This is good post at Trainer Tails.
As I’ve said before, I am not a dog expert. I merely play one on the internet, but I do know that every word of that post is true.
But if you are around dogs long enough, you’ll see that you’re actually influence their behavior a lot.
It means that you have to take a step back. Put the ego on hold for a bit.
And then you can consider the dog.
***
One of the reasons why I think dominance theory is so prevalent is that it is really good food for a crappy ego.
I mean need to control something to make yourself feel good, right?
And why not come up with some “science” that says you must do so with your dog?
Brilliant.
So now, you can be a jerk to your dog.
And when other people who aren’t jerks to their dogs aren’t like you, you can attack them.
Which is also good for your crappy ego.
Not only do you control dogs.
You can find ways to feel morally superior to other people.
Brilliant!
I also think a bit of this has something to do with nostalgia for the good ol’ days when people just about half drowned their dogs to stop behavior problems.
It’s the old way.
We must do it that way.
It says so in the book.
You see, a lot good things have disappeared over the years.
I won’t deny it.
We don’t have the Gemeinschaft in our communities that we once had.
We don’t have safe neighborhoods anymore.
We don’t have a lot of the working characteristics we like in our dogs.
We like to hold onto the old as best we can.
But sometimes that means holding onto the old, just because it’s old.
That actually is something I would avoid.
Just because it’s the old way doesn’t mean that we should be nostalgic about it.
And maybe we should move on.
See, I’m writing this so it will be read on the internet, which I do believe they have on computers now.
i can hear Tevye singing now…
* tradi-shun! TRADI-shun! (bum, bum, bum…) tradi-SHUN!…*
i agree – there are plenty of traditions that are sacred-cowflop as opposed to sacred-cows, and life would improve enormously if we ditched them pronto;
they are brutal or ignorant or pointless or bigoted or unkind,
and some of the DOG-*training* (quote) traditions are all of the above.
rubbing a pups nose in feces or urine is as bassackward as shoving an infants face into their full-diaper, and just as asinine;
that particular tradition is becoming rare, but hanging, poking, choking, *tapping*/kicking, Alpha-rolling, etc, appear to be immortal perennials, re-sprouting in two or three heads for every head that has been weeded free of the ugly growths.
its like trying to behead the Hydra… not merely One Other, but clutches of them arise. :-(
not resigned yet – but growing discouraged,
— terry
terry pride, APDT-Aus, apdt#1827, CVA, TDF
“hanging, poking, choking, *tapping*/kicking, Alpha-rolling, etc, appear to be immortal perennials”
More like internet legend, mostly.
Hanging / choking? I’ve never done it. It’s reserved as a safety maneuver for big, bad dogs intent on making his human hander his lunch. I guess if I was in that situation and redirecting the dog’s attention from wondering what I taste like to improving his oxygen supply was the only way to keep his teeth out of my flesh, I’d probably go for it. Those of us who don’t work with these types of dogs don’t get to pass judgement. The idea that it’s used for lesser transgressions… Never done it, never seen it, never had a reliable report of it.
How many dogs have YOU observed (not heard of via second, third or fourth hand stories) being hung?
Kicking, again unless it is the only route open to keeping yourself safe from a dog who is actively and seriously attacking you, is never dog training, and I’ve never heard of anyone putting it out there as such.
“Tapping”? As in with an ecollar? Now you’re really showing both your ignorance and your bias. An ecollar is a perfectly humane and legitimate dog training tool when used by a knowledgeable handler in appropriate situations.
Alpha rolling was in an old Monks of New Skete book, and even the Monks have rescinded that particular recommendation. Although I did see an adult male dog do it to a bratty adolescent male with quite good results.
>> Hanging / choking? I’ve never done it.
It’s reserved as a safety maneuver… [snip]
The idea that it’s used for lesser transgressions – Never done it, never seen it, never had a reliable report of it.
How many dogs have YOU observed (not heard of via second, third or fourth hand stories) being hung? <> Those of us who don’t work with these types of dogs don’t get to pass judgement. <> Kicking, again unless it is… to keep() yourself safe from a dog who is actively and seriously attacking you, is never dog training, and I’ve never heard of anyone putting it out there as such.
“Tapping”? As in with an ecollar? Now you’re really showing both your ignorance and your bias. << – eleanor
TAPPING is *cesar millans* term for the use of his foot on the dog – it can be seen presented as =rehabilitation= on The Dog Whisperer, as shown on Natl-Geo.
re Alpha-roll –
Heres a how-to from the Westie Club of America –
http://tinyurl.com/28hdhc7
heres a search-page for more instances –
http://tinyurl.com/2dm9cku
and yes –
entirely separate from the strong-arm techniques which
i have listed, ALL of which have been used and still are used by supposed dog-trainers and even instructors teaching dog-trainers,
i do not use, support, recommend, promote or defend shock for any use on animals whatever, other than as a livestock-fence for large animals.
i did not even mention *shock* –
but feel free to add it, as another old-fashioned tool; U can also add helicoptering (yes, still in use), body-slamming, etcetera.
various police-departments, Ring-Sport, Schutz, etc, trainers or handlers use these and other harsh aversives quite often, and even when the dog has committed a minor transgression – not even meriting anything more than a mild, *ah-ah…*
such brute-force trainers refer to pos-R biased trainers like me as *treat-slinging weenies* – feel free to use the term,
i regard it as a compliment. ;-)
cheers,
— terry
*proud member of Treat-Slinging Weenies World-Wide –
treats slung with abandon, dogs drunk with joy!*
[tmp, 5-15-08]
It sounds like you need to hang with a better crowd.
