



## Shell

I like that way of thinking of things CptJack.


----------



## Hiraeth

CptJack said:


> I've been thinking about this thread lately and it's making me realize that there are basically two approaches to dog training.
> 
> One assumes that the dog is A Problem, and that means shutting down the dog and ending behaviors is actually fine for the folks coming at it from this pov, because they're not actually interested in teaching the dog anything. They don't want the dog to DO things, really, it's all about stopping negative behavior. Everything the dog does is either neutral or negative. Accepted or not. If accepted, ignore. If not, FIX IT.
> 
> Then there are people like most of us here, where it is very much about *communicating* with the dog, and let's be real - that's how I see training. It's building an actual working relationship with the dog, teaching them, and the ultimate result of anything trained - regardless of behavior, even if it's something as silly as spin - is about being able to communicate with your dog. You build from one to the other, the relationship gets deeper and richer and the language you can use and have be understood by the dog becomes a little more varied and complex. It's not that problems don't occur, but it isn't about STOPPING a behavior. It isn't "OH MY GOD MY DOG JUMPS ON PEOPLE" it's about teaching the dog how to sit down to get attention. And to do that you have to be able to, at minimum, communicate both 'yes' and 'sit' to your dog and THEN how to communicate 'when you see someone you do that sit thing'.
> 
> And really? I find that first attitude pretty freaking sad. You're missing EVERYTHING good about having a dog, at least everything I find rewarding about dogs and working with them.


Very well said. I've run into quite a few "fix the problem" dog trainers lately, so this resonates pretty deeply with me and is very relevant to what I've been trying to communicate to people. Thanks for thinking this through and putting it so concisely. 

This post will certainly influence how I communicate with people who are part of the former group and attempt to get them to convert to being a member of the latter group


----------



## MrsBoats

SlabGizor117 said:


> You want proof? Call Tony Ancheta at koehlerdogtraining.com.


I don't need to call Tony...dogshowscores.com gave me the proof that he hasn't qualified in anything AKC (obedience, rally, or agility) with any dog in 10 years. I kind of wished he had so I could see the scores he would have gotten. That's the thing about actual scores from judges...they tell all about what caliper of trainer you are. Some people probably could take a 10 week obedience class and qualify once with a score of 170.5 (the lowest qualifying score is 170.) I would rather take a year to polish our performance and earn scores of 190 and above. The highest score possible in AKC obedience is a 200...and very few people earn them. 

To you guys who have sung my praises in this thread....thank you.


----------



## JohnnyBandit

koehlerdogtraining.com

This is another case of: "I read it on the internet, so it must be true." 

He is what is true.... I was bored last night.... I looked Tony up on every database out there.... He has not done squat with a dog.... Not titled dogs for Tony...... He can talk a big game all he wants.... But all the man has done is tried to capitalize on the books written by his wife's ex father in law..... If there is a title for being a leach, Tony has earned it.


----------



## MrsBoats

JohnnyBandit said:


> koehlerdogtraining.com
> 
> This is another case of: "I read it on the internet, so it must be true."


Worst. Website. Ever. 

Every page is a wall of text. Yeah, anyone can preach anything they want on the website. If someone wants to sell me on something...they had better show me what they know and what they know works: video, photos, and respectable trial results (of both their own AND their students) will put their money where their mouth is.

And...just so you know....Lars, by himself, has 41 different titles on him spanning across conformation, rally, obedience, agility, herding, and therapy work.


----------



## Amaryllis

CptJack said:


> I've been thinking about this thread lately and it's making me realize that there are basically two approaches to dog training.
> 
> One assumes that the dog is A Problem, and that means shutting down the dog and ending behaviors is actually fine for the folks coming at it from this pov, because they're not actually interested in teaching the dog anything. They don't want the dog to DO things, really, it's all about stopping negative behavior. Everything the dog does is either neutral or negative. Accepted or not. If accepted, ignore. If not, FIX IT.
> 
> Then there are people like most of us here, where it is very much about *communicating* with the dog, and let's be real - that's how I see training. It's building an actual working relationship with the dog, teaching them, and the ultimate result of anything trained - regardless of behavior, even if it's something as silly as spin - is about being able to communicate with your dog. You build from one to the other, the relationship gets deeper and richer and the language you can use and have be understood by the dog becomes a little more varied and complex. It's not that problems don't occur, but it isn't about STOPPING a behavior. It isn't "OH MY GOD MY DOG JUMPS ON PEOPLE" it's about teaching the dog how to sit down to get attention. And to do that you have to be able to, at minimum, communicate both 'yes' and 'sit' to your dog and THEN how to communicate 'when you see someone you do that sit thing'.
> 
> And really? I find that first attitude pretty freaking sad. You're missing EVERYTHING good about having a dog, at least everything I find rewarding about dogs and working with them.


Yes! Once you stop seeing the dog as a problem and start seeing the dog as a partner, everything changes. For the better.


----------



## TSTrainer

MrsBoats said:


> Worst. Website. Ever.
> 
> Every page is a wall of text. Yeah, anyone can preach anything they want on the website. If someone wants to sell me on something...they had better show me what they know and what they know works: video, photos, and respectable trial results (of both their own AND their students) will put their money where their mouth is.
> 
> And...just so you know....Lars, by himself, has 41 different titles on him spanning across conformation, rally, obedience, agility, herding, and therapy work.


And how many years have you been training? The OP needs some perspective on what it actually takes to be so successful. 

I have under a year of experience as a professional trainer, I want to title my dog in many things but have no idea where to start, but I know I'm gonna need MUCH more experience and many dogs to work with before putting 41 titles on anything.


----------



## LittleFr0g

> And...just so you know....Lars, by himself, has 41 different titles on him spanning across conformation, rally, obedience, agility, herding, and therapy work.


That is just amazing! So much respect...SO MUCH!!!


----------



## MrsBoats

I started training for more than pet stuff back in 2004...so 12 years I've been at training dogs competitively. I also teach competitive obedience classes, rally obedience classes, therapy dog classes, and canine good citizen classes. I've been teaching for 10 years. 

And....Lars isn't done. He's 8 and we're still competing in obedience so he has some more titles to get. By the time he's truly retired from everything...I think I can get him close to 50.  

Ocean's 4...and he has 19 titles spanning across rally, herding, and agility. He's well on his way too.


----------



## cookieface

MrsBoats said:


> I started training for more than pet stuff back in 2004...so 12 years I've been at training dogs competitively. I also teach competitive obedience classes, rally obedience classes, therapy dog classes, and canine good citizen classes. I've been teaching for 10 years.
> 
> And....Lars isn't done. He's 8 and we're still competing in obedience so he has some more titles to get. By the time he's truly retired from everything...I think I can get him close to 50.
> 
> Ocean's 4...and he has 19 titles spanning across rally, herding, and agility. He's well on his way too.


Hmm, and when people are looking for a trainer, are they going to choose the teenager who read a book, but has never owned a dog? Or the woman who has been training a dozen years, owned and trained multiple dogs (far more than two), and has numerous titles in a variety of venues?

I know where I'd go for advice.


----------



## InkedMarie

Mrs Boats: I read that as dogchowwhores LOL. Need new glasses I guess!


----------



## MrsBoats

InkedMarie said:


> Mrs Boats: I read that as dogchowwhores LOL. Need new glasses I guess!


ROFLMAO!!!!! I guess some people could look at me as a dogtitlewhore. LOL


----------



## Amaryllis

MrsBoats said:


> ROFLMAO!!!!! I guess some people could look at me as a dogtitlewhore. LOL


I would print out business cards. Mrs. Boats Dog Title Whore.


----------



## JohnnyBandit

SlabGizor117,
This has been a pretty interesting thread.... 393 posts and not one person has agreed with you.... There is not even one person that is on the fence.... Everyone that posted has been in complete disagreement. Which is nothing less than Epic..

We could point out the fact that everything you have said is incorrect. Starting with the tread title. You are NOT a dog trainer.... You read a book.... You do not have dogs, do not train dogs..... 

And as much entertainment as this thread has been.... It seems now you feel you have the confidence and experience to branch out and give advice on other training threads.... Terrible, violent advice that borders on abuse and is potentially dangerous to both you and the dogs in question.....

I loved this little tidbit..


> Even if he were to fall off balance when he hit the ground, keep praising him and don't worry that he didn't land perfectly on his feet.


Aside from this being mean spirited and un necessary..... It is dangerous to the puppy.... IF you knew ANYTHING about dogs, which you clearly do not, you would know that a puppy falling on the floor can have lifelong health implications...
But who cares about those joints and growth plates as long as the puppy does not jump on the couch.... Right? 


I have some advice for you..... When you do finally get the opportunity to train... Not just any dog will do for you... You need a dog that is on par with the near magical skills you have learned from the words of Bill Koehler.... 

No you need the right puppy to start with.... Not a young puppy.... 7-12 months is about right for you... And it needs to be the right breed and from the right line.... After all, you truly deserve to shine....

You need a working line bred Belgian Malinois, Dutch Shepherd, ACD, or maybe a Briard... Such a dog will react very appropriately to the methods you intend to you... You will be simply amazed at the quick response you will get from such a dog when you pull it off the couch, causing it to fall on the floor... OR when you string it up, You will be astonished at speed in which the dog gives you his complete and undivided attention...


----------



## Bentwings

Well said Johnny....
I'll volunteer the EMS vehicle ....diesel dually. I'll even loan him my 8 foot leash to hang onto as we move out. It'll be attached to the soot pipe and he can walk, crawl or slither behind. I don't want blood or body parts inside the truck.

I do this couch thing differently. I simply spread a blanket on the couch that now belongs to the dog. The puppy I help up on the couch and help down, the young dog can jump when he is ready, the older dogs the same. I like the dog to curl up next to me while I read or watch tv and let him rest his head on me or just be near me. Developing a bond most would call it. There is something going both ways when the dog looks up at you and slowly closes his eyes falling asleep. He is comfortable, you are pleased and comfortable....none of the teeth mashing "get off the ....* couch, bad dog" stuff.

Would you throw your kids off the couch on to the hard floor?

The rest of training gets easier when you have this bond.


----------



## Shell

Bentwings said:


> Well said Johnny....
> I'll volunteer the EMS vehicle ....diesel dually. I'll even loan him my 8 foot leash to hang onto as we move out. It'll be attached to the soot pipe and he can walk, crawl or slither behind. I don't want blood or body parts inside the truck.
> 
> I do this couch thing differently. I simply spread a blanket on the couch that now belongs to the dog. The puppy I help up on the couch and help down, the young dog can jump when he is ready, the older dogs the same. I like the dog to curl up next to me while I read or watch tv and let him rest his head on me or just be near me. Developing a bond most would call it. There is something going both ways when the dog looks up at you and slowly closes his eyes falling asleep. He is comfortable, you are pleased and comfortable....none of the teeth mashing "get off the ....* couch, bad dog" stuff.
> 
> Would you throw your kids off the couch on to the hard floor?
> 
> The rest of training gets easier when you have this bond.


