Canis lupus hominis

Posted in dog behavior, wildlife | 34 Comments

34 Responses

1. on March 8, 2010 at 7:28 pm EmilyS

   or a force/”condition”/adversive trainer. Is there an shock collar big enough?

   
   
   • on March 8, 2010 at 7:53 pm retrieverman

     I’m not saying that one should never do these things.

     But I think some people take glory in it.

     I’m not opposed to e-collars. People use them for fences all the time, and no one complains.

     I do think that reasonable people can disagree on these issues.

     I just find Cesar Millan very annoying. And I don’t think the average person needs to do all of these confrontations to have a well behaved dog– even if that dog is a bit aggressive.

     But then I learned how to train dogs from McConnell and Dunbar, so maybe I’m missing something.

     
     
2. on March 8, 2010 at 7:54 pm YesBiscuit!

   Everyone knows that the only way to rehab an aggressive Grizzly is click and treat.

   
   
   • on March 8, 2010 at 7:56 pm retrieverman

     What is rehab?

     Isn’t that where you when you’re on coke?

     
     
   • on March 8, 2010 at 11:16 pm Jess

     Saw a video recently where a Grizzly in a zoo was taught to present itself and accept a vein stick for a blood sample, using click and treat.

     
     
     • on March 8, 2010 at 11:20 pm retrieverman

       I’ve seen lots of this.

       I saw where lions were taught to open their mouths on command.

       
       
3. on March 8, 2010 at 8:43 pm EmilyS

   No one “rehabs” aggressive grizzlies. They’re not pets. I’m not even sure what to do with the concept of “aggressive” grizzlies. They’re not “aggressive”.. they’re top-of-the-food-chain predators (well, actually omnivores, but there are few other animals they won’t kill and eat if the opportunity presents)

   There are very few grizzlies in captivity of any kind, let alone performing as trained bears. Bart and his successors didn’t need “rehab”. They were raised from babies, conditioned to humans and trained (as far as I know, and I haven’t read anything to the contrary) with knowledge of bear behavior, positive techniques and treats. But in the end, NO form of training would keep any of Seuss’s bears from easily killing him if they decide that’s what they want to do.

   Same as Tillicum. Same as any wild predator kept in captivity (or in the wild for that matter: see “Grizzlyman” for a prime example)

   People who used the Tillicum killing to launch rants about positive training have a screw loose.

   Scotty, I certainly agree with you: Millan’s confrontational style with dogs (some of which are not “aggressive” but fearful and/or in pain) is not just annoying and unnecessary: it’s often counterproductive and more likely to lead to someone getting bitten than not. Millan is bitten a LOT. I think Millan strives to get bitten as part of his macho routine. Most dog trainers are NEVER bitten and would regard it as their mistake rather than as some mark of pride.

   And it would be fun to see a enormously fat trained grizzly sit on Millan’s face. ;-0

   (p.s. whatever else you learned from her, I don’t think you got your ideas of the “conditioned” fetch from McConnell.)

   
   
   • on March 8, 2010 at 9:58 pm retrieverman

     The conditioned fetch isn’t something I would use, but the trial and test system for retrievers in this country essentially require that you use it.

     
     
4. on March 8, 2010 at 9:05 pm YesBiscuit!

   Well. I can see my humor is underappreciated here. *ahem*

   
   
   • on March 8, 2010 at 9:58 pm retrieverman

     Sorry about that.

     
     
5. on March 8, 2010 at 9:33 pm Christopher

   I’d like to see Dunbar keep the grizzly out of the trash cans with “handfeeding, play-fighting, and tug-of-war.”

   Putting a hot wire around the trash would be too cruel, so we might as well just shoot the raider bears instead after Sue Sternberg, lover of all things Dunbar, puts a mannequin arm in its face while it’s eating the trash and determines that Yogi is “food aggressive.”

   
   
   • on March 8, 2010 at 9:59 pm retrieverman

     My view is that a dog should never have a reason to fear your hands.

     A dog that is afraid of hands will bite.

     
     
     • on March 8, 2010 at 11:30 pm Christopher

       Heh, that’s like me saying that a human should never have a reason to fear a dog’s teeth. A human scared of teeth will beat a dog.

       I think both humans and dogs should have a full understanding of the power of the other.

       A dog who bites a hand because it doesn’t appreciate that hands can “bite back” is ignorant of reality. Hand-feeding the dog in the Caesar video isn’t going to inform the dog that he must respect that the man isn’t a pushover.

       Substituting another positive experience isn’t a sufficient deterrent. It’s like telling women to give the rapist a sexual favor so he won’t rape you.

       A dog who

       
       
   • on March 8, 2010 at 11:19 pm Jess

     In one of his books, forget which one, Dunbar recommends booby-trapping a trash can so that cans filled with pennies or rocks fall on the dog’s head when it pokes into the trash. For a bear, you’d have to use mighty big cans, though.

     
     
     • on March 8, 2010 at 11:36 pm Christopher

       I guess Dunbar isn’t really against aversives then, is he? I know for certain that I could cause more emotional distress in my dogs by chasing them with a tin can of pennies than I could rolling them on their backs, heel bumping them, or even “biting” them with my hand. A million “tssts” wouldn’t come anywhere near the impact of such a booby trap.

