# How to find a reputable "balanced" trainer?



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

I'm asking for my own edification and am not actually in need of a trainer. Professionally/personally, I train force free and would not recommend a person to a balanced trainer for moral and contractual reasons. But I do realize that for some dogs, properly applied P+ in a training program that is significantly R+ can aid in training those dogs with minimal chances of damaging relationships. I would imagine that a truly "balanced" trainer recognizes when they are working with a dog that is not suitable for corrections, and that the trainer does not apply a one-size-fits-all solution.

Where are these good balanced trainers and can someone direct me to the website of one? So far I've seen a lot of false marketing, videos of stressed dogs, and flat out lies. I am starting to think that "balanced" is something only a well educated owner can decide. I've only heard of proper corrections being used on paper by members of this forum and have NEVER seen a proper correction in real life thus far. Also, I'd be interested to see any videos of dogs being trained with R+ and P+ having a great time and learning efficiently, as in the dog does not need to be corrected for the unwanted behavior over and over again, the dog is rewarded for correct behavior, and the training is more focused on rewarding good than correcting bad.

I don't mean to start a training debate; plenty of threads on this forum for that and those of you who know me well enough know (and have seen) how I train.


----------



## esuastegui (Aug 8, 2016)

The problem with all this is that terms like "force free" and "balanced" are so up for interpretation as to become useless in rendering any sort of well-agreed universal agreement. They become marketing catch phrases rather than useful differentiators. Add to this the individuality of dogs and the wide variability of circumstances that may lead to egregious behavior and... well... Good luck finding a trainer that fits the bill based on such amorphous definitions.

So perhaps we should start there, with some basic definitions. Where do you draw the line between what constitutes "force" and what doesn't? A tug on the leash when using a body harness vs. a regular collar vs. a tongue collar? Then, what is acceptable force, what is constructive force, and what isn't? How do you decide? What circumstances and behavior drive you to P+ vs. R+?

Maybe then we can discuss what "balanced" means. For me, for instance, I would want to know how the trainer decides when to move from P+ to an encourage-and-reward posture. How long does he stay in P+? How does he decide? Once he transitions to R+, what cues does he follow to let him know whether additional P+ is required?

Incidentally, we could run into the same lack of clarity when selecting a "positive-all-the-way" trainer. What he may call "positive" some might deem too physical and restraining to pass the giggle test. In many of those "positive" youTube videos, I see lots of physical intervention that, well, when recalling my high school physics, look an awful lot like force.


----------



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

I think your questions have been answered in your thread: http://www.dogforums.com/dog-training-forum/450353-training-philosophy-positive-reward.html

And I think your questions would theoretically be answered by a truly knowledgeable balanced trainer. I'm not interested in debating the semantics of words and such today; there are plenty of other threads for that as well. But maybe others might bite.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

esuastegui said:


> For me, for instance, I would want to know how the trainer decides when to move from P+ to an encourage-and-reward posture. How long does he stay in P+?


 I think maybe you have that backwards. Most balanced trainers, well the smarter ones at least, will begin with R+ and reserve P+ for the proofing stage, once the dog has learned what is expected.

Here is a video of Michael Ellis coaching a student on how to to "layer in" corrections for looking away during comp heeling training. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxii1H0waGY In my opinion, the same result can be accomplished, and simply too, by utilizing R+ and perhaps P- (withholding of rewards) during progressive heeling drills. To a skilled R+ trainer, there really is no need for P+ corrections. 

And I'll reiterate once again, as far as comp OB goes, the rules clearly state that a judge shall choose a happy working dog over a more precise dog. So, why would anyone risk precision at the expense of possibly instilling fear ? A judge / friend of mine has informed me that's how he chooses a victor for any run-offs, not by looking for precision whatsoever, but by looking solely for the happier working dog.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

In my experience most people who *advertise* themselves as balanced are actually positive punishment and pretty aggressive - but equally so most positive trainers I have worked with can and will read the dog and use some corrections as are suitable to the dog and the situation. These are usually very mild, in most cases, and they sure as heck don't lead with 'I am willing to use punishment/corrections/aversives'. Or advertise that. Nor should they, IMO. 

Which is to say find a good trainer and you'll find what you need and works for your dog, period.


----------



## Mirzam (Jan 17, 2011)

This strikes me as a non-question and more of a dig at "balanced" trainers. But I guess if I were pushed to provide a website of a "reputable" balanced trainer I would say Tyler Muto's http://connectwithyourk9.com/what-is-balanced-dog-training/. 

Please note I would not utilize his services, neither would I utilize the services of a +R clicker trainer either.


----------



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

Thanks petpeeve, I agree completely. And now that I think of it, I do see Ellis as a very intelligent and fair trainer *based on the videos that I have seen*. I don't agree with his use of "No" and his progression of reward to correction far down the line... But the way he does it is much more informed than what is traditionally seen. I love some of leerburg's videos. Maybe not the one posted, but still! 



CptJack said:


> Which is to say find a good trainer and you'll find what you need and works for your dog, period.


Yeah, I'm starting to think my question wasn't a good one because I agree with this.


Mirzam, I don't think trainers who use corrections are necessarily bad or wrong. It's just not what I would do. No digs here.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Canyx said:


> Yeah, I'm starting to think my question wasn't a good one because I agree with this.


When I started agility with Kylie, years ago, there was no communication of wrong to the dog - ever. The trainer didn't just advise that, she helped me come up with ways to do that. To keep moving, to not drill, to give her rewards for effort, etc. It was all about building her confidence and keeping her happy and playing. Runs went on uncorrected, parties were thrown for attempts, etc. After more than two *years* there's started being some very, VERY, gentle working in of 'that's not right' - almost exclusively from known behaviors she's gotten lazy and is trying to short-cut. Communicating 'nuh-uh, sunshine' amounts to stopping the run where it goes wrong, withholding the treat and having her try again. If she misses the second effort, criteria is dropped, but she can't progress on with the course if she misses the thing. The exception to this is distance work where 'went ot and did a thing' = Party, even if it was the wrong thing. 

When we started classes, she didn't touch Kylie, didn't talk to Kylie, didn't stand too close to Kylie, whatever. If Kylie made contact with her, jumping or sniffing or whatever, she let it go and quietly gave her a cookie. Or held her leash and didn't engage with her while I course walked. Now? Kylie rushes in to meet her, and occasionally bounces up on her and the trainer kind of stands there and arches an eyebrow and Kylie gets the cookie for sitting the heck down - or she makes Kylie perform commands for her to earn cookies while I walk the courses.

She read the dog Kylie was then - soft, shy, easily shut down and lacking confidence - and trained that dog. Then Kylie changed - she got more confident, she got faster, she got more resilient - and my trainer updated her image and trained *that* dog. 

She has had a very similar trip over the year-ish she's known Molly (compared to Kylie's 3). 

I doubt seriously she would break out a prong collar herself and I can in no way imagine her being rough/aggressive/physical/hurting a dog intentionally, but I know for a fact that when someone made a remark about ways to upset her involving prongs she shrugged and said, "Depends on the dog and the reason and the use." And I know for a fact the way she handles her soft, kind of fearful dog and the way she handles her hard as nails dog, and the way she handles her young dog vary. She meets every single dog where they are. 

And that is what I want and my image of perfection and the ideal. 

I don't want ANYONE who adheres to a METHOD or a theory to the point that they disregard the animal in front of them and their needs and personality and temperaments. Flexibility matters, darn it.


----------



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

Nicely put. Thanks for sharing!


----------



## trainingjunkie (Feb 10, 2010)

I recently decided to explore a more balanced approach in my competition training. I went to the shows and watched the trainers in the warm-up rings and found the most successful competitors I could find who were treating their dogs in a manner that I was comfortable with. Then I approached them after the show and went and spent 4 days with them. Their "corrections" are very mild: They take their dogs by the flat collar and physically assist them to the correct behavior. So a forged dog would be led back to heel, a lagged dog would be pulled forward to heel. Very mild and adjustable to the dog and handler's comfort level. I found my 4 days with them to be very, very educational. I am still sifting through all of it to decide what I want to adopt and what I want to reject, but I learned so much.


----------



## hanksimon (Mar 18, 2009)

Altho wvasko doesn't post, I think he still lurks and may respond to a PM. I think he was a correction-based trainer, which might be 'balanced' for trainers today ... and he may have some pointers. I believe that Pierce (his boxer) was known for demand based training, and getting what he wanted based demands ;-)

Very early in Shep's training, we went to an older trainer that was trained by Wolper (sp?), so he used a choke or pinch. But he was the only person that had the timing to pop the leash to get the dog's attention without causing harm ... it was like watching someone use a well-timed [and appropriate?] 'negative' clicker.


----------



## jade5280 (Feb 20, 2013)

I have encountered many good balanced trainers in IPO and PSA. The majority of people in our club train with positive reinforcement first and are light and fair with their corrections.


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

Some of the good "balanced" trainers that I've encountered tout themselves as positive trainers because they teach with R+, even though they also use (mild) P+ for proofing.

I agree with CptJack tho, it's about what works for the dog. I just happen to think that properly applied R+ can work for most dogs in most situations.


----------



## sandgrubber (May 21, 2014)

Ok. From the client's perspective. For the most part, I do ok with stuff that's P+. My dogs are responsive and even though I'm not an expert trainer, I'm kindly, and they seem to get my meaning MOST OF THE TIME. Say I need a trainer to help me with some finishing touches. I have good recall. I need excellent. I'm moving to a place where there are protected species or poisonous snakes and need solid aversion. My youngest has an awful tendency to lunge at bicycles on the bike path (on lead). I've done my best to praise/reward when she ignores bikes, but sometimes I don't see them coming and can't distract her when a bike is coming. My dogs are robust and generally ignore me when I attempt negatives (verbal or jerking the leash) and I see no danger of them going nervous from mild punishment.

How do I find a good balanced trainer?


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

IMO I've seen +P used in ways I'm more comfortable with from people who are based in +R than people who are based in +P. So I'd try to find a +R based trainer that was open minded and go from there.


----------



## esuastegui (Aug 8, 2016)

Canyx said:


> Where are these good balanced trainers and can someone direct me to the website of one? So far I've seen a lot of false marketing, videos of stressed dogs, and flat out lies.


This might be a good place to start: https://leerburg.com/webboard/forum.php?category_id=27

For a fairly fair and _balanced_ description of the balanced approach, check out this article elsewhere at the site: https://leerburg.com/allpositive.htm


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

> For a fairly fair and balanced description of the balanced approach


If that's considered fair and balanced I'd hate to see a biased article . 

Also, I know it's shallow to pick/exclude a trainer based on apostrophe abuse but I think my eyes (eye's ) (haha, auto-correct didn't want me to do that. He needs auto-correct) are bleeding. . .


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

I am not a purely positive trainer...and classify myself as a "balanced trainer." I do teach a variety of classes from rally to Canine Good Citizen to competitive obedience.

I use a variety of "corrections" while training my dogs when needed...and the type of correction fits the error made. My intention of using those various corrections is to motivate my dogs to be correct or make the right choices. Corrections, when used correctly, should never shut a dog down. Proofing, done correctly, should build confidence in the dog...not shut them down. If you're watching someone correct a dog and the dog shuts down....they are really off the mark and they are seriously doing it wrong. Using corrections appropriately and correctly so the dog is motivated to be correct or make good choices sort of falls into that category of dog training being a "living art."

Here's my youtube channel and more videos of my dogs working than I can count...you'll see two dogs having a great time and learning efficiently. 

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC03bZz4U6yWXHdgsp2K4DnA/videos?shelf_id=0&view=0&sort=dd


----------



## esuastegui (Aug 8, 2016)

Willowy said:


> If that's considered fair and balanced I'd hate to see a biased article .