Appreciate the link to the Westie Club’s article. I don’t have many occasions to visit their website, but when I can put together a reasonable rebuttal, I’ll be sending it to them. Hard to imagine any breed needing or benefitting from random alpha rolls.
As to the comments about shock, clearly our experiences with the ecollar are vastly different, and we will just have to agree to disagree.
BTW, “Treat-Slinging Weenies” is SO over. Us “Brute Force Trainers” (also known as “Neanderthals”) now prefer “Pozzie Nazis” or “Rainbow and Fairy Farts Trainers”. I do think it’s important to keep the lingo straight. ;-)
trying again…
the first HALF of my post above was seriously deranged, :-)
reprinting
____________________________
>> Hanging / choking? I’ve never done it.
It’s reserved as a safety maneuver… [snip]
The idea that it’s used for lesser transgressions –
Never done it, never seen it, never had a reliable report
of it.
How many dogs have YOU observed (not heard of via second,
third or fourth hand stories) being hung? <> Those of us who don’t work with these types of dogs
don’t get to pass judgement. << – eleanor
as an FYI –
if by *these types of dogs* U mean aggression, in any of its
many manifestations,
i have and do and will work with dogs who have bite histories.
____________________________
ADDENDUM:
by =brute-force= trainers, i say precisely what i mean:
those who hang, choke, pin, roll, drag, helicopter, body-slam, strike the dog forcefully, etc.
cheers,
— terry
and again… a section was deleted?! arrggh…
____________________
> How many dogs have YOU observed (not heard of via second,
third or fourth hand stories) being hung? << – eleanor
hey, eleanor! :-) nice to meet U, too.
i stopped counting the number of dog-hangings on choke-chains
and slip-collars somewhere around 1976; they are still quite
common, i can see hangings at the local park when owners get
p*ssed-off at their dog for lunging gleefully at other dogs,
in an attempt to meet them.
*hanging* as in interrupting the dogs airway,
can be seen an any number of You-Tube clips by various handlers,
who are NOT preventing injuries to themselves, nor to anyone else.
supposedly in their presentation, this is *training*.
it is also used, according to the AVMA, AVSAB, and other highly reputable sources, by *cesar millan* during his rehabilitation
of various dogs on national-TV –
and as a vet-asst, please note: these dogs can be seen to be
cyanotic with stertorous breathing, spooned-tongues, protruding
eyes, etc.
_____________________
hopefully this time it will work?
— terry
By “these types of dogs” I mean the 75#-plus dogs that are REAL serious about biting you. If you’ve got a better way to handle a dog like that, that is actively coming up the lead at you in a way that looks like he’s picked that moment to remove your vital organs, more power to you. I’m open to learning about that. Just know that if you ever get in that pinch and all else fails, so you’re forced to make him choose between biting you and adequate oxygen, I won’t think less of you if you choose not to be bitten. ;-)
For ANY other situation… Nope, this just doesn’t work for me. Those folks at the park? Is that an actual training technique? A misapplication of a training technique? Or just overwhelmed pet owners attempting to restrain the dogs?
As to Cesar’s show, I think you must watch it more than I do. I actually watch Victoria Stillwell more. Not because I agree with her more or admire her more, just because I have some weird addiction to watching and making myself crazy noting all the places where I believe she gives crazy advice. It’s kind of like a bad traffic wreck. I can’t stand to watch, but I can’t make myself look away.
I have seen some of Cesar’s shows where the dog is clearly recovering from a period of less than optimal oxygenation. The ones I’ve seen have been Bad*ss dogs who, if this fails, will be dead. I don’t have the strength or skill to handle this kind, so again, I feel like maybe I ought to shut up unless I can do it better.
Helicoptering, kicking, body slamming, etc. I don’t get that. But even being a “four quadrant trainer” whose friends and mentors are also “four quadrant trainers” (aka “Balanced Trainers”), I don’t see it, don’t hear about it, and don’t know of anyone who would tolerate it if they did witness it.
Don’t be lumping those people in with us Brute Force Trainers. We don’t want ‘em either.
By the way, I was less confused before you tried to fix your post! LOL
Cesar isn’t the only one, there’s a copycat named Brad Pattison who has a show too now (At the End of My Leash), and he actually -punches- dogs as well as dragging them around and whatever else he does. He only has a paper-mill ‘certification’ and no actual training.
If Cesar wasn’t such a ‘Force Poster Boy’ for uncertified dog trainers everywhere to take a stab at playing ‘experts’ on TV, you wouldn’t have the sheen of legitimacy being given to other guys to have shows teaching people how to terrorize their dogs into ‘submission’ to their ‘alpha human’.
*vlad the bad-dog handler* is a serious sand-in-my-bathing-suit abrasive to the huge majority of trainers –
even trainers who use choke-chains or prongs on every dog or puppy in class, object to his behavior – often they are just as offended by his behavior toward the humans, as toward the dogs.
*vlad prattison* was at a hotel when the IPDTA was there for a conference; unfortunately, one of his trips thru the lobby coincided with their disbursement from a workshop.
(i was a member of the IPDTA at the time, but not at the conference; i heard about this via e-mail from those who were there.)
he proceeded to TAKE THE LEASHES of 2 dogs (the second owner, having observed with horror what he did to dog #1, verbally objected, but he ignored the woman and simply took the leash from her hands).
he dragged the dogs, jerking, popping + hauling, around the lobby, up the stairs, and back – while the dogs yelped, cowered, drooled and tried to bolt.
the 2nd-owner was in tears when he returned her shocked + shaken dog.
WHEN HE WENT FOR OWNER #3, luckily one of the trainers present came out of the collective freeze that had struck everyone present, and she went over and announced, No – U;re not taking any more dogs.
he surrendered with bad grace, and went off muttering.
