One Method Training

Is that a personal attack? Hmmm .. No, that's not ALL I did. I gave a brief summary of training just to illustrate that I didn't just go out and slap an e-collar on my dog.

To everyone reading this thread .. I think the most important message I want to get across is that positive reinforcement is a wonderful tool but it is NOT the only tool nor does it need to be. Using a correction on your dog is NOT a terrible thing. Of course, if your dog is screaming or wincing or running from you in fear then you are obviously doing something wrong. But setting reasonable discipline is not bad, and you are NOT a bad person if you do this. Please don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Use the most positive methods possible, use corrections sparingly and use them only in a way that works for YOUR SPECIFIC DOG.

I look at the training of the dog club I belong to. Back in the original days it was pretty much all Koehler. It evolved - luckily - but it swung so far the other way that everyone was afraid to use corrections. What we saw was that, in an eight week class, there was a much lower level of consistency in the dogs. Dogs used to go through 16 - 24 weeks of class training and be ready to enter the novice obedience ring! And then it became all about making the dog feel good .. building the dog's ego .. never creating any situation where the dog responds out of a fear of consequences .. and what a dog used to accomplish in 16 - 24 weeks now took a year or more.

No, I don't think everyone should go back to the old methods. But I'm seeing a balance start to happen in the training classes here. The teachers are recognizing that pet people (as well as competition people) need to find a level of control within a reasonable amount of time. Our teachers are knowledgeable and educated. They've gone through a lot of training - multiple seminars, instructor training, clicker expo, etc. And they're finding that balancing the high level of positive reinforcement with a small amount of aversives is not only providing a quicker response, but it is setting up owners to succeed and therefore owners are sticking with it better. We haven't required our instructors to use aversions .. we HAVE set a limit on what can be used, however. Choke chains are banned at our club. It's rare to see anything other than a flat collar, martingale, head halter or gentle leader style harness. People are taught to use properly timed reinforcements. But a lot of people don't want all the scientific methodology. They just plain want a dog that minds. It's that or the dog is off to the pound in many situations.

It's almost humorous how different groups of people are about training. I'm on a chow list and there are people on there who think it's AWFUL that I make my dogs do anything. I mean simple stuff, like sit or down or hold still while I trim nails. They actually think of the chow as some mystical creature who has the right to bite the vets and groomers. I've been told that it's above a chow's dignity to have to learn tricks. And then I have a German shepherd forum I go to. On there, I'm considered WAY too kind. I've been one of the main defenders of positive reinforcement methods on that forum (and it's a huge forum, much more active than this one is). I used to post extensively trying to stop people from using shock collars and prong collars for everyday behaviors, but I haven't done that much lately. Reading the posts on here from people who are trying to throw guilt at anyone who uses corrections has truly dampened my enthusiasm for being a advocate against corrective collars. I don't EVER want to sound like the people on here again.

When I give online advice to people on training, I don't tell them to use corrections. Anyone who wants to can go back in my posts and see how much I've encouraged the use of positive methods. I understand that people over-use corrections easily. But I can't condone this constant battering of people's training techniques just because they .. *gasp* .. may use a correction on a dog that truly benefits from it.

I have great relationships with my dogs. Khana (the chow that I dared use an e-collar on) raced into the garage today and Mom had the door open. She ran for the opening and I called "Khana!" and she turned and raced back to me. No, she didn't have the e-collar on. She wiggled around me and I played with her and let her out into the fenced area. Last weekend she took second place in rally excellent (AKC). In her eight times in the ring, she's qualified seven times and the one NQ was because she peed in the ring. She's been in the placings every time she's qualified. And yesterday she walked with me as I returned a cart to the grocery store. I left her on a sit-stay outside as I took the cart inside. I returned and stopped to talk to two little boys who asked if they could pet her. I released her from her stay and she wiggled all over as the boys petted her, while I talked with their Mom and told her about Khana's therapy dog training. This morning she jumped onto the bed and curled up beside my head, stretching out when I reached over to rub her belly. She tipped her head back and licked my chin. THIS is the dog that people want to claim I'm being cruel to because of a minimal use of an e-collar for off-leash play time.