       Not that I’m against either, but just because an aversive isn’t physical doesn’t make it impotent.

       I frankly don’t see a fundamental conflict between Millan and Dunbar because I don’t believe either of them have a one stop solution to all training issues, nor do I believe that their methods are mutually exclusive.

       
       
       • on March 8, 2010 at 11:57 pm retrieverman

         None of these positive people are against punishment. It’s just the kind of punishment.

         
         
         • on March 9, 2010 at 12:07 am Christopher

           Sorry about the double post. Laptop crashed during the first and I didn’t realize it posted. Funny how much I was able to re-write from memory though.

           I am under the impression that “positive only” precludes punishment. And not in the “I’m not going to give you a treat” is equated with punishment.

           
           
           • on March 9, 2010 at 12:18 am retrieverman

             It happens to me at least once a month!

             
             
           • on March 9, 2010 at 12:24 am retrieverman

             I don’t know of any person who is positive only. I don’t that all situations can be treated using this, but it is a bit of a cartoon to say that people who use these methods don’t use punishment.

             There is punishment. The formulation you gave is what is called negative punishment. It is a type of punishment.

             And e-collar nick is positive punishment.

             I don’t see what the big deal on e-collars is, because they can be adjusted and are so effective that they don’t have to be used that often.

             You can indeed overuse them.

             
             
       • on March 9, 2010 at 12:00 am retrieverman

         I’m fine with e-collars.

         I’m not fine with throwing a dog on its back and holding it down.

         
         
6. on March 8, 2010 at 11:27 pm Christopher

   I think both humans and dogs should have a full understanding of the power of the other.

   A dog who bites a hand because it doesn’t appreciate that hands are powerful and can “bite back” is ignorant of reality. Hand-feeding the dog in the Cesar video isn’t going to inform the dog that he must respect that the man isn’t a pushover. It simply diverts the actual question of “can I get away with this.”

   Substituting another positive experience isn’t a sufficient deterrent. It’s like telling a woman to give the rapist a sexual favor so he won’t rape her.

   Appeasement is much more likely to lead to further victimization than confrontation is.

   And aversive training isn’t simply about enforcing ones will, it’s simply the most effective form of communication in certain situations.

   
   
   • on March 8, 2010 at 11:59 pm retrieverman

     The problem is dogs do have power over people. They have teeth.

     If you get into a brinkmanship situation with a dog, the dog will always be better armed.

     And the last thing you need is a dog that sees human hands as weapons.

     
     
7. on March 9, 2010 at 12:10 am Christopher

   Isn’t that precisely why people like Millan use a prong collar and a leash? It evens the score.

   
   
   • on March 9, 2010 at 12:26 am retrieverman

     The dog will not always be wearing a pinch collar or a leash. If you get into a fight with a dog, it’s not going to be pretty for you.

     
     
8. on March 9, 2010 at 2:26 am Bill

   I like the fact that e collars are adjustable from 0-10 (mine will even vibrate like a cell phone, the feature I use 90% of the time). And that she has no idea that the correction came from me is important as well.

   The fact is that most dogs who wear collars spend a lot of time working with their masters and many reach a high level of polish. That has to account for something, as a lot of working bred dogs I know spend a lot of time cooped up alone at home.

   My pups flip out (in a good way) when they see the collars. It means they are about to go look for birds.

   
   
9. on March 9, 2010 at 5:55 am EmilyS

   meh Christopher: … What would be the point of teaching Bart not to get into garbage? the simple solution, which I would bet my life was the solution Seuss used, was not to allow him around garbage cans. Why would you want to force a confrontation like that with an animal who could kill you in an instant?

   (In fact, Bart was a tester of “bearproof” containers for use by hikers. There were some containers he couldn’t get into.)

   In contrast, short of actually electrocuting the grizzly, an electric wire would not deter a very determined individual.

   The fallacy of physical pain-punishment training is that there are always some individual animals who don’t care how much pain you inflict on them.. they will do what they will do (or not do what YOU would will them to do). And then what does the trainer do, other than escalate the pain (or discomfort, or “nick” or “flick” or whatever term you choose)?

   (p.s. no, the clicker trainer doesn’t “click harder” in the same circumstance)

   Honestly Christopher: your post sounds like you advocate beating a dog who bites you (or “defies” you in other ways), which I find extremely hard to believe you mean. Generally, it’s best to avoid value-laden, human-behavior oriented terminology (like “appeasement”) when trying to understand and train dogs.

   Considering what we do to dogs, we’re lucky that their world for the most part consists of desperately trying to understand us and to get us to give them what they want.

   
   
   • on March 9, 2010 at 6:11 am Christopher

     Hahahaha. Bart isn’t the one who needs to stay out of the trash Emily. All those wild bears who raid the trash cans at ski condos are. The ones that will be shot dead otherwise.