*vlad prattison* IMO is a k9-nightmare – and he touts himself as a Life-Coach, not a dog-trainer…
despite the fact that he has now branched-out and is instructing and CERTIFYING trainers thru his own *program*.
*Dog Borstal* named for a notorious Brit-prison, is a
UK-telly version of the Might-makes-Right trainer concept.
more brain, less brawn,
— terry
It REALLY bothers me that dog training as a profession is respected so little that TV shows are given to ‘self taught’ or ‘untaught’ people who simply have to claim they know what they’re doing and nobody will call them on it.
It’s beyond a simple difference in training philosophy — these people are amateurs at best or charlatans at worst, who can do real harm to dogs and spread misinformation to the general public, but because dog training is considered some kind of fluffy hobby instead of a legitimate job, none of those things are taken seriously by TV producers. It’s criminal.
Here’s another example of this man’s ‘training':
* quote –
By “these types of dogs” I mean the 75#-plus dogs that are REAL serious about biting you. If you’ve got a better way to handle a dog like that… more power to you. – eleanor
_______________________
hey, eleanor! :–)
in the case of CM/DW, the problem often would not arise if the aforementioned Dog-Wrassler would not deliberately over-face the dog…
provoke?
flood and panic?
instigate?
call it what U will, when i handle dogs with a past-history of seriously biting, i don;t set out to CAUSE the dog to bite.
i handle them mostly as i do dogs with no bite-history;
i deliberately avoid cornering, looming-over, and other classic dumb-moves,
and i watch the dogs reactions to whats going on…
if the dog shows signs of serious discomfort, i find another way, i give the dog more distance from the trigger,
i back-up 2 steps and start-over, whatever it takes.
*cesar* WANTS the dog to act-out… after all, if he does not provoke the dog, wheres the drama?
i don;t need drama – in fact, i don;t like drama;
i like happy relaxed dogs who can learn – a freaked-out defensive dog may be learning, but WHAT that dog learns is detrimental, IMO.
i have worked with terrified dogs who would bite like buzz-saws, and confident dogs who would bite like steel traps; and perfectly ordinary dogs who would bite for perfectly justified reasons.
so far, i have not caused a dog to bite – nor has any dog bitten me just for the H*** of it, dogs usually have valid reasons to bite.
for less drama, and more learning,
— terry
I’m against bad training, no matter what the method. I’m not a perfect trainer–but I’m getting better.
I do know that terrible damage can be done with treats, mixed messages and expectations, and nagging–I wish the Treat-n-Click (perhaps a regional term, and applied even to those who don’t formally “click”) would acknowledge this. Just because the methods are humane doesn’t mean the dog has learned to behave in a manner that is safe and confident.
For some people, the priority is that the dog is “happy.” I don’t know exactly what that means to other people. For my dogs, and I think the people I train with would be in agreement here, I like to be more specific; my priorities are that my dogs are safe and confident. We are around hundreds of other dogs, mostly intact, and around vehicles and guns, with live and dead birds that they are instinctively driven and reinforced though training to seek and chase.
Without being safe, the dog (and I) can’t be confident and successful; without being confident, the dog (and I) can’t be safe and successful. And my dogs love success (as much as I do)–getting to get birds is far more rewarding to them than any treat.
Teaching is paramount, but I also constantly proof on the basic go/stop/come commands. Call it setting a dog up for failure, but that’s a misunderstanding for sure. If a dog needs a well-timed aversive on a known command, I’d rather do that than risk my dog learning it can push the envelope on behaviors that could get it in a dog fight or put it in harm’s way from a gun or moving vehicle.
Yes, I’m guilty of the e-collar, and even the odd “tap.” The more I know, the less I use either–but also, the more I know, the more important I think they are when used appropriately. At least for me and my dogs and what we do.
its *click + treat* in that order – or MARK + REWARD, whatever thrills the student, BG. ;-)
the order is important – the marker must reliably predict a rewarding experience, for the marker (whistle, flash, click…) to become a 2ndary-reinforcer.
quote:
For some people, the priority is that the dog is “happy.”
– blkgldn-n-labmix
_____________________
having helped disabled-owners train their dogs to
public-access standards, obviously *happy* is only
One Component –
RELIABLE is at least as important, as an outcome.
no-one, least of all the handler, wants an unreliable SD.
but learning itself is stressful; lowering stress by making learning and its associations highly-enjoyable is IMO important, so that the dog is not only willing but eager to engage, learns to learn, and wants more of it.
quote:
my dogs love success… getting to get birds is far more rewarding to them than any treat.
– blkgldn-n-labmix
______________________
U use shock as a training-tool to proof (i am here presuming) on dogs who already have basic fluency, AND in an exercise that is intrinsically rewarding for the dogs –
Ur intention is consistent compliance.
as U point out, access to birds is an intense thrill for these dogs; but i would say that denying access to birds is an equally intense punishment for an instinctive hunter – even more memorable than shock, without the potential for fallout. HOWEVER –
the risk of fallout from shock is reduced when
* a knowledgeable trainer handles the remote
* an intrinsically-rewarding behavior is involved
* shock is used to proof – NOT to *teach* naive dogs
we now have a rapidly-growing franchise that TEACHES with shock from day-1 and lesson-1, on naive dogs and even pups as young as 8-WO, and uses shock as *both* pos-P and neg-R –
which i contend is a recipe for insanity in the dog.
there is no instinct to HEEL, once a pup is past infancy; shock is therefore especially inapropos in such exercises, which are not self-rewarding behaviors.
we also have APOs buying powerful shock-collars who have no idea what the H*** they are doing, and i watched one such eejit at a state-park ZAP his dog when he had called him just a few seconds before –
since the dog was out of eyeshot, how did he *know* what the dog was doing at the time, and what he, the fool with the remote, had just PUNISHED?
if the dog is running in, but out of sight, shocking him is the last thing U want to do. :(
i would be perfectly happy to see anyone who wanted to use shock as a training-tool be certified in its correct use, and have that use limited in application; NOT for teaching sit, down, stand, heel, OR for proofing similar.
i would be even happier to see shock restricted to use under the direction of a CAAB or a vet-behaviorist as that so-called last resort…
which it so rarely is, in pet-owners hands; they get slightly frustrated, go to a box-store and lay out a couple hundred for an instant-fix.