I don't post here to try to change the minds of those so set in stone that they can't recognize anything other than their limited choices. I post to keep this from being a one-sided forum like some of the others. There are MANY valid methods out there and they aren't all just +R. The key to it is to know your dog, recognize when another method is needed, use aversives sparingly but effectively, and to not be pushed into something because others choose to throw guilt at you.

Good luck to all of you, especially those lurkers who may be reading this.

Melanie and the gang in Alaska

Honestly, I just LOVE the whole pushy lot of you guys. When you fight, it reminds me of my old family picnics.

*chuckles*

Well, the reality is that these types of threads are the ones that get the most hits. They're the threads that keep a forum alive. If all we had were "oh, look at my cute doggie" types of threads then this place would be dead. People THRIVE on dissonance .. it's what makes things interesting.

Now, before anyone takes offense .. I don't have any problem with "cute doggie" threads. I show off my own dogs from time to time. But really .. people come to forums to see conflicting opinions. If a person only wanted to see a reflection of their own opinion they would avoid forums and just read studies and stories that matched their beliefs.

Melanie and the gang
.. so many alphas, so little time ..

IQ, another awesome thread!!!! kudos!!!

BTW, I also agree in that people ned a little "spice" (productive arguments like this one, where different methods are discussed not only in training, but ANY topic...like breeding) in order to keep it interesting. The forums that are all "Oh lookie how cute my foo-foo is!" do not get revisited by me and the more productive arguments/discussions a forum has the more I go back because THAT is where I learn the most on a forum. As nice as it is to see pictures of everyones pups, those pictures arent really going to further my knowledge and understanding of dog behaviour....or teach me what happens when you cross a APBT to a Greyhound for a better catch dog...

I just want to say that I appreciate these threads. Personally, I learn something new every time. I appreciate that people on both sides take the time to compose thoughtful and informative messages. I don't have much to contribute, but I am reading what you have to say.

Good to know Melissa.
I agree that this is exactly what people need to see in order to make an informed decision, at least a part of what is necessary to decide for themselves.

I also want to add that this thread has made me feel a little better about some things.

I'm fairly new here and have mentioned a couple of things I do to my dogs, like popping my baby girl on her butt with one finger when she runs into the road. People have overreacted to that and tried to make me feel like I was a horrible person. Or leash training my rescued aggressive dog, and people here have implied I'm jerking him around by the neck. That's not even close to the truth and for anyone to *assume* that is wrong. He wears a body harness specifically so I'm not pulling at his neck in any way, and I only tug it along with the verbal command when I'm teaching him not to do something.

I believe in all things in moderation, and try to practice that as much as possible. I don't cause my dogs any serious pain, if any at all, but I do feel there's a time & a place for physical correction when all else seems to be failing; and particularly when their safety is involved. I *want* them to have a negative association with certain behavoirs.

As far as the pain a TENS unit inflicts, perhaps I have a high pain threshhold, but you can turn that thing up very high and it doesn't bother me in the slightest. Why wouldn't dogs have different pain tolerances? I don't use ecollars myself, but I've seen them used very effectively with dogs endangering themselves. Again, the animal's safety is paramount and whatever it takes to accomplish that, the ends justifies the means.

I honk at *all* animals I see that are near or in roads, and I time it perfectly. Lots of people have yelled at me for that, calling it cruel, but if I teach an animal to be *afraid* of the road, haven't I done that animal a huge favor? Personally, I'd rather scare the chit out of the animal than watch it get hit by the car behind me; the ends justify the means.

Again ..

I will explain in detail how and why the low level stimulation works.