Ah, yes. So much eye of the beholder in these things. I thought it was balanced because he acknowledges the impact that positive training has had (how it has improved training) and doesn't dismiss it out of hand. In fact, he has another article (see the bottom of the page) on the use of treats, so he knows P+ works (and when) and uses it. I found his discussion about how treats/rewards may not be enough to overcome other stimuli thought-provoking, too. He also scorns the use of correction (calls it abuse) when it isn't called for (given the individual dog's needs), so there's that.

One additional point I'll make is that he conflates training a pet with training a dog for work/competition. I think we can have a more nuanced conversation about whether correction is needed at all for pets vs. working dogs (though I strongly suspect a "balanced" [in the eyes of some] conversation might well say, no, correction is wrong across the board, because, well, it just is--has to be!).



> Also, I know it's shallow to pick/exclude a trainer based on apostrophe abuse but I think my eyes (eye's ) (haha, auto-correct didn't want me to do that. He needs auto-correct) are bleeding. . .


Agreed there. I'd go further and say that whole sight needs a proofreader big time.

At any rate, the main point of my reply was to show a _place_ (the boards) where one might go to locate "balanced" trainers, which I believe was the main line of inquiry in the OP.


----------



## Nikkair (Sep 13, 2016)

canyx, I can personally understand why you posted what you did...but the words "trainer" and "training" need to be put in context. Are you talking about "formal" competition training, which seems to be what all the responses you got are alluding to, or are you talking about the homeowner that doesn't want their dog to bite the neighbor or chase the mailman?

People that are in the midst of training a perfect agility dog or perfect competition obedience dog are probably (I hope) are well beyond the "my dog is eating my house" or my dog is growling at my kid" stage. The training ratio you want to be defined can be elusive. 

I agree that there is a lot of false advertising out there...but you cannot equate methods for achieving (much less perfecting) competition obedience skills with everyday skills people need to just have a well-behaved dog...the ratio is different. It is two different discussions.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Well, yes and no. 

The basic skills needed to train high level competition skills or sports skills are very much applicable to a dog not eating the house. It's honestly not different. It's still teaching. If the method works for very precise, detailed, behaviors, why in the world would it not work for 'don't pee in the house'?


----------



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

Honestly, I'm a fan of a lot of leerburg's materials. They know what they're talking about, I'll give them that. The thing is, I don't *need* the idea of perfect compliance from my dog. As an example, my dog snarks at other dogs... I don't feel the need to correct his behavior even though I am fairly positive a few well timed leash corrections would stop him from reacting the way he does when other dogs get in his space. My dog would growl if I tried to move him in his sleep... I don't feel the need to teach him I should be able to do whatever I want to him. But leerburg suggests that your dog should basically learn to accept those things. 

Nikkair, I am talking about training in general but deal with 'pet' training professionally. I can understand why one would separate the two but at the core I believe training philosophy can apply to both worlds. There certainly are trainers across the board and in between who claim to be R+.

In terms of competition, and we can also throw in leerburg's examples of work like police work where absolute compliance is necessary... I can understand why P+ is included in the training program. I really do. And when I watch videos of MrsBoat's dogs I see happy dogs, thrilled to be doing what they're doing. But there is a line somewhere that is drawn by the person and not the dog. The person needs the dog to hold down the assailant. The person needs the dog to win ribbons. It's selfish. And that's not me looking down on anyone... Heck, I'll have my dog balance a piece of meat on his nose. You think he enjoys that rather than scarfing it down immediately? I train my dog because he's my dog and I want him to do things, just like any trainer from decades ago. But I want my dog to WANT to do things. And I'm okay sometimes with my dog not doing what I want him to do. That doesn't make me better or worse than the next trainer... It's a personal decision. I don't look down on trainers who correct their dogs because the dog's position loses them points in the ring. But I sure don't look up to them either. They exist alongside me and I take from them what I want to include in my training program.

In the professional world I've learned some things, one of them being: people will correct their dogs whether you like it or not. Even if they buy into R+ training, at home they are still saying "No" (effectively or ineffectively), pulling on leashes, etc. If they do it in class I will try to gently stop them from doing those things. Not because "you're being mean to your dog" even if they are, but because it isn't working. In all cases I've seen, IF they do P+ they're doing it in a way that even leerburg would look down on, ie ineffective and relationship damaging. In a situation where people come in with less than perfect timing, a bare bones understanding of learning theory, and a desperation to get their dogs to be "good"... I would not put the idea of corrections into their minds. If they are imperfect with their rewards the training might be slower going, but at least it stops them from the needless chatter ("No! Bad! Stop! No bark! Off!") and at least some good behaviors are being rewarded. 

But I digress... yeah, Michael Ellis is someone who, based on what I've seen, I would trust my dog with if it ever came down to that. Purely theoretically and all. I've seen in some of his videos where he even tells his clients to stop leash correcting their dog in that stage of the training. Looking at Tyler Muto's videos, I think he knows what he's talking about as well. I would not do some of the things he does, because of where my line is drawn... But I am impressed with his honesty and humility. In the resource guarding video I would not in a million years approach resource guarding in that direction, but at least he tells the viewer why his two e-collar corrections were due to wrong and unnecessary training setup. I appreciate the resources. I won't use them for myself or recommend them, but living where I live there is no non-R+ trainer who is worth it. As in, I find their methods to be abusive. And believe it or not I find it refreshing that a solid middle ground still exists. Now I'll happily go off back into my R+ land


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

I really like Michael Ellis. From what I've seen he's outstandingly honest and fair. Which means I don't think he would touch most of my dogs with a 10 foot pole, because he'd recognize how ill suited they are to some of his methods. Thud. I think he would enjoy Thud and to tell the truth Thud would probably enjoy *him*.

But I'm not going there, either.

(Also of course trainers who do sports and performance events do both - they have to live with their dogs OUTSIDE the ring, too!)


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

CptJack said:


> I really like Michael Ellis. From what I've seen he's outstandingly honest and fair.


Michael Ellis is great. And he wouldn't go out and use harsh corrections on a soft dog. 

Ed Frawley (owner of Leerburg and writer of that article) is a bit of a training dinosaur. I take most of what he says with a grain of salt.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

elrohwen said:


> Michael Ellis is great. And he wouldn't go out and use harsh corrections on a soft dog.


I actually saw him teaching a tiny little happy bouncy dog to heel (some video, somewhere) and he really does adapt to the dog in front of him. I also like some of the videos explaining why there are dogs HE won't touch for protection work because it would be terrible for the dog. 

I just really respect the man.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

CptJack said:


> I actually saw him teaching a tiny little happy bouncy dog to heel (some video, somewhere) and he really does adapt to the dog in front of him. I also like some of the videos explaining why there are dogs HE won't touch for protection work because it would be terrible for the dog.
> 
> I just really respect the man.


His use of positive reinforcement (specifically toy and food play) is more impressive than his use of corrections. I respect him a lot and have learned a ton from watching his videos and Watson is nothing like the dogs he works with.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Yeah. His drive building and toy/food play stuff is probably 98% of where I got info to build toy and play drive in Kylie -

and she couldn't be more like a GSD or Mal if she tried.


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

So I'm reviving this thread... Sorry if this is long, but hoping for some feedback. I've reached a point in training where I feel I need a new trainer. I just don't think the school I'm using is helping anymore - my dog is super solid with most of her obedience skills, but where she's lacking, I don't find that the school I've been using is very effective. So. In perusing other options for local trainers, and feeling like I might need to go in a more one-on-one style of training focused on our problems vs. generalities, I'm coming across some doozies. Some are immediately nixed (lots of references to both Cesar Milan and Don Sullivan). But others are a little trickier to figure out. Insight is appreciated.

My current issues are: 
*jumping on people when greeting: She's so-so with this, and it's one thing I've spent a LOT of time on... she just loves people so dang much she loses her mind sometimes. It definitely seems to depend on the environment a lot of times as to whether she'll sit for a greeting or not - and if it's a friend of mine that she knows and loves, forget about it.
*polite dog-dog greetings, both on and off leash: When we're hiking on a trail, or in a group class, or in the pet store, she's fine. She knows she's working. It's the other types of random interactions, and ESPECIALLY when people bring strange dogs to our home, where it gets dicey. If she doesn't like a dog, it's certainly obvious. I don't need her to love every dog every time of course, but I *DO* want her to be consistently polite in both outside and home environments. It's the consistency in her behavior for both of these problems that we're struggling to overcome
*emergency recall: we actually haven't really trained for this yet. We have trained recall of course, and she has an excellent recall - but I'd like to get that "emergency - COME NOW" reaction ingrained.

So those are our challenges. I'm leaning towards private lessons vs. group lessons, though I know they will be far more expensive.

The one trainer I seem to be drawn to has this as her training philosophy:

_Here, we use a balanced approach to training. We treat each dog as an individual and use the training method(s) that best fit that dog’s personality type and learning style. To teach new behaviors, we use 100% positive reinforcement, reward-based training so that the dog enjoys training and has a good attitude towards it. To correct unwanted behaviors, such as pulling on the leash, we use a training collar paired with positive reinforcement techniques. For clients who want 100% off leash training, to include an emergency recall, we offer e-collar training. We never use force or punishment to train dogs, and our goal with any training equipment is to “Use it…then lose it!”
As a dog owner, you want a well-behaved dog who listens to commands and has good manners. As dog trainers, we want to help you communicate effectively with your dog and understand your dog so that training is clear, consistent and easy to implement. By teaching you and training your dog, we’ll help you reach your training goals together. We work with dogs of all ages, breeds and temperament types, and we encourage everyone in the family to participate._

Now most of what she says sounds good, but I've never used an e-collar and it's not something that thrills me. Yes, I know an e-collar is not the same as a shock collar. But it seems to deviate a little from the +R methods we've always used. That said, I do feel like corrections are appropriate at times, depending on the dog and the situation. She does a free evaluation, so it might not hurt to check it out.

What are your thoughts on this "balanced" approach to training? I can't seem to find ANY trainers in my area that claim to be 100% +R, but I'm also wondering if the dog-dog interaction aspect of our training might be an appropriate part to switch things up. (BTW, I can't use treats with her for dog-dog training because all the dogs just want to bombardl me when they realize I have treats, which makes the entire situation more stressful and just not worth it. So I don't carry treats with me in those cases)
It seems based on the description that this is truly a balanced approach, and that corrections only come into play when +R fails.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Could you give more specifics on the dog-dog interactions that you are having issues with? Why are strange dogs coming into your home if she isn't okay with them? I know many people just don't allow their dog to greet others while on leash for a variety of reasons, is there a reason this isn't possible?


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

If you want to use P+ / R- in your training, this person seems reasonable. I will say that if they are using training collars (I'm interpreting that as choke or prong) and e-collars, they _are_ using punishment and / or force, maybe not technically in training, but in proofing. 

I'm confused by this statement, "Yes, I know an e-collar is not the same as a shock collar." What is the difference?

Personally, I would not use P+ / R- for the issues you described (especially not for dog-dog interactions when one dog is already "dicey"), but there are folks here who have has success with using an e-collar (R-) for recall.


----------



## Hiraeth (Aug 4, 2015)

My big problem with this trainer is this statement:



> For clients who want 100% off leash training, to include an emergency recall, we offer e-collar training. We never use force or punishment to train dogs, and our goal with any training equipment is to “Use it…then lose it!”


E-collars and shock collars (which are the same thing) ARE punishment-based tools. No two ways about it. While I don't use punishment in training, I understand that other people do. And as long as it's not excessive, that's their prerogative. 

However, one of my pet peeves is people who use punishment and claim that it's NOT punishment. The only way to use punishment correctly is to understand that your technique is punishment-based and to apply it accordingly. So any trainer who uses punishment-based techniques and insists that they don't punish dogs would be someone I'd absolutely refuse to work with, because they clearly don't grasp the basics of their own methods.