3-months later, the original problem may have improved, but there are new and worrying problems in the dogs behavior that will co$t more to fix than the shock-collar co$t to buy. its a pattern i have seen many times.
i get really irritated by pet-owners who announce dramatically, We;ve tried EVERYthing… because of course they have not, if they had they would have solved the problem. the 2 things they most-often fail to do at all are
A – actually teach the dog the cued behavior
and B – MANAGE the dog for success.
management is crucial for lifelong success –
the fact that Ur dog has a reliable-recall does not mean that leaving the yard-gate wide open is a good practice.
how many hundreds of pet-owners have i told to LEASH their habitual-jumper before visitors arrive?
do they do so? maybe half the time.
does the dog stop jumping? dream on…
i even had a long-term client turn her biting-dog loose from her bedroom, while i was alone in the living-room, saying, “i thought U;d like to visit… ” while she changed outfits. oh, RIGHT –
i love introducing myself to a barking dog with hackles up, careering across a hardwood floor to sniff my legs while growling!
he had bitten 3 adults already – i was not happy to hear him coming down the hall, barking angrily.
as KILCOMMONS says, “control first – then train.”
it is not all on the evil dog; management matters.
i get frankly angry with *trainers* who tell pet-owners that stress signals are DOG DEFIANCE – slow-mo recalls to a visibly + audibly angry owner, yawning in high stress circs, a look-away under social-pressure are NOT “the dog just flipped U the bird”. >:–/
such trainers may be ignorant, but that level of ignorance is beyond my tolerance – if U are teaching others, i expect U to KNOW the subject.
ignorance is curable – stoopid is for life;
people who willfully persist in doing things because their great-grandad did it that way, *despite all evidence that there are now better and more efficient methods*, as well as more humane, are not worth my time; and yes, i do meet them, some are pet-owners, some are competitive handlers, some are self-nominated EXPERTS who don;t even know what a shake-off indicates during a transition.
learning is lifelong – for dogs and humans.
— terry
Yes, click and treat. Which a good number of people confuse in actuality, not just in an internet post, often equally unwittingly. Remember the old joke, “Don’t–stop! Don’t! Stop! Don’t stop!” Tell me this isn’t abusive to a dog willing to please and doomed to fail!
I agree that the e-collar should be used with great care by good trainers.
But you can’t legislate great care and good training. It would mean secretly drying liver treats would be as subversive an act as using an e-collar without the requisite paperwork (fees, taxes, renewals of fees…).
I wouldn’t want that, either.
And yes–you are absolutely right–being denied a bird can be far greater punishment (term used imprecisely) than can a shock from a collar. Being denied the retrieve can be a permanent momentum-killer and confidence-shatterer. That’s part of the reason a properly-timed and appropriately-measured physical correction is often far more desirable to a recall or pickup during training. No one wants a “piggy” (slow, disinterested, tentative, avoiding, over-cautious, unconfident) retriever. Nothing is easier to time and measure than an e-collar correction.
I’m the first person to say that e-collars aren’t for everyone. In fact, they’re for very few people. But for retriever training–which is high-risk, high-reward, and a delicate balancing act–they can be a perfectly proper (and NOT abusive) tool.
Now THIS:
“i get frankly angry with *trainers* who tell pet-owners that stress signals are DOG DEFIANCE – slow-mo recalls to a visibly + audibly angry owner, yawning in high stress circs, a look-away under social-pressure are NOT “the dog just flipped U the bird”. >:–/
such trainers may be ignorant, but that level of ignorance is beyond my tolerance – if U are teaching others, i expect U to KNOW the subject. ”
THIS I totally agree with.
I’m going to amend a statement: I said nothing is easier to time and measure than an e-collar correction. Nothing is harder, either.
But it’s not abusive, given certain parameters and some dog sense.
I remember reading the Tri-Tronics training book a few years ago, and thinking that this was a good training manual even if an e-collar was never used! The authors made the point that one does not *teach* with the e-collar, that it is used only after the dog understands what action is required on the cue (verbal, signal, or whistle) that has been taught.
With the modern e-collars, what the dog feels can be made appropriate to whatever is needed. Many don’t even use an (electrical) impulse but either a tone (sound) or a vibration, like a pager or cell phone.
A clever trainer could even use these features to deliver a “click” at a distance….
Is a collar inherently abusive because it uses electronics?
Should knives be outlawed because they could be used to injure?
Quote –
The authors made the point that one does not *teach* with the e-collar, that it is used only after the dog understands what action is required on the cue (verbal, signal, or whistle) that has been taught. – M-R-S
_____________________
i am sorry to say that enormous numbers of pet-owners and trainers now TEACH with shock-collars from lesson-One, with utterly naive dogs – and puppies as well.
not only are shock-collars NOT used to proof –
the dogs are not even conditioned to the collar before it is used to shock them; IOW there is no ‘get used to it’ period, where the collar is merely worn, or is paired with training but not activated.
the collar is fitted, and voila! we begin… immediately.
the financial success of a certain franchise contributes to this spreading phenomenon, which IMO is not only an UNnecessary practice but is damaging to the dog.
however, my opinion means less than nothing in the face of profits to be made.
if the instructor assures U, the client, that it does not hurt – who are U to dispute it?