First of all, the collar must have a large number of levels - mine has 100. Yes, it is an aversive - anything that the dog prefers not to have or hear is an aversive to the dog. I tried the collar on myself, felt various levels, knew for myself how it felt against MY skin and how I would react to the different levels. My 80 year old Mom felt it at the level I used on my dog and said "oh, is that all it is?".

With the collar on the dog, you start at level 1 and you go up slowly in levels, watching the dog carefully to see a reaction. At a certain level, Khana flicked an ear. That's it. She didn't even pick up her head. That was the level chosen for a working level. The idea is not to create a pain-filled reaction. Is it pleasant? No, as I've said numerous times already. Is it excruciating? No, of course not. No yelps, no cringing - JUST an ear flick to show that she felt it at all.

I then did a series of training exercises designed to teach Khana how to turn off the stimulation. She was on a long-line, wandering around sniffing. I gave her a command (a new one specifically for this training), pressed the button and pulled her toward me lightly. As soon as she swung around toward me, I let up the button. The entire process was about two seconds long. And then I backed up and praised her happily as she came to me - following that with treats and scratches.

This was repeated a few times. She very quickly picked up on the concept of spinning and running to me. At no time did she wince, yelp or act like there was pain. Yes, it was an uncomfortable and maybe even slightly painful. Yes, the idea is that the use of an aversive helps to teach her to respond to a command.

When I could call her and have her spin and race back to me immediately without any stimulation from the collar (as I continued to praise and reward), we went off-leash. This was not the first day .. we practiced the "spin and race back" for several days still on a long-line, just in case. Keep in mind that this dog had been worked on recalls for the previous 18 months, using tons of positive reinforcement. It wasn't that she didn't understand the concept of coming when called, it was that there was nothing I could produce as a reinforcement that could over-ride her excitement in exploring the big wild woods. Her motivation to explore was higher than her desire for treats or petting or interaction. My choice was to make her live her life on a leash or find a way to introduce a reason to not run off and explore.

Off-leash we continued our training. This dog had NEVER been free outside without me there so it's not like she had developed a habit of running off just on her own. Did she test the consequence? Yes, she did. After a few weeks of everything going well (meaning she came consistently when called with very little need for the collar to be used) she tucked her butt and took off. I called, pressed the button (it was obvious she wasn't turning on my call) and I held it down. She went another 100 feet or so and then veered around and came toward me. And, of course, I released the button as soon as she turned toward me and I praised and clapped my hands and tossed treats and made a huge game out of her returning.

Why does it work? Because it IS something the dog wants to avoid. I keep saying it, but somehow people keep misunderstanding .. the stimulation is not something pleasant but it's NOT the huge "zap the dog into submission" that was the premise of the original use of the shock collar. A constant thumping (and it feels kind of like a hard thumping - remember, I've felt it myself) is not enjoyable and I think any of us would want to avoid it. But it's also not traumatic, not life-threatening (like being hit by a car or stomped by a moose would be), and it's not cruel to want to give my dog the freedom to run and play with the other dogs.

What it all boils down to is that no one here knows my dog or the level of training that has gone into her. When it comes right down to it, none of us know that anything anyone else is saying is truth. People say they've trained thousands of dogs (as I've said) and there's no proof .. it's just a claim. In my case, I do have a large number of performance titles on my dogs to prove that I have success with my dogs. This is a matter of record. But I've also worked extensively with a large number of pet dog owners as well as competition people.

It just escapes me why anyone wants to make others feel bad just because they've chosen to use a small amount of aversives in training. To me, it's a matter of complete practicality - dogs UNDERSTAND aversives because they're a part of real life. When a dog plays with a porcupine, there are aversive consequences that teach the dog what a huge mistake that is. When a dog chases a moose and the moose turns and attacks the dog, that's an aversive consequence. When a dog tries to go through a door that's closing and gets pinched, that's an aversive consequence. Aversive things are completely normal and part of the dog's manner of learning.