I bought a leather couch to deal with the dog hair and made washable cushion covers for extra ease of cleaning. My parents have a white leather sofa without a scratch on it-- they cover it with a full couch cover with the dogs visit. The only reason Chester is currently blocked from the couch is his recent knee surgery. I simply put a long cardboard box across the couch when he's in the living room, it blocks him and is easy to move out of the way. 

Cuddling on the couch with a dog curled in your lap (or at least, the dog's head in your lap for those of us with dogs that would smush us under their weight) and watching a movie is such a relaxing thing. Especially if they start in with the little snores and snuffles and running legs like they are dreaming about catching rabbits.


----------



## MrsBoats

41 titles later...and I failed to teach Lars not to get on the furniture. Guess I'll have to start throwing him off the couch/chair now because a teenager who has no dog training experience outside of reading a book says that's going to work.


----------



## TSTrainer

At my house, we teach the PEOPLE not to sit on the couch. It's the dogs' couch you see. And it may have been peed on once or twice.... Oops!


----------



## Shell

MrsBoats said:


> 41 titles later...and I failed to teach Lars not to get on the furniture. Guess I'll have to start throwing him off the couch/chair now because a teenager who has no dog training experience outside of reading a book says that's going to work.


Looks like you failed at teaching other dog not to get on the furniture too


----------



## MrsBoats

**sigh**

Yeah.....guess the truth is out. Mrs Boats is a dogtitlewhore and her dogs are untrained heathens.


----------



## Bentwings

tstrainer,
How do you teach humans to stay off the couch? String 'em up like K. says? LOL

I'm glad others like the close company of dogs in the house.

I also have a jump, tunnel and I build a maze out of chairs for my dog to run through when it is too nasty for ME to go out side.

Ex wife said it was her or the dog....the dog won. Haha


----------



## petpeeve

Hey I just noticed, the commode in my bathroom is made by Kohler. Slight variation on the spelling, but still ....


----------



## InkedMarie

petpeeve said:


> Hey I just noticed, the commode in my bathroom is made by Kohler. Slight variation on the spelling, but still ....


ROFL, if we're talking toilets, both of mine are!


----------



## Willowy

Isn't oe pronounced "ay"? I know people named Goeden (gayden) and Boese (bayze), so I pronounce it as kayler. But yes, I was noticing Kohler toilets too, and was highly amused .


----------



## Willowy

So this kid has been PMing me ever since the original post. I thought he might be educable but he's thoroughly brainwashed. And after losing both my boys in 3 months I find I have no more patience for abuse apologists. Anyone else want to give it a go?


----------



## Hiraeth

Willowy said:


> So this kid has been PMing me ever since the original post. I thought he might be educable but he's thoroughly brainwashed. And after losing both my boys in 3 months I find I have no more patience for abuse apologists. Anyone else want to give it a go?


Ha. Feel free to send him my way. I'll even try to be nice. 

I was wondering if something was going on behind the scenes. His responses to several threads have become much more mild in the last few days.


----------



## cookieface

Willowy said:


> Isn't oe pronounced "ay"? I know people named Goeden (gayden) and Boese (bayze), so I pronounce it as kayler. But yes, I was noticing Kohler toilets too, and was highly amused .


I found this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kB4ra0RrqBc (long "o"), but this is how I was taught to pronounce the "oe" combination (or ö) in HS German classes: http://www.howtosay.co.in/pronounce/koehler-in-german/


----------



## CptJack

"Bet my dog's life on a cookie" and just about everything else you said there proves to me that you don't know *CRAP* about actually training dogs. You're just someone who thinks you know a lot, with an ego, refusing to learn better. "OLD SCHOOL BABY!" and ignoring new information, science, and proven results rather than admit ignorance and attempt to learn.

Yay.

Just what this forum needs more of. 

Someone else who doesn't know the first thing about dog training, dogs, learning theory, giving bad advice to everyone because they INSIST they are the AUTHORITY.

Get back to me when you have some verifiable credentials. Certification from a decent dog training academy, degree in animal behavior or animal science, or heck, even, some upper level performance titles. Something, anyway, that isn't just your word on an online forum, while you try to advice other people and impress them with your so called knowledge that you have no proof of, at all, much less objective proof of.


----------



## LittleFr0g

USALhasa said:


> Abuse apologists? There's no abuse in the Koehler method. I have used it to train many a dog. You should really read the method and listen when the trainer explains things to you.
> All of the so called "abuse" you describe has to do with a dog that was told to preform a behavior e.g. sit, and refused AFTER it has been completely trained, and responds to a correction by attacking its owner. This was meant specifically for guard dogs or extreme aggressive cases, not a correction for disobedience. The Koehler method operates on the principle of choice. No correction is ever issued until the dog demonstrates understanding of a command. The dog is rewarded with praise and comfort, becoming subordinate to right action, rather than the command itself. I support and recommend the Koehler method myself. If you want proof of its success, you can talk to anyone who has a Koehler trained dog. I have 7 currently. All of these dogs obey off leash, even at a distance with distraction. I am so confident it works I will bet my dogs lives on it. If they should ever get out of my fence or door for any reason (never happened, they don't try), I can control them with only a command. Would you say you could bet your dog's life on a cookie? I own Lhasa Apsos, even Koehler himself said they are the one breed that can be most resentful of training. They were not resentful, it was done with a loving but firm hand, and they respect me and obey me because of it. They are not fearful, they love people, but they follow the rules, because it is expected. Far too many people fall for this cookie training which produces a dog subordinate to a bag of treats...as long as it's hungry...and something it wants...and more interesting than chasing that deer...and maybe you should neuter him...well, if you still can't control it use a head collar, or a no pull harness, and just keep them on a leash 24/7. See? Problem solved, the dog is obedient...in my kitchen. ..as long as its leashed. Treats don't belong in training. Its the fastest way to screw up the bond with your dog as well as obedience. YOU should be the shining light, the most amazing and wonderful reward that your dog could ever receive, not a treat. The result is an unshakable bond between dog and owner and rock solid obedience because the dog loves YOU.


LOL, all this rant proves is that you have zero understanding of positive reinforcement, OR how operant conditioning and the four quadrants of learning theory works. There are many, many incredibly experienced dog trainers here who have trained their dogs to a level I'm guessing you can only dream of, and all with positive reinforcement. I'd HIGHLY suggest you stick around and read with a mind open to learning, because the kind of ignorant misinformation you just spouted won't fly here.


----------



## Kathyy

My first dog was trained using a choke and corrections. She didn't get it. I switched to cookies and clicker when she was about 5 years old and behaviors that were poorly performed became solid as a rock. Stand. Loose leash walking. Eye contact. Leaving prey. 

She did okay, placed 5th at a show and go obedience event [as a mutt wasn't eligible at that time to do AKC trials], could perform most of the open obedience and some utility obedience skills and was training in agility but wow, the power of positive training. Choke collar gone and clicker and cookies forever.


----------



## DaySleepers

Yes. A man who advocated swinging the dog at shoulder height from the collar, choking "dominant" dogs until they passed out, and filling holes in the yard with water, then holding the dog's head in them - _underwater_ - to teach them to stop digging isn't at all abusive.

Funny that we can train literal wild animals with "cookies" (regardless of how anyone personally feels about zoos, sanctuaries, etc., that trainers in these places have trained tigers to sit still and allow their blood to be drawn with no drugs or punishment necessary is an undeniable fact), but dogs are so hard and "resentful" that we need to use pain and fear to control them.


----------



## cookieface

USALhasa said:


> Abuse apologists? There's no abuse in the Koehler method. I have used it to train many a dog. You should really read the method and listen when the trainer explains things to you.
> All of the so called "abuse" you describe has to do with a dog that was told to preform a behavior e.g. sit, and refused AFTER it has been completely trained, and responds to a correction by attacking its owner. This was meant specifically for guard dogs or extreme aggressive cases, not a correction for disobedience. The Koehler method operates on the principle of choice. No correction is ever issued until the dog demonstrates understanding of a command. The dog is rewarded with praise and comfort, becoming subordinate to right action, rather than the command itself. I support and recommend the Koehler method myself. If you want proof of its success, you can talk to anyone who has a Koehler trained dog. I have 7 currently. All of these dogs obey off leash, even at a distance with distraction. I am so confident it works I will bet my dogs lives on it. If they should ever get out of my fence or door for any reason (never happened, they don't try), I can control them with only a command. Would you say you could bet your dog's life on a cookie? I own Lhasa Apsos, even Koehler himself said they are the one breed that can be most resentful of training. They were not resentful, it was done with a loving but firm hand, and they respect me and obey me because of it. They are not fearful, they love people, but they follow the rules, because it is expected. Far too many people fall for this cookie training which produces a dog subordinate to a bag of treats...as long as it's hungry...and something it wants...and more interesting than chasing that deer...and maybe you should neuter him...well, if you still can't control it use a head collar, or a no pull harness, and just keep them on a leash 24/7. See? Problem solved, the dog is obedient...in my kitchen. ..as long as its leashed. Treats don't belong in training. Its the fastest way to screw up the bond with your dog as well as obedience. YOU should be the shining light, the most amazing and wonderful reward that your dog could ever receive, not a treat. The result is an unshakable bond between dog and owner and rock solid obedience because the dog loves YOU.


Oh dear god.....


----------



## [email protected]

Koehler....... I grew up seeing our family german shepherds trained this way. I've watched my father dunk dog's heads in a hole filled with water for digging. I've also seen a dog " choked off " when it attacked the guy giving the correction. Anyone that grew up in the southern USA and older than 30 probably has. Yeah the methods worked in the end, but the amount of conflict created was ridiculous. I do use a prong for training my dogs, but I use treats and toys waaaaaaaay more than corrections.


----------



## [email protected]

Dang it I hit the send button by accident on my last one. I'm no cookie pusher, but my own personal experience has been that using food and toy rewards results in a much more motivated dog. I'll still use physical corrections for the dog blatantly blowing me off, but I've seen a big big difference between corrections based and motivation based, at least in my personal dogs. Besides, it sucks when you have a dog that will take a bunch of corrections just fine for awhile, then decides to bite the crap out of your leg or the hand holding the leash for it. I have a scar on my shin from that very thing. Using treats and toys to motivate has been much smoother sailing for me. Less um...arguments from the dogs.