(see Milgram experiment via Google)
Q for the industry –
———————————–
if pain is needless, or even non-existent (as i repeatedly see alleged),
why not make collars that ONLY deliver a beep or a vibration, and drop the shock-option altogether?
3 years ago, i searched for a maker who had a collar that ONLY vibrated, for a deaf-dog whose owner wanted a vibe-collar for off-leash (within a large park, not entirely unfenced freedom).
i failed signally – no manufacturer had one, or knew of any on the market.
NONE were interested in making a new no-shock model, etiher. interesting, eh?
talking-collars can also be used to deliver a remote-click –
instead of speaking to the dog, click –
but remember that if the dog has been taught the click TERMINATES the behavior, the distant dog will be coming in, expecting reinforcement.
talking-collars and duration behaviors
————————————————
using verbal praise or a keep-going signal as a bridge will work better, for behaviors that U want the dog to continue for duration…
i-e, not a go-out and return, but trailing, finding a downed-bird or a bumper, ball, etc.
re reading the Tri-Tronics booklet –
how many pet-owners do U think bother?
most KNOW what they are doing (or at least they think they do, which is the same thing, right?),
and regard any instructions beyond how to fit the collar or how to replace the battery, as superfluous to the purpose.
analogy –
i have met HUNDREDS of people whose dogs wore a Gentle-Leader, and who used a Flexi or some imitator of that pernicious device, with said GL –
DESPITE instructions to the contrary, and a clear warning.
several even argued that it appeared nowhere on their packaging, nor on the DVD – which most had of course, not watched.
when i told them that the combination was not only uncomfortable, constantly cranking the dogs head to one side with the spring-tension, but potentially dangerous, they looked at me as if i was a psych-case, and went on…
Flexi still in hand, dogs nasal-bone firmly depressed by the nose-band.
MADAME GAZA PREDICTS –
if their dog ever does sustain a cervical injury, these owners will insist they were never informed that extensible leashes are **not** for use with the Gentle-Leader (or other head-collars), and will sue to recover vet-costs, and probably for emotional suffering as well.
to get back to shock-collars –
IMO selling them off the shelf to the general public should be a misdemeanor and subject to a fine, with repeated violations earning jail-time.
IOW ** if ** they are sold, they are sold With A Series of Instructive, Hands-On Classes – either one-to-one or group –
mandatory.
no class? no sale; getting the collar to take-HOME is graduation day.
outlawing shock-collars in the hands of the ignorant will not stop abuse;
strangling, hanging, or jerking a dog with a leash is just as easy as pushing a button, plus less expensive, and is even more prevalent than shock-collars.
ban knives, and someone will bash their victim with a rock – simple.
if people are determined to assault or murder, or (only, ha) ABUSE, they will find a way.
cheers,
— terry
You assert that e-collars are abused by masses of idiot people and must be accompanied by training, yet you go on to give the example of the flexi/halti combo–but you do not insist that either of these (generally speaking, IMO, dangerous and oft-abused toolds).
You insist that e-collars lead most of the masses of idiots to abuse them, but then insist that if an idiot wants to abuse a dog they’ll find a way anyway.
While I appreciate that you want to see dogs treated and trained humanely, I don’t see how your logic holds up.
hey, BG! :–)
most ppl do not Want to abuse their dog, they just do not know enuf to avoid it.
they USED * TO sell the GL only directly thru trainers, who fitted it properly, explained habitation, etc; now its an off the shelf item, and owners are responsible for their own education… and failing to read warnings, or watch the DVD, or read the booklet.
i also met a woman whose 2-YO Golden was breathing thru a slotted-mouth, while wearing a GL –
the dog had accomodated by pulling his commissure back, in order to breathe here in the heat + humidity.
she bought her GL from her veterinarian in Florida when the dog was 6-MO, and he never explained how to adjust it, nor the dangers of overheating + the need for an unobstructed airway in dogs while they are active.
she had NEVER checked with anyone about how to adjust the headollar; her 70# adult-dog was wearing the GL just as it was fitted when he was 6-MO.
if the collar had fitted his NECK –
would she have adjusted it as he grew?
i don;t know; he might have been one of the many dogs who has a pup-sized collar surgically removed.
handing over a shock-collar in exchange for a credit-card is too simplistic –
limiting the ease + speed with which they can damage the dog is my intention, rather like handgun laws that require the gun + ammo to be kept SEPARATE to protect kids who may find the weapon.
Q –
as a savvy shock-collar trainer, how long would it take U to teach a complete novice how to PROOF, not teach, a retrieve on their dog, who has only played fetch –
but loves the game?
we are not talking blind-retrieve or steady to wing + shot…
just go get the bumper 8 times out of 10, on a 1st cue.
rough estimate?
curious,
– terry
I’m going to answer below where there’s more room–it’s getting a little narrow. :) Give me a few minutes.
A few points: In the end, I can only truly monitor and take responsibility for my own actions and environment. I suppose I have a hard time getting worked up about the potential for someone I don’t know and never see to use an e-collar incorrectly, anymore than any other tool, because as you point out, if they are determined to use an e-collar incorrectly, they will most certainly use a boot incorrectly. I just drove home from the park after training, and I saw someone abusing their fat old dog by simply being stupid enough to be walking their fat old dog in this heat. The guy was literally jerking him along the sidewalk… on a flat-buckle collar. Can’t blame the tool.