Do any of us want to create a huge amount of pain for our dogs? No, I don't think so. But even those claiming to be pretty much all positive still use aversives. If they stop while the dog runs forward to hit the end of a leash, that's an aversive. If they withhold food, that's an aversive. If they put the dog in a crate or confine them when the dog wants to be elsewhere, that's an aversive. If they say "NO" that's an aversive. And to some dogs, a verbal "NO" is worse than a swat on the butt.

As I've said before, no one should be ashamed or made to feel guilty just because some try to make it sound like the use of any type of aversive is cruel. There's a huge difference between a mild aversive and being cruel or inhumane. Training needs to be appropriate for each individual dog. My dogs are extremely physical with each other. They yelp and bark and sometimes even have little wounds on them from playing (chows tend to grab and sometimes the teeth scrape one of the other dogs). There is NOTHING that I've done that is even close to what they inflict on each other IN PLAY.

So how anyone can consider my training cruel just boggles the mind .. *L*

Melanie and the gang in Alaska
Kylee (Chow): AKC CD/CDX NA NAJ, CKC/UKC/ASCA CD's, NADAC NAC NJC, Schutzhund BH, CGC HIC (#1 chow in AKC obedience two years - seven 1sts in all-breed Open A classes)
Trick (GSD): AKC CD NAP NJP RN/RA/RE, ASCA CD, CKC CD, CGC HIC
Dora (Chow): AKC NA NAJ CGC
Khana (Chow): AKC RN/RA (1/3 RE)(all with placings)
.. and always in my heart: Dawson (GSD): AKC CD/CDX/UD, ASCA CD (2 HIT's), CGC HIC
Lady (Aussie): AKC CD/CDX/UD, ASCA CD (2 HIT's) STDs, CGC (#6 Novice Aussie in ASCA 1995-6, ASCA Honor Dog, Dog World)

as i am new to positive training [and it's been years since i have done ANY training] i figure my opinion will matter little to the general public and will not add much to the discussion at hand.

however, i wanted to say that personally that i have found melanie's points to be very clear and understandable. i personally believe that to remove ALL consequences from every dogs life is a bit of a stretch. animals in the wild have to deal with severe consequences, even from their packmates. yet, we don't classify that harsh treatment as abuse, but as natural.
i personally wouldn't call some minor discomfort that can be controlled by an animal's choices [aimed towards the greater health and wellbeing of an animal] a form of abuse or cruelty.

Who ever suggested removing ALL consequences from a dogs life. There's not a trainer on the planet who would suggest such a thing. Why this keeps being misunderstood is beyond me.

There still seems to be some real confusion about what positive training is and what it is not. Every good trainer uses aversives, it's the level of aversive that is in question. What I and others have CLEARLY stated is that we don't use physical punishment as an aversive. There's an ENORMOUS difference.

sorry, but i don't think i am confused about this aspect of positive training in general, just perhaps the personal viewpoints of posters on this board. if you look back, there have been statements on the forum, and in this thread, that have specifically referred to not using aversives at all.

like i said, i am learning and am trying to glean as much as i can from those more experienced than i am. message forums can be a tricky place to learn because much is said in quickly typed replies and can be easily misunderstood. perhaps the posters meant to say "no harsh aversives" but they didn't and as i don't know them, i can't assume what they mean. and i have met people who believe their dogs should never suffer consequences! i am not implying that is what you personally believe, nor do i have any illusions that that is what "positive training" is about [though i used to]. i was merely replying to comments i have read, that is all.