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

Hmm... maybe I'm mistaken but I thought true shock collars were those that were set to zap at higher levels, whereas the e-collars are more like TENS units that have a "tone" setting as well as lower stim settings. Maybe they are the same thing? I don't know, it has been a looooooong time since I've been around anyone with a shock collar on their dog, and back then it was basically just high or low. There is an article posted on this site about the use of e-collars, which seems fairly sensible as far as these things go: http://valork9academy.com/2016/06/15/the-benefits-of-e-collar-training/

OK so the dog-dog thing. Sigh. I'll try to explain (brevity is not my strength, haha) a bit about my social structure. Most of our friends have dogs, and most of them usually take their dogs with them wherever they go. As do we, when it's possible. It's a rather large group of people, and when we have gatherings, it's not unusual to have 30-40 people with 10-20 dogs or more (could be our home or someone else's). Most are off-leash, if not all. Now I've trained my dog on-leash AND off, and despite the fact that she has known most of these dogs since she was a puppy, I still always control her initial greeting while on-leash. She is never let off-leash until she is calm and listening to me in the face of all the distractions. (I've discussed this here before some) 

So anyway, I often get into situations that people simply take for granted that they can visit my home with their dogs - and to be honest, I *WANT* to be welcoming to my friends' dogs and I enjoy having them over, mostly. So while many will ask first, there are just as many that don't. And before you say "why do you allow that", it's just not that simple. Take me, take my dog, is a common philosophy. It's often easier to welcome our friends and manage any negative interactions than it is to just tell them not to come. So when we are camping, for example, and all the dogs are off-leash, my dog is actually really good - she seems to be better in larger groups than with one-on-one interactions. There are certain dogs that are known to be trouble makers, and we just watch her really closely when they are there and/or leash her - since no one else believes in a leash apparently (not something I can fix, by the way).

So anyway, as an example, say it's one dog we're greeting and we're both on-leash. We will walk up to each other, the dogs will sniff, tails are wagging... then my dog either wants to play immediately, by jumping on the dog and play bowing, or she hates the dog and wants to eat its face off. It's probably 70/30, respectively. I just need to have more consistency and not worry about it EVERY time, because that's what's happening. Before every greeting with every new dog, I get super anxious about it and I try to calm myself, knowing it's not helping and she's picking up on that, but it's easier said than done. So typically I'll ask the other person if we can just walk our dogs around the yard together for a while until they stop paying attention to one another, then we try off-leash if things are going really well for a while. Which usually works out well provided that the other person agrees to do things my way, and if they have a collar/leash for their dog. I just never seem to know the correct course of action here when she decides it's a dog she doesn't like, though. We take her a LOT of places, so she needs to be at least consistent in not wanting to approach every dog so exuberantly. It's typically the shy, timid dogs or the herders she has problems with.

**ETA: I should also mention she's not by ANY means a soft dog

**Double ETA: I also want to say that it's the strange dogs coming into our home I'm most concerned with, as she is far more territorial there of course. Off-site, she is more likely to be friendly and play with other dogs. But what I don't want to do, and I'm afraid I've already done, is to have her think that any time a dog comes over, she gets put away - in HER house... because then of COURSE she won't want dogs coming over. She wants to be where the people are. So it's this part that I'm most concerned with and I want to fix this before it turns into a larger issue. All of the "problems" I have with her so far are fairly minor - but I want to nip these things in the bud before they ARE legitimate problems.


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

Oh, please stick to topic of "balanced" training, and what that actually entails, in terms of the issues I'm trying to address. I really don't want to get into a "well I wouldn't have my dog in that situation in the first place" discussion, because this is our life. I just need to figure out the best ways of dealing with this stuff in THESE types of environments, and if a trainer that suggests a mix of methods is appropriate - because I'm hesitant about it. But I also want to focus on this while she's still young, and I'm serious about finding a new trainer, and I have to just kind of sort through my available options in my area.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

An e-collar is the same as a shock collar. Old school and cheap collars tend to have very few settings and operate at a high level, while modern units are very adjustable on the low and high end. Training methods have also changed to focus on low level use instead of zapping the crap out of a dog (if they're zapping the dog right away, they're an idiot). But yeah, there's no difference. It is like a TENS unit but if you crank it up, it's still gonna hurt. If it's not something you're comfortable with, then this may not be the trainer for you. IME with ecollars and trainers who use them, it tends to be the go-to solution for recalls and you'll have a tough time saying "I want an emergency recall, but I don't want to train it the way you always train it"

Personally, I might give this trainer a shot, but I would be ready to run after the first lesson. I've worked with a few balanced trainers - some worked ok for us and were able to read the dog in front of them. They weren't going to zap and collar pop my soft nervous dog in the first session. But another trainer wanted me doing harsh collar pops immediately, even though it was pretty obvious that my dog was nervous about the environment and that's why he wasn't sitting immediately. So I ran away and didn't work with her again. You have to be an advocate for your dog and you have to be able to tell when a trainer really knows how to read dogs or not. You don't have that same risk with a more +R based trainer because they may not work for you, but there isn't going to be fallout either.

As far as the dog-dog stuff goes, what you've described sounds very normal to me. I'm not sure how a trainer would help except for bringing in neutral dogs to work around. But it sounds like she's fine with neutral dogs. Her reaction depends so much on how the other dog is behaving, and I don't know that it's possible to train her to not get pissed off by a dog being rude, or giving off weird signals.

ETA: I have ecollars and I use them. Any time Watson is off leash in an unfenced area he is wearing his collar. But I agree with Hireath that people should call it like it is - it's compulsion pure and simple. Depending on the moment it's -R or +P. I decided I was ok with that because I felt the opportunity to be off leash outweighed my desire to never use compulsion training. But I went into it being honest about what it is.


----------



## hanksimon (Mar 18, 2009)

If you are satisfied with your Recall, then you might work on the emergency recall, yourself. According to Susan Garrett and the 5 Minute Recall, you use successive distractions and distance, incrementally making coming to you on recall more interesting and rewarding than the current distraction. [I've never taken the training, so I don't know her detailed method.] An e-collar provides a way of distracting a dog from the current distraction. A potential downside is that a painful approach may affect the trust and independence of the dog. Those traits may not matter or may not be important to some training. 

Dog-Dog interactions - I spent 3 years super socializing my previous dog with 100s of different, friendly dogs, so he would be OK with dogs ( as well as people ... a different issue). I believe that if you expose your dog to lots more friendly dogs - one on one play dates, or group playdates - whichever is 'calmer' and friendlier, that she will grow less inclined to want to eat faces, even if the other dog growls first. 

With my current dog, I'm in a similar situation. I just got him about 6 mos ago, when he was an unsocialized 1.5yo. At that time, the initial reaction was eat face. But, as I slowly introduced him to well socialized dogs, he learned to play, then he learned to play appropriately, then he learned to play and self-handicap with smaller dogs and puppies. Now, his first reaction is to try to play - He's good with timid dogs. But, with fearful or 'aggressive' dogs, if they bark or growl, then he will bark back. And, if another dog starts up with him, he doesn't back down and will escalate, although we've been able to stop fights before they really get started. As he gets older and more experienced, he's getting less reactive and calmer. 

You might make a pointed effort to try to work with the 'reactive' dog, either one on one with your dog, or with a few friendly dogs as support. Similarly with strange dogs: find some very well socialized, friendly dogs and invite them [individually or group] to come to your house for a playdate [or pizza party for the owners]. This is the idea that Patricia McConnell suggests in her books.

Jumping on people is a management issue ... You have to manage the people that 'sabotage' your training. You have to be stern with people to tell them that she is in training and could they help by asking her to Sit and ignoring her until she does, before even making eye contact, or talking, or reaching down, or petting ... One person can 'poison' the training, but if everyone helps, she'll learn pretty quickly.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

> Here, we use a balanced approach to training. We treat each dog as an individual and use the training method(s) that best fit that dog’s personality type and learning style. To teach new behaviors, we use 100% positive reinforcement, reward-based training so that the dog enjoys training and has a good attitude towards it. To correct unwanted behaviors, such as pulling on the leash, we use a training collar paired with positive reinforcement techniques. For clients who want 100% off leash training, to include an emergency recall, we offer e-collar training. We never use force or punishment to train dogs, and our goal with any training equipment is to “Use it…then lose it!”


Honestly, it sounds as if they actually don't treat dogs as individuals, but instead "pigeonhole" them into certain pre-conceived notions. ie: all dogs will require training collars to learn not to pull; all off leash training will require an ecollar. Neither of these implications are true, of course, and indicate to me at least that the trainer is not very skillful at the positive end of the spectrum. 

Further, they claim their goal is to "use it .. then lose it" and we all pretty much realize that's seldom the case. Lifetime reliance is generally the norm with punitive training devices. I have a gut feeling that's their approach when it comes to the use of food treats or R+ as well, since, like most balanced trainers, they seem to only approve of it in the teaching phase. To be clear, ALL training methods will necessitate on-going and enduring application. But I'd rather make a habit of having a few hotdog pieces on hand, rather than spare batteries for the ecollar.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

elrohwen said:


> An e-collar is the same as a shock collar. Old school and cheap collars tend to have very few settings and operate at a high level, while modern units are very adjustable on the low and high end. Training methods have also changed to focus on low level use instead of zapping the crap out of a dog (if they're zapping the dog right away, they're an idiot). But yeah, there's no difference. It is like a TENS unit but if you crank it up, it's still gonna hurt. If it's not something you're comfortable with, then this may not be the trainer for you. IME with ecollars and trainers who use them, it tends to be the go-to solution for recalls and you'll have a tough time saying "I want an emergency recall, but I don't want to train it the way you always train it"
> 
> *Personally, I might give this trainer a shot, but I would be ready to run after the first lesson.* I've worked with a few balanced trainers - some worked ok for us and were able to read the dog in front of them. They weren't going to zap and collar pop my soft nervous dog in the first session. But another trainer wanted me doing harsh collar pops immediately, even though it was pretty obvious that my dog was nervous about the environment and that's why he wasn't sitting immediately. So I ran away and didn't work with her again. You have to be an advocate for your dog and you have to be able to tell when a trainer really knows how to read dogs or not. You don't have that same risk with a more +R based trainer because they may not work for you, but there isn't going to be fallout either.
> 
> ...


Agreed in general but I bolded the parts that I think need to be particularly paid attention to. From a review of the website, this trainer appears to have a decent concept overall of the various training options and does not appear to be overly heavy handed. There is some descriptions of their techniques that I might call into question based on the terms but would be willing to see in person how it plays out. The dog-dog interaction thing is a big question mark for me. Dogs are going to like or dislike other dogs in a way that they want to; you can work with how the introduction goes, you can work on management, you can work to lower the stress of an interaction but if a dog doesn't like another dog, that's usually just kinda how its gonna be. Any punishment during a dog-dog interaction risks increasing dog aggression.



petpeeve said:


> Honestly, it sounds as if they actually don't treat dogs as individuals, but instead "pigeonhole" them into certain pre-conceived notions. ie: all dogs will require training collars to learn not to pull; all off leash training will require an ecollar. Neither of these implications are true, of course, and indicate to me at least that the trainer is not very skillful at the positive end of the spectrum.
> 
> Further, they claim their goal is to "use it .. then lose it" and we all pretty much realize that's seldom the case. Lifetime reliance is generally the norm with punitive training devices. I have a gut feeling that's their approach when it comes to the use of food treats or R+ as well, since, like most balanced trainers, they seem to only approve of it in the teaching phase. To be clear, ALL training methods will necessitate on-going and enduring application. But I'd rather make a habit of having a few hotdog pieces on hand, rather than spare batteries for the ecollar.