Also, you say, “if the instructor assures U, the client, that it does not hurt – who are U to dispute it?” Well, who are you? If you are the superior species with the inferior species in your care… if you have a thumb to press the button, and the cajones (metaphorically) to insist, put the damn collar on and see if it hurts. That’s what I did–and it’s what I still do. A friend borrowed my collar the other day, and didn’t know what to set it on b/c it was a different brand than she has. I said, “Well, try a thirty.” She held the collar, zapped herself, and said, “Yeah, that’s about right.” If you’re not smart enough to do that, well–you’re probably way too dumb or lazy to put a halti on so it doesn’t hurt the dog. Should haltis require a training course? How many people put on slip chains backwards, despite all logic? Ban slip chains? How many people put their dog on a porch, tied on a rope that’s longer than the porch and shorter than the jump to the ground? Ban porches? Ban ropes?
An interesting note–the vibration function on my e-collar absolutely, positively freaks my older dog out. Believe me, I tried it early on, thinking it would be a “humane” option–I almost ruined him. I’m not saying all dogs would react like this–but he’s a sensitive dog, and he accepts a moderate shock with no aftereffects, but to this day will act “hinky” for well afterwards if I try the vibrate function. I can’t imagine how freaked out he’d be if he heard me say “sit!” in his ear when he’s two hundred yards out on a retrieve!!!
I really do think your heart is in the right place, but I think you don’t understand e-collars, and I think we have very different philosophies about how to protect dogs. You would legislate everyone–I would teach those I have contact with. It’s just very different.
As someone who started training dogs a long time ago, and has had the honor of seeing some of the very best dogmen and women in action over those years, I grow very weary of hearing ALL trainers before the entrance of operant conditioning, characterized as cruel, abusive, domineering, etc etc etc. It simply was not so.
1953: young teenager with timid 6-month old Cocker. Obedience class instructor: 20 pound ex-Marine Devil Dog trainer. Set-up for disaster? No way. Both girl and dog learned confidence and skills under that man, who had great understanding of both dogs and people. By the time the dog got his CD title, he thought he owned the world. Later earned many more titles, and High in Trial awards, lived long happy life. The girl– she has now spent a lifetime in dogs.
There were good trainers then, and now. And they were (are) always open to a “better way”. None of the good ones were ever knowingly abusive. The proper use of training tools, timing, appropriate corrections, the importance of praise and play, was always highly important. And the best trainers were very, very skilled; they truly knew dogs, could “think dog”.
Yes, there were some bad trainers then– and everyone else knew they were bad, and condemned them. And there are bad trainers today as well, for many, many reasons. Some even call themselves “positive trainers”.
Just don’t issue a blanket condemnation of the past, especially if you don’t have first-hand knowledge of it.
i cannot speak for anyone else, but as i began training under a mentor just 10-years later (1963), i am well aware that there were then, good and bad trainers…
as now.
however –
i would lay down $50 that my mentor, Mrs Frank Arnold of Bucks Co, PA, would have loved the chance to clicker train.
we used convertible-collars in her class, with leather tab-ends and a buckle, which could be fixed or choke collars; but her handling was nowhere near as harsh as what i see from CM/DW or *prattison*, or indeed many APOs that i see on the street, some of them jerking + hauling on pups under 4-MO –
why anybody would ever think popping the pups head off like a cork from a bottle is part of TRAINING, i cannot fathom.
and yes –
i do think that *watching* some supposed expert yank, yell, poke, roll + pin has contributed to a level of casual violence toward pets that exceeds anything perceived as acceptable handing in the 1960s.
40 years later, and so many handlers are WORSE –
less patient, more punitive; less proactive, more reactive.
i am really, truly tired of being told that punishment is necessary for reliability; IMO + IME, thats a crock.
yes, there was a long history of positive-reinforcement training **before** WW-I… but after WW-II, it seemed that everyone had completely forgotten the 1890s and 1920s performing animals in circuses, exquisitely trained horses in equissage + dressage, and so forth.
the 6-week boot-camp for dogs was the universal post-world-wars standard, with lots of bolt-upright box formation drills, commanding tones, etc.
i will be thrilled to bid the drill-sergeant good-bye, and greet a trainer who uses management + rewards, not incessant nagging corrections + aversives to punish the dog (horse) into the desired behavior.
in a given exercise, the dog can screw-up in virtually limitless variety – there is usually only ONE right answer, so teaching right is far more efficient vs *correcting* bad.
another long-time trainer,
— terry
Oops, that was supposed to be “200 pound…”
no worries, m-r-s –
i just added a digit, i;m sure others did, too. ;-)
cheers,
– terry
Leashed for Life said,
“Q –
as a savvy shock-collar trainer, how long would it take U to teach a complete novice how to PROOF, not teach, a retrieve on their dog, who has only played fetch –
but loves the game?
we are not talking blind-retrieve or steady to wing + shot…
just go get the bumper 8 times out of 10, on a 1st cue.
rough estimate?
curious,
– terry”
I wouldn’t myself teach a complete novice how to use an e-collar. I’d give the person a couple of cards of respectable pros. What I’m going to detail is in NO WAY meant to teach anyone how to do it, because without seeing it done, it’s impossible to really know how a dog is supposed to react and when it’s going well.
I’m going to give you a really, really long answer that involves the teaching part. Sorry.