     If you don’t have the stomach to use a technique that works, you can as you suggest try and avoid the problem altogether. Lock the dog in the bathroom every time a guest comes in the front door. Don’t take Rufus to the dog park. No kids. That’s just avoidance, not a solution.

     The most effective and widespread use of an aversive is the electric fence. Well, I’ll put an electric fence up against Dunbar’s lure and treat and we’ll see who trusts their dog out in the front yard without a 6 foot fence.

     
     
10. on March 9, 2010 at 6:39 am Christopher

    Tell me, Emily, are those individuals you mentioned magically controlled by a clicker then? The use of a clicker or a shock is the same, to add clarity. Neither is effective automatically. Positive reinforcement is clearly better to communicate “yes” and negative reinforcement is clearly better to communicate “no.”

    You can take three left turns, or you can turn right.

    Simple words are enough for low risk low reward situations, but just like “jackpots” are effective to drive the point home, so too is a shock. Show me a video of a trainer who can pull a Border Collie off of chasing a tractor tire with a clicker.

    You can try the three left turn method and try rewarding every non-chasing behavior you want, but when that engine turns on and the tractor becomes prey, good luck with that.

    
    
11. on March 9, 2010 at 6:49 am Christopher

    And appeasement is the perfect word. I’ve seen plenty of weak dog owners who are unwilling to be “mean” to fluffy and who have become victimized by their own dog. They will change their entire lifestyle and make any accommodation to avoid being “cruel.”

    Here’s a good example of one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IQTDag7u8M

    Watch Cesar once in a while and see any number of owners who have done the same. I’d say watch Dunbar, but I’ve never seen him work on anything quite so serious. Making Fido sit pretty isn’t really the big leagues. I have read his materials where “some dogs just need to die” though. I guess he admits the limits of his skills.

    
    
    • on March 9, 2010 at 12:55 pm retrieverman

      Well, I agree with Dunbar. Some dogs would be better off put to sleep. I’m a no kill heretic. I guess I’m just a low kill. It’s better that an animal die from euthanasia than be tortured its whole life.

      For example some of these food possessive golden retrievers cannot be cured. It’s probably the hardest type of aggression to stop.

      My biggest problem with Cesar is when he handled John Grogan’s dog. Grogan, for some reason, decided he needed another field line Lab, and although not the same sort of dog as Marley, this dog took to killing his chickens.

      Okay. It’s a BIRD DOG. The cannot be trusted with chickens or poultry ever!

      If you have them, you’re better off keeping them in a coop with an electric wire around it. See, I’m far more comfortable with than what that dog eventually received.

      This was a very sensitive Labrador, and I could tell that Cesar was pushing her right up to the point where most dogs start pissing because they want it to stop.

      The problem could have been solved by just keeping the chickens in the coop and putting an electric wire around it.

      
      
      • on March 9, 2010 at 6:14 pm Christopher

        I’m no life-at-all-costs person either. I do believe that there are dogs that are simply not worth the effort. I find it deeply troubling that, for instance, the greater pit bull situation is such a dominant contributor to dogs in shelters that plenty of dogs that don’t need rehabilitation are put down simply because of space and time and money concerns.

        I vaguely recall the Grogan episode but my take-away was what absolute idiots the Grogans were. I’ll have to watch it again to see why you think the alpha roll is so out of line.

        
        
        • on March 9, 2010 at 7:14 pm retrieverman

          Why is the alpha roll out of line?

          1. Dogs don’t roll other dogs.
          2. What looks like rolling is actually the submitting dog assuming a placation posture.
          3. The other dog didn’t put him there at all. If two dogs are equally sized, then one cannot flip the other simply by grabbing its muzzle. The force that that action would require would probabaly decapitate the other dog.

          In some cases, doing the alpha roll can turn a dog into a fear biter. Patricia McConnell has an example of a young golden that develops fear biting in The Other End of the Leash.

          It may work as a punishment, but we’re fooling ourselves if we think we’re acting like dogs or wolves when doing so.

          If Cesar is taking to its fullest extreme, then the best way to keep dogs is the way Shaun Ellis interacts with wolves.

          Oh shit!

          He already started doing dog advice:
          

          
          
12. on March 9, 2010 at 3:42 pm EmilyS

    Christopher: If you honestly can’t tell the difference between training with a clicker and training with a shockcollar you need to go back to first grade. Preferably one in THIS century not the last.

    And no one pulls a dog off of anything using a clicker. Try to learn about what you criticize before you mouth off, eh?

    And do tell us when you’ve stopped beating your dog so we can take your ranting seriously.

    
    
    • on March 9, 2010 at 7:01 pm Christopher

      Oh Emily, you’re so charming. Thank you for debasing yourself with baseless insults meant to demonize me because you’re unable to answer like an adult.

      We’ve come to the same point these discussions always come to. Positive only fanatics must admit that their technique, while wonderfully successful in low-risk situations where the dog needs to offer behaviors, is not nearly potent enough to overcome the strongest aggression, and more importantly inbred behaviors.

      Of course no one _successfully_ uses a clicker in such situations, Emily, because it doesn’t work. And that’s my point. Positive-only is not the be-all-end-all universal wonder technique.

      
      

Comments are closed.