That's interesting. I can't think of anyone on this forum who doesn't use aversions.

that's quite possible. the chazzers seem too smart for that!
like i said, though, i am fairly new and have no way of just assuming that when people say:

i'm just a newbie to positive training principles and am trying to hack out the details while i train my new dog. i want to learn from others, and can only interpret the text i see while i quickly scan the forum!

speaking of being condescending and adding very little to a converstation, at least I can admit i'm being an ass sometimes, but I guess those on the pedestals aren't judged by the same standards are they?

and I hate to break it to you, but there is loads and loads of learned helplessness in training those tigers, but tigers aren't dogs, isn't that an excuse you always use when we compare dogs to something else? When they can't go out and get their own food, can't roam where they want to roam, and they learn from a very early age that they pretty much are helpless, unless the trainer decides something good can happen, what would you call it?? It pretty much is the definition of learned helplessness, why call it something else? doesn't fit your pretty picture anymore?

oh yeah, and what have Jean's Chows been trained to do? Just wondering

It would have been nice to see who you quoted about clicker training. I can tell you that I don't know ANYONE on here who believes in and practices positive training who does not use some kind of aversives. Mine mainly consist of NRM's -
NRMs are intended to be a verbal cue for extinction, not a punisher, so people attempt to say them in the most neutral tone of voice possible. "Uh-uh," said quietly and calmly, is a common NRM. In a training session, the trainer would either click or use the NRM after each repetition to let the dog know whether his behavior was correct or not.

And Negative Punishment -
Negative punishment, like positive one, is used to stop any behavior your dog is doing when the punishment is applied. However, this kind of punishment consists in removing a pleasant thing or situation. Thus, "negative" means that the punishment removes (-) something your dog wants.

Stopping a game is a common negative punishment in dog training. For instance, you can let your dog play with your kids only if he does not jump on them. If the dog jumps on the kids, everybody stops playing (removing an activity that is fun for your dog).

These aversives, along with properly timed RM's and appropriatly quick fading are extremely effective in training.

I just wanted to say - I don't recall if I've seen those posts or not. But I wanted to say that possibly, the reason everyone "overreacted" to that is 1. They way things are worded on the forum. People can read it and decipher it however they please if its worded loosely, that's exactly what happens lol
2. Spanking a dog, or popping it (not too sure what it is, doesn't matter) after the dog runs into the road and comes back, or you have to go get it, is mute point. I think all of the trainers - on both sides of the argument (LOL) agree that a correction, done properly, has to be timed right. A dog isn't going to understand what its being 'corrected' for after the fact. Hope I made sense... I think the meds are going to my head :lol-sign: Or maybe its all these wonderful, long posts.
You can actually learn something here... in between the accusations and poking LOL . . .

If you punish a dog after he's done something wrong and he runs back to you after you call him, he will think you are punishing him for coming to you. Eventually he will think coming to you is a punishable offense. That's the worst timing of all.

When someone has a hard time getting their dog to come when it's wanting in the worst way to run off and chase prey and has such a drive that way, that the recall is hard to get reliable, there are some specific exercises that can help with that....geared for that very type of competing motivator. There's a system, step by step that works up by levels. When someone just goes and uses a shock collar, it bothers me because I don't think they're nice at all. When someone says that they gave treats and ear scratches for 20 months and the dog still didn't have a good recall, I say, "elementary" because there is lots more you can do besides praise and treats and it's not all about reward. It's about setting up situations and a whole lot more. When that someone says that she was just summarizing and she did do more, but only wrote ear scratches and treats, how is the reader suppose to know that she did more? It looks like, when you read the post that that was the only method employed. So, to me, that is very basic and not enough to train a good recall in prey distractions. It is not meant to be condenscending. It was that I was aghast that a trainer, no less would think that was the only trick in the bag. I cringe at the thought of shock collars and I can't help that.
But....never mind.


When I say "harsh aversives," I mean things like shock collars, very stern scoldings, slapping, jerking hard on a collar, ear pinches, anything that causes pain, fear; coercion, intimidation or bullying, loud, frightening cans of things, spraying things in a dog's face....stuff like that.

Whatzsamatter, I try really hard to ignore you and not answer anything you write. I'm making an exception now. Don't bother telling me or anyone else that they're condenscending or any of the other nasty remarks you regularly make. You have NO place in doing that. You are consistantly rude, attacking, personal and a real ass, just like you said. You have come so close to being banned I don't know how many times. So don't tell me about condenscending.

You took the characters right off of my keyboard Doberluv.