----------



## hanksimon

I like swimming against the current ;-)

" I read Kohler's book as a very young man, before having any aspirations of ever becoming a dog trainer. As dumb as I was about dog training, common sense told me there were some things in book I just was not going to use on dogs. I did manage to train my 1st protection dog using some of Kohler's methods. (notice I said some) 

Anybody reading a book has freedom of choice, to use or not use methods in any book read. As far as dog training common sense dictates balance. The individual training the dog decides what methods/balance is necessary to train their own dogs.

I've never had a problem with books disappointing me as it was very easy to stop reading the book. If I really was upset I could throw the book away. I have always advised people to read dog books because there could be one thing in a very large book of things that jumps right out at you and be of value in working your next dog. The things of no value you disregard. "

I didn't write that quotation. Wvasko did ... in 2009 ! I think most of us respected him, his advice, his experience, and his balanced approach to correction-based training. [ I don't think that his pet boxer used correction-based training on Wvasko ;-) ]


----------



## DaySleepers

I think it will surprise no one when I say I'm generally pretty much on the side of "no physical punishment unless there is an issue that impacts the immediate health and safety of the dog that management alone can't mitigate". IE things like snake aversion training when you get venomous snake in your yard and house. But I do respect that other people use physical corrections more than I do, and while I believe it's often unnecessary, I don't think it's abusive, violent, or even morally wrong (when done skillfully and rationally, ofc). Particularly when the dog clearly does well with that method of training.

Koehler may have the excuse that he didn't have access to modern research about learning theory, canine cognition, and animal behavior - heck, back then it was considered debatable whether animals felt pain. But his punitive methods are - as you said Dexter - ridiculously extreme. I struggle to imagine how someone who _didn't_ enjoy hurting and having power over animals conceptualized some of his "training techniques," let alone put them into action and popularized them in his classes and books. Even if you want to ignore modern understanding of how canine brains work and say that a dog can't be emotionally damaged by such training, they sure as heck can be physically damaged! That's abusive, imo. Then or now, but _especially_ now, when we have so many more options and so much more research from many quadrants of science and psychology saying "hey, this is a bad idea".


----------



## Bentwings

I thought this one got beat to death here a couple years ago. But oh no, it’s risen from the grave!....I sure hope this isn’t the “ second coming.....”. 

I’ve got some spray stuff called weed be gone that I use on the cockle burr plants on our walking path.......”spray, spray...squirt,squirt” Cocklebur plants shrivel up in hours. I hope this one does too.

Too bad the proponent of this stupid method can’t see some our thoughtfully trained dogs. I wonder if they even notice when we refer to things we do with our dogs such as; we go for a ealk....notice ‘we..’. “Our walks..’notice our’”. And so on. Noting team work and play. 

Note to the OP. I’ve trained some really tough GSDs both for sport and police work and never had to abuse them like this. Try to yank one of these around and if you survive you will be in ICU for a long time. Hope you don’t have a rare blood type.

I’m too disgusted to comment further.

Byron


----------



## Lillith

Ugh. Not this one again. USALhasa, you'll notice that throughout this thread, absolutely nobody agreed with the OP. That was from people who never ever correct to people who employ (thoughtful and appropriate) corrections in their training. The Koehler Method IS abuse. Plain and simple. How anyone could ever support someone who HANGS A DOG by their leash and swings them around or DUNKS THEIR HEAD underwater to teach them not to dig holes is beyond me, especially when methods exist that do not require you to use pain and fear to train your animal.

Just. Ugh. Disgusting.


----------



## LeoRose

Because you just can't do things like this with positive reinforcement...

https://www.facebook.com/zoospensefull/videos/1847061941970565/

That was sarcasm, by the way. Pretty much the only way that can be accomplished is with positive reinforcement.


----------



## LittleFr0g

LeoRose said:


> Because you just can't do things like this with positive reinforcement...
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/zoospensefull/videos/1847061941970565/


Were you being sarcastic, or did you mean to say that you CAN do things like that with PR?


----------



## LeoRose

Kuma'sMom said:


> Were you being sarcastic, or did you mean to say that you CAN do things like that with PR?


Sarcasm. Heavy on the sarcasm. Positive reinforcement is about the ONLY way you can do that. I edited.


----------



## Effisia

Oh good. This thread is back.

If anyone reading this is considering these outdated and positively disgusting "methods", please reconsider. Come on, now.


----------



## Shell

I just wonder what search terms managed to bring this post up to the forefront to inspire such a lengthy and impassioned comment...

But mostly, thanks to Bentwings' comment, I remembered to buy weed spray for the garden on my way home from work.


----------



## LeoRose

Yeah... I've read the books. I trained with a trainer who used his methods, including hanging the horribly skittish, reactive dog who tried to come up the leash at her when she "corrected" him for trying to escape her and get back to his owner with a hard leash pop. I've trained with another trainer who rolled and pinned her demo dog for breaking a down in a Competition Novice class. 

I give thanks every day that I've found a community that thinks that training should be done with kindness and fairness.


----------



## LeoRose

Your blog, right? http://rivaltkennels.zohosites.com/blogs/post/Cookie-Training/


----------



## Shell

USALhasa said:


> I was actually searching for the online copy of Koehler's book. I was getting ready to train a new puppy. It came up randomly and I was curious. I read the whole thread. Very interesting, actually.


Good. Good meaning that I am glad those search terms bring up this thread. Not so good in that someone would be searching for a Koehler book for current training plans



LeoRose said:


> Although, from reading this, http://rivaltkennels.zohosites.com/blogs/post/Cookie-Training/, it's fairly clear that you really don't understand positive training.


That blog post just kinda made me sad. I am not going to try to debate the training methods (beating a dead horse) but more just sad about the lack of openness to really effective methods that make, well, everyone a happier participant. I don't have titles on dogs and I don't have credentials by my name but I've done some dang good rehabs that never would have happened with those old school methods.


----------



## gingerkid

USALhasa said:


> Abuse apologists? There's no abuse in the Koehler method. I have used it to train many a dog. You should really read the method and listen when the trainer explains things to you.
> All of the so called "abuse" you describe has to do with a dog that was told to preform a behavior e.g. sit, and refused AFTER it has been completely trained, and responds to a correction by attacking its owner. This was meant specifically for guard dogs or extreme aggressive cases, not a correction for disobedience. The Koehler method operates on the principle of choice. No correction is ever issued until the dog demonstrates understanding of a command. The dog is rewarded with praise and comfort, becoming subordinate to right action, rather than the command itself. I support and recommend the Koehler method myself. If you want proof of its success, you can talk to anyone who has a Koehler trained dog. I have 7 currently. All of these dogs obey off leash, even at a distance with distraction. I am so confident it works I will bet my dogs lives on it. If they should ever get out of my fence or door for any reason (never happened, they don't try), I can control them with only a command. Would you say you could bet your dog's life on a cookie? I own Lhasa Apsos, even Koehler himself said they are the one breed that can be most resentful of training. They were not resentful, it was done with a loving but firm hand, and they respect me and obey me because of it. They are not fearful, they love people, but they follow the rules, because it is expected. Far too many people fall for this cookie training which produces a dog subordinate to a bag of treats...as long as it's hungry...and something it wants...and more interesting than chasing that deer...and maybe you should neuter him...well, if you still can't control it use a head collar, or a no pull harness, and just keep them on a leash 24/7. See? Problem solved, the dog is obedient...in my kitchen. ..as long as its leashed. Treats don't belong in training. Its the fastest way to screw up the bond with your dog as well as obedience. YOU should be the shining light, the most amazing and wonderful reward that your dog could ever receive, not a treat. The result is an unshakable bond between dog and owner and rock solid obedience because the dog loves YOU.


Using it to raise dogs doesn't make it not abuse.

Luckily, I DO listen when very skilled and knowledgable trainers explain things to me. I never would've developed the trusting relationship I have with my dogs otherwise.


----------



## DaySleepers

I haven't read the whole book, sure. I can't stomach reading much of it at one time, and I refuse to buy a copy and support anyone still touting his methods. I've certainly read enough:



> "if you come home and find your dog has dug a hole, fill the hole brimful of water. With the training collar and leash, bring the dog to the hole and shove his nose into the water; hold him there until he is sure he's drowning. If your dog is of any size, you may get all of the action of a cowboy bull-dogging a steer. Stay with it. I've had elderly ladies who'd had their fill of ruined flower beds dunk some mighty big dogs. A great many dogs will associate this horrible experience with the hole they dug. However, to make sure of a permanent impression, fill the hole with water and repeat the experience the next day, whether the dog digs any more or not. On the third day, let him watch you dig a hole and prepare it for a dunking. Class surveys have shown that more than seventy percent of the dogs who experience this correction for as many as six consecutive days swear off hole digging. If the master takes the first sign of repentance as a permanent change, and stops the dunking after only a couple of days, failure is generally the result."


I wasn't pulling examples out of thin air. This is actual, _abusive_ advice given by Koehler in his book. For only a 70% success rate, at that - horrifying.

Thank goodness that training has changed since the 60s, and that any decent trainer is constantly evaluating and tweaking their techniques with an aim towards _humane_ and _rational_ methods. Thank goodness modern corrections - whether or not I personally use them - are generally appropriate and proportional to the misbehavior. It's pretty boggling that you insist on not considering current research and learning theory in the 20 years you've been training, especially when you began with a method that was _already_ 30+ years out of date in the 90s.

Need more examples?



> "When the noise comes, instead of trying to sneak up to the door so you can barge in while he's still barking, which is generally impossible, respond to his first sound with an emphatic bellow of "out," and keep on bellowing as you charge back to his area. Thunder through the door or gate, snatch up the belt that you've conveniently placed, and descend on him. He'll have no chance to dodge if you grab the line and reel him in until his front feet are raised off the floor, or, if he's a big dog, until you've snubbed him up with a hitch on something. While he's held in close, lay the strap vigorously against his thighs. Keep pouring it on him until he thinks it's the bitter end. A real whaling now may cut down somewhat on the number of repeat performances that will be necessary. When you're finished and the dog is convinced that he is, put him on a long down to think things over while you catch your breath. After fifteen or twenty minutes, release him from the stay; and leave the area again."


Yes, this seems a rational and proportional application of correction to a barking dog. Nowhere have I seen him discuss evaluating _why_ a dog is barking, of course. In the sixties, dogs didn't have emotions or feel pain - or was it that they did and we just didn't have the scientific research to back it up, yet? 

And any training method that has to teach you how to handle a dog who redirects on you _due to the training techniques used_ has major issues.