Also agreed but sorta disagreed. Overall, I think reliance on any training method does tend to stay around which means a treat/reward based training is far preferable, but from my own experience, I have used prong collars and transitioned to harnesses or flat collars and not moved back OR shifted back in very limited circumstances.

I'd want to see in action how they treat dogs as individuals and assess their needs at the beginning of training. Slapping an e-collar or a prong on every dog from the first meeting is different than working through a few sessions and then selecting an a punishment option if that's the route that the owner wants to go.


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

Thanks for your input everyone, it sort of follows along with what I was thinking about this trainer. Incidentally, did anyone read the article link I posted (from the blog on their site)? It addresses the fact that e-collars are NOT for every dog, and is in fact not the default approach in their training. It seems they defer to the owners and also the dog's needs before making that determination. So that makes me feel a bit better about things. Honestly after searching for trainers in the area, this one seems to be my best shot. I think, after hearing all of your opinions, I'll at least call these people and talk to them and perhaps schedule an evaluation - test the waters before making any commitments.

I think it's a good point that the dog-dog thing depends so much on the OTHER dog, but I also do think I stress her out a little so I'm trying to work on that. She certainly has her favorites, and we try to get together when we can, but more often than not it's multiple dogs at a time that we encounter and there may be a handful she hasn't met, so I get anxious. I have seen her, in group situations, get barked/snapped at by another dog and I told her "leave it", and she turned away/disengaged - which is awesome, but it has only happened a few times. 

Of course it could be totally possible that I over-analyze everything and things aren't as bad as I feel they are. I guess it's just the lack of consistency that bothers me. I think hanksimon nailed it for me when he says that his dog will not back down and will escalate if confronted by aggression or whatever from another dog - that's what I'm afraid of. My girl is a VERY strong dog so the risk of damage should things escalate too far is pretty high, and with her being a bulldog I am always conscious of the "it's your fault" mentality of a lot of folks regardless of who started what or how it happened. Thankfully we've not encountered that kind of situation thus far and even her negative interactions have never developed into a fight due to our vigilance. On the flip side of it all, sometimes I feel like she SHOULD be put in her place by another dog a time or two. Sometimes it's just really hard to figure out the correct course of action, especially when things are hectic and people are hugging and greeting and such. I'll continue to work on the people too, but it's definitely the hardest part of training. It also might be she'll never be totally reliable with strange dogs, and that's OK, but I'm going to at least try my hardest and train diligently to give her the best chance of being civil more consistently - hence, finding a newer, more focused trainer. My last instructor at the school was the sweetest lady, but spent more time telling stories about her therapy dog than actually teaching us useful skills - and my dog gets really bored when we're in class NOT working.

Ultimately I think I just need to relax. Haha. She's not quite 2 1/2, so still has a lot of puppy crazies, and my expectations can sometimes be too high. But I'm going to call this lady and see where it goes - it might be that we're not a match but it's worth looking into. I really appreciate all of your advice and thoughts!


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

TGKvr said:


> Thanks for your input everyone, it sort of follows along with what I was thinking about this trainer. Incidentally, did anyone read the article link I posted (from the blog on their site)? It addresses the fact that e-collars are NOT for every dog, and is in fact not the default approach in their training. It seems they defer to the owners and also the dog's needs before making that determination. So that makes me feel a bit better about things. Honestly after searching for trainers in the area, this one seems to be my best shot. I think, after hearing all of your opinions, I'll at least call these people and talk to them and perhaps schedule an evaluation - test the waters before making any commitments.


I did read the article but I didn't get quite the same thing from it that you did.

She is saying that she doesn't put ecollars on dogs when owners want a quick fix. She's not going to use it inappropriately just because owners request it. And she won't use it with people who aren't going to put in the work to train with it properly. That's just being a decent ethical trainer. But she does imply that she uses it on pretty much all dogs who are there for recall training. Most balanced trainers are not out there to fry dogs, but IME most trainers who utilize ecollars do make use of them on most cases, because that's the training they know and what they're good at. They don't immediately use ecollars on shut down terrified dogs, but it's a myth that only hard tempered dogs can handle ecollar training. I would be shocked if she didn't recommend one immediately for your emergency recall issue, and possibly the jumping up issue.



> Ultimately I think I just need to relax. Haha. She's not quite 2 1/2, so still has a lot of puppy crazies, and my expectations can sometimes be too high. But I'm going to call this lady and see where it goes - it might be that we're not a match but it's worth looking into. I really appreciate all of your advice and thoughts!


Honestly, I think most of your issues with her are the result of your expectations.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

After 50 years of professional training and 90 breeds trained, retired now. I always told potential customers that I had more references than they had time to call and actually had a reference list handy with different breeds and owners. I also would have them visit and show them DVDs of different dogs trained and showed them how I did it. They then could make their decisions.

I always thought that was a better program than having them watch one of my dogs work because obviously one of my own dogs would be able to walk on water.

All dogs trained left with their own DVD training disc so owners could continue the work. Any trainer that does not have many references is one to be avoided, my opinion only.


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

Some of the responses here speak of narrow approaches thay may not address the dog in front of them. WVasko is correct on CHOOSING a trainer. Lots of good references and lots of different dogs and breeds. 

I know a good lot of trainers. I know a few very good trainers. The very good trainers are never one size fits all. 

I use an ecollar. I make no excuses. It is a good tool (I find some of the comments/critiques regarding ecollar use by those who are aghast at their use and never used one to be quite entertaining in their incorrectness.. but I digress). 

While I use an ecollar, I DO NOT USE AN E COLLAR ON EVERY DOG. No very good balanced trainer would. It is not an "every dog" tool (like a leash). It depends on the dog. 

Good trainers use a wide range of tools to train dogs. They usually only use a very few of those tools on the individual dog in front of them in for training.

I can say this. The really good trainers I know and interact with do not take very many clients and most cannot be found on YouTube. Some give seminars, but most do not. They could train almost any dog to do basic obedience and do it with enthusiasm and joy. 

I know of more than a few who refuse to train for the pet owning population. The most common reason for this refusal is due to lack of committment to training the dog by that populace (two 10 minute training sessions a day 4x a week and consistant handling between training sessions). The next reason I hear is these trainers don't want to deal with the pet owners' massive ignorance about dogs (in general) and especially their own dog coupled with the stubborn intent to remain encased in that ignorance!! 

I know of a person who turned down $2500 to take a dog in for 4 weeks and just train it to not counter surf and to go to its bed on cue. The aggravation of dealing with that dog's owner was just not worth it!!!!

Training the DOG is not the problem. Training the pet dog owner is the big chore. 

Some of the best of these trainers do not do one to one training or group lessons. They will do "board and train" with a lesson with the owner before the dog goes home. That said, there are a lot of real bad trainers that board and train so beware!! 

The best way to FIND a balanced trainer is to ask people who have well trained dogs who they train with. You may find a gem. If you do find that gem, they may refuse your business.


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

Well I contacted this trainer, and she wants to meet me and my dog to evaluate where we are before making any decisions. I'm good with that. Also, she is providing references which I haven't received yet, but her willingness to do so is a good thing. I told her I wasn't really interested in starting anything new until after the New Year, so it will be a little while before we get to that point. I'm very curious to meet her and to get a better handle on her methods and what, specifically, she'll recommend for my dog. It might end up being cost prohibitive, but I guess we'll see.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Regarding references provided by trainers, I haven't found them to be useful. What one person is looking for in a trainer may not be the same thing I'm looking for. The one woman who sent me running has a million references and has trained dogs to an OTCH. I don't doubt she can train a dog and she was a nice person. But hard collar pops for a dog who is nervous and looking around the room isn't for me. Midway through that training session my normally happy exuberant dog was lying on the ground completely shut down. Like I said, she can train a dog, and I don't doubt that we would've made some sort of progress if we stuck with her, but that session was enough. 

I only care about references from people who I know personally, and whose training style I like and agree with. Otherwise references from random clients are no better than taking a chance with a trainer and finding out for yourself (which has been my primary method)


TGKvr, keep us updated! I hope she works out for you.


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

Yeah I've always thought references were a good thing to get, but I generally take them with a grain of salt. I mean... most people aren't going to provide you a reference for someone that isn't going to have good things to say. But that doesn't mean I won't check them out anyway.
Whatever happens, I'm excited about heading in a different direction, training-wise. I just don't think my current school has much more to offer me.


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

A good trainer won't shut a dog down. Collar pops are a tool. They are not the tool for every dog at every stage of training. 

Training a dog is never one size fits all.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

3GSD4IPO said:


> A good trainer won't shut a dog down. Collar pops are a tool. They are not the tool for every dog at every stage of training.
> 
> Training a dog is never one size fits all.


That was my point

A highly recommended training with lots of students and OTCHs can still be a bad trainer in the right situation/right dog. Which is why I don't put much emphasis on recommendations anymore unless they come from people who I know well.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

> But hard collar pops for a dog who is nervous and looking around the room isn't for me. Midway through that training session my normally happy exuberant dog was lying on the ground completely shut down.


Indeed there are some dogs that can be shut down with an unfriendly voice and others believe it or not that cannot be shut down with an E-collar. 

So while shutting dogs down/off could be a problem, a good trainer will have the experience and knowledge to then turn the dog back on when it's time. It is (my opinion only) the finished product at 
the end of the training program that shows the competency of any trainer.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

How is this for a finished product ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxVAOIuozXY

I don't know. Maybe "finished" is too strong of a word after a mere ten minutes. But that dog seems well on his way towards that eventuality, in due time.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

wvasko said:


> Indeed there are some dogs that can be shut down with an unfriendly voice and others believe it or not that cannot be shut down with an E-collar.
> 
> So while shutting dogs down/off could be a problem, a good trainer will have the experience and knowledge to then turn the dog back on when it's time. It is (my opinion only) the finished product at
> the end of the training program that shows the competency of any trainer.


This same dog wore a prong for a long time and wears an ecollar almost daily (for recall on an unfenced property). It's not the tools, and he's not that soft. It was a crappy trainer with an inability to read the dog in front of her. 

And my entire point is that this woman is highly accomplished and highly recommended. Going of of that won't always get you a trainer who is a good fit.

Also that by going to a balanced trainer you run a greater risk than you do by going to a +R based trainer. A +R trainer may be ineffective, but a balanced trainer can cause fallout. I've worked with other balanced trainers who were excellent and I learned a ton from them, so I wouldn't recommend someone never work with them, but I do think you need to be ready to advocate for your dog and walk away if the methods don't feel right to you.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

"reading the dog in front of you" can be an extremely difficult task to perform accurately, even for the most experienced of trainers. What you are seeing is merely a microscopic "snapshot" of who or what that dog truly is. Ascertaining a dog's constitution at a relative glance, as a basis for whether it's prudent to apply P+ or not, is nearly impossible. At best it's an educated guess and a leap of blind faith.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

> This same dog wore a prong for a long time and wears an ecollar almost daily (for recall on an unfenced property). It's not the tools, and he's not that soft. It was a crappy trainer with an inability to read the dog in front of her.
> 
> And my entire point is that this woman is highly accomplished and highly recommended. Going of of that won't always get you a trainer who is a good fit.


I do not understand crappy trainer 1st paragraph and then the accomplished trainer in 2nd paragraph. Pretty hard for same trainer to be both. 

But and a big BUT

There are many trainers who have a favorite breed (one breed only) but for pocket money may work other breeds halfheartedly, then there are other trainers who will and can work with any breed or mixed breeds because they like and just enjoy working with dogs. Just sayin....


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

wvasko said:


> I do not understand crappy trainer 1st paragraph and then the accomplished trainer in 2nd paragraph. Pretty hard for same trainer to be both.
> 
> But and a big BUT
> 
> There are many trainers who have a favorite breed (one breed only) but for pocket money may work other breeds halfheartedly, then there are other trainers who will and can work with any breed or mixed breeds because they like and just enjoy working with dogs. Just sayin....