Okay, so… some basic info. Dealing with retrievers, I can tell you it’s a very rare retriever that anyone teaches or proofs a dog on a “retrieve,” per se. The dog should already be chasing the item, and the dog should know that the object of the game is that he should return with it. Most folks don’t have much problem with puppies if they have a decent puppy–the puppy WANTS to come back, usually with its prize. If it comes without the prize, it’s no big deal if it chased it to begin with–it’s just encouraged and coaxed to do it. It’s all about encouraging the different natural components of chase, pick up, bring. (The “pick up” part is usually encouraged until adolescence, and then many trainers formalize that part of the retrieve with force fetch. Many dogs don’t “need” this, but if they are moving on to blind retrieves at some point it’s a very effective tool. Some folks have a “hold” command, reinforced in a variety of ways. But the more naturally the dog learns to do it and love it, the easier the formalizing of the components is.)
Generally, a dog being trained to eventually retrieve in a disciplined way (as opposed to a “game of fetch”) is not asked to retrieve more than three or four times tops. Eight to ten is WAY overmuch on a thrown retrieve, even for the big dogs!
As far as “8 times out of 10,” when people are teaching a retriever to retrieve, there is no such thing. It’s 100 percent success–not because we’re over-achieving jerks, but because the dogs need to trust that there’s no such thing as a failed retrieve (unless the handler gives them a command to stop). Success, success, success breeds confidence and more success. If a dog doesn’t find the object on its own, the “gunner” helps the dog as little as possible and as much as necessary until it comes up with it. (An older, more experienced dog may be “handled” to a mark… but both my dogs CAN handle, and I usually have the gunner help so that it’s THEIR retrieve–not mine.)
Okay, I’m getting to the proofing recall, but I can’t do it without talking about teaching. I assume you know how to teach a recall–but for those who aren’t familiar with formal recalls or e-collars or both, I just can’t separate it out because I think it emphasizes that a collar correction isn’t a random bolt of lightening raining down at the dog’s first refusal.
Recall is generally taught totally separately from the retrieve, first in fun ways. For example, a friend has a litter of 5-week-old puppies, and since they went to solid food a week and a half or two weeks ago (I don’t remember), the routine has been to bang the pail and say “HEEEEEERE Puppies! HEEEEEERE Puppies!” as they all come running to eat. Same now with nature walks, now that they’re out and about a little, always with joy when they come, and occasionally with a pat or a tidbit.
Once the dog knows the word and has a fun recall, and knows that the fun of the game of retrieving is to go out and come back with something, and when they’re old enough–5 or 6 or 7 or more months minimum, it depends–only then is the recall really formalized, and only then is it really needed and it can be proofed with an e-collar.
Before the e-collar, though, a recall is formalized on a long line with a flat-buckle collar. The dog learns a little bit about pressure/compliance as it learns what is expected of him. If the dog doesn’t come on command, the one holding the line gives a tug or series of tugs until the dog decides to come, and then it’s praised like it’s done the most fantastic trick in the world. It works best with three people. It might take a few ten-minute sessions for the dog to be responding in a way that indicates it understands it’s a no-arguments command and that joy comes from complying–it may take several. The general idea is to start in a very simple place with no distractions, and build up to a more interesting place with some distractions. This isn’t using the collar, I know, but it’s important that the dog understands that tug, because the collar “nick” is going to substitute for the tug in proofing.
So, the recall has already been taught over the last 4 to 6 months, and it’s been formalized and “proofed” with the long line. Then with the e-collar on a very low setting, the same process as with the long line is used to proof the recall. Usually the dog is on a long line as well as having the collar on. If the dog hasn’t been collar-conditioned (taught what the stimulus means), this is when it happens. (The dog already has gotten used to just wearing the collar when it’s training and retrieving.) The e-collar “nick” (momentary stimulus/shock) is gradually substituted for the tug when the dog hesitates or refuses to come, or comes slowly. The collar starts on a very low setting, and only gets turned up to an effective setting and no higher. Like with the long line, it is first done in a simple place, and then the long line comes off, and then it’s done in an interesting place, and with simple distractions, and so on until the dog is reliable. It might take a few sessions–it might take several (5, 7–a few more–something like that). Then it’s ready to take responsibility (and correction) in the field and be proofed there while retrieving.
So retrieving isn’t proofed with a collar. Recall is. How long does it take, not including the teaching and the long line exercise? Simple answer–maybe three to five ten-minute sessions, maybe a few more. True answer–five to seven months, plus proofing in the field.
Sorry so long. I have a hard time boiling things down.
Gosh, you guys decided to have an argument.
Thank you, because you know I can’t do this right now.
good heavens, this is no argument – honest, R-man,
we are discussing + exploring.
i thought this was interesting – definitely not entrenched disagreement.
– t
hey, BG! :–)
sorry U had to do all that typing, but its very interesting to read, so i feel it was a worthwhile investment – anyone curious about the process now has an overview,
and it will be here later for reference.
its been at least 12 years since i watched someone with a teen-retriever during a proofing session, but that man did use the shock for such things as dropping the bumper on the way back –
so i am presuming that he was using a different technique to Urs? [only a guess, as i have no idea – but U stipulated that the proofing is for recall vs return-object.]
but these parts IMO are key –
QUOTE,
I wouldn’t myself teach a complete novice how to use an e-collar. I’d give the person a couple of cards of respectable pros. – BG
END
and
QUOTE,
How long does it take, not including the teaching and the long line exercise? Simple answer–maybe three to five ten-minute sessions, maybe a few more. True answer – five to seven months, plus proofing in the field. – BG
END
so U have been doing this with Ur dogs for some years now, U are confident of accomplishing this Urself,
yet U would not teach a novice using a shock-collar…
and even with Ur skill-set and a dog who has an innate desire to perform the goal-behavior, it takes 5-mos or more for the dog to become fluent on the retrieve [post-proofing].