> "Since we are presently concerned with the dog that bites in resentment of the demands of training, we will set our example in that situation. (In a later chapter we will deal with the much easier problem of the dog that bites someone other than his master.) First, the trainer makes certain that the collar and leash are more than adequate for any jerk or strain that the dog's most frantic actions could cause. Then he starts to work the dog deliberately and fairly to the point where the dog makes his grab. Before the teeth have reached their target, the dog, weight permitting, is jerked from the ground. As in coping with some of the afore-mentioned problems, the dog is suspended in mid-air. HOWEVER, TO LET THE BITING DOG RECOVER HIS FOOTING WHILE HE STILL HAD STRENGTH TO RENEW THE ATTACK WOULD BE A CRUELTY. The only justifiable course is to hold him suspended until he has neither the strength nor inclination to renew the fight. When finally it is obvious that he is physically incapable of expressing his resentment and is lowered to the ground, he will probably stagger loop-legged for a few steps, vomit once or twice, and roll over on his side."


Because hanging a dog until he vomits and can't stand is TOTALLY not abusive, right?

Good grief, I need another shower now.

@LeoRose, cooperative care is brilliant, isn't it? I've seen it done with wolves, primates, parrots, big cats, sea lions, bats... heck, I've even seen fish trained to come to the surface and show their sides on cue for a stress-free physical exam! Pretty much anything with a nervous system responds brilliantly to positive reinforcement, given it's how we're hardwired to learn. Glad most people here know dogs aren't magically exempt from that.


----------



## Lillith

USALhasa said:


> *Well, that shows what kind of person you are.* Instead of admitting you are wrong (Koehler has his book free online for anyone who wants to read the actual way to train), you attack me personally. How childish.


LOL. Just....LOL. I have no idea who exactly this was directed to, but I think your support of "training methods" that would disturb and boil the blood of most decent people tells me a lot more about you...I would rather be childish than abusive and...well, just disturbing.

Taken from Daysleeper's post of quotes from Koehler's book:



> "if you come home and find your dog has dug a hole, fill the hole brimful of water. With the training collar and leash, bring the dog to the hole and shove his nose into the water; hold him there until he is sure he's drowning. If your dog is of any size, you may get all of the action of a cowboy bull-dogging a steer. Stay with it. I've had elderly ladies who'd had their fill of ruined flower beds dunk some mighty big dogs. A great many dogs will associate this horrible experience with the hole they dug. However, to make sure of a permanent impression, fill the hole with water and repeat the experience the next day, whether the dog digs any more or not. On the third day, let him watch you dig a hole and prepare it for a dunking. Class surveys have shown that more than seventy percent of the dogs who experience this correction for as many as six consecutive days swear off hole digging. If the master takes the first sign of repentance as a permanent change, and stops the dunking after only a couple of days, failure is generally the result."


I don't think that is merely interesting....THAT is abusive, and how anyone could possibly read that and say "that's interesting" and then decide that's a good way to train an animal....just...there are no words.


----------



## 3GSD4IPO

The Koehler Method was used for Schutzhund (now IPO and soon to be "IGP..").

Here is what I know. If you look at the old Schutzhund videos you will see dogs in heel position, maintaining that position but with heads down.. often with a tell tale tail position stating clearly they are doing this because to NOT do this is going to result in negative consequences for the dog. Some of the "protection" is accomplished because the dog is 100% in defense because the lesson has been "do it for you will die" without taking into account the suitability of the dog for the work being done. 

Fast forward to today. Today the dog needs to be engaged with the handler and look happy. A dog exhibiting the pressure in those old tapes is severely penalized. Too much exhibition of pressure can result in being DQ'd. ANY use or exhibition of pressure ANYWHERE (including at the motel where you are staying) once your score book has been handed in will DQ you and you will get an "un-sportsman like conduct" in your score book and in the published trial results. This means once that score book is in, NO E-collar use, NO prong collar, NO fursaver on the live ring and no corrections at all including collar corrections, harsh voice and so forth. This can be a challenge for a lot of handlers just taking their dogs out to potty at the hotel (because they never trained for it and are too reliant on those tools!). 

So, we train using positive methods. This does not mean we never use an E collar or a prong in training. We do most certainly. What it means is the use needs to be sparing and you best know what you are doing when you do use it. It also means that every correction at a level of "X" requires _a counter-acting positive_ that is "3X" value _to the dog_. 

There are dogs that are doing the work that are not really cut out for it. In the old days those dogs would be worked in Defense (work or die.. in the dog's mind). Today it is the handler's job to find a training decoy that can pull that less powerful dog out of defense and into prey drive and teach the dog that the work is fun. 

Koehler has some good stuff in there but to use the method exclusively is like any method used to the exclusion of all others. It leaves you weak as a trainer and without the ability to train different kinds of dogs.


----------



## petpeeve

USALhasa said:


> I support and recommend the Koehler method myself. If you want proof of its success, you can talk to anyone who has a Koehler trained dog. I have 7 currently. All of these dogs obey off leash, even at a distance with distraction. I am so confident it works I will bet my dogs lives on it.


Yes, I want proof.

Please post various, explicit videos of your Koehler trained dogs. Now is the time to back up your beliefs.


----------



## LeoRose

DaySleepers said:


> Because hanging a dog until he vomits and can't stand is TOTALLY not abusive, right?


And how many have either suffered permanent brain damage from lack of oxygen, damaged tracheas, or even died from being hung? Not to mention the lasting psychological damage that can result.


----------



## DaySleepers

LeoRose said:


> And how many have either suffered permanent brain damage from lack of oxygen, damaged tracheas, or even died from being hung? Not to mention the lasting psychological damage that can result.


He claims right after that he's never had a dog injured from this treatment (though that's not exactly easy to verify and we all know thyroid and trachea damage might not be immediately apparent), but if there's enough doubt that you have to make such a disclaimer, you're... probably doing something wrong.

And I've absolutely heard of dogs dying from choking out in the name of "training". Do I think it happens often? Nope. But I think most people will prefer to stick with training methods that do _not_ risk permanent injury and death as a direct result of the technique being correctly applied.


----------



## Bentwings

3GSD4IPO, I was hoping you would reply. I always like your insightful thoughts. I came from the old school but fortunately had several trainers who converted to the modern ways. They had me working both ends of the leash,( when it was used). How to handle these dogs and how to work them as a helper. The human end was more old school than for the dog. For example protection work. I was constantly asked and critiqued about what the dog was doing and why. A wrong answer was greeted with a smack by a leash and critiqued in front of the group on how dumb this helper was for not seeing something in the dog. Most others didn’t see it either. So turn this around for the dog. The dog may not understand the exercise yet gets punished and corrected for it. How does he learn, what does he learn? He learns the whole situation is a bad experience and now lacks intensity to even get close to it. As explained, he often is hanging his head, dropping his tail or maybe raising it high in expectation of getting battered that he can’t avoid. Learns nothing useful.

In another human situation. I had a very old lady math teacher in about 8th grade. She had coke bottle glasses and required problems to be worked out using a full sheet of paper with the page vertical. So being a juvenile the guys elected me to screw off. While not the exact problem the example was 3+3=6. Instead I wrote with the page hoizintaly 3+3=4. “whack” with the 18” scale on my hand as I presented this to her. “How can you be so stupid? “ she boomed. Laughter. “ well one 3 is one character, the plus sign is another, then 3 again is another, and the equal sign is another so this equals 4 characters.” I was immediately sent to the office and received a lecture and several hours of detention for being disrespectful. Yeah, here I deserved the correction, I hnew the exercise well. So with the dog, you can’t make a correction if the dog doesn’t know the exercise. If the dog blows you off, you need to step back and reteach the exercise with lots of reward, not beat the daylights out of the dog.

The humans can maybe understand and infer the exercise even with harsh correction. Dogs work differently, humans need to understand this. Applying human actions and thoughts to the dog just isn’t going to work. Getting upset while you are training and taking it out on the dog is just plain stupid. Even in the early days I would have been kicked off the field and told not to return. There is no place for egotism in dog training.


----------



## CptJack

petpeeve said:


> Yes, I want proof.
> 
> Please post various, explicit videos of your Koehler trained dogs. Now is the time to back up your beliefs.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0hPOTYgLow

This is what *I* have for my 'all cookies' dogs. I mean, I know it's not obedience exercises, but they're in the woods, tearing around, happy to stick close or play and recall. Technically I guess I could be risking their lives if they were going to blow a recall.

(I know you weren't asking me, but I really want proof of this person's dogs performing too and I will accept this level of proof. I also want to see how 'not damaged' they are and to be able to compare attitudes int he dogs)


----------



## Shell

USALhasa said:


> Rolling and pinning? Oh you mean a veterinary restraint. Yeah, they use that to prevent a dog from harming itself or others.
> That trainer was not hanging the dog, guaranteed, you are exaggerating. She was not allowing it to slip its collar, and telling it that it must do something. You know, I have to do a great many things I don't wish to do either, but allowing that poor dog to remain miserable was not a kindness. That trainer by the end of the program would have instilled a sense of confidence in that dog. If you don't believe that breaking down old behavior and building up anew works, you haven't seen how they train solders. Hint : they don't use treats. Soldiers obey command. Life is like this, you can't pretend its all sunshine and roses. Your dog may learn about consequences one day, while chasing a cat into traffic, with your frantic calls falling on deaf ears, but by the time it learns it won't be able to appreciate it. It will be dead or maimed. So many dogs trained with "kindness" that you speak, I have seen, and not one is reliable off leash. Those people paid money to have those dogs trained.
> There is no kinder or more fair training method than Koehler. You read the book, so you know this. You read the book, so you know that we were cautioned about all of these things.
> We too, are a community, perhaps more so with our well behaved dogs. But I guess you never thought about the police dogs, the k9 officers who put their lives on the line every day to protect you in your community. I know they don't cookie train.





USALhasa said:


> Yes, and that example is not in use anymore. We all know this, but then I've kept up with Koehler training. You seem to have fallen behind.
> I'm not worried about your insecurities, but I do care about dogs. I think it unfair and even abusive to assume they are too stupid to make choices. They can and do. All choices to a dog are good choices, but they cannot be allowed to do whatever they please because you can't bear to correct them. To choose this means one day dogs will be banned as public nuisances.People will become tired of it. Not us, not the loving owners, but neighbors and non dog people and those natty better than thou types. Then we all lose. Have you ever given a thought what would happen to dogs as a species if they were no longer kept as pets? This is an honest question. I've pondered it on more than one occasion while reading long threads like these. The logical answer, because dogs that are feral are dangerous, is that the species would be eradicated. For me, such a thing is terrible. I could not imagine a world without dogs. But it seems so many people are, intentionally or not, trying very hard to bring that about.
> The reality is, the fact that your small group of wincers is louder (I could make a political comparison to liberals here, but I won't), the truth always finds its way out.
> Also, Mr Koehler won several awards from the Humane Society of the United States. But I suppose that fact must never surface, or perhaps the very group who represents the things you preach is...wrong? I thought they knew about humane things, even then. Unless, they were wrong. Which means this current advice you follow you might want to be careful, lest you find out someday it was wrong.