Huh? I don't really understand your post. I'm not speaking Greek here, I've made the same post five times now and I don't feel like you've actually read it.

I'm talking about the same trainer. She is highly accomplished and highly recommended locally. She did not work for me and my dog - I didn't like her methods and my dog was completely shut down. OTCHs and recommendations don't mean a trainer will be right for you and your dog. That is literally my entire point.

Someone asked about how to tell if a balanced trainer is good, and I said that you can't go off of recommendations and accomplishments alone, sometimes you just need to work with them and see. And unlike a +R based trainer, the risk of fallout is much higher working with a balanced trainer who doesn't read your dog or give you good advice. So you need to be ready to advocate for your dog.


----------



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

petpeeve said:


> How is this for a finished product ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxVAOIuozXY
> 
> I don't know. Maybe "finished" is too strong of a word after a mere ten minutes. But that dog seems well on his way towards that eventuality, in due time.


Wow, so sad to see.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

> I'm talking about the same trainer. She is highly accomplished and highly recommended locally. She did not work for me and my dog - I didn't like her methods and my dog was completely shut down. OTCHs and recommendations don't mean a trainer will be right for you and your dog. That is literally my entire point.


Well because she did not work well for your dog, I suppose calling an accomplished trainer crappy is your prerogative. Please excuse my misunderstanding, I have never claimed to be the brightest bulb in the box.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Canyx said:


> Wow, so sad to see.


Take one happy and exuberant dog who is pulling slightly and I mean just _barely_ on the leash, apply some corrections with an ecollar over the course of ten minutes, and the dog miraculously turns from his former monstrous self into a timid and unhappy bundle of "success". 

But that's just good, balanced training ... right ?


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Oh but it all depends on the end result later on, ya know? You can abuse him all you want now as long as he's forgiving enough to be happy again when it's all over. 

Bleh.


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

Yeah... if I saw that dog walking down the street, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be thinking "wow, that dog sure has a pulling problem".


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

TGKvr said:


> Yeah... if I saw that dog walking down the street, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be thinking "wow, that dog sure has a pulling problem".


Walking down the street, ok. But what would you think if you saw the same dog walking into your future trainer's facility, then seeing it emerge ten minutes later showing classic signs of shutdown, with the trainer in tow and proudly proclaiming to the world "look what I ahem,_ fixed_ with an ecollar ! .. look everyone !! ... LOOK !!!" ? 

KInda puts a whole different slant on *the problem* hmm ?


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

petpeeve said:


> Walking down the street, ok. But what would you think if you saw the same dog walking into your future trainer's facility, then seeing it emerge ten minutes later showing classic signs of shutdown, with the trainer in tow and proudly proclaiming to the world "look what I ahem,_ fixed_ with an ecollar ! .. look everyone !! ... LOOK !!!" ?
> 
> KInda puts a whole different slant on *the problem* hmm ?


Um... I don't really understand this post, or why you're trying to argue with me? My point was only that I didn't really see a "problem" in the first place, at least nothing that a little regular patience wouldn't solve. But to answer the question, yeah... I'd think poorly of the trainer in your scenario. Is that what you were after?


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

So we've scheduled an evaluation two weeks from now. I'm very curious to see how this goes. 

I do have a little checklist of questions I want to ask her during our eval, but I'd like to get some advice/suggestions from anyone here in case I'm forgetting something important. Thoughts? TIA!


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

TGKvr said:


> So we've scheduled an evaluation two weeks from now. I'm very curious to see how this goes.
> 
> I do have a little checklist of questions I want to ask her during our eval, but I'd like to get some advice/suggestions from anyone here in case I'm forgetting something important. Thoughts? TIA!


Cool! I'm excited to hear how it goes! She seems like a competent trainer from the one thing you posted so hopefully she works for you and your dog.

What types of things were you going to ask? I always have a list but end up kind of going with the flow. Somehow what I came in to talk about never ends up being the thing we focus on.


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

So some of the things I have written down to ask her are:

*Which types of corrections/conditioning will be recommended for my dog's negative behaviors?
*How long can we utilize exclusively +R methods before determining if another method might be appropriate?
*If I wanted to maintain exclusive +R training for the duration, is she willing to do so?
*What are my options if I agree to train with her, then discover I'm unsatisfied?
*Would she be available at no charge for questions in between sessions if necessary? 

I'm sort of looking for answers that indicate there IS no one answer, if that makes sense. At least for some things - I basically need to know she's flexible and that MY concerns/preferences will be a priority. Not that I'm not willing to listen to a professional of course, that's why I'm considering hiring her, but I do want some assurance that she won't be like "my way or the highway".

Definitely interested to hear if anyone has other recommendations of topics to discuss or questions to ask during our evaluation. Her rates are certainly higher than what I've paid before, but if it's going to help me focus on my dog's problem areas more specifically, then it's probably worth it.


----------



## hanksimon (Mar 18, 2009)

Be open-minded with her answers. "Corrections" can imply +P but some +P methods are not 'harmful/aversive' and are used by positive trainers. For example, both Dunbar and McConnell use methods that are effective and positive, but not always on the +R spectrum.

Ask her who she has learned from and how she learned her methods. If you disagree with something you hear, probe more deeply ... For example, Cesar Millan is not a +R trainer, but some of his methods are good methods ... [Some are terrible.]

Ask her opinion and experience with clicker training. One reason not to use clicker training is because the trainer doesn't have the timing. Some trainers may not understand that timing is the reason that clicker training doesn't work for them.

Ideally, I think that you might want to watch her with the first repetition for a specific behavior. Then, you want her to train you to do the same thing. 1/3 time her training the dog and 2/3 time her training you as you train the dog. Some trainers prefer to let you do all the training, but my opinion is a successful first repetition starts the positive momentum going. Ask her about her philosophy...


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

Thank you hanksimon! Those are some good insights. I'm definitely going into this with an open mind and a sincere wish that she will be a good match for us. Two weeks can't go by fast enough! Haha!


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

In my experienced with balanced trainers, they tend to scoff a little bit when people come in and say they want to use only +R for everything. I guess if they thought that would work, they would bill themselves as +R trainers  So I wouldn't ask that specifically. I would ask her to lay out how she would approach your training difficulties before you start training. Sometimes trainers like to jump in and start doing stuff and if you feel uncomfortable with a method it can be harder to speak up. But if you discuss first you'll be able to think about whether that's something you're comfortable with, and work together to get to a method you are comfortable with.

And I will respectfully disagree with hanksimon about letting her do the first rep. I feel very uncomfortable letting other people train my dog if I don't know them well. For initial sessions with a new trainer, especially when I'm not too sure about their methods, I would prefer they walk me through what to do.


----------



## hanksimon (Mar 18, 2009)

I agree with elrohwen's advice when you don't yet know the trainer [also when you have elrohwen's level of expertise ;-) ]. 

After you understand and trust the trainer, I think it is easier for a new trainer to watch the expert, for the first rep. and then try to copy what was seen, letting the trainer correct and fine tune.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

hanksimon said:


> I agree with elrohwen's advice when you don't yet know the trainer [also when you have elrohwen's level of expertise ;-) ].
> 
> After you understand and trust the trainer, I think it is easier for a new trainer to watch the expert, for the first rep. and then try to copy what was seen, letting the trainer correct and fine tune.


Definitely agree with you there! If you trust them and their methods, it's a lot easier to see it done right and then try to imitate than fumble around yourself.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

I'd ask her if she thinks it's reasonable or fair to regularly and arbitrarily thrust your dog-aggressive dog into an environment with 40 people and 20 dogs while you're caving, hiking, and camping. IMO if this trainer is worth her weight in milkbones, the answer will undoubtedly be "no". I'd also want to know, aside from that environment, what methods she will use to address your dog's DA issues. If she mentions anything like ecollars, choke collars or any type of physical corrections I would terminate the lessons immediately. 

"*What are my options if I agree to train with her, then discover I'm unsatisfied?" Well I can't really speak to someone else's policies, but your options would seem to be to take your business elsewhere. 

"*Would she be available at no charge for questions in between sessions if necessary?" As a general rule, trainers will gladly answer very brief questions between sessions, occasionally and when warranted. However if the questions happen to become frequent or lengthy in nature it basically amounts to a free lesson, and not many professionals will work for free.


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

First of all, my dog is NOT dog aggressive. She occasionally has some reactivity issues, but in general she gets along with most dogs just fine. My goal in seeking a trainer to work on this is to ensure it doesn't BECOME a problem in the future, and to help me become more consistent in our approach when meeting new dogs. She has met hundreds of dogs since we've had her as a puppy, and there are literally only a handful that she doesn't like. She has NEVER been the aggressor, and she has never been in a fight. I don't appreciate your snark here, especially because your assumptions are entirely incorrect. I'm just very conscious of the fact that I have a strong bully breed dog, and so I maybe take the obedience and training to the extreme in order to ensure she is a good ambassador for her breed. There is a lot of judgement surrounding bullies, and if anything DID happen with another dog, it would be my dog's fault. I am simply trying to avoid any such situation. She really is very sweet and very affectionate and enjoys romping and playing with other dogs. I know she won't love EVERY dog and I'm not saying she has to, but she does have to be civil at all times and this is what I want to work on - those few times she encounters a dog she doesn't like (typically one that is shy, timid, and doesn't want to play). I wouldn't even think of pursuing the CGC with her if she didn't have the potential.

Most of the time when we are actually hiking or caving, there may be about 10-15 of us, with maybe 6-7 dogs. If we are camping, the number for both may be higher. We attend two annual events where there may be 100+ people and maybe 20-30 dogs - she actually does great in these situations and is reliable off-leash. She also has met MOST of these people and dogs before, though there are always a few new folks and a couple of dogs she hasn't met. So I'm not "thrusting my dog-aggressive dog" into any sort of environment that is unsafe or uncomfortable for her. I care about my dog and her welfare, and I care about my friends' dogs and their welfare - so to suggest that I take an aggressive dog and push her into these situations is just wrong. If she gave any indication of not enjoying it, or if she DID become aggressive, I'd remove her from the situation. I'm not an idiot. But don't presume to think that my social situations are negative environments simply because the environment is a foreign concept to you.

As for the unsatisfaction question - more snark, thanks. That question is more about financial reimbursement should I be dissatisfied with the trainer or her methods.

I'm open to any constructive advice or suggestions, but I would really appreciate it if you'd get your facts straight before making me out to be a stupid and possibly dangerous pet owner because that's just downright offensive.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

> We will walk up to each other, the dogs will sniff, tails are wagging... then my dog either wants to play immediately, by jumping on the dog and play bowing, or she hates the dog and wants to eat its face off. It's probably 70/30, respectively.


A dog who "hates the other dog and wants to eat its face off" IS dog aggressive in my books, and at the rate of 30 % of the time is definitely considerable. 

I wasn't being snarky, just blunt, and just going by what you wrote yourself.

I would tread very carefully with your new trainer, and I would be 100 % honest and forthright in disclosing your expectations and your current lifestyle. Just my own thoughts, hopefully you see it as a helpful suggestion.