i tell pet-owners that RECALL off-leash with distractions is a post-graduate level of dog-schooling, and they laugh at the idea –
then they swear at their 5-MO dog, who has just ignored a recall to continue playing with a dog that s/he has just met.
or they think that 8-WO pup who toddled at their heels will continue to do that for life… and are really irritated when the umbilical cord falls off, and there goes their (unleashed) puppy, romping off to explore.
these are the owners who refuse to admit that
* ages are stages:
infancy is not juvie is not teen is not adult is not senior…
* TEACHING is required to get a behavior on-cue
* PROOFING is required to make cued-behaviors reliable
they just expect the dog to $%#@! Do It, d*mmit.
and if they have a spare $200 they are the owners i would predict would grab a shock-collar at PetsMart.
there won;t be any step-by-step stuff, either –
the 1st time the dog hesitates to come when called, zap –
or if the dog hesitates WHILE on the return, zap.
they use the collar primarily to vent spleen, i think – altho of course, i may be totally wrong, that is merely the impression i get as an observer, when they use them.
its a way to “reach out + spank someone” who is too far off to touch. which of course, is why i feel this is not an appropriate tool for any Tom, Diane or Hussain.
* they have lousy timing
* they have no idea how to teach behaviors
* they think dogs comprehend English and defy them, when they never TAUGHT the dog to drop from a stand – only from a sit.
if U hesitate to teach a newbie in the proofing stage,
(and BTW i think U know what U are doing),
why should the collars be available for anybody over 18-YO to simply purchase?
the old saying was that every trainer ruins ONE dog –
the unsaid subtext is that it is their first, when they don;t know any better and that dog is their Guinea-pig.
shock-collars in the hands of APOs are similar to microwaves in the hands of home-cooks –
as a long-time cook in commercial kitchens, i know that a microwave is a terrific convenience – it lets U ruin food in one-hundredth the time of conventional cooking.
but U can toss the ruined entree – the ruined dog is another category.
all my best,
— terry
blkgoldn’s overview of this part of basic retriever training is very good. Same progression as the best trainers use. Simple in basic principle, it just takes lots of words to describe accurately. (as with much of dog training!).
Thank you!
Gosh–I didn’t think it was an argument. I thought it was an honest question.
Otherwise I just would have said, “Why would you care? You just think we’re jerks who shock our dogs.” THAT would have REALLY turned into an argument, I guess!
Don’t worry too much, Scottie. I’ll really try to behave–and if I don’t, ZAPPP! OUCH!!!!.
;)
If LeashedForLife has trouble behaving, she can go have a dried liver treat.
Blech.
Well, arguments are fine.
I can’t do one right now.
QUOTE,
If LeashedForLife has trouble behaving, she can go have a dried liver treat.
Blech. – BG
__________________
perfectly apropos, BG – as i hate liver, raw, fried, boiled, creamed, dried, on toast, anywhere, anyhow. ;-)
– t
Wait.
If she BEHAVES she can go have a liver treat.
Blech.
Now I’ve gone and confused myself.
The all-positive stuff baffles me pretty quickly. :)
nobody can be ALL positive(-reinforcement) –
its impossible.
the reinforcement part of the phrase is important, too,
as applied punishment, technically, is POSITIVE-punishment, just as reinforcement of desired behavior is pos-R.
positive = add
negative = take away
pos-P = add something the dog will work to avoid, thus discouraging the prior behavior
pos-R = add something the dog will work to get, thus encouraging the prior behavior
neg-R = remove something to REINFORCE (increase) the prior behavior… what would be removed?
neg-P = remove something to DISCOURAGE /reduce the prior behavior… what would be removed?
denying the dog the opportunity for reward is punishment;
ignoring un-desired behavior to extinction is punishment, too, since PUNISHMENT technically-defined reduces (un-desired) behavior,
while REINFORCEMENT increases the likelihood of (desired) behavior.
neg-R is almost invariably paired with pos-P:
the choke-collar tightens FIRST… [pos-P]
the dog slows down, a slight tug brings the dog to side,
the collar relaxes – neg-R.
similarly, shock must be applied before it can cease.
neg-P is removing something the dog wants –
the dog jumps-up on me; i leave – the dog wanted attn, and social-isolation is NOT what was wanted.
ergo, the dog will be less-likely to jump-up.
i have clients whose dogs jump on everybody BUT me –
cuz i reward the dog with attn only when their feet or butt are firmly on the floor.
typically, this is a persistent problem because
** one person ** refuses to stop giving attn for jumping,
often a relative, neighbor or friend; dog-owners just don;t feel comfortable saying, =please don;t pet Fido till he SITS, and if he gets up, turn Ur back…=
i just suggest they stand on the leash until s/he sits, then tell the visitor that the dog can now be petted.
this is not a quadrant – its Management, a very-much neglected means to goof-proof dog learning, training + behavior.
— terry
“its been at least 12 years since i watched someone with a teen-retriever during a proofing session, but that man did use the shock for such things as dropping the bumper on the way back –
so i am presuming that he was using a different technique to Urs? [only a guess, as i have no idea – but U stipulated that the proofing is for recall vs return-object.] ”
Okay, here the dog psychology gets a little difficult to explain, but I’m going to try.
If a dog has been force-fetched, has a forced hold, or in some other way has a disciplined “pick it up and carry it back” part of the retrieve… dropping the bumper or messing around with it on the way back is more essentially a delay in/break-in-the-completion-of the recall. The command being broken is “here”–generally speaking.
I know it doesn’t make complete sense the way I’ve explained it–but that seems to be what makes sense to the dog.
There are other reasons a trainer may do this, but I’ve reached my limits of typing and maybe explaining… :)
Or the trainer might not know exactly what he’s doing. Hard to say given the scenario.