LOL. 

I could dig into a lot here but meh, I am on my phone and thumb typing so....

They sure do use "treats" to train military members. "Treats" in training any animal means rewards. Not literal cookies but whatever the animal finds rewarding- meat, cheese, tug toys or fetch for dogs. Maybe grapes or oranges for chimpanzees etc.
Soldiers are rewarded with bonus pay, with enticements of educational monies, with weekends off or other priviliges. The psychological and physical beat-down is part of the game but its a game played between humans. (Drill instructors are at least in theory human  ) People understand delayed gratification but they still work for the reward.

You did make the political comparison and not subtly either.

HSUS has a whole lot of issues and being honored by them is something of a negative in many people's opinion. 

Pretty much, I fail to see how using proven, safe and humane training methods will lead to the extiction of dogs.

Edit to add-- I wonder if signatures turn up in search engines so "Rivalt Kennels- The Gold Crown Standard" as a search term would pop with these posts or not?


----------



## CptJack

I'm... just going to ignore people who sincerely aren't worth much of anyone's time, and contribute to the more general discussion about training, with the awareness that other people always dig up and read these threads, and some of them are not just capable of learning but eager to.

I went to a disc dog seminar today, with the USDNN World Freestyle Champion, for I think the second year running. Big, big deal and I learned a lot. Also one heck of a dog trainer in general, not just disc. 

And this guy stressed, really hard, how important it was to be sure that you're conveying FUN to the dog, and building - and constantly building and never, ever breaking down- your dog's confidence. Because a dog who is confident believes they can do anything, and that is the most valuable thing you can have in a dog when it comes to training - not just disc, but any kind of training. 

They will try, and it doesn't go entirely right, they will get up again. They are more resilient. They will WORK THEIR ASS OFF FOR YOU, and do it with JOY. 

How do you think 'beat your dog until he believes he's going to die' plays into that?


----------



## CptJack

Shell said:


> LOL.
> 
> I could dig into a lot here but meh, I am on my phone and thumb typing so....
> 
> They sure do use "treats" to train military members. "Treats" in training any animal means rewards. Not literal cookies but whatever the animal finds rewarding- meat, cheese, tug toys or fetch for dogs. Maybe grapes or oranges for chimpanzees etc.
> Soldiers are rewarded with bonus pay, with enticements of educational monies, with weekends off or other priviliges. The psychological and physical beat-down is part of the game but its a game played between humans. (Drill instructors are at least in theory human  ) People understand delayed gratification but they still work for the reward.
> 
> You did make the political comparison and not subtly either.
> 
> HSUS has a whole lot of issues and being honored by them is something of a negative in many people's opinion.
> 
> Pretty much, I fail to see how using proven, safe and humane training methods will lead to the extiction of dogs.


Heh. Posting at the same time, from very different direction, but HIGHLY similar themes.

The breakdown with humans is part of the game, because of delayed gratification but also? They KNOW they're going to have their confidence built in the long run. 

You're not building a dog's confidence with pain or fear. Not in any way, shape, or form. They don't work that way. All you're doing is breaking down their resilience.


----------



## LeoRose

"Veterinary restraint"? Um, yeah, I've worked for vets, and held my own dogs for veterinary procedures. Practically yanking the dog off his feet with the leash, and then grabbing the side of his neck, flipping him onto his side, and then putting all your weight against him to hold him in position on the floor certainly doesn't count as "veterinary restraint" in my book. 

As for the first dog, I really don't know what else you could call dangling a thrashing dog to where all four feet are at least six inches off the ground using a choke chain until he quit struggling could be called anything but "hanging". By the end of the six week session, the dog was slinking on its belly during heeling, and leaving an almost continuous stream of urine anytime the instructor came near it. So, yeah, real confident....


----------



## CptJack

CptJack said:


> I'm... just going to ignore people who sincerely aren't worth much of anyone's time, and contribute to the more general discussion about training, with the awareness that other people always dig up and read these threads, and some of them are not just capable of learning but eager to.
> 
> I went to a disc dog seminar today, with the USDNN World Freestyle Champion, for I think the second year running. Big, big deal and I learned a lot. Also one heck of a dog trainer in general, not just disc.
> 
> And this guy stressed, really hard, how important it was to be sure that you're conveying FUN to the dog, and building - and constantly building and never, ever breaking down- your dog's confidence. Because a dog who is confident believes they can do anything, and that is the most valuable thing you can have in a dog when it comes to training - not just disc, but any kind of training.
> 
> They will try, and it doesn't go entirely right, they will get up again. They are more resilient. They will WORK THEIR ASS OFF FOR YOU, and do it with JOY.
> 
> How do you think 'beat your dog until he believes he's going to die' plays into that?


Oh and on the people side of things? Who lot of 'okay that was wrong, but that was wrong in a good way' and generally building confidence in people and making sure they were having fun, both in general and in playing with their dogs. 

Amazingly, even in the absence of punishment and in the presence of reward, people learned a lot!


----------



## Shell

CptJack said:


> Heh. Posting at the same time, from very different direction, but HIGHLY similar themes.
> 
> The breakdown with humans is part of the game, because of delayed gratification but also? They KNOW they're going to have their confidence built in the long run.
> 
> You're not building a dog's confidence with pain or fear. Not in any way, shape, or form. They don't work that way. All you're doing is breaking down their resilience.


Yes, good point about the difference in the future knowledge between people going through things like boot camp or other similar training (police for example) versus a dog or other animal who has no way of having the "game" explained to him.

It is like the difference on the mind to be yelled at, berated by and nitpicked to the last little detail by a training officer who you know is working to set you up to be safe and successful (and that training ends on a specific date in time!) Versus yelled at and berated by say, a parent or spouse, who you are controlled by and who has an indifinite time frame to pick you to pieces.

One is a tough working environment and the other is abuse.


----------



## LeoRose

USALhasa said:


> Well, I don't have to prove anything to you, their your dogs, your risk, but I wouldn't place a puppy in a home that allowed them to run uncontrolled. You can offer me no more than your word either, but if you are so suspicious, it makes me question. My mother always said people think in terms of themselves, I have found this to be true. I tend to want to believe people, and try to see the good in everyone. I am more often than I'd like let down by the general population. It breaks my heart. If you knew me, if you knew my dogs, you would see what I mean. The people who have gotten my retired dogs have found them all to be a delight. For reasons of the privacy of others, which I must respect, I cannot give you their names or numbers. I suppose I could offer a video, but might that be edited? How could you know? Sadly, without you meeting my dogs in person, there is no realistic way to absolutely PROVE what I'm saying is true. But the same goes for everyone else on here.
> I would be proud to have you meet my dogs, but I restrict that privilege to my buyers alone. I suppose if I had a rowdy bunch of disobedient, cringing dogs stricken with terror people would still buy the puppies? Well, actually, I don't know about that, because my dogs aren't and don't. Maybe people do? I wouldn't. I'd be thinking temperament problems. My neighbors think my dogs are cute and funny, they behave the way dogs should, but are well behaved. I wish I had the luxury of living in the country as you do, but I live on a busy highway, where one mistake in recall would mean their life. I can't afford to gamble, not that I'd want to anyway, but...I've said my piece, my words are true, I do and will continue to support Koehler method, and teach about it to others. And no, I don't sell books, just so you know. I don't make money off of anything I recommend, I think that's silly, though I've seen people who do. So this is my last post on the subject, though I'm sure someone else will have to get the last word and try to one up me, but I really don't care, the whole truth is out there for anyone who wants to do the work to dig it all up, as I did, so many years ago, researching. Or maybe one day when I have time, I'll compile the whole thing for people to make it easier, but time has not allowed that for me just now.


I'm going to translate that as "I can't prove anything because I don't have any proof". 

Interestingly enough, the litter on your Facebook page is listed as "CKC registered". Since you don't live in Canada, according to your website, I doubt it's the Canadian Kennel Club. There don't seem to be any dogs with the Rivalt prefix registered with the AKC.

And I'm done now. I'll go push some cookies at my dogs, who love to train.


----------



## CptJack

LeoRose said:


> I'm going to translate that as "I can't prove anything because I don't have any proof".
> 
> Interestingly enough, the litter on your Facebook page is listed as "CKC registered". Since you don't live in Canada, according to your website, I doubt it's the Canadian Kennel Club. There don't seem to be any dogs with the Rivalt prefix registered with the AKC.


You know, while discussing this kennel/breeder: 

CAN YOU IMAGINE ANYONE ON EARTH VOLUNTARILY SIGNING UP FOR A LHASA WHO IS even CAPABLE of withstanding koehler methods? Christ on a cracker, what a nightmare. That breed has enough temperament issues without BYBs and that kind of probably completely incidental selection criteria of being able to tolerate abusive 'training' techniques.


----------



## Canyx

Funny I've avoided this thread for so long. But USALhasa is as ignorant or perhaps even more so than the person who started this thread. Sadly they may have more of an impact, because they are producing dogs and spreading harmful information to paying clients. 

However, I find it interesting that across this thread and the others the user has so passionately contributed to... It's a lot of emotion and nothing else.

Sure folks here agree and disagree on many topics. But many of us here freely share our trials and tribulations, post videos of our dogs' antics and of our training, have titles that prove our abilities or have photos to show how happy our dogs are. And regardless of our differences, the folks here are genuine.

What strikes me about you (Lhasa), is you do not seem genuine. You are impassioned. And I truly do want to see the merits of your breeding program. I have never met a 'good' breeder with so much to hide.


----------



## Canyx

Hey mods, is it against forum rules to post a topic about a breeder/kennel with very objective information that may not be favorable? Or would that still be too slandering? I have no personal vendetta against anyone but if there is in fact false information, I would like it to be seen by the public when they search that there are breeders or kennels being dishonest or disingenuous. Again, based only on objective information and not opinion or ethics or name calling or anything like that. 

Thanks!


----------



## Lillith

USALhasa said:


> Rolling and pinning? Oh you mean a veterinary restraint. Yeah, they use that to prevent a dog from harming itself or others.
> That trainer was not hanging the dog, guaranteed, you are exaggerating. She was not allowing it to slip its collar, and telling it that it must do something. You know, I have to do a great many things I don't wish to do either, but allowing that poor dog to remain miserable was not a kindness. That trainer by the end of the program would have instilled a sense of confidence in that dog. If you don't believe that breaking down old behavior and building up anew works, you haven't seen how they train solders. Hint : they don't use treats. Soldiers obey command. Life is like this, you can't pretend its all sunshine and roses. Your dog may learn about consequences one day, while chasing a cat into traffic, with your frantic calls falling on deaf ears, but by the time it learns it won't be able to appreciate it. It will be dead or maimed. So many dogs trained with "kindness" that you speak, I have seen, and not one is reliable off leash. Those people paid money to have those dogs trained.
> There is no kinder or more fair training method than Koehler. You read the book, so you know this. You read the book, so you know that we were cautioned about all of these things.
> We too, are a community, perhaps more so with our well behaved dogs. But I guess you never thought about the police dogs, the k9 officers who put their lives on the line every day to protect you in your community. I know they don't cookie train.