----------



## Hiraeth (Aug 4, 2015)

TGKvr said:


> It's a rather large group of people, and when we have gatherings, it's not unusual to have 30-40 people with 10-20 dogs or more (could be our home or someone else's). [snip]
> 
> So anyway, I often get into situations that people simply take for granted that they can visit my home with their dogs - and to be honest, I *WANT* to be welcoming to my friends' dogs and I enjoy having them over, mostly. So while many will ask first, there are just as many that don't. And before you say "why do you allow that", it's just not that simple. Take me, take my dog, is a common philosophy. It's often easier to welcome our friends and manage any negative interactions than it is to just tell them not to come. [snip]
> 
> So anyway, as an example, say it's one dog we're greeting and we're both on-leash. We will walk up to each other, the dogs will sniff, tails are wagging... then my dog either wants to play immediately, by jumping on the dog and play bowing, or she hates the dog and wants to eat its face off. It's probably 70/30, respectively. I just need to have more consistency and not worry about it EVERY time, because that's what's happening. Before every greeting with every new dog, I get super anxious about it and I try to calm myself, knowing it's not helping and she's picking up on that, but it's easier said than done. So typically I'll ask the other person if we can just walk our dogs around the yard together for a while until they stop paying attention to one another, then we try off-leash if things are going really well for a while. Which usually works out well provided that the other person agrees to do things my way, and if they have a collar/leash for their dog. I just never seem to know the correct course of action here when she decides it's a dog she doesn't like, though. We take her a LOT of places, so she needs to be at least consistent in not wanting to approach every dog so exuberantly. It's typically the shy, timid dogs or the herders she has problems with.





TGKvr said:


> She has met hundreds of dogs since we've had her as a puppy, and there are literally only a handful that she doesn't like. She has NEVER been the aggressor, and she has never been in a fight.


I've just been following this thread since my first few comments, but I have to say, some of the things you're saying just don't add up. One moment you're routinely around 30-40 people with 10-20 dogs, and the next you're telling us that you're only frequently around 10-15 people with 6-7 dogs. 

Also, you said she's 70/30 want to play/eat the other dog's face off, and then suddenly she isn't DA? If 30% of the dogs she meets she tries to attack, she's DA, there's no avoiding that. It's just selective DA. But now you're saying she's never the aggressor and only doesn't get along with 'a handful' (so 5?) dogs out of hundreds. So what is it? Is she eat your face off aggressive towards 30% of the dogs she meets, or does she only not get along with .025% of the dogs she meets?

My take on this situation, ever since you said she's 'eat your face off' aggressive towards 3 out of every 10 dogs she meets, is that you are frequently exposing her and other dogs to a potentially dangerous situation by putting her in large groups of off leash dogs. I think you want her to be a good ambassador for the breed, but she sounds to me like she's dog selective based on the facts that you've presented, and like you're trying to glaze over that fact so you can continue with the lifestyle that you are currently living with her, even if it's highly risky. Training doesn't fix dog selectivity - management and not allowing your dog in dangerous situations does.

In any case, no trainer is going to be able to help you unless you're honest and you have the facts straight from the beginning. You can't walk into a facility one day and say 'my dog doesn't like 30% of the dogs she meets' and then walk in the next day and say 'well, she actually gets along with hundreds of dogs and only dislikes a handful'. Your trainer won't even know where to start if you present such completely different facts and then ask how you should begin to tackle her issues.


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

OK, so I was being dramatic by using the term "eat its face off" - I can fully admit that I'm a little overly neurotic and paranoid about my dog not behaving perfectly all the time because of her bully-ness. I really do have high expectations, and that is something I am working on, because she is mostly a great dog, and incredibly smart and obedient and truly enjoys working and learning. When I put a leash on her, she becomes very focused and attentive... most of the time, depending on the distraction. So sometimes I sell her short in my desire to have her be consistent in her behavior. But really, if I look back, 70/30 is probably not accurate - it was an arbitrary figure I threw out there for discussion's sake, but if I think about the specific dogs she has had problems with, I can count 7 - 2 of which are actually known aggressive dogs that I keep her away from 100% of the time after their first meeting (which actually was accidental, since I already knew those dogs couldn't be trusted - I didn't know they were both there at the time). So... my friends don't even think it's a problem that I need to address, and think I'm crazy for spending more money on training at this point, but I feel like we need a little more structured training as a preventative for the future. Her "eat the dog" moments are almost always set off (as other people have pointed out here) as a result of the other dog's behavior - her default is to play, not to fight. She is most certainly not DA. And as seems to be typical by a lot of dogs, those few times sounded worse than it was (both dogs growling but no teeth/bite contact). It's always scary to hear the dogs growling at each other regardless of what they're physically doing - even during play sometimes. Mostly, if these other dogs have no interest in playing - then she feels she can bully them. There have been exactly two times where she has reacted to another dog while both were off leash (her trying to play, the other dogs not into it), and in both cases she sort of smacked them down with her paws and just stood still over them - so she didn't escalate the situation or try to bite the dog, and there was actually not even growling/snapping then...but I'm not entirely sure what would happen if the other dog had chosen to react to that smack down aggressively instead of submitting - I sense she wouldn't back down though. In both cases, she still shouldn't have reacted that way in my opinion. Nevertheless, I whistled and she came immediately (and was rewarded for that) and after that she just ignored them. 

There is being blunt, and there is being snarky - I appreciate blunt, and I appreciate constructive criticism. I'm also not too proud or closed-minded to be dismissive of other's viewpoints and advice, even if it may differ from my own thoughts. I'm always trying to improve and learn. That's why I'm here, after all. But when sarcasm and blanket statements color your "advice", it becomes less constructive and more personal.

Overall, I really suspect this trainer might tell me my "problems" aren't problems at all. Most of the people that interact with my dog comment on how well-behaved and sweet she is. She has a very endearing personality, and picks things up very easily. I think the training is really more for ME than for her, so I can better manage these unknown situations. I just get anxious, often times for no reason at all. I've showed and trained a lot of dogs before (in another life, and using some different methods), but none that have been quite this smart or this headstrong. I also took for granted what it was like having dogs with more aloof personalities - they require so much less of me than my current dog who wants to engage with everyone all the time, so that alone has thrown me a little out of my comfort zone when it comes to training. She's only 2 1/2 so again - it's on me to be more realistic with my expectations since she still has bit of adolescent/puppy behavior going on. Regardless, she needs to learn that not every dog wants to play and that it's OK if they don't. That's the main thing I want to focus on, and what I am searching for a new trainer for.

I've already discussed our lifestyle with this trainer (thank you for that suggestion), so we'll see how it goes during the eval. I'm trying to keep an open mind. I will get to see her with other dogs as well (part of the eval), so I'm looking forward to seeing how she interacts with them and how the dogs respond.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

My blunt contribution is: 

A dog whose response to a correction - ie: Growling or air snapping because the other dog doesn't want to play - by smacking with her paws and standing over them is actually escalating the situation. It isn't a BITE, but it absolutely is escalation and if done to the wrong dog is going to lead to a full on mess and is, yeah, indicative of a problem beyond being a rude player. 

Bug plays rude. She's pushy. She LEAVES if the other dog snaps at her. 

Molly is DA. She ignores 80% of dogs, wants to kill 10% and adores 10%. If one of those dogs she likes corrects her for something she, um, backs off. If a dog who isn't one of the ones she likes corrects her she, yep, stands over and stares at them. That's aggressive behavior. Toward a dog. That's DA. That is a major fight waiting to happen.


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

Hiraeth, perhaps I should clarify my environment comments... I can see why there would be confusion based on my comments.

So I'm part of a large community of cavers... it's a small world, mostly, but I'd say the "core" group consists of about 40 people. There are a few pieces of property where we regularly convene to hold meetings or work on property improvements or set up for other events (where no dogs are allowed due to the number of attendees). During these regular gatherings, which occur maybe 2-3 times a year, is when we'll have the larger groups - the number of people and dogs fluctuates by a good bit. My dog seems to do really well in these larger packs and the dogs all have a great time running the property. 

In between those times, perhaps weekly or every other week, smaller groups of us get together to hike or go caving, or just camp and eat. 

These groups are pretty laid back and probably sound like a more intense situation than they really are. The properties where we meet are hundreds of acres, and everyone sort of has their own campsite - so it's not like all these people are crowded together in one space.

But just about every weekend, *something* is going on, and the number of people and dogs we are around during the weekends varies greatly.


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

I don't want this to come off as being in denial, but I'd respectfully disagree that she should be classified as DA at this point. I think there's being selective, and there's being aggressive. I can see where some of her *behavior* is aggressive for the situation, and it's definitely not cool, but I also don't think it's to the point where I'd put a generic label on her as DA dog. Her track record with getting along with other dogs is really good as opposed to when she doesn't, and her default behavior is definitely to play. Soo... I'm not saying she couldn't turn into a DA dog but I don't think we're there yet. Hence my desire to work on these things before it is a problem, so she never has a "first dog fight".

Either way, we'll see what the new trainer has to say about it all. Just know that I do watch her very carefully - she's not allowed to run off-leash with other dogs until I've reviewed the situation and deem it acceptable. There are specific dogs we avoid. If I don't know what the situation will be, she stays close to me on-leash and isn't allowed to engage with other dogs. Like I said, I just want her to be consistently and reliably civil when confronted with a less playful dog.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

It's your call and you've clearly got some image of what DA means in your head, above and beyond being aggressive with some other dogs. Maybe you think that means all other dogs (it doesn't - almost all but the very, very far extreme end of DA dogs have some dogs they love and play with, with proper introduction), I don't know. 

But I don't think you're going to be able to change, regardless of training, her response to being told 'no' by another dog. Better focus, better recall, whatever, but since she has no negative feelings until she's told no, I don't even know what you're hoping to teach ehr with training, since what you're saying amounts to the other DOG giving her a cue (I dont' want to play) and having her do some particular behavior in response to that, rather than perform an action in response to a command from you. 

Which is... pretty much what training is. B-mod, maybe, but that's never 'balanced' and is about changing emotional response to stimulus which doesn't fit either. 

So mostly, I'm confused. I wish you luck, but. Confused.


----------



## Hiraeth (Aug 4, 2015)

CptJack said:


> My blunt contribution is:
> 
> A dog whose response to a correction - ie: Growling or air snapping because the other dog doesn't want to play - by smacking with her paws and standing over them is actually escalating the situation. It isn't a BITE, but it absolutely is escalation and if done to the wrong dog is going to lead to a full on mess and is, yeah, indicative of a problem beyond being a rude player.
> 
> ...


Agreed. If a dog paw smacked and stood over one of my Shepherds when they politely indicated that they didn't want to play, a massive and bloody fight would have ensued.

TGKvr, I really think you're trying SO hard to fight the 'bully breed stereotype', but the thing is, DA isn't a stereotype of bully breeds, it's just a reality. Many of them have dog selectivity and DA tendencies. That doesn't necessarily mean they're outright aggressively going for dog's throats all of the time. Sometimes it can mean, like in your dog's case, that they stand, stare, intimidate and wait for a response from the other dog. And if that response comes, it's all out war. 

I think you've been lucky so far in that the dogs your dog has greeted poorly have backed off and that she's never been in a major fight. But some day she's going to behave that way towards the wrong dog, and there you have it, another bully breed who is aggressive and reinforces the stereotype. 

IMO, people who ignore dog selectivity and DA in their bullies because they want their dogs to be good, friendly examples of the breed sets the breed up for more bad press than good.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Of my 5:

Bug and Thud would tolerate being smacked down and stared at pretty well. They'd look away, get up, shake off, come back to it and throw appeasement signals to try to make friends. 

Jack would be petrified and terrified and probably traumatized. I mean piss himself and scream from the second he hit the ground. 

Kylie and Molly would come up looking for blood. 


That said, the line between dog selective an DA is probably pretty personal. I'm not even sure what it actually is, and will admit it. For me it's somewhere in how the dog responds to correction and a willingness to diffuse the situation and remove themselves from it. 

I call Kylie dog-selective. She doesn't want to be friends with dogs OR fight with them - one dog in a hundred she'll play with. She tries to remove herself, diffuse the situation, and gives appropriate and appropriately escalating warnings (tries to leave, tries to appease and then leave, growls, bares her teeth, air snaps) on the way to getting out of the situation, but takes no issue with any dog existing around, with, or even on top of her. The dog has to DO something to her for her to even go to 'attempt to leave ---> air snap' type escalation. To FIGHT it has to be a dog seriously smacking her dog and refusing to let her go. Ie: Physically rolling and standing over her. 

Molly I call DA because she doesn't diffuse, she doesn't give appropriate warnings, she doesn't want to leave, she decides she's taken offense and wants the other dog to leave and if it won't do that she wants to eat them face first. She absolutely takes offense to things like 'stares too hard for too long' 'invade her space bubble which is huge' and 'carries itself strangely' or 'doesn't look like a dog' and 'sniffed her in the face'. 

For me, it's not about whether they get along with some dogs or most dogs or not. It's their response when they *don't*.


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

Hmm. Food for thought I guess. I've always held a distinction between "dog selective" and "dog aggressive", and I have felt that my dog is simply selective. I will think on that. I do appreciate all of your responses - sorry I get a little verbose. 

The interesting thing is that she doesn't *always* react that way to being told no by another dog. The whole "smack down and stand over them" happened twice, and she hadn't met those dogs before that day - it was a rare occasion where she met a strange dog while off-leash. BUT if it's a dog she already knows, and that dog says "nah, not interested" and snarks at her, she usually crouches down or rolls onto her belly, then jumps up to lick the other dog's mouth. She's a big mouth-licker. I haven't really mentioned that behavior in this thread because I'm focusing on NEW dog interactions, but I guess it's worth throwing out there to show that she does actually respond appropriately to other dogs... if she knows them. Which is the big reason why A) I don't think she's actually DA, and B) I totally think some focused training on her *consistency* with dog-dog interactions will help her. We have a friend with a German Shepherd that is quite a bit larger than her, and while they play well together most of the time, he's old and doesn't always want to romp. He barks at her, and she gets the hint and backs down. So she has that in her, to allow another dog to put her in her place without escalating. It has only been in the last year while meeting *new* dogs that I've seen this other behavior that I want to address. I'm sure my own bit of anxiety gets passed on, too.

Anyway, y'all have given me a lot to think about.

**PS - yes I do want her to be a good ambassador, but I also recognize genetics. She's a bully - she's going to be a bully. I know this and get this - it's why I'll never just throw her out in the mix without feeling out a situation first. I will likely NEVER let my guard down while I have her, and acknowledge that selectivity and aggression can be part of the package. Indeed, I knew this going into it. BUT there are some fine examples of her breed that have become therapy dogs, CGC titled, service dogs, that are solidly reliable (her mother was one such) etc. and she's mostly so friendly (exuberantly so) that I truly do feel that training can address this. But I suppose we'll see.


----------



## Hiraeth (Aug 4, 2015)

Of the six dogs I'm who have recently been in my life, Titan would potentially tolerate being smacked down and stared at once, but not twice. Zephyr, Shenzi, Little Dog, Atlas and Loki would all have attacked to defend themselves from such rude and aggressive behavior. Maybe my dogs are exceptions, but I think you've been VERY lucky in that the dogs she's behaved that way towards have not retaliated. I personally don't know many dogs who would just lay there and 'take it'.

Honestly, if another dog attempted to initiate play with Shenzi, Little Dog, Atlas or Loki, they turned the offer down and then the dog crouched, and then licked their faces, they all would have also taken exception to that. I don't even consider that behavior to be 'good play etiquette', because she's still ignoring the 'nah not interested' warning and continuing to approach. 

Whether you consider her to be dog selective, or dog aggressive, or whatever, the terminology doesn't matter as far as training goes. As CptJack said, standing over and staring, bad "situationally aggressive" behavior isn't something that you can really put on a cue or diffuse for her. You can't (or shouldn't) set up situations in which she's playing poorly and attempt to behavior mod that. 

This is why dogs are generally deemed 'not dog park dogs' and that's that. Their natural response to other dogs in a hyped up situation isn't always great, so they're just not good dog park material. Our advice to people with dogs who aren't good dog park candidates is never 'go out and train and then go back to the dog park and try again'. It's just 'don't go any more'. 

I absolutely think working on recall and other things you feel like you haven't had success with is a good idea and hopefully a new trainer could help you with that. But the only way you're going to stop putting other dogs at risk and stop chancing a fight is by disallowing her from interacting in large, amped up groups that include strange dogs in which she has a chance to perform her "situationally aggressive" behavior.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

I'm coming back to say that I don't think your dog isn't being friendly (in general), is the thing. Certanly she has no grand temperament issue because she's sometimes an aggressive ass to other dogs.

Honestly, I know flat out DA dogs who really despise other dogs who can do therapy work and CGC. Those don't require the dog be able to play nicely with other dogs. Just ignore them while they're all on leash. There's no off leash play in therapy testing or therapy work or getting a CGC. 

Your dog, with this issue, could do those things. I mean you need to learn to not want to greet the other dogs or jump on people, but that's got not a thing to do with how well they do or don't play off leash with other dogs. So, even if it doesn't get resolved there's nothing here to stop her being a therapy animal or passing the CGC test.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

CptJack said:


> I'm coming back to say that I don't think your dog isn't being friendly (in general), is the thing. Certanly she has no grand temperament issue because she's sometimes an aggressive ass to other dogs.
> 
> Honestly, I know flat out DA dogs who really despise other dogs who can do therapy work and CGC. Those don't require the dog be able to play nicely with other dogs. Just ignore them while they're all on leash. There's no off leash play in therapy testing or therapy work or getting a CGC.
> 
> Your dog, with this issue, could do those things. I mean you need to learn to not want to greet the other dogs or jump on people, but that's got not a thing to do with how well they do or don't play off leash with other dogs. So, even if it doesn't get resolved there's nothing here to stop her being a therapy animal or passing the CGC test.


My former foster Luna (of all dogs!) managed a CGC. She was a nutcase with major reactivity/ dog selectivity issues. 

I am not "purely positive" in my training. I do use corrections at times, I do use a prong at times. I can see the use of an e-collar for recall when used properly (Like Elrohwen did for her spaniels for example). But dog-selectivity or dog-aggression is one area that corrections are, IMO, never applicable.


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

TGKvr said:


> I wouldn't even think of pursuing the CGC with her if she didn't have the potential.


I think maybe you have some misconceptions about what the CGC is or what it signifies. It DOES indicate that a dog is well-behaved and (generally) safe to be in public, around strange dogs and people. It does NOT guarantee that your dog is safe to _interact with strange dogs_. There are PLENTY of dogs who have passed their CGC/CGN that are not good with other dogs, so please don't use it as a curtain to hide behind while your dog over-corrects and escalates with dogs who appropriately communicate that they don't want to play.



TGKvr said:


> I don't want this to come off as being in denial, but I'd respectfully disagree that she should be classified as DA at this point. I think there's being selective, and there's being aggressive. I can see where some of her *behavior* is aggressive for the situation, and it's definitely not cool, but I also don't think it's to the point where I'd put a generic label on her as DA dog. Her track record with getting along with other dogs is really good as opposed to when she doesn't, and her default behavior is definitely to play. Soo... I'm not saying she couldn't turn into a DA dog but I don't think we're there yet. Hence my desire to work on these things before it is a problem, so she never has a "first dog fight".


Pinning another dog is *not* an acceptable response to an appropriate correction. You seem to know this, and yet and every single time you put her in a situation where she does it, it becomes more and more habitual, and it is not a matter of "if" that behaviour will start a fight, but when. In my experience, dogs like yours may not officially start a fight... but they sure as heck try to finish it. Your dog is showing unwarranted aggression towards other dogs. That is DA. Is it selective DA? Seems to be, from your description, but like CptJack said - most forms of DA are selective. Does it make her dangerous? No, not with proper management. Which is actually pretty easy - stop putting your dog in situations where another dog might tell her it doesn't want to play. Don't let your dog play with strange dogs. Don't let your dog play with dogs who don't like her play style. And during play, give frequent breaks and end the play date when the other dog shows signs of being done.

I am not saying don't work on it. By all means, work on it, work on teaching her to ignore other strange dogs, work on obedience commands like recall. But if you would like to keep placing her in positions where she might potentially be told "no" by another dog, at least consider muzzling her.


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

Yeah, and that's really it... I don't necessarily *need* her to like other dogs all the time, I just want her to not feel like she has to *engage* so much, whether for play or otherwise. I do realize the CGC is not about getting along with other dogs, it's about ignoring them - I've done the research on this and the CGC training which focuses on ignoring all kind of distractions is exactly why I wanted to pursue it, so no - I'm not hiding behind the CGC as a fix-all. And in actuality she doesn't always have to engage; on rare occasions she seems like she doesn't care at all whether there is another dog nearby, preferring to sniff the ground and wander - especially if we've already been working or playing and she's worn out. When we're "working" she is very focused and great about ignoring other dogs if I coach her through it. But in general social situations when we're not actively training, she just wants to approach all the people and all the dogs - she's just very bold and outgoing. And like Hiraeth pointed out, all it takes is the wrong dog to make it all worse. I'm not walking around with blinders on, so if she ends up being the dog that I have to manage on leash all the time, then so be it. But I'd prefer it if we can come to a happy medium and at least take her initial level of engagement down a notch or two. We can work on polite greetings and see where it takes us. And hey, at least I'm conscious of the potential problems here and *trying* to do something about it. The two people that own the two problem dogs in our group are dear friends, and I love them, but they don't seem to care that their dogs always start things with other dogs - not just mine - and I've never seen any of them on a leash - ever. They just shrug it off and say "yeah, I know my dog's a bitch" - so they KNOW, and acknowledge it, but they just choose not to do anything about it. I'm not going to be that person. (I actually changed my NYE plans because I found out those two dogs were going to be there, and I didn't want to deal with it - so I went somewhere else. I heard they were snapping at the other dogs all night, so good call on my part.)

So all of this talk about selective vs. aggressive is interesting... Clearly there are some different schools of thought. I found this article that describes the levels of tolerance for dogs. Seems to be a pretty good guideline overall. Based on this, I'd say that the description for selective fits her best, though she does sometimes exhibit behavior that fits both with the tolerant category AND the aggressive category. But mostly, I'd say selective describes her more often than not. I've never seen her have a short fuse during play- she's very tolerant of rude behavior with dogs she already knows and likes, and once she has a positive interaction with a dog, I've never seen her change her mind about it.

https://paws4udogs.wordpress.com/2011/10/31/normal-dog-sociability-levels/

All that said, I think I must have given the impression that this happens ALL THE TIME, and that I'm constantly putting her in weird situations. Please know this is actually not the case. She pinned a dog two times. Twice, since I've had her. I know this isn't acceptable - it's rude. I want to work on it... But that's all it took for me to go "Oh hey, I shouldn't let her do this... I should really focus on working on her polite interactions". I really feel like I'm being unfairly judged here sometimes when all I'm trying to do is to learn and continue training my dog, and improving her behaviors. Like I said before, I get compliments ALL the time on how well behaved she is in public - I could stop training new things right now and she'd still be a great dog, with better manners than most. But there are these things that in certain specific situations need help, hence my search for a new trainer and this entire discussion. 

Incidentally, she met two new dogs last week at my aunt's house and she was totally fine with it. It's moments like that when I wonder if I even need to work on anything with dog-dog stuff, because it always seems like I get so anxious prior to the meeting, then more often than not it ends up fine. But still... I think I'm just too close to the situation to be truly objective, and so I'm really looking forward to hearing what this trainer has to say about it all since part of our eval will deal with dog-dog interaction. No idea how she plans to do that.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

There are tons of dogs who make fine service dogs, therapy dogs, and CGC dogs who are dog selective, even DA, and are not good dog park dogs. Those things aren't really related at all. It is perfectly possible to do all of those things with a dog who is will trained but dislikes other dogs in their space. Her issues with meeting new dogs off leash has nothing to do with whether you can get a CGC on her.