Ummm...yeah, military/police/law enforcement dogs do get cookie trained....many use toys because they are more motivated by toys, too, but food rewards are very often used if the dog finds that more motivating...You're just..very, very wrong in that department!

HUMAN soldiers get paid...they get bonuses, college tuition, additional training through the army. Do you think they would do it if they had to work for free? Would you work for free? And humans have the ability to understand that what they go through is building their mental fortitude, their physical stamina. Dogs do not. They only know that what is happening in that moment, right there, is painful and they don't like it. 

Have you not read the many accomplishments of members on this forum who have called dogs off of deer, rabbits, and other wildlife? Have you seen the videos? I think that proves you quite wrong...


----------



## Bentwings

I’m going over to the library tomorrow. They have both a K.... book and a Momks... book. I’ll ask the librarian how much it will cost me if check these books out and they mysteriously disappear. They will not be in my dog book library. They will be in our monthly bonfire as an offering to the devil himself. Even he might not take them.

As far as military goes, remember humans are being trained, we think differently than dogs, so training is tailored to us. I can tell you when the enemy fires the first shot at you, you will be scrambling to remember all your training. When you see him the first time your heart will skip a beat. Hopefully it will recover in time to do your duty.

It’s totally wrong to try to use human methods on dogs, they simply don’t think like we do. Stringing a dog up is just egotism, serving no purpose but to terrify the dog. I still don’t know how you are going to string up a hundred pound GSD or Rottie that can lick your face without stretching. You must be a giant and have extraordinary strength. Add a dog that is struggling for its life and you are going to come out severely injured or dead. 

As for the vet, my GSDs and Boxers were trained to be picked up and carried. They were also trained to be rolled over for vet work, not dominated. It was “ fun” for them. They were never “ hurt” by the vets. My Aussie goes to the vet and is better behaved than human kids in the office. She sits quietly on the bench with me even with screaming sick cats whom she would put in the nearest tree at home. She gets treats at the vet and I carry or pick her up as required. No training collar necessary. Just the mandatory leash. The training was gentle and easy.


----------



## CptJack

Bentwings said:


> I’m going over to the library tomorrow. They have both a K.... book and a Momks... book. I’ll ask the librarian how much it will cost me if check these books out and they mysteriously disappear. They will not be in my dog book library. They will be in our monthly bonfire as an offering to the devil himself. Even he might not take them.


That's actually a good plan. I think I'll do much the same. Decent community service, that. And as a bonus no one except the library gets any money, and the books won't, at this stage, be replaced. They're just too old and out of date. Though in all fairness I'm pretty sure both of them are out of circulation in my local area. They're *that* irrelevant now.


----------



## Lillith

CptJack said:


> That's actually a good plan. I think I'll do much the same. Decent community service, that. And as a bonus no one except the library gets any money, and the books won't, at this stage, be replaced. They're just too old and out of date. Though in all fairness I'm pretty sure both of them are out of circulation in my local area. They're *that* irrelevant now.


Any IT professionals here? Perhaps we can wipe it from the Internet, too....


----------



## Shell

CptJack said:


> That's actually a good plan. I think I'll do much the same. Decent community service, that. And as a bonus no one except the library gets any money, and the books won't, at this stage, be replaced. They're just too old and out of date. Though in all fairness I'm pretty sure both of them are out of circulation in my local area. They're *that* irrelevant now.


A quick search on my local public library web site found zero hits for William Koehler.

I did find some cookbooks authored by a different Koehler that look tempting so its a win-win.


----------



## CptJack

Shell said:


> A quick search on my local public library web site found zero hits for William Koehler.
> 
> I did find some cookbooks authored by a different Koehler that look tempting so its a win-win.


Yeah, the only things I found were a couple of children's books, by two different Koehlers. 

I did find we have McConnell, Patricia B books! That excites me. 

(Oldest dog training book available is from 1997, the second oldest 2002. Looks like they're working on, imagine that, keeping up to date.)


----------



## petpeeve

CptJack said:


> And this guy stressed, really hard, how important it was to be sure that you're conveying FUN to the dog, and building - and constantly building and never, ever breaking down- your dog's confidence. * Because a dog who is confident believes they can do anything, and that is the most valuable thing you can have in a dog when it comes to training* - not just disc, but any kind of training.
> 
> They will try, and it doesn't go entirely right, they will get up again. They are more resilient. They will WORK THEIR ASS OFF FOR YOU, and do it with JOY.


Quote of the Year Award.

This pretty much defines what it is that Koehler-minded people seem to miss. Completely.


----------



## petpeeve

LeoRose said:


> I'm going to translate that as "I can't prove anything because I don't have any proof".


 I'm interpreting that as ... my dogs really don't recall, or behave, as miraculously as I proclaim they do.



> Interestingly enough, the litter on your Facebook page is listed as "CKC registered". Since you don't live in Canada, according to your website, I doubt it's the Canadian Kennel Club. There don't seem to be any dogs with the Rivalt prefix registered with the AKC.


Continental Kennel Club. That's where *breeders* and buyers go when they want to *"receive an official certificate proving that you are the owner of the dog. Not to mention, having a puppy birth certificate is as cute as it gets"*. 

Because, heck who needs a pedigree? 

https://ckcusa.com/about/member-benefits/


----------



## parus

The idea of choking twelve-pound lapdogs to get them to do what you want is mindboggling to me.


----------



## DaySleepers

I can direct you to Dr. Patricia McConnell's books, given she has a doctorate in zoology, is a Certified Applied Animal Behaviorist, a trained ethologist, and has worked successfully as a dog behaviorist for issues including aggression for decades. If that's what you need. She's one of many.

You said Koehler's book was available free online. I found the first free PDF. Heck, even the Koehler website doesn't make any stipulations to avoid older editions on their "bookstore" (Though they do say they're out of print, thank goodness):



> But another option, and generally my go-to recommendation, is eBay. Just be careful that you don't over spend. The pricing on Koehler dog training books can be all over the map, but here is what you can expect to pay: The Koehler Method of Dog Training (any edition): about 25.00 USD


That's it. That's the only comment about the editions. That they all cost the same. So you're basically encouraging people to read all of these techniques that aren't "up to date". Until I brought out actual quotes, you didn't even attempt to explain that the method had some techniques that were known to be abusive and outmoded. I'll gladly read through the most recent edition, if you can provide it free. Again. Not spending money on this garbage. Can't find any evidence about his HSUS award in a quick google, but an award from an animal rights organization that, among other things, wants to put an end to cats and dogs being pets (or how about that time the CEO said Michael Vick could be a great dog owner?) isn't exactly a high honor to any animal professional. 

I don't want a terrified dog. I don't want a dog that's so afraid to _behave_ it does nothing unless it's cued. If I wanted that, I'd have gotten a robot. I'd _rather_ have a dog that's been given no structure in its life and doesn't know a single command or how to have leash or house manners. Why? Because it'll be much easier to train a dog like that than rehabilitate a dog who believes its handlers might choke it and beat it within an inch of its life at the slightest "wrong", whether or not the dog knows it's wrong. Also, the first dog is likely much less of a bite risk. Yes, even after reading Koehler's descriptions of a well-trained dog vs a poorly trained one - if anything, that made me more certain. His "trained" dogs do not sound confident in the slightest.

Thank goodness my dog knows how to make good decisions, because I taught him. He knows how to move out of the way in the kitchen when asked. He knows to go and settle in a crate. He knows to wait for his food until he's released, understands the rules of walking on-lead and on a long line (on a HARNESS no less, the shock). We're making good progress in him offering me the feet I ask for while grooming or nail trimming. He has a couple dozen cue that he can do reliably and enthusiastically that range from useful obedience to silly party tricks. Thank goodness I know how to create rules and structure without needing physical corrections. For that matter, thank goodness our _human_ soldiers aren't so terrified of doing the wrong thing they can't function on their own. I'll happily be a "wincer" and keep the company of my fellow "wincers" with our happy, well-trained dogs who aren't too afraid to offer us behaviors and make us laugh and try new things. Frankly, if I see some of the techniques described by Koehler in use, I'll be a "taping it to send to the police-er". 

And I could be wrong (sarcasm here), but I'm pretty sure you don't have to be liberal to think that deliberately hurting and terrifying animals is wrong.


----------



## InkedMarie

Too bad it’s too early for popcorn. Coffee will have to do.


----------



## DaySleepers

I referenced Dr. McConnell in case you want to do _your_ own research on a scientific basis for dog behavior and learning theory, as I have. I'm a layperson with an interest in dog behavior and psychology, sure, but I do try to ensure my sources are up to date, done by people with valid credentials, and based on solid research. If I can, I read the research papers themselves, though those aren't always publicly available. Even with books published several years ago, I like to check up on the authors' current articles or blogs, because a good trainer is, as I've said before, always evolving and tweaking their methods.

You've made no logical arguments for your training method here. Your main point seems to be that rewards-based training doesn't work, based solely on your own grave misunderstanding of how the techniques are applied and why they get results, and therefore the Koehler method is the only option. I've seen you cite no research, no studies, no current professionals working and respected in the field. It's not on us to educate you on how our methods work any more than it's on you, but we have tried, and you've shown no interest in engaging on a mature level with that information. So instead, tell us. What would the "modern" Koehler method do about a dog digging in the garden? Or a dog that aggresses towards the handler? What about a dog that is, say, fearful of thunder or fireworks? Or you can keep screaming that we're wrong and somehow harming you by not agreeing with you, but if you actually want a chance of convincing anyone, the onus is on you to give us something to work with.

PS, that was not a threat. I haven't seen you train your dogs, but if I saw _anyone_ holding a dog's head underwater, or hanging one off the ground from a choke collar, or beating one with a belt, yeah. I'd call the police. Because that's abuse in my eyes _and_ the eyes of the laws. If I saw someone administering harsh corrections, I'd not be happy, but it's considered legal and I wouldn't waste police time with that. I would hope that even modern Koehler methods work within the current animal abuse laws, but the methods that Koehler himself originally wrote sure as sugar don't. That is fact.


----------



## Effisia

USALhasa said:


> That is slander. I'm going to have to get in touch with the website moderates and obtain your ip and personal information and I will have you in court, unless you retract that statement.