ETA: My dog obsessed dog has his CGC. It really wasn't that hard, I just let him grow up and grow a brain a little. But I guarantee that in any situation where there are other dogs around he's probably thinking about that dog. Is it a friend? Is it scary? Is it female? Is it intact? And on and on. CGC is just training, but it doesn't change how a dog feels emotionally about other dogs in certain situations.

I just think you need to completely separate out your desire for a CGC/therapy dog stuff, with her dog-dog interactions. They're really not related, because CGC and therapy dog tests don't require your dog to interact with another dog.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

elrohwen said:


> There are tons of dogs who make fine service dogs, therapy dogs, and CGC dogs who are dog selective, even DA, and are not good dog park dogs. Those things aren't really related at all. It is perfectly possible to do all of those things with a dog who is will trained but dislikes other dogs in their space. Her issues with meeting new dogs off leash has nothing to do with whether you can get a CGC on her.


All of those things and more. 

The CGC is really not a temperament test. It's a basic 'can your dog handle being in public without being an asshole' test. Some parts of it are hard for various dog, but it's really not about temperament, anyway, it's a bout behavior and being safe. 

And as a related story to 'dogs can be Da and do things'. At the agility trial this weekend the dog that was next while we were at the start line and setting up got really close to the ring entry. I tossed Molly's leash behind her and she turned, looked and saw this cattle dog *right there* staring at her. She has despised every cattle dog she's ever met. Or seen. Or been within 100 yards of. 

She left the ring/went to the gate, barked once and - I was able to recall her, have her come, have her run the course and Q. 

Bad - terrible - that it happened. I felt guilty, I apologized profusely to the other dog's owner and took steps to make sure it could not happen again- but that she recalled back? HUGELY GOOD. 

It's not that she is not now DA and doesn't hate cattle dogs. It's that she has a recall and can focus. 

You can train BEHAVIOR in response to a command. You can train for focus. Those are the things something like CGC tests - only more simply with less distractions and on leash - not the dog's personality, likes, dislikes, or play behavior. Those are personality and you can't change a personality through training.


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

I'm confused is her issue how she plays, or how she greets other dogs?



> Yeah, and that's really it... I don't necessarily *need* her to like other dogs all the time, I just want her to not feel like she has to *engage* so much, whether for play or otherwise. I do realize the CGC is not about getting along with other dogs, it's about ignoring them - I've done the research on this and the CGC training which focuses on ignoring all kind of distractions is exactly why I wanted to pursue it, so no - I'm not hiding behind the CGC as a fix-all. And in actuality she doesn't always have to engage; on rare occasions she seems like she doesn't care at all whether there is another dog nearby, preferring to sniff the ground and wander - especially if we've already been working or playing and she's worn out. When we're "working" she is very focused and great about ignoring other dogs if I coach her through it. But in general social situations when we're not actively training, she just wants to approach all the people and all the dogs - she's just very bold and outgoing.


Okay well, you know what the solution to this is? Teach her what you want instead of running up to other dogs. Teach your dog to ignore them (or people, if that's what you want). Start at a distance far enough from other dogs that she doesn't care about the other dog, and reward heavily for offering you her attention. Move closer to the dog, reward for offering your her attention. You could also reward for literally any behaviour that doesn't involve paying attention to the other dog (or person, or whatever you're teaching her to ignore). Move closer. When you can get within ~15 feet without her paying attention to the other dog, start practicing walking by other dogs giving rapid-fire treats for not paying attention to it. 

It is literally that simple, if you go at your dog's pace, there is no need to get involved in corrections and potentially create a negative association with the thing that she currently likes. Just make the exciting thing less exciting by 1) being more exciting yourself and 2) rewarding her for ignoring them. 

It will take time and practice, but - assuming she's like 90% of dogs and there aren't a bunch of other environmental factors involved - it is, for real, that simple. (Note that I am not saying it is *easy* - it is frustrating and takes a long time BUT it is straight forward).


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

Yeah I see what you're saying... I do actually separate the CGC (no desire for a therapy dog, just CGC) with the other things in my head like dog-dog stuff and recall. I guess I made it seem like all one big lump of a problem, because I'm thinking of all the things I want to discuss with this trainer, and things I want to work on. But I get where you're going there, and I'd agree they are completely not related. But when you said that, it made me realize that maybe I'm all over the place with my point of direction, and that perhaps I should take it one thing at a time and not be like.. oohhhh new trainer - let's work on CGC! Emergency Recall! Dog-dog! And just pick one thing first, focus on that, and move on to the next thing. Maybe I have a little bit of "SQUIRREL!" going on. 

Gingerkid, it's the dog greetings, not the play. But yeah that's kind of what I've been doing with her, and what we've done in group class before (all wandering about, passing close by other dogs, rewarding for not looking at them). When my mom came to visit with her dog a couple of weeks ago for her Christmas vacation, I went out in the yard with her just before she arrived and worked on-leash with basic obedience. Sit, stay, heel, come, etc. We did that for a good 5-10 minutes while I was waiting for her to actually get there. So she was pretty focused and in training mode when the car came up the driveway. Normally if we're outside and someone arrives, she goes crazy and wants to run over to the car and greet them and barks like mad. This time, I could tell she WANTED to, but I put her in a sit-stay/heel position while Mom pulled in to park and let her dog out. She did way better than she ever had before, and though she was wiggly about it, she managed to hold her "stay" until Mom was out of the car with the dog. I asked Mom to simply walk her dog out to the yard, towards us, while we also walked towards them. (Not "hi mom, haven't seen you in a year" but "hey can you walk your dog over this way?" haha!!) I'd stop every step or so and reward when she plopped into a sit. Finally, Mom passed me and we turned around and walked parallel to each other through the yard for a few minutes before the dogs were allowed to interact, and at that point my dog looked to me to release her. Sooo... that was pretty much a perfect situation and if I could replicate that ALL the time, that would be fantastic. The main difference between that situation and others though, was that my mom was doing exactly what we needed her to do in order to have a successful greeting. If only everyone could be like that - the people are by far the biggest challenges when working on this kind of stuff. People want to come up and hug you, while you're trying to just keep your dang dog in a sit, you know? And if it's someone she knows and likes, forget it - it's SO HARD to keep her feet on the floor. I've gone to Cabela's and put her in a sit-stay in the aisle to work on stranger greetings and she's slowly improving with that (she's more likely to get excited about people than dogs, really). But yes - it's frustrating, and takes a ton of time and consistency, and I know that's the kind of stuff we need to do. Sometimes it gets chaotic with the people and I'm not as consistent with my approach and I'm sure that's not helping.


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

It certainly sounds like you know exactly what you need to do, and you just need to be more of a gate keeper - don't let people interact with your dog without your permission, don't let other dogs interact with your dog without your permission, etc.

I still don't see how a balanced trainer is going to help with that any better than a good R+ trainer will, but good luck to you.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

TGKvr said:


> Yeah I see what you're saying... I do actually separate the CGC (no desire for a therapy dog, just CGC) with the other things in my head like dog-dog stuff and recall. I guess I made it seem like all one big lump of a problem, because I'm thinking of all the things I want to discuss with this trainer, and things I want to work on. But I get where you're going there, and I'd agree they are completely not related. But when you said that, it made me realize that maybe I'm all over the place with my point of direction, and that perhaps I should take it one thing at a time and not be like.. oohhhh new trainer - let's work on CGC! Emergency Recall! Dog-dog! And just pick one thing first, focus on that, and move on to the next thing. Maybe I have a little bit of "SQUIRREL!" going on.


I think this is a great idea. Perhaps focus on the CGC and manners stuff you want to work on, and see how you and this trainer mesh. And it's a lot harder for a trainer to screw up not jumping on people than it is to screw up meeting other dogs. If you're working well together and getting through the more training related stuff, then do the behavioral stuff.


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

Today was supposed to be our evaluation, but I had to cancel. I've had some other life things come up and I just won't be able to commit to anything new until possibly March. Plus I had to put my cat of 20 years down yesterday, which I guess really has nothing to do with it but there is just a lot going on. So we have just postponed the meeting for a few months, but I do eventually want to still meet her. In the meantime, we'll continue our home training and I'm going to start focusing on some LAT exercises.

FWIW, to address why I couldn't just do a +R trainer anyway vs. a balanced trainer... I just don't know of any around here. It seems to not be a thing for some reason, except at the school where I've been going anyway - but I think we've maxed out with the training classes there so will need something more individualized. Who knows, maybe in the next couple of months of trying some LAT methods I will feel like we don't need a new trainer.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Does your "current" trainer have enough qualifications and skills to help you with your dog / dog issues, in a one-on-one setting ? Usually that's the most efficient way. I can't speak to her specific curriculum, but typically, only generic, broad advice is given in a group setting. Private lessons, as you know, allow the trainer to concentrate on problem areas directly. You may be surprised to find that she has the ability to help you progress. 

Jumping on people, that's relatively easy to address during private lessons. And emergency recall is merely the product of graduated distractions coupled with a super strong history of reinforcement, if you are dedicated enough to remain in the positive realm and put in the time and effort to build it yourself. I don't believe any actual instruction is needed for that. 

Unless there is a clash of personalities for example, I don't really see a need to change horses entirely. Especially considering she's the one and only R+ trainer in your area. Whenever the timing is right in your personal life just change gears, try some individual lessons with her and see how it goes on a week-to-week basis. 

Sorry to hear about your cat.


----------



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

Have you tried looking on the CCPDT website? I mean, not every trainer who is CPDT is going to be phenomenal. But that at least tells you they are R+ oriented. Beyond that, same questions and screening you would ask any trainer. I am willing to bet there is SOMEONE nearby who can help you. I lived in the south east for a few years, maybe in a different part... But the population lends itself to having some CPDTs around. I now live in a town of ~60k, and yet there are still 5+ in our vicinity.


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

I haven't! Great suggestion - really not sure why it hadn't occurred to me yet! Thank you.


----------



## islanddog (Dec 29, 2015)

Sorry to hear about your cat--20 years is awesome, what a trooper.

In answer to your question, a good balanced trainer should know everything about a +r a force free trainer does, and if you insist on working that way, as long as you are willing to do the management necessary, (as in keeping dog under threshold, not allowing self-reinforcing behaviours, etc.), she should be able work with you, or be honest with you and say, not a good match.
Balanced trainers (a good one) should be able to help you with engagement (building up your dogs drives and getting those drives working for both of you). A good balanced trainer will be using those words and teaching you how to do that and work as a team with your dog.


----------



## TGKvr (Apr 29, 2015)

Thanks folks! She was a good girl and lived a long life, but I had to make the choice of letting her go while she was still fairly happy - she hadn't eaten much in the last week (really anything) and when I thought I might need to give her water via dropper in order to keep her hydrated, I knew it was time. 

@petpeeve - sorry I missed your last post. The problem with my school is that each class I've taken has been with a different trainer. My favorite trainer of them all only works with agility dogs in her non-class lessons, so that wasn't an option for me. The other trainers were all very sweet, and clearly knew what they were doing, but... a little more chatty and less focused than what I'd look for outside of the group setting. My dog is nearly perfect while in class - every trainer has complimented her on her focus on me and most other people in the classes tell me things like "I wish my dog looked at me like that when we train". She just really enjoys it and loves nothing more than to show off while we're there. So we need to get out of that environment and into the real-world settings with all of the distractions that life provides. And yes, working more on specifics and less on generalities since we're really beyond any basic obedience at this point. 

After checking the CCPDT website, there is ONE trainer listed... I might give her a call when things settle down and we can re-visit the private trainer again.


----------