Hahaha. Oh, bless your little heart. I don't even know who you're threatening with lawsuits here, but what are you even claiming was false? That the Koehler "Method" isn't abusive? Because unless you find a judge who enjoys waterboarding kittens on the weekend, all a defendant would have to do is present the court with a few passages from this "training" book you love so very dearly and bye bye lawsuit. IF you can even find a lawyer to take the case in the first place. And prove that whoever it is you're suing KNEW that the information was false. Because, you know, you can't just sue someone for saying something negative or that you don't like.


----------



## cookieface

USALhasa said:


> Well, that's not proof of your expertise, so you couldn't evaluate my dogs anyway. I do suppose I said so already.
> No sarcasm, you sound like a liberal. You just tried to pass of Patricia McConnell as your PhD. I asked for YOURS, not her's.
> Why is it my fault you didn't do your research? I did mine or I would have believed the outright lies being told. (Blaming others).Since I began a post there's been more lying than half truths coming from all of you. I'm supposed to believe you? (Lies.)
> That's funny. The police use Koehler method. Don't think they would prosecute themselves. They don't even get charged with noise violations if the police dog barks all night. But I bet they will make your life hell if you try. And that response to the weak attempt at( threat.) You do sound like a liberal. However, you all have definitely proven to be less than admirable human beings, having no trouble at all hurting your own kind. How could one possibly expect you to treat animals better? If you assured me you do, I don't believe you after all of this. I mean this in response to all of the irrational and personally damaging responses.
> 
> As per my earlier statement, I have taken a screenshot, and already notified the site as 4:30AM today, as to the situation. I don't make threats.


You've come here offering nothing but insults, vague threats, and rants against how you imaging modern, force-free training methods. You've offered no evidence to support your statements, have not demonstrated any desire to learn, and have yet to make a rational argument for your training methods. And you expect us to take you seriously? :laugh:


----------



## cookieface

Shell said:


> Edit to add-- I wonder if signatures turn up in search engines so "Rivalt Kennels- The Gold Crown Standard" as a search term would pop with these posts or not?


Yep, right now it's the second link.


----------



## CptJack

petpeeve said:


> Quote of the Year Award.
> 
> This pretty much defines what it is that Koehler-minded people seem to miss. Completely.



Very, very much so. 

So many problems we see represented, online and in real life - from service dogs, to competition dogs, to pets - are down to a lack of confidence in the dog. People like this? They don't - and won't - see that. To them the solution to every problem is to shut down behavior they don't like, and to make anything not asked for or explicitly given as a command dangerous for the dog.

That... that isn't how you get a dog who eagerly tries things and wants to work with you. 

A dog that trusts you and is confident in themselves and the environment is gold. Seriously. You have that, you can do anything. ANYTHING. 

You start making the dog afraid of trying or being wrong, you've got a problem. You have a dog who is at all afraid of YOU? You don't have a dog.


----------



## Canyx

I am a CPDT-KA (Certified Professional Dog Trainer) with over 1000 logged hours (which really isn't a lot) of professionally training dogs that are not my own. I work in a 501(c)3 shelter that has an intake of about 1300 animals a year and an adoption rate of 98%. I'm part of the Behavior team and help do evaluations and create treatment plans for more difficult animals, including ones with bite histories. I graduated from Duke University with a BA in Biology and a minor in Evolutionary Anthropology. 

I think you run a breeding program no better or worse than a common backyard breeder. I think your training is abusive and unethical. I think your communication is lacking and you are certainly not transparent or honest about your breeding program. I would never recommend any pet owner purchase an animal from you. I am very happy to add you to my list of breeders NOT to contact if ever a person asks me about this breed. In fact, the silver lining to this is I can actually use your website and your forum posts to show clients (if they ask) how breeders can be misleading with their words to make their breeding program look better than it is.

ETA: Here is a screenshot of this post to make your life easier:


----------



## Effisia

Canyx said:


> I am a CPDT-KA (Certified Professional Dog Trainer) with over 1000 logged hours (which really isn't a lot) of professionally training dogs that are not my own. I work in a 501(c)3 shelter that has an intake of about 1300 animals a year and an adoption rate of 98%. I'm part of the Behavior team and help do evaluations and create treatment plans for more difficult animals, including ones with bite histories. I graduated from Duke University with a BA in Biology and a minor in Evolutionary Anthropology.
> 
> I think you run a breeding program no better or worse than a common backyard breeder. I think your training is abusive and unethical. I think your communication is lacking and you are certainly not transparent or honest about your breeding program. I would never recommend any pet owner purchase an animal from you. I am very happy to add you to my list of breeders NOT to contact if ever a person asks me about this breed. In fact, the silver lining to this is I can actually use your website and your forum posts to show clients (if they ask) how breeders can be misleading with their words to make their breeding program look better than it is.


None of this, by the way, would legally be considered slander/libel, hahaha.


----------



## CptJack

They're gonna sue google to linking them to their own words, too!


----------



## DaySleepers

For the record, I did some digging and the PDF version of "The Koehler Method of Dog Training: First New Addition of a Dog Obedience Classic" I have was published in '96, and seems to be the most updated text of his basic training book available. It is where I directly pulled all the quotes previously from. But please, if there is a more updated version, tell me the full title, or ISBN, or anything that would allow me to accurately evaluate this modern Koehler method. For something that "Koehler has... free online" as you previously asserted, I certainly can't find it. It's certainly not free on his website (I use "his" loosely, given Koehler passed on in the early 90s). Unless the '96 edition is the most current? In which case reading it isn't going to convince anyone that the Koehler methods now shun abusive techniques.


----------



## CptJack

Holding a dog's head under water or beating it until it thinks it's gonna die isn't abusive.

Telling someone that it is is abuse though! Their blog says so and I can't stop laughing.

Yeah. Popcorn time. I really hope their readers seek out this thread. I really really do. It might be enlightening to them about their so-called-breeders training methods and behavior.


----------



## Lillith

USALhasa said:


> You are experts? Show me your PhD. I want to see degrees in canine psychology, veterinary medicine, canine behaviorist. PhDs. Produce them. I don't believe you. You sit on this forum all day shoving chips down your throat and saying how much better you are than everyone else and belittling people to make yourself appear bigger. Get a life.
> Fyi, ALL breeds are trained with Koehler. OP had his facts straight, which is more than I can say for any of you.


You have offered nothing but a single book as your sources for your claims. Everyone else is citing sources from multiple trainers, and they have demonstrated their own success. Some are professional trainers in real life and are constantly updating and modifying their techniques based on new scientific evidence and the work of other highly regarded trainers and behaviorists. Those letters after the dog names in posters' signatures? Those are titles. They have posted multiple videos of their dogs performing, or even being called off of wildlife. You have repeatedly told people to "grow up" when they refute your claims, insist we're all just "trying to win", and have contributed absolutely nothing useful or objective to the discussion.



> That is slander. I'm going to have to get in touch with the website moderates and obtain your ip and personal information and I will have you in court, unless you retract that statement.


???? Good luck, I guess.



> Any dog will play. What are you going to do? Throw a frisbee while he runs into traffic? You people are....not very logical. You need to work on your thought process, instead of trying to force everyone to believe what you believe and do what you do. You couldn't even let the OP have an opinion. Its vicious.


Again, ??????. And we did let the OP have an opinion. But here's the thing about opinions: they can be misinformed, they can be wrong. His opinion was soundly defeated with scientific evidence.

I think it's quite ironic that we're "vicious," but this entire thread is about a "trainer" who hanged his dogs by their leash and nearly drowned them to get them to behave.


----------



## Canyx

Also, funny story, since USALhasa is going on about credentials and making pretend they know about things they don't... 

I work with a police dog, like a K9 (Belgian Malinois) that is active on the force. The dog's history is a pretty messed up story I won't get into but... The only reason I am working with this dog after it was trained by countless professionals who make a living training police/protection dogs is the dog has bitten multiple police officers (Level 4+ biter, multiple people) because of excessive corrections and use of the Koehler method. I am not at all saying that I fixed everything for this team, not by a long shot. But the officer told me what we've done is the only thing that has made things better.

My breeder sends a good number of dogs to law enforcement as well. 

There is a LOT of tape and culture to go through before the police will use other training methods, and some already do. However, I can assure you there are no Lhasas on the police force. Using them as justification for what YOU do is very disrespectful. There is no reason to bring police dogs into a petty conversation about your pet breeding program.

Actually, it says a lot about your training mentality that you would think to recommend 'police methods' for your little dogs. And that you somehow think it is easy enough for average pet owners to do without risk or harm. Now THAT is insulting to what people and dogs on the force must endure.


----------



## Canyx

CptJack said:


> Holding a dog's head under water or beating it until it thinks it's gonna die isn't abusive.
> 
> Telling someone that it is is abuse though! Their blog says so and I can't stop laughing.
> 
> Yeah. Popcorn time. I really hope their readers seek out this thread. I really really do. It might be enlightening to them about their so-called-breeders training methods and behavior.


And, how their dignified breeder engages in petty online arguments about topics they don't understand. Real gold standard here.


----------



## CptJack

I mean, personally speaking my dog's don't run into traffic and if I think it's a possibility I mostly call their names because they, yeah, expect something good will happen. So they come tearing back to me. 

Pretty sure I posted video evidence of that in this thread actually.

Also any dog will play. I mean. First of all no, they won't, especially one who has had the confidence beaten out of them, but also:






REALLY no.


----------



## cookieface

I think USALhasa got disappeared from here, but his/her blog got (more) interesting.


----------



## DaySleepers

That's probably for the best. There was clearly a culture clash, and we were upsetting them so much they had to write multiple blog entries about how wrong and stubborn we were.

Funny how people who cry sensitive, easily offended liberal (whether or not any of us who disagreed with them were actually liberal) are so often doing so because they're... offended.


----------



## CptJack

"He knew that you could never teach an animal anything if you struck it, or even shouted at it angrily. He must always be gentle, and quiet, and patient, even when they made mistakes. Star and Bright must like him and trust him and know he would never hurt him, for if they were once afraid of him, they would never be good, hard working, oxen." Farmer Boy, published in 1933. 

NINETEEN THIRTY THREE. Set in the 1870s.

I know they're gone but you want to go old school, how about you REALLY go old school.


----------



## cookieface

DaySleepers said:


> Funny how people who cry sensitive, easily offended liberal (whether or not any of us who disagreed with them were actually liberal) are so often doing so because they're... offended.


For sure. "They are insecure, can't stand to lose, and hate challenge."


----------



## DaySleepers

I'm going to go and read Grisha Stewart's BAT 2.0 for Geeks now - the appendix where she goes in-depth about all the psychology, behavior, and learning theory research that helped her create and refine her Behavior Adjustment Training program. Fascinating stuff, and it makes me feel better about the dog world after something like this.


----------



## Bentwings

I just spent almost an hour watching the video above and the string of subsequent videos.
Grisha Stewart's BAT 2.0 for Geeks 

Thanks for the lead.

She is shown with a 16 foot leash. She is using the exact method of dealing with a problem dog that I’ve used for many years. Notice how she is constantly managing the leash so she has control but the dog has freedom to snif and explore. I use this size, a 30 foot, a 60 foot and a 100 foot leash. Also notice the lack of cell phone and cigarette. She is concentrating on the dog. Notice no prong. I use a tab on the prong with the leash going through the tab. I use my left hand to slip through the handle and a leather glove. Should I fall down there is no way for the leash to come off my hand.

Most of all notice how she directs the dog to focus on her. You will see it in the sidebar videos too. This is the key to redirecting the dog during the mental change that is taking place. Where does K....note this? Notice how she introduces distraction when the dog is ready. Then directs the dog to her. The dog then automatically looks to her. BINGO the dog is in a new mood he no longer is threatened by other dogs. Each encounter gets better. It is nice to have controlled distraction but you can do this even with uncontrolled dogs as I have in our apt. The same principal.

There were three other videos working on reactivity. All used the same basic method of creating the “ watch me” for the dog to look to you for the decision and direction. He wants YOU to be the leader. No physical pressure required.

And PPUULLEESSEE, PLEASE don’t try to simplify this with a stupid flex lead.


----------



## DaySleepers

BAT 2.0 actually gives the dog even more freedom to make its own decisions and learn how to approach the trigger than the original BAT, though they both have a lot of great components to help out with reactivity! The handler still guides the dog to keep it from making decisions that will send it over threshold, but her focus is keeping the dog in that below-threshold zone where he can learn on his own about the trigger and really absorb the trigger's behavior and how his own behavior affects it - it uses a lot of functional rewards and minimal food or toy rewards, actually. It's a very cool method, though it requires quite a lot of work because for a full set-up you need a helper, with or without a helper dog (depending on whether you're working on human reactivity or dog reactivity), and a lot of space that's relatively controllable/predictable. But even without that, the book's taught me a lot of little things I can use on daily walks and with my other reactivity training that have really improved Sam's ability to disengage from interesting things (and re-engage with me).

The "for Geeks" bit is just a little appendix at the end of the BAT 2.0 book, where she gets into the real nitty-gritty of scientific theory and research that form a basis for the method (and totally skippable if you want to use her techniques but aren't a huge nerd like me), which is a nice refresher from "this technique works and is best because I/a dead guy 60 years ago says so" that happened a lot in this thread.


----------



## Canyx

Wow, all the posts just disappeared. I guess I should have screenshotted them or something 
For real though, there are actual breeders and self-proclaimed trainer experts like them out there and IMO they do no good for dog culture. I don't think they should be called names or bullied. I do think their businesses and practices should be scrutinized. I think the record of conversation (before it was wiped) was very interesting and very educational.

But oh well. Yes, Grisha Stewart is awesome and I use BAT 2.0 all the time!


----------



## Shell

Funny timing today. I clicked on the TV to local PBS station and its showing a show on Working Dogs for Conservation. The trainers are demonstrating the training for detecting everything from ivory and weapons to find poachers in parts of Africa to fox scat to track endangered foxes in California.

They are using toy rewards and quote "The toy is their paycheck" and they love working for their favorite toy. Plus explaining how they evaluate shelter dogs and pick the ones with the right kind of crazy 

The dogs look super happy working. Whole body wagging engaged in their tasks.


----------



## cookieface

Shell said:


> Funny timing today. I clicked on the TV to local PBS station and its showing a show on Working Dogs for Conservation. The trainers are demonstrating the training for detecting everything from ivory and weapons to find poachers in parts of Africa to fox scat to track endangered foxes in California.
> 
> They are using toy rewards and quote "The toy is their paycheck" and they love working for their favorite toy. Plus explaining how they evaluate shelter dogs and pick the ones with the right kind of crazy
> 
> The dogs look super happy working. Whole body wagging engaged in their tasks.


Do you remember the name of the show? That sounds really interesting.


----------



## Shell

cookieface said:


> Do you remember the name of the show? That sounds really interesting.


“Shelter Me: Community Matters” (episode 7)

(The info button on my smart TV comes in handy)


----------



## DaySleepers

That's super cool, Shell! I've always been fascinated by "repurposing" dogs' breed skills for other work, especially with stuff like conservation. I've heard of using Lundehunds for hunting weasels in the same environment they were bred for hunting puffins in - only they're now protecting the puffins because the weasels eat puffin eggs. And Karelian Bear Dogs for chasing newly released wildlife post-rehab so they still properly fear humans. Not to mention the dogs trained to sniff out invasive plants and insects - I'll be over the moon if I ever get to work on a project like that (in some future where I have the skills and experience to be useful, anyway). And yeah, one of the best parts of the K9 unit and border patrol shows here is seeing the working dogs be so elated when they get to Find A Thing and get their tug toy in return! Once a shepherd tracked a scent from the scene of a crime... and lead directly to the witness that had called the crime in. He still got a reward, though, because he was a Very Good Boy who followed a trail just like he was taught, even though it didn't lead to the suspect.


----------



## cookieface

Shell said:


> “Shelter Me: Community Matters” (episode 7)
> 
> (The info button on my smart TV comes in handy)


Thanks! I'll see if I can get that here.



DaySleepers said:


> That's super cool, Shell! I've always been fascinated by "repurposing" dogs' breed skills for other work, especially with stuff like conservation. I've heard of using Lundehunds for hunting weasels in the same environment they were bred for hunting puffins in - only they're now protecting the puffins because the weasels eat puffin eggs. And Karelian Bear Dogs for chasing newly released wildlife post-rehab so they still properly fear humans. Not to mention the dogs trained to sniff out invasive plants and insects - I'll be over the moon if I ever get to work on a project like that (in some future where I have the skills and experience to be useful, anyway). And yeah, one of the best parts of the K9 unit and border patrol shows here is seeing the working dogs be so elated when they get to Find A Thing and get their tug toy in return! Once a shepherd tracked a scent from the scene of a crime... and lead directly to the witness that had called the crime in. He still got a reward, though, because he was a Very Good Boy who followed a trail just like he was taught, even though it didn't lead to the suspect.


If you ever get a chance to hear Ken Ramirez speak about his conservation work do it! I think he's written about it a bit on Karen Pryor's site, but there's nothing like hearing him tell a story.


----------



## DaySleepers

@cookieface Thanks for the recommendation! I'll look around to see if he has any talks recorded somewhere. Sounds like interesting stuff.

Grisha Stewart mentioned this Humane Hierarchy in one of her Appendixes I was reading last night, and I felt it was relevant to this thread in general, even if it's more about behavior mod than training:










The hierarchy goes from least invasive (at the bottom) to most (top), and the idea is to only move up the "road" if the step before isn't working. But also that there's speedbumps and before the last three - and road signs before the last two - to signify that you should slow down before attempting each one, consult others, do research, etc. to make sure that moving forward is absolutely necessary. Not surprised that positive punishment is at the top.


----------



## Bentwings

I guess that chart pretty well sums it up.

Each of us trainers/handlers can see where we really stand.

Out

Byron


----------



## DaySleepers

I hope the chart can give any lurkers or future readers a good visual representation of how many tools we really have before positive punishment, and that the fairest thing for the dog is to use these first - the way you wouldn't correct a dog for poor performance before they've fully learned and understand the command using various reinforcements. I may not always agree with some of the balanced trainers here, but I respect that most of y'all are very clear on this point, and take great pains to make sure your corrections are fair and measured in training. The chart is a little severe for general training - I think positive punishment is much, much more risky to use in behavior modification and this hierarchy reflects that. I know there's a big difference between rehabilitating a fearful dog and giving a stable, confident dog fair and well-timed corrections, even if I don't use corrections in my own training.


----------



## NorthSky

Does anyone else think this 17 yr old is well spoken and well versed in a method they are just 'studying'?

"I'm 17 studying dog training and I use the Koehler Method exclusively."


Does anyone notice how often the readers are referred to the website, beginning on page one?



SlabGizor117 said:


> you can also go to koehlerdogtraining.com and look around to see how it all works.


This 17 yr old proclaims to have 'seen' a lot for someone who has studied only one method. And has no dog.



SlabGizor117 said:


> As for why I chose the Koehler method, in summary, it's because I have seen the result of it, and that is a happy dog, a good relationship, and complete off leash control.


What would prompt a 17 yr old with no direct training experience to say this?



SlabGizor117 said:


> Then why don't you test it? Actually do some research? Google around for Koehler trained dogs and see for yourself, or, do the unthinkable! Use the method for yourself, and tell me if you can't title your dog after.


I notice many references to 'Tony' more than make me comfortable for a thread about the Kmodt.



SlabGizor117 said:


> Tony Ancheta, who leads the method himself, has said that the slack leash is the dog's primary reinforcer.


Still wondering where this first hand insight came from.



SlabGizor117 said:


> Because I've seen the results that it produces and that is not a fearful dog who only does what he's told because he's afraid to "suffer". It is a happy dog who has a relationship without contention.


I wonder why this person keeps referring people to Tony and the website? Not the book.



SlabGizor117 said:


> You want proof? Call Tony Ancheta at koehlerdogtraining.com.


Did anyone notice how the OP got quiet after this post?



JohnnyBandit said:


> And while we are at it..... Post up some of the titles Tony has put on his dogs..... I have NEVER seen his name associated with a titled dog....
> 
> 
> It is fair to say MsBoats is far more credentialed than Tony....


I've noticed Tony joins Dog Training groups and 'half answers' questions in an effort to get people interested in his online classes. This kind of smells of that to me. Just sayin'


----------



## LittleFr0g

NorthSky said:


> Does anyone else think this 17 yr old is well spoken and well versed in a method they are just 'studying'?
> 
> "I'm 17 studying dog training and I use the Koehler Method exclusively."
> 
> 
> Does anyone notice how often the readers are referred to the website, beginning on page one?
> 
> 
> 
> This 17 yr old proclaims to have 'seen' a lot for someone who has studied only one method. And has no dog.
> 
> 
> 
> What would prompt a 17 yr old with no direct training experience to say this?
> 
> 
> 
> I notice many references to 'Tony' more than make me comfortable for a thread about the Kmodt.
> 
> 
> 
> Still wondering where this first hand insight came from.
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder why this person keeps referring people to Tony and the website? Not the book.
> 
> 
> 
> Did anyone notice how the OP got quiet after this post?
> 
> 
> 
> I've noticed Tony joins Dog Training groups and 'half answers' questions in an effort to get people interested in his online classes. This kind of smells of that to me. Just sayin'


If you suspect anything, you should report it, rather than revive a dead thread just to level your accusations. Just sayin’.


